Emilian Huminiuc
Registered
You do realize that the cars in LMU are GTE not GT3, don't you?
Released GT3 Update and (v1) BOP
- Thread starter Paul Jeffrey
- Start date
Let´s wait for the GT3 in LMU and than i will laugh.
cristianuk
Registered
camber conditions can be simulated during the tire making process, can you make the tires and car your self and reconfirm the camber doesnt work?
Havner
Registered
When GT3 release for LMU and don't have that absurd downshift protection they'll tell you:
"It's not GT3!!!!111eleven, it's LMGT3!!!111"
You can't win...
I don't need to win, it's enough to know that you're right and can just laugh at the end ;-)
The_Bad_Fasterd
Registered
You must have a really interesting life if this is the shit that keeps you going.
Hope you get a good laugh when next year a videogame might release content that isnt to your exact expectations of how a racecars’ (that you will never be able to afford) downshift protection works.
You sound like you need it.
All i can say is LOL.
Havner
Registered
The rFactor 2 shifting protection is not only much more annoying than in LMU, it's also downright broken.
It works only one way, when you downshift you need to make sure you are not accelerating, but also the revs after downshift cannot go beyond the limit. But it's only checked on downshift, not on upshift.
Accelerate to 6th gear, hit neutral and upshift -> engine immediately blown. The wonderful shifting protection of rF2 cannot protect you from that.
LMU does protect you properly. It detects that the revs when going N->1 will go beyond the limit and prevents you from going gear 1 until you slow down to a safe speed. And it does all that without being annoying on normal gear downshift/upshift.
Eventhough I agree that electronic systems should be implemented properly, let's also be honest here: how often does it really happen that you hit neutral while accellerating to 6th gear and then to shift up to first. I mean, if you really try it you can do it, but what's the point of it? Or does it really happen in a way that you need a system that protects you? Other software titles get away with mouch more trivial stuff like the lack of speed limiters and nobody really cares while we are discussing edge cases here. I would rather see a proper implementation for manual gear boxes, but I don't hold my breath at this point of rF2s life cycle. And on top of that I think it's also worth to note that LMU get's quite a few advanced tech things right that you don't find in other products, not even the ones asking premium prices. So it's not all doom and gloom. I would also argue that it's perfectly possible to adjust to the system. IIRC it also works on upshifts btw. You can't upshift while hitting the brakes, wich is rare but it can happen.
Havner
Registered
The system is there to prevent you from breaking the engine. It doesn't matter how often if happens. It can happen by accident. And then it should protect you.
That's the whole point. It doesn't work sensibly. It doesn't check if the revs go out of bounds. It works annoyingly. You have the accelerator pressed even 0.1%, you can't downshift, even though the downshift would be 100% safe. You have the brake pressed even 0.1%, you can't upshift even though the upshift would be 100% safe. LMU allows for both (if the resulting revs are safe).
So what I meant by "it doesn't work for upshifts" is that it doesn't check the revs for safety (as it should, I think it only does that on downshift), but a simplistic and stupid check (that is both: not enough and annoying) if the brake is pressed or not.
That's obviously all correct. But I'm not discussing this broken downshift protection because I have some vendetta against it or it's the biggest problem rF2 has right now. Neither of those. But because people claim it must be correct, cause S397 implemented it. It definitely is not. And both, LMU and the behaviour I described above prove that. Someone was definitely overzelous implementing that and it's beyond defending.
Last edited:
Where do you get that knowledge from? Is it first hand?
Lazza
Registered
I know things take on a life of their own, but...
Originally you had to have <=1% throttle to downshift. They changed that to 5%. So it's not "0.1%".
The implementation was as per the information they got:
View attachment upload_2024-5-11_23-8-41.png
Which is why, elsewhere or here (who cares), I said people arguing 100% this is wrong are asking S397 to go against the information they have when making a car.
That doesn't mean the cars are correct, it just means they might be in the form they were licensed. (and maybe they're not - but despite what gets said, that's actually pretty difficult to prove)
So take it easy with the "over-zealous" stuff, and people just blindly trusting S397 to have got it right, because that's not the case.
Shifting into gear at speed from Neutral is separate, sounds logical to have protection but do you know that's the case? With Neutral only accessible via a wheel button it may not be something that is ever actually needed.
Havner
Registered
I stand corrected. I remember it now, it was 1% and they extended this for people with poorly calibrated pedals. In practice it doesn't change much as small applications of pedals are usually higher than 5%. But being strict you are correct.
The question is was it a manual for one car and they applied it to every single one? As they did with those TC/ABS lights that are not there in this form (as represented by S397) in most cars in real life.
I can believe that one manufacturer has a shitty implementation, but all of them? Also I don't believe that this is a part of GT3 specification (as it's not performance defining parameter) and even if it is the specification would be either be sensible or was so loose that at least allowed sensible implementation. The one we have is not.
I would also remind that some cars were actually almost the same for GTE and GT3. Namely old Vantage and 488. This year in ELMS there is a car (97 or 98, can't remember, blue/pink livery) that is the chassis that was previously GTE, then converted to GT3 EVO and then to LMGT3. Somehow I doubt they downgraded a sensible implementation of shifting protection (as represented by LMU if correct) to a shitty one (as represented by rF2) when doing the switch.
If they put their hands on one shitty implementation (I now remember seeing some table that described it, probably in this thread, Porsche? Was it even GT3? I seem to recall Cup car, but I might be wrong) and extended it to all cars it is over-zealous in my book.
I don't, but it sounds sensible as you said. And you have to remember that people making those cars should be sensible as well. The cost of a mistake (blowing and engine) is too high. And if someone actually made such a mistake it would be fixed in further revisions. Those electronics are programmed and people doing electronics or higher level RT OS'es where you actually program this stuff are usually pretty good at what they do.
Last edited:
Another thing that I would like to know is if it's still possible to get into neutral at all by accident if you are going full revs and in 6th geart. IIRC that was changed at one point (after one of the LMV?!). So either it has slipped back in or I have a bad memory regarding this topic. Another point to keep in mind about electronics for GT3 cars is that there isn't one single system that covers it all. You have different manufactureres supplying those system so I am not sure if it is even possible to get that working perfectly working for all cars/systems and it might be perfectly possible that they implemented one of the many different systems. Does not mean it's wrong. If we like how it's working or not is a different topic. I remember people not liking the F2 car due to it's suspension setup and people kept running in circles. Tough luck I guess ... 
davehenrie
Registered
I don't think you can reach Neutral accidentally IF you have a separate assignment for Neutral, but you CAN go from neutral to 1st when the revs are waaaay high and instantaly grenade your engine.
Lazza
Registered
I haven't tested specifically but I imagine that's still possible with both paddles (it's not something I run into troubles with, as my TM Ferrari wheel doesn't let me do that). This itself I've always assumed is a throwback to the early days of Momo wheels having 2 buttons, so you couldn't exactly dedicate one to Neutral. IMO this options (both paddles for Neutral) should be disabled by users, and probably by default.
In LMU too there have been some reports of the car shifting itself into Neutral, which seems likely to be due to this. I don't think anything else in the game will slam you into Neutral - except the Neutral control, obviously.