Talking about "idiotic vibrations" rF2 FR3.5 must be the car with one of the most annoying experiences while going over bumps, offroad and etc. When I make a mistake and go offroad I literally want to plug out the cable of my wheel Considering that I have relatively weak consumer wheel (T300) the vibrations and left/right movements when going over bumps is ridiculously strong in comparison to other forces (grip feel) that you actually need to drive the car. I like this car but the suspension construction(?) of this car is making me mad.
For the 78th time, the 16th thread, and the 2nd website, try adjusting the STS (steering torque sensitivity)
Agreed, it exaggerates the forces. Put higher ffb smoothing, otherwise it will just rip off your table. There's a reason why the default value isn't 0 but 9 (at least for g27). At even then feels like there's too much, maybe 12-14. Though at 14 may already be too smooth, but just try different values and see how it feels when going on road, on kerbs, and off road.
Hello msportdan, I had a G27 about 8 years and when rF2 came out and even up to the latest build I could not get my G27 dialed in...it was ok, but not great compared to other Sims. I decided to upgrade to a T300RS and the difference between the 2 wheels is astonishing, rF2 feels amazing with the latest build, and so do all the other Sims I have. I could also use my G27 Pedals with a 'Ricmotech Thrustmaster to G27 Pedal Adapter' which gave them better/higher resolution making for smoother acceleration and braking...no regrets so far, worth every cent...and of coarse this is my own personal opinion and my vary from other T300RS users.
For sims, u dont make the ffb to follow ur taste. U set it up correctly, and then wuteva ure getting is due to cold tires and green tracks, flat spots or bad modded tracks. u dont expect a road z06 to have same ffb feel as the fr3.5. Know ur car, know the track, load up a rubbered track, do a proper setup, heat up ur tires n brakes in a few laps, and gve it a nice push if u can. And come back here n talk.
Already using custom STS, the issue with it is that is not accurate way of making forces linear(lower end becomes too weak, which already has kind of force fall off). And as far as I know there is know way of knowing how much you need to set it corectly apart from "feel". Scoop knee and scoop reduction like settings as in pCars could help a lot (it can make these wheels almost perfectly linear with small deviations). https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1E1BWyZ1nh3VWypzaNFOod81r-qaIDHmx1Z3weluJo3I/edit?usp=sharing
You can use the wheelcheck program (v1.72 is the newest version as far as I'm aware) and step 2 linearity test to check your wheel's linearity with all sorts of different control panel FFB settings. Then you apply a curve (think of the curve when/if you adjust your pedals' and steering's input sensitivity) using STS. Basically the STS is software FFB linearity. The curve probably adjusts in a linear/consistent fashion throughout it's total range (0.0 - 2.0) so there may be a way to figure out that curve formula and enter the curve into a spreadsheet along with your wheecheck's results ("Force" and "DeltaX") and from there be able to visually apply the STS curve to your wheel's raw linearity results and play around with all sorts of different STS settings and dynamically view how different STS values affect the wheelcheck-generated graph. This would allow you to see how the STS affects your linearity chart in real-time for a true end-result of your FFB linearity (combination of hardware linearity and software linearity). I don't know if I explained that correctly but do any of you guys see what I'm trying to say? Basically, find out the curve formula for RF2's STS and stick it into a spreadsheet with your wheelcheck graph in order to apply STS to the graph and experiment with STS values.
STS is very simple curve. rF2 doesn't have the value to set the force falloff point or "knee" as per pCars, see spreadsheet I have included it explains it all. As you can see in Pcars you set a point and how much you want to reduce from that point. Applying generic curve as in rF2 across the range can make it worse. T300 wheels have "knee" at around 70% force which is why generic curve with highest point at around 50%is not a good way of making it more linear. In addition that rF2 STS curve will make lower end forces less linear. Most consumer wheels have "deadzone" and weaker forces near center, where you want to increase the force, however in case of STS you decrease it even more. Higher STM (in my case more than 3%) will cause rumbling at the center. That's why pCars have DRF (deadzone range falloff). In pCars I can set minimum force to ~8% while applying some DRF to make the low forces more linear without introducing rumbles or squared signal at lower end. Of course STS and STM are better than nothing, but a lot is left to be desired compared to what is available in pCars regarding this matter. These settings shouldn't bet very hard to implement, right? While the increase in linearity is very noticeable. How do you convince ISI to introduce new options as per above? How likely they would listen? This would be beneficial for consumer wheel users that want linear wheel response.
When you drive a real car you cannot adjust any FFB settings except for power steering. FFB should be something as objective to simulate as tire load, suspension, etc are. The fact that all those FFB tuning parameters are there, mean that something is not being done as it should by either the sim or the wheel. It is quite evident that wheels are very different so I would think that, in 90% of the cases, the wheel is responsible for not providing a realistic FFB and those parameters try to compensate those limitations. Powerful DD wheels should not need any of those parameters to feel as they should. They can provide high torque at the full range of speed of simulation. I have seen in many post the linearity graph obtained by that external software that compares input vs output. I don't think that dynamic effects are included in that test so it is not useful to check if under fast variations of input forces the dynamic response is being the expected one. It does not show either the delay wrt to the input which takes to the wheel to provide the commanded force. I am not sure but I think that G27 has separate motor for resistance and vibrations. This would be meaningful of the inability of the motor to provide very high frequency dynamic forces which would need an extra device to provide a faked vibration. It is clear that ISI could provide a lot of info about this but they simply don't want to. There have been too many FFB threads already and they have never posted in order to clarify anything there. I only remember them explaining the criteria to adjust the FFB strength to be a compromise between different vehicles. Enviado desde mi GT-I9505 mediante Tapatalk
okay so I tried the sts at 2.0 and I must admit it feels much better on my wheel. I do get a rumble in some cars like the vette at Atlanta on the high speed parts. But when trying these cars at an oval at top speed banking all was fine.
I have a T500. I now have found a setzing thats ok for most cars. But sometimes it does not ferl like "rubber" wheels but " wooden" wheels instead. Like a hard Bang! What to do? I also feel that the ffb in rf2 is very difficult to set up right. And even then, it feels different with different cars. The whole system needs to be reworked.
rF2 ffb is pretty good right out of the box, and of course it feels different with different cars. You are driving different cars, different tyres, fwd, rwd, different suspension, different aero. Its testament to just how good the ffb is compared to others where, yes ffb feels the same in all cars.... Fudged and canned. Jeez.
I neverhaf any complains abt rf2 ffb. It worked wif my g27 out of the box. Too many ppl like to say 'dats how it shud feel'. Meaning how a car feel shud follow their say instead of following the cars physics characteristics.
feels crap out of the box on my t300 too light and unrealistic, ive driven a few cars race and road. but.... raise the sts and your there...it feels better.
This way you making already non linear response even less linear, causing higher end to loose details.
Some people for some reason just don't like having detailed force feedback. I seem to remember empty box tweeting that he dislikes the feel of the stock car because the force feedback is too detailed... In that case I guess iracing and SCE are the better choices. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As long as you don't clip then it's not a huge deal if forces that are supposed to feel like 50% feel like 70% instead (just an example). So you have some compression/boosting to the forces in order to help the weak wheels with the big dynamic range of some car's FFB, big whoop. Don't sweat it man. If it feels better then stick with it.
i get what people are saying.... but ultra detailed ffb isnt what i would consider real. In a car you dont get all the feeling through the wheel anyway its mostly through your bum and back. but i can see why people like to have it thru the wheel. But for me out of the box, the lower forces feel all sloppy and light, even with detailed forces. Im not clipping and i have no smoothing or damping so i have a good feeling wheel without any weird workarounds. Having said that im still feeling tyre slip friction kerbs suspension not much different than before, theres just more resistance now.