A good analysis of grip: rFactor 2 vs iRacing.

I'm rendering my Skip Barber Regional lap at Mid Ohio... 1:37.642 with no tire pressure adjusted, as I said before, this car needs an optimal pressure to works fine, I founded best one for slicks, but I have no time to test now best for Regional version.

With more testing I'm sure I can do 1:36, and I'm not an alien, only a good driver I think. And one more thing to say is something has been said before, rF2 Mid Ohio is fan made, and curbs aren't the same as reality, in rF2 are almost intouchable, the real curbs can be attacked in almost every turn.

PS: this thread is going far from first post explanations... I will try to talk about first post and trying to say times don't matter, but despite of that in Mid Ohio with rF2 can be done really nice times, not as video author said 39s was hard to do...

 

Sorry for double post, but here is my demonstration, such lap times can be achieved, close to real life one, invalidating lap times argument. Not adjusted tyre pressure in my setup, untouchable curbs in fan made Mid-Ohio for rF2, some mistakes in my lap (I have better partials but not together*), and despite od that I did a 1:37.642 improvable.

Is hard to do better than 1:39s as video author said? a big NO.

PS: pay attention to my pedal telemetry overlay... and honesstly I don't know how is Empty Box driving, weird how bad he drives that car just compare laps. I have experience with National version, I'm in a league racing with It, but is the second time I use Regional, and first time this last version, I have only 30 entire laps with Regional at Mid-Ohio and I'm doing It well, Empty box is driving like drunk.

*One of the mistakes is in turn one, with better driving line can be done almost at full throttle after braking. And the whole third partial can be done better.

 

Me too, and I agree. iRacing has many awesome features and attention to detail, but rF2 feels and acts more like the real car. iRacing may be using more literal engineering data and rF2 may be "massaged" a bit, but what matters is the result. And for me (with my PC and racing equipment, rF2 is the winner.

 

Skippy is not neutral. It can be set-up however you want for training purposes. It is meant to be a difficult car to drive (rear weight bias and unforgiving in many ways) so that if you can master it you should be able to drive any other race car. That's the design philosophy, at least. Just like an old 911, once you figure out how to keep the throttle on through corners and you "get" how the balance works, it's an addictively fun car to drive, though it will always be there to bite you if you overdrive it even a bit.

The iRacing verison is too skittish in my opinion. The real car, even with the street tires, can be pushed quite a bit and there is lots of warning when you are pushing it too much. I feel and hear that warning with the rF2 version. I don't (enough) with the iRacing version.

I should also add that this is all relative. The latest iRacing build and tire model is vastly better than the older versions. The difference now is minimal and some may prefer one over the other. When rF2 Skippy was released, there was no comparison with the then current version of iRacing's Skippy.

 

I drove the Williams F1 Driver In Loop simulator at Grove a couple of years ago and what we have here with rF2 is very, very impressive. Just saying.

 

Completely agree.

He did 1e40's but in every lap he made the same mistake loosing the rear at some point and not really "attacking" any turn while in iR he is always tight and over the curbs...

IMHO useless.

 

Yes, he overdrive the car in rF2 and drives better in iR, just watch my last posts with a nice video of rF2 version lap at first day of training...

PS: and more... real Mid-Ohio record with Regional Skip Barber is around 1:35.7. iRacing Mid-Ohio version is way more accurate than rF2 (way more...), despite of that, Empty box do easily 36s with slides, and mistakes. This does me to question about accuracy of iRacing Skip Barber version... every time I go here I found more and more incoherences in that "analysis".

I think with an accurate version in rF2 as iR one, rF2 would win in times accuracy for sure.

 

No, probably only the guy posting it would offer an explanation of it.

 

I see but nothing relevant to understand.

 

until NTM5 came out two weeks ago, the Skippy in iRacing was nearly impossible to drive (for me). the Skippy here in rFactor 2 has always been quite driveable for me. Now the skippy in iRacing is driveable and I ran several races in it yesterday. That said, I don't see a huge difference between the rFactor 2 Skippy vs. the iRacing one at this point. I would guess that some simple setup changes can make either feel worse than the other. NTM5 in iRacing, so far, looks to be a beautiful thing. That doesn't take anything away from rFactor 2, however. Both enjoy a spot on my harddrive. Yesterday I ran Star Mazda and Skippy races on iRacing, then later in the day, I ran FR3.5 and Camaro races here on rFactor 2. Both were quite fun! Not sure why there needs to be animosity to one or the other. Maybe people have such tiny harddrives that both won't fit on their drive at the same time?

 

It's not the proper NTMv5 yet in iRacing on those two models, just an early beta.

 

So let me get this right, is this guy saying iracing is a more accurate simulator based on the best lap he could do in both simulations?

Is he saying iracing performs more accurate physics calculations than the most sophisticated to date racing simulation?

Man where have I been wasting my time here, I'm going joining iracing cos this guys word is gospel.

So dude, whats your point? stop making up storys for attention. Just go practice you obviously need it to get better.

...and don't let me catch you here again posting crap like this and making me read it and reply.

 

Well so it's interesting you say the real car isn't neutral. You may have driven them more recently than I have. How would you describe its handling balance in each corner phase? And do you feel like it's different high speed vs low?

If you look at Esteve's lap (nice lap, btw) you can see him making lots of small corrections coming OFF of the slower corners like the Keyhole. This is where the rF2 car shines and is very much like the real car, IMO. You don't just go wide open in the real car when you're at the limit and then wait for it to track out. You're managing it all the way out. Even a really fast corner like LRP's Downhill, where you have very little torque going to the wheels and even some compression from the track elevation, the real car doesn't just understeer heavily and let you stay wide open with ease.

Not trying to argue with you though. I'd really like to hear your thoughts on the balance of the real car and how it relates to the rF2 version.

 

I said nothing about the accuracy of either sim at all, merely that my point was that while I previously preferred the rF2 version by a mile, the gap is basically nil at this point.

Also worth noting the 37.6 posted is on an EXTREMELY rubbered track to the point real road may not even bother to exist. I ran with 25 AI + Me for 45 minutes for the preset I'm using.

 

In rF2 you may compare best laps in real life, with best in rF2 with fully rubbered track because of real hot laps are done in optimal conditions, and real tracks in race are in very nice conditions due practices and that stuff (how rubber "looks" depends on the modder, textures used...). And I repeat again... isn't the fastest lap, in that version of Mid-Ohio can be done 36s for sure being a really fast driver and perfect setup.

Around a second slower than reality and iRacing time. Fully justifiable because of great differences between versions. You are ignoring that rF2 Mid-Ohio is not iR Mid-Ohio, elevations are different, you also ignore that we can lose tenths in rF2 due untouchable curbs, in iRacing you attack every curb in the track, something impossible in rF2 version. Also turns modelling are different in some points.

As I said you on youTube, you did just a really bad comparison.

 

Just in response to this post from page 1 (which I don't want to quote in full, since it's quite lengthy) - I have to say that is an excellent post from someone with some experience. If I can pull two 'themes' from it:

1. There will always be a design choice on how to convey the things you can feel in a real car, but can't in a sim. With the quality of a number of sims these days it's quite possible those choices will produce a bigger difference in feel than the underlying physics.

2. People tend to simplify issues such as 'grip', conducting tests they feel illustrate important differences but are likely to just be misguided focusing on one single aspect of car behaviour, without even properly eliminating all variables - which is increasingly difficult anyway. Unfortunately entire arguments are based on nonsensical evidence.

I especially liked the reference to things happening in certain situations in real life that a lot of sim-fans would see as unrealistic if it happened in a sim. It's a bit like when an undoctored video on youtube attracts a lot of "Fake!" comments because people are so unwilling to adjust what they see as possible even with the evidence in front of their eyes.

On top of all that, the placebo effect is amazing. I think anyone who's played around a bit with modding and made the mistake of editing the wrong file will be aware of that, but most people underestimate how easily they can be misled.

 

There is one thing i agree, in rf2 its faster to go unbridled than to keep the line and drive smooth.
When i watch replays, i always feel the same, a real car wouldn't handle those moves people are doing. Its the only thing i don't like, races get out of control many times.

I love rf2, and i have never played iRacing, so i can't compare.

 

Sentell and Spinelli, have you tried the last version of iRacing's Skip Barber, or you are talking about past experiences? I used to hate the Skippy, but since the last build (2 weeks ago) it has improved a lot.

 

I don't find this to be true at all and I'm one of the faster people online in rF2 atm. A really fast guy (Aleksi Elomaa) posted a Formula 2 replay over in that thread a few weeks back, and it was quicker than I can go but looks almost boring. The thing is that it varies in rF2 according to the car, just as irl. The rl Skippy regional car can be slid around quite a bit without losing much time, whereas something like the F2 car cannot.

 

I've raced it, yeah. The latest tire model has improved things a great deal and I expect it will continue to improve.