Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Official Content' started by ferrettank, Dec 21, 2021.
It doesn't but i did read that bastion will be getting a sound update
I love how insanely heavy this car is, just like the boat known as the dodge charger
It should be noted that the speed is completely irrelevant if you're just comparing two cars: it's a fair comparison if both cars are at the same speed, as they're both dealing with the same situation (it just becomes dissimilar to real life tests). I chose a high speed because it makes the differences even more obvious.
Anyhow, I did try 4 cars (Vivace, ETK 800, SBR4, Bastion) at the usual speed of 64 km/h in a small overlap test against a solid wall.
They all do relatively well at this low speed, however the bastion's front structure seems to suffer the most (the front left wheel is practically in the firewall, this a little strange at such a low speed). In terms of actual cabin damage, the SBR4 is definitely doing the worst here.
At 100 km/h, the bastion actually seems to be winning, however a look inside shows a different picture:
Compare this with the ETK's interior, which despite looking more beaten up, has actually suffered a smaller decrease of driver space than the Bastion.
Hiding all the non-structural parts (body panels, drivetrain, etc.) shows the damages a little more clearly:
Finally, I compared the ETK 800 and the Bastion against a flat wall at 100 km/h (once again, totally invalid for comparison with real crash tests, but perfectly valid for just comparing the two cars). I hid the doors (they are physically there, but they're made invisible) to show the interior damage:
I would say steering wheels aren't supposed to give the driver an uppercut to the chin, and the seats aren't meant to pitch down so violently on impact.
Overall the Bastion seems pretty adequate at low speeds, but the physical skeleton definitely needs some fine-tuning, as the deformation seems unlike what you'd see in a car of this type in reality (especially interior-wise, the seats and dash are way too prone to dislocation). Maybe some stiffening of the firewall, floor, and roof structures would help, though I wouldn't know for sure.
By the way, I hope that at no point does it look like I'm criticizing the devs here; the standard of quality has evolved immensely in recent years, and the devs have been doing a stunning job of bringing older content to this new standard. So, it's confusing to see a brand new release looking this "unrefined", compared to the fidelity of other recent (and recently-remastered) content
Heavy cars, like the new Bastion, have a higher kinetic energy ( E_kin = 1/2 * m * v² ) in case of a crash compared to ligther compact cars. Therefore the crash structures must dissipate more energy in a crash-event.
You could clearly see, that the passenger survival cell of the 3 cars (Vivace, ETK800 and Bastion) is intact and that the "crumple zone" has done it job relative to the mass and velocity of the vehicle.
And i don't know tho which extend they have modelled the European and US cars to thier respective crash-test requirements, as there are some differences between US and EU.
though while the bastion has more inertia, it would also be expected that it has more metal in its crumple zones to make up for the extra inertia.
I'd imagine it's just the case of the jbeam needing some more fine adjustment, and it was left on the side of being too weak for the sake of stability, for now.
The crumple zones on heavy cars must be more "soft" than on an lighter cars, as you want to keep the g-forces on the occupants as low as possible and in a certain range in the process of de-acceleration of the car. A "stiff" or "heavy" crumple zone in the direction of the crash event would be negative, as you want do dissipate energy controlled.
To manage the structual stiffness for dealing with the forces while driving, you need manage your load paths and define at which forces certain joints break in an crash event. The load transmission into the chassis structure between normal driving and crashing is obiously very different.
It's European car needs same crumble zone as new car
Meaning European car needs same jbeam as Bastion I think
For future conversation: all of these were taken after hitting an official Bollard just inside the front fender at 60mph, then had the doors visibly hidden. My PC will not win any graphics awards, but the structures here are what matter.
Gavril Grand Marshall:
Ibishu Pessima (2nd Gen):
This only includes cars from the late 90's to 2022, and all are in base trim. If anyone thinks these should be redone at a lower speed, feel free to say so.
These are a good comparison Now that it's all side by side, it's a bit shocking just how bad the Sunburst's structure is as well. For such a modern car, it crumples like a tin can from the late 90s.
It also has the size of one. It's a wanted feature that it's as small as it is but i hope they make it a tad bigger and stronger, it's ridiculously small and flimsy for a modern car. Even the suspension, it's flimsier than a burnside.
Has anyone else found that the Jbeam, especially on the hood and the doors is a little bit spiky and janky
Merry Christmas everyone!
Just noticed a couple more details.
1) In the 'Caged' drivemode, the G-Meter still appears on the gauge cluster screen like it does in all other modes except for the 'Comfort' one. I don't think the G-Meter is needed in the 'Caged' drivemode, especially since this is the mode which significantly decreases power and torque (by decoupling the Supercharger, among other things) and gets the ESC/TC systems at their nanniest settings for the optimal drivability. It should just show the current speed, like the 'Comfort' mode does.
2) I noticed that the Bastion has no Sunroof. I think it would be really nice for the Luxe variants to have this option!
I absolutely agree with the sayings of both of you. The Bastion does seem to lack some important reinforcements at the front and rear crumple zones, at the firewall, at the roof pillars, at the rear deck and at the transmission tunnel. In a 62mph - 100km/h either overlapped or head-on crash, the rear suspension detaches from its bushings and lurches forward and the rear driveshaft breaks from the pressure it receives at both its ends (front end the engine going back from both the front crumple zone and the firewall deforming and rear end the rear axle going forward from the kinetic energy being liberated). No other modern BeamNG car deforms its firewall or detaches its rear suspension/break its rear driveshaft that much in a 100km/h collision. Especially the modern ETKs and the Cherrier FCVs. The engine gets locked up but that's nothing special, all modern BeamNG cars do this.
Even the suspensions of the Bastion, in spite of the fact that the suspension arms and tie rods were strengthened with this 0.24.1.1 Update, still jiggle slightly during launching, braking and burnouts, something I rarely see in all other modern BeamNG cars.
Tbh, the crash results of the Bastion remind me of some crash tests of the 2016 Camaro and Mustang, in which these cars scored zero stars.
But tbh, if this is for showing the real variety in modern car safety (like the fact that the 2016 Camaro scores 0 in crash tests), then BeamNG has done it very right and I'm not complaining!
This also implies that the chassis of the Bastion has been around for some time before the Bastion came out, in 2016.
im kinda confused where your getting the zero stars thing for the 2016 mustang and camaro everything ive read even on iihs official website is that they performed fine
--- Post updated ---
--- Post updated ---
my bad looking into the mustang more it did not perform spectacular roof structure wise iin a small overlap.
--- Post updated ---
but it still got a good rating by iihs
your opinion is actually a fact
right now, the bastions V6 & V8 sounds are reused from the general sounds they have for those engine types
so it isn't really made for the bastion right now
it will get changed in the future
gud comparison. JBEAM needs to be stronger a bit. Cuz this is modern car
You're right, I said this in a very wrong way. I thought of it this way: the 2016 Camaro is based on the Alpha platform, which we first heard of in 2012, when the Cadillac ATS came out. The Small Overlap test was also introduced in 2012, so I made the wrong assumption of thinking that the Alpha platform wasn't designed for this crash test and I connected all 3 facts together. I made a mistake and you're right, thank you.
That's exactly the video I was looking for tbh. It seems like the mess the Camaro made looked enough for me while the Mustang faired worse.
There's also this video, showing the Challenger at about the 57th minute and it shows the steering wheel being pushed to the right.
Did someone find the Engine Jbeam ?
Definitely a sorely needed vehicle; a decent selling yet good driving large slab of present day Americana (A hint of Ger-mericana perhaps?) that is available from the factory with everything from rental/hooptie to racecar specs. Something like a modern Codge Dharger has always been on my personal wishlist, especially when Beam's theme/scope evolved.
So, some (a lot of) random thoughts from here and there, some hopefully constructive criticism too:
Modern US police car! Correct number of power window switches! Close mechanical recreation and model tiering/specs of a specific IRL vehicle family! Windscreen cowl that correctly fills the gap between the glass and the engine bay!
Spinning radiator fans and other bits! But the front facing sides of the fans are invisible. This invisibility is prominently visible from some angles.
Front upper wishbones! A little clipping of the springs into the wheel wells though. Steering column absence in the engine bay may be a bit obvious. Extremely good to see a unique looking rear multilink setup distinct from the ETKs too. Was very worried that the ETK strut and multilink design would be totally copied.
Factory speed limiters are a tad conservative. And the derestricted top speeds of the 3.5 and 5.7 models seem a little low relative to the 6.5 and S/C models. The need for tire and aero fine tuning strikes again?
The rougher sounding V8 exhaust in sport modes seems a little too rough. Maybe needs more prominent S/C whine too?
I guess the drive mode selection and ESC toggles are in a gauge cluster/infotainment sub menu accessed by the physical direction controls? Not that many physical switches around the gear shifter.
The dash mounted headlight on-off switch doesn't rotate, it really should, here and in others too. Fog light controls on base models without them too? Curious to also see no provision for auto headlights unlike the modern ETKs. It will be very neat if light sensors are ever simulated in Beam.
The gauge cluster uses the "!" symbol for the parking brake while typical USDM models include or even only use the word "BRAKE". Would be cool if the physical switch also lit up.
Auto shifter with a flexible boot! Lacks animation though.
The PRNDSM layout should be displayed somewhere on or near the physical gear shifter. An interesting possibility is the removal of M and sport ESC from base models.
This isn't specific to the Bastion, butttt..... no rev-matched downshifts in autos or understeer compensation in the ESC yet.
There's a dedicated clock button on the centre console stack but the only clock is in the main gauge cluster. A redundant clock and ambient temperature gauge are good to have somewhere on the infotainment screen. Low ambient temp/black ice warnings would be neat to have in the main clusters of the modern cars too.
1 neat thing about higher end US vehicles is the sheer availability of info like component temperatures and pressures, this would be a good thing to add to the infotainment screen in future, especially if the GPS has no map to display. (Cough, pure grid)
Modern US vehicles usually have a compass display somewhere, even base models without map functions. Another detail not yet accurately capable of recreation in Beam is reverse cameras, especially with the relatively recent US federal requirement.
A modern style slip indicator is used for stability intervention, good. However, turning ESC off usually lights up a separate symbol that includes the word off. Some modern vehicles then retain use of the flashing slip indicator just to warn of non-intervened slip or when un-defeatable intervention takes place, like EDL/ETS/auto-brake-diffs, or actuation of the torque transferring clutches in variable locking diffs or AWD systems. Some of this point applies to the modern ETKs, Cherriers, and perhaps the SBR too.
The V6 engine's mesh is pretty much the V8's with 1/4 chopped off. It shares the 90 degree V angle and doesn't quite look like it has the typical modern DOHC configuration.
Now for the proportions portion; there seems to be a little too much front overhang, possibly with engine frame rails/front crash structure a little too long. Maybe not quite as severe as the modern ETKs, but the front can look bulbous from certain angles with an overhang length too similar to the rear's. And the radiator should fit more neatly just ahead of the front bits of the wheel wells, maybe by being a bit taller but narrower. Extra space in front of it can then be used for other heat exchangers without stretching the front structure forward too much. Think it's better to keep weight as close to the cabin as possible while keeping coolant hoses shorter. Also, YouTube is now recommending me every front bumper removal video in existence :/
The jutting forward and squaring-off of the corners of the front bumpers below the headlights also leads to recommendation of the collision damage waiver option at the friendly rental agency.