Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Why the need for so much torque ?

125 posts in this topic

Did you read that thread (I gave in the link)?

Weren't you the poster there?

I think one needs to spend some serious time with both sims to draw own conclusion instead of just reading and blindly accepting someone's opinion, there are plenty on the net.

 

WARNING!

Huge thread's derailment is in progress. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A proof of what? The only thing I am interested is something that fools me it´s right it can be 100 % wrong but if the end result is that it feels real I buy it :). I mean to do proper tire physics you need 20 pcs like the F1 simulators are running. And there is complaint about those not being all that useful also :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A proof of what? The only thing I am interested is something that fools me it´s right it can be 100 % wrong but if the end result is that it feels real I buy it :). I mean to do proper tire physics you need 20 pcs like the F1 simulators are running. And there is complaint about those not being all that useful also :)

I bet you did not watch those videos. "a proof of what?"

the videos and telemetry data showed that rF2 suspension is more realistic than AC:

http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/26211-Does-rF2-implement-chassis-flex-or-semi-chassis-flex/page2

 

Sure, you feel what you like and say what you like. I don't care..!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet you did not watch those videos. "a proof of what?"

the videos and telemetry data showed that rF2 suspension is more realistic than AC:

http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/26211-Does-rF2-implement-chassis-flex-or-semi-chassis-flex/page2

 

Sure, you feel what you like and say what you like. I don't care..!

Yes exactly I haven´t read the links I am not sure why I get them. I am not into prooving that one suspension modelling is better then the other. It doesn´t matter I drive what feels best :)

rFactor 2 has some cars that feels golden and others you just wonder what it is :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never have driven a DD-wheel, but read enough about it and will probably get my AF this month. 

 

IMHO the main reason why people wants to have more torque than available with the AF is iRacing. Really i hate the FFB in iRacing with my TX and tried the new update today on Road America and it still is the worst i ever experienced.

 

There´s this long turn while i was driving this Cadillac CTS-V and there was no difference in the FFB between enough grip / off the grip / off road and my TX was way behind clipping as far as i know from other sims. If iRacing cannot get enough FFB-difference through my TX with this very different kind of conditions, it needs this 20 to 30 Newtonmeter Power to get a few more than subtle differences out of this sim. And you will never have a torque problem with AC, pCars, GSC, rF2, Dirt Rally and others, because they are even good enough with a G27. Just my 2 cent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the 13Nm is just not enough to experience realistic 1:1 FFB feel. You shall consider a Servo motor at least 20Nm (better to have the 30Nm one). I have the AF wheel. Good wheel indeed.  I am now thinking  update to the 30Nm Servo one.

(still a $1800 wheel)

http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/24900-Sim-Racing-servo-ffb-systems-OSW-Bodnar/page32

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never have driven a DD-wheel, but read enough about it and will probably get my AF this month. 

 

IMHO the main reason why people wants to have more torque than available with the AF is iRacing. Really i hate the FFB in iRacing with my TX and tried the new update today on Road America and it still is the worst i ever experienced.

 

There´s this long turn while i was driving this Cadillac CTS-V and there was no difference in the FFB between enough grip / off the grip / off road and my TX was way behind clipping as far as i know from other sims. If iRacing cannot get enough FFB-difference through my TX with this very different kind of conditions, it needs this 20 to 30 Newtonmeter Power to get a few more than subtle differences out of this sim. And you will never have a torque problem with AC, pCars, GSC, rF2, Dirt Rally and others, because they are even good enough with a G27. Just my 2 cent. 

 

Hi Leynad..

 

Your wheel should handle iRacing just fine.  Are you running the wheel in linear mode or non -linear? I would suggest not checking the 'use linear' box and adding maybe 0.4 points to minimum force to start with.  Does the TX also have any OS based / driver based settings that allow you to crank up forces? Perhaps leave those at default and maybe someone here on iRacing with a TX can confirm. You should feel some forces on/off grip if you're at the limits.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<p>Nonlinear node feels terrible imo. I'd stick to linear even with a tm wheel. Non linear feels fake. Its a springy mess. Try going into the app.ini file in Iracing folder located in documents. Check the settings. Watch Darin's video review (pc) of the t300 and itl explain further. You can adjust it more than you know. You need enough force to communicate loss of grip, and try not to oversaturate the ffb. Check the clipping meter, same as fps meter. Hope that helps.&nbsp;</p>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you that linear is better. My suggestion stemmed from the fact that non-linear settings are fool proof in that they scale min forces and dont allow for clipping. It would be a good test for him to start.

 

David Tucker suggests to use non-linear for wheels with ~5NM or less torque. That said I run linear on with 10 in minimum force with my CSW and it feels really great. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was using a G25 or CSWv1, I didn't like iRacing FFB at all, or rF2's for that matter. AC's was best at that time but, now I'm using the AF and the FFB picture has turned a complete 180; iRacing & rF2 top the FFB charts for me now.  One advantage of SC4 with other games is the adjust-ability through the Foundation FFB, it can totally transform the FFB in a game like Dirt Rally into something great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One advantage of SC4 with other games is the adjust-ability through the Foundation FFB, it can totally transform the FFB in a game like Dirt Rally into something great

 

I love rF2-FFB starting with 1.5 FFB-scale up to 3 for the Indy Car plus this amazing good SimVibe-support, which is also very nice and clear in iRacing. Yesterday i tried this linear mode in iRacing and it sucks totally like i wrote. But the non-linear mode isn´t enough as well. iRacing should implement this nice and optional Seat-of-Pants- and grip-/no grip-effects from pCars, which gives you much more FFB-information from the rear axle and the grip level, because not everybody have a DD-wheel with Traction-loss-motion. And with the TX pCar is much more close to rF2 than iRacing in terms of FFB and physics because the cars sliding/drifting and in iRacing it feels like grip: yes or no. 

 

Best comparision is the Skippy in iRacing vs rF2. In rF2 it´s a very hard to handle but satisfying drifter, in iR it´s nothing like that, what it should be with this kind of tires and real Skippy-Drivers saying: rF2 is close, iR is way off. 

 

PS: AC has a much better FFB with many cars since the 1.2-update, because they reduced the self aligning torque resulting in a less strong but more subtle FFB especially in tight corners, but they always had this additional and optional road-effects (not realistic but effectiv) which gives you at least some grip-informations through vibrations. No such effects in iRacing and that´s why SC4 is doing a job, that iRacing should provide out of the box. And this very strong DD-wheels can provide in every situation at least 5 additional NM for more FFB-effects, an AF can´t. But other sims provide this differences even with a G27. It´s not realistic, but sim-racing isn´t the real thing as well and in a real car you get just far more information through every muscle of your body. So for me it´s just very okay to get fake-informations from the wheel-driver instead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those titles can introduce other feedback effects into the steering wheel to simulate forces felt by a driver but not necessarily through the steering column.  iRacing simulates what a driver feels through the steering column only for better or for worse. I certainly feel if my tires are getting loaded and when they start to lose traction and  I personally prefer the iRacing model since I can predict what the car is doing. The other titles make the FFB feel more pronounced on lower end wheels and perhaps this is why many find it more appealing with the belt driven wheels.

 

Augmenting iRacing with Simvibe I find the experience even more enjoyable.

 

It is true with DD wheels the feel in iRacing truely shines. I think that reflects their work to provide a realistic experience but it may require those more expensive motors. I'll be upgrading to one myself.

 

End of the day, if you like RF2 stick with it, each sim provides different aspects to different people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is true with DD wheels the feel in iRacing truely shines. I think that reflects their work to provide a realistic experience but it may require those more expensive motors. I'll be upgrading to one myself.

My AF is coming this month (i hope), but it shouldn´t be a must have, what i think it´s quite necessary in iRacing if you don´t want to memorise the limit for each corner instead of just feeling it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those of you discussing linear vs non-linear mode in iRacing here's a little recent nugget of information from David Tucker I saw and it reinforces what he's said in the past in his optimal FFB settings thread since this feature was first introduced, which is basically the ONLY reason to switch on linear is if you have a high end DD wheel, in my experience the T500 can only JUST handle linear mode but there's a high risk of clipping so it should really be set to non-linear.

 

"When non linear is checked we compress the data in such a way that you really can't get clipping, even if you drive into a wall. That is what the yellow bar is for, to indicate that you are deep into that highly compressed zone. The goal is to see as little yellow (or red) as you can when you are driving cleanly (not on the curbs or hitting a wall).

If your seeing red through a corner then you are saturated and the wheel will feel numb. If you have non linear enabled and you see orange through a corner than you are not saturated but the bumps will be really muted."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Post your impressions of the AF especially of the new raw modes that are available when you have it up and running.

I have been running the test version for a few months now. I think that is what you are talking about. 

 

First of all, I race ovals, so roadies may feel/act different, the car you are driving may be different, and many, many other variables I'm not talking about. I'm talking about the A,B and C NASCAR vehicles on iRacing. :-)

 

TBH, I don't care for the "raw" modes, or the extra torque. It feels like "too much" to me. Yes, it makes the wheel react quicker, but I never had the problem of it "not" being quick enough to begin with. I have tried the High and Responsive modes, as well as with Dynamic Boost on all of them to experiment. I didn't care for the Dynamic boost at all on anything from Default to Responsive.

 

I still run in Default mode, no dampening of any kind, and my intensity is set to where it's comfortable to drive for 2+ hours, but strong enough to feel real to me. I would never want to run with 100% feedback, it's just too much IMO. 

Some tracks I prefer the IR FFB, but there is something about the CUP car that a lot of times the SC FFB feels better and I just can't use the game FFB. I like the option to change it to what feels best and not have to settle for a wheel that is too strong or lets the bumps come through too strong. 

 

So for "me", the need to make more modes and the extra torque were for nothing, but on the road side it may be different. I think it boils down to some people like to tinker and get the settings perfect for themselves at certain tracks and with cars, some just want to drive. I've always liked the ability to make things the way I like, so I would not want to do without SC on a wheel or on my transducers. It's just a game-changer to me.  :mrgreen:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been running the test version for a few months now. I think that is what you are talking about. 

 

First of all, I race ovals, so roadies may feel/act different, the car you are driving may be different, and many, many other variables I'm not talking about. I'm talking about the A,B and C NASCAR vehicles on iRacing. :smile:

 

TBH, I don't care for the "raw" modes, or the extra torque. It feels like "too much" to me. Yes, it makes the wheel react quicker, but I never had the problem of it "not" being quick enough to begin with. I have tried the High and Responsive modes, as well as with Dynamic Boost on all of them to experiment. I didn't care for the Dynamic boost at all on anything from Default to Responsive.

 

I still run in Default mode, no dampening of any kind, and my intensity is set to where it's comfortable to drive for 2+ hours, but strong enough to feel real to me. I would never want to run with 100% feedback, it's just too much IMO. 

Some tracks I prefer the IR FFB, but there is something about the CUP car that a lot of times the SC FFB feels better and I just can't use the game FFB. I like the option to change it to what feels best and not have to settle for a wheel that is too strong or lets the bumps come through too strong. 

 

So for "me", the need to make more modes and the extra torque were for nothing, but on the road side it may be different. I think it boils down to some people like to tinker and get the settings perfect for themselves at certain tracks and with cars, some just want to drive. I've always liked the ability to make things the way I like, so I would not want to do without SC on a wheel or on my transducers. It's just a game-changer to me.  :mrgreen:

I agree with what you say here Steve. I run mostly Road Courses in Default Mode with only about 60-70% force strength; works for me but, maybe I'm a lightweight. :-P

 

In most cases, I prefer SC4 FFB as I feel I can adjust the attributes I want better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you that linear is better. My suggestion stemmed from the fact that non-linear settings are fool proof in that they scale min forces and dont allow for clipping. It would be a good test for him to start.

 

David Tucker suggests to use non-linear for wheels with ~5NM or less torque. That said I run linear on with 10 in minimum force with my CSW and it feels really great.

Yeah I ran about the same setting on the ffb slider with my t500 and it felt great to me. Regarding a previous post i saw from another member about not being able to catch the cts-v grip loss...that's not something a direct drive wheel does very well either. That's just the car's nature. Once you loose a little grip, its going to try and kill you. The problem with the cts-v for me is that it looses grip smoothly and progressively, but the weight and momentum of the car will often dictate your outcome based on the initial input you give from the wheel and pedals at the corner entry. Half way through a turn, its hard to catch slides on the cts-v even in an osw. Grip the wheel lighter, be smoother, and get to know its tires behaviors, especially once those suckers get hot. An osw helps me catch grip in many cars, but the cts-v wasn't one where I magically got better at driving it because of the wheel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's only one reason for more torque and that's the DW12 on certain tracks, that's the only car the Accuforce can't quite accurately replicate but quite honestly I don't need a work out for sim racing.

BTW Maya did you get your Accuforce issues resolved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites