You are right. Maths is one of the toughest subjects in the world and if you don't understand, gosh, u feel like killing yourself.

animation is not the problem. the problem is in math. And math is a horrible thing when you don't understand it.

On paper its simple to make such a simulation but ........... in reality its tough. Can I help ? I know a bit about 3D animation.

I would call it bunch of colored blocks accelerating across the screen. :D

But as I said the whole thing turned out to be a fiasco. I will need lots of research to do and couple more evenings to set aside to make this work as it should. And I don't know when I am going to do this and if it will ever be completed.

Mr.fastestlaps - amimated simulation ? So, it will look like a virtual drag race ?

Wow! 10+ cars!, you know what do it, id love to see 10 cars compared! even if it is calculated.

That's easy. The hard part is to make my idea actually work. I was certain that it worked and actually made a little online tool for comparing up to 10+ cars for accelerations figures X-Y km/h or drag races with variable length and could even add animated simulation. Unfortunately then I discovered that method I used didn't always work as predicted and now I have to find another method which is proving to be very difficult. So it is a disappointment.

I wouldt do it.

Any calculated data would have to be VERY CLEARLY marked in the data pages to avoid confusion..... and any "real" data no matter how good must always take priority..... how easy is that to do Mr FL?

I get you. There is no harm in adding cars without lap times. The only thing that is lost is time but as for me, I visit this website when I get bored, so I can make up the time that is wasted.

CarsWithoutLaps.com :D That's pretty much any car catalog website on the Internet.

This is CarsWithLaps AND CarsWithoutLaps.

About adding cars without laptimes - I don't encourage that. I think it's almost pointless. But it has no negative effect either. None of the laptimes are lost because somebody adds a car without laptimes.

NO, im with you, i suggested wee get rid of cars without laps, and if theres a lap that found, just add the car with the lap, but it is becoming CarsWithoughtFastestLaps.com, theres very few cars i dont know, but the main subject is laps, and more than half the cars here dont have them, but, it can be nice to see a car here without a lap.

And I will be the first to flame.

I know some get upset when that is mentioned, but I think it might be something that needs to be addressed, I personally don't spend as much time on FL.com anymore because I came here in the first place to look at sports cars, and now that it's becoming carswithoutlaps.com it simply isn't as interesting (to me) anymore, I'm sure I'm not the only one. I guess they can flame if they want to....

Nah Nitro, as much i i hate to see these crap cars with no data and no laptimes, i tryed that same poll in the forum, n got Flamed for it pretty bad lol but, i do sorta agree with you on not adding cars without data and espescially lap times, since you know this is FastestLaps.com.

I think a better poll might be should cars with no lap times or other performance figures even be on this site. Sure we don't have to look at them, but seems like a few like to spend lots of time arguing about them. Maybe someone could make a "sistersite" called carswithoutlaps.com or something like that Lol

I don't really like the idea. If we're not using exact data, it's probably well enough to just do rough estimations (like some people do now in comments).

Thing is, it shouldn't be too hard to get a reasonable idea about a cars performance so long as it doesn't have some non obvious limitation (like extremely long gear changes for example). Real testing reveals this limitations while an estimate might not.

However if it's going to be labeled and away from the real numbers, it can just be ignored when appropriate. So I guess it's fine if people don't trust their own estimates.

Out of curiosity, do you have any code I could look out to see how it's calculated? If you don't mind.

I guess if it were listed in a separate calculations section like you stated it might not be to bad.
The program I used to have is this one, mine's too old to work anymore: http://quarterjr.com/quarter_jr.htm

Yes I have tried that and results where mostly realistic. However, current method that I use sometimes results in absolute rubbish and I think I will have to rebuild the whole system.

The idea is to use given acceleration figures as data points and to create acceleration function that goes trough those points. 1/4 times and trap speeds that I have calculated this way are quite accurate +- 0.2-0.5 seconds off the real 1/4 times but I have to rebuild the whole math part (when I have time do it) because current method just doesn't behave as I expected.

FL, have you tried your program on the cars and times that are already on here? My guess is that some cars might be close, but some cars are going to be way off, and it's only going to be something else people will argue about.
That drag software is better for taking your drag strip times and figuring out how much HP your car is actually putting to the ground (another variable that a wheel or engine dyno can't tell you) than it is for trying to figure out quarter mile times from HP
A lot of first time drag racers are stunned when they learn that their 500 HP motor is only putting around 200 HP to the ground, but once you learn actual HP to the ground the software is invaluable for tuning.