Today in sim racing axioms. I want a shot!

Very roughly speaking, flow = displacement x RPM. These engines max out at 4,000 RPM. A 700cc class motorcycle v-twin will turn twice that.

I mean, it is... But there’s a lot of fine print here. First up, don’t miss this part of the press release:

I mean, not that every part of this build isn’t just bonkers awesome, but the Audi 2.5L I5 (O7K) engine is transverse only in Audi’s line up. The older 2.1 I5 had longitudinal applications, but not the O7K. It takes a lot of time and engineering to get a transverse to longitudinal swap done correctly.

I mean, not that every part of this build isn’t just bonkers awesome, but the Audi 2.5L I5 (O7K) engine is transverse only in Audi’s line up. The older 2.1 I5 had longitudinal applications, but not the O7K. It takes a lot of time and engineering to get a transverse to longitudinal swap done correctly.

I’m trying to hate them, but I can’t get past this horrible sensation of complete embarrassment.

But it can’t tell you how it felt in the car. Yes, you can analyze telemetry and compute the perfect response, but is that the standard by which we’re officiating races now? Why run the races? Let’s just simulate the result and wrap the season up in an afternoon.

The regulations are written for scenarios where a car leaves the circuit, then rejoins. Think of it like pulling off the side of the road, then turning your car to re-enter the roadway. This is different because of the curvature here. Vettel was going to re-enter the circuit. His momentum assured that. So what would…

The problem with relying on cockpit footage is that you can’t feel the car. For example, if the rear is getting loose again (having just been off-circuit), a late correction might have been entirely justified.

What a horseshit call. Hamilton practically (although probably not intentionally) forced the issue by wedging his car up there between Vettel and the wall. Hamilton should have known exactly where Vettel was headed (in a straight line). This is the racing equivalent of driving in front of a speeding train. You know…

Pleeeeease. Let me have this!

You keep making your argument relative to ancient turbo technology, but I cannot figure out why. That’s not my point of reference. I’m not comparing to a homebrew turbocharged Iron Duke. My frame of reference are modern cars. I literally just drove the new F90 M5 the other day, and I can feel the turbo lag in that car.

I have two hypotheses to put forth:

You’ve made a lot of counterpoints to things I haven’t said.

Motor Trend says they’ve moved the torque curve upward on this one.

I have found the best candidates for lease takeovers are folks that want something interesting but they don’t want to keep it for very long.

The key is in understanding the engineering goals and priorities:

It’ll come down to personal preference. The specifications on both are extremely close, and they both feel about the same quality, IMO. Some people sit down in the X3 / SQ5 and love it, while others are turned of by one thing or another. We just happen to really like iDrive and BMW’s general styling. The SQ5 is very…

I know that feeling. I was still in the edit window on mine, so I modified it. Hopefully that helps.