Car Wiki articles

[Cas]

Hey, guys!

I've been taking a look at car articles in the Wiki, especially those that are custom-made. I found that some custom-made cars that are very used (and some that are not used so much) don't have an article or have a very minimal article. I am willing to create and edit articles to have that completed, but it turns out I don't know a lot about cars so I'm not the best car reviewer. I could start by making the articles and then other people could contribute a thorough analysis or you guys could help me make those analysis in the depth these cars deserve.

So far, what I have done is create an article about the DTM pack, which mentions the three cars, but this article is very basic and I think each of the cars should have its own individual article as well with much more detail.

Then... which aspects should I measure and how?  Everybody who would be interesting in adding to this, I guess the more we are, the better, but as I said, I'm willing to do the whole thing myself if necessary... I would just want some directions to do it well. Thanks!

[Duplode]

Sounds great  There indeed are some car articles that have been pending since forever.

Then... which aspects should I measure and how?

As far as stats go, I think the infoboxes cover the basics (see e.g. the GT3 article for an example of a fully filled one), though ideas for extra data are of course welcome. A couple notes on the numbers:

• In the existing articles, torque peak and maximum power are both obtained from Car Blaster data, using the conversion factors from the Car Model Physics article.
• Using the Car Model Physics factors, a half mile is about 12.9 tiles. Back in the day, IIRC I measured the half mile times by the using centre line markers and other visual cues to eyeball that distance from the starting position in a test track, likely the one attached below. Alternatively, these days there is the option of analysing repldump output in order to get fully accurate results.

By the way, I'll be happy to carry out the measurements for any article you write.

[KyLiE]

I can definitely help with real world information and terminology.  If you need me to proof read anything, just let me know.

[Cas]

That's a great test track!  Thanks, guys. I think I'll make a good list of cars and start "testing my testing" to get used to the procedure, but yes, any help is very welcome. Two things I have pending in the community are: learning more about cars (Stunts cars, but also some about real cars) and becoming a reasonable pipsqueak

Alright... I've added articles for the three DTM cars. The text is very brief, but I've been able to fill the car information by copying from the forum post. I'm going to take pictures of the cars. What I'm not good at is reviewing the cars, so when I write the text in the articles, what I will need is a review of my review because my comments will probably be pretty childish. For example, I envy the car article for the Speedgate XSD. I would like to write something like that. By the way, that same article says "no bugs", ha, ha... Looks like the Speedgate trick had not been discovered at that time. That should be added, but I don't remember very well what that trick consisted in. It was something like lowering all gears quickly at certain moments and the car would turn into a bullet.

[Duplode]

That's a great test track!

Thanks for reminding me of it; now I feel like playing around a bit there  Those blender renders are pretty nice. I'll try to chime in with something tomorrow.

For example, I envy the car article for the Speedgate XSD. I would like to write something like that. By the way, that same article says "no bugs", ha, ha... Looks like the Speedgate trick had not been discovered at that time. That should be added, but I don't remember very well what that trick consisted in. It was something like lowering all gears quickly at certain moments and the car would turn into a bullet.

IIRC beyond the first couple of paragraphs the text in that article was taken directly from Mark's readme. And yes, it was written well before we properly learned about the downshift bug/trick. I don't think any other car ever went through such a sudden change in public perception...

[Cas]

Yes, I felt like using Blender renders. I've been thinking they do look good, but it'd make sense to also have a picture of what the car looks like in Stunts, so maybe I'll put that in the information tables and then put the renders below, maybe with some context, like a track in the background, I don't know. But so far, I like it this way.

About the downshifting bug, I'd like to document it in the Speedgate Wiki article... although maybe the less people know about it, the more they'll enjoy the car XD. I don't know. I don't even remember very well how to do the trick. And to be honest, I still like the Speedgate. If one doesn't like the bug, it can be forbidden for a race. It's very easy to see when the bug was used and when not. And otherwise, it makes the car interesting because, as far as I know, it's the only Stunts car that has that bug. If we've become used to seeing PG as a feature, then maybe this one is too.... Anyway, Stunts philosophy

[dreadnaut]

Yes, I felt like using Blender renders. I've been thinking they do look good, but it'd make sense to also have a picture of what the car looks like in Stunts, so maybe I'll put that in the information tables and then put the renders below, maybe with some context, like a track in the background, I don't know.

Maybe this, yes. They are nice, but look like they are from a different game. The SpeedGate image is a good mid-point: more details than a Stunts screenshot, but the same palette and lighting.

[Cas]

Yes. That is exactly what I feel. I want to make it look good with the details easy to appreciate, but I don't want to remove it too much from Stunts

[Duplode]

I'll try to chime in with something tomorrow.

Here is an article for the 911 Turbo. You'll note I have used a showroom screenshot, mostly to see how it would look like (I was originally inclined to be as lazy as possible by borrowing the ZakStunts scoreboard pic and possibly replacing it later. For some ungodly reason, though, MediaWiki is not rendering the car windows in that GIF correctly when the picture is resized). Doing the performance tests stirred a few thoughts on the stats; I will share them once they settle down a bit.

(Speaking of stats, credit where its due: looking at the Wiki history logs, I remembered the half mile results that already were in the Wiki had actually been obtained by CTG, as documented in this thread.)

[Cas]

Nice article!  The image looks good to me...  A problem I had when I went to filling the DTM individual cars' articles is that I had already said all I knew in the main DTM-pack article. Not sure if I should just rewrite that same thing more or less for each of the cars. The thing is that the DTM cars have always been together in Race For Kicks whenever they were used and in ZakStunts, while separated, they've played similar roles, so it's little what can be said about them separately except comparing the individual features, which is what I think I'm going to do, although the information table says it all in that regard.

[Daniel3D]

About the DTM cars. Maybe a individual article (like all others) with only reference to the pack and a main pack  article  with the story behind and the comparison between the three.

[Daniel3D]

There are a lot of cars now. But on the main car page i kind of miss segmentation,.
Like what are the original cars, which are considered cheat cars and which cars have new models.
Also, some cars are not really made for racing like the ikarus 260 or the starting line truck (thats still wip)

(some cars can be in more than one category, but i think it will make it cleaner)

maybe a download option? or link to a download page?

[Duplode]

There are a lot of cars now. But on the main car page i kind of miss segmentation,.

That's a good point. Instead of just the Cars category as the entry point, we might set up a few subcategories or create a fancier landing page.

A problem I had when I went to filling the DTM individual cars' articles is that I had already said all I knew in the main DTM-pack article. Not sure if I should just rewrite that same thing more or less for each of the cars. The thing is that the DTM cars have always been together in Race For Kicks whenever they were used and in ZakStunts, while separated, they've played similar roles, so it's little what can be said about them separately except comparing the individual features, which is what I think I'm going to do, although the information table says it all in that regard.

I think of the DTM cars as being very similar in straight line performance but differing in handling feel. Quoting myself from the DTM pack thread: 

After racing with the three cars, I can confirm each of them has its own distinctive temperament. The Audi is smooth as butter, IMSA like as you say, and definitely the easiest of the three. The BMW is very nimble, and I'm fairly sure it beats the other two on a twisty track. All the responsiveness, however, means you end up being very close to the limit at all times. Another complication is the occasional curveball thrown by the bug-susceptible nature of the car. To me, the BMW is the most challenging of the set. Lastly, the Mercedes feels more like a typical "slow car", and is probably the one for which the conventional driving techniques translate more easily.

Since this is a rather subjective picture, I wonder whether you all think of them along similar lines.

[KyLiE]

Since this is a rather subjective picture, I wonder whether you all think of them along similar lines.

I prefer the BMW out of the three, but that is mostly because I prefer it in real life.  I find it is the hardest to control, but the fastest when everything comes together.  The Audi is the most civilised and the easiest to get a competitive time with.  The Mercedes feels like it is slower, but has more lateral grip.  They all obviously have similar straight line performance so the difference I perceive might just be based on my opinion of the real cars.

[Cas]

I just gave them a try on the same track one after the other. It really is difficult to tell the difference as the time it takes to start over is enough to blend the memories. They are very similar. My feeling, probably very subjective, was that the Audi was more "powerful", not necessarily faster. I found the other two more similar between them and I felt more comfortable with the BMW. Odds are it was just the experience I had with each at that moment. They really are very close to one another.

I'm thinking I could quote both of you guys in the article just as that: as a quote of personal experiences