First of all let me thank Studio 397 for taking the right steps to wake up the sleeping giant that is RFactor 2! Withe the release of the DX11 version of the game, I see that all the previous modules from ISI are being converted to DX11 too! One thing I noticed is that EVE and Spark Historics, Howstons and the Brabham BT20 have not received any love for some time now! Does Studio 397 have any plans to add chassis flex, CPM and any other things missing in these cars? One other thing missing is the tire size on the BT20, it is completely off! Cheers
Totally agree with you chum. The Historics are LONG overdue some love. While the Howstons and the Brabham BT20 got dx11 updates, I would love an answer to the OPs' questions myself.
BT20 probably won't receive an update as it was already released in DX11 and it was updated few years ago with flex chassis etc. The other historics are about five years since an update now, so surely I expect they will get some updates before they appear in the S397 workshop, they are just too outdated currently.
I'm hoping they are having the dx11 update in next batch -historic Belgium has been mentioned as being next release Sparks/Eves hopefully too +the strange suspension arms flickering fixed that started since last update Can't moan though as rfactor2 owners have never had it so good
When I opened this thread, I had no intention of moaning or anything like that. Actually I'm enjoying S397's work alot! But I think that Historic cars like the ones I mentioned benefit alot from an accurate tire model, as they had no aerodynamics to help. The chassis flex is also important, because cars flexed alot at that time. Cheers
The effect of chassis stiffness on the suspension depends on the stiffness of the suspension. Modern racing cars need to have very stiff chassis because they have very stiff suspension. 60s racing cars had very soft suspension with approx. 7 inches of travel so their apparent lack of chassis stiffness should be seen in this context.
Of course cars at that time were made in a very different way for many reasons. The thing that counts to me is that in RF2 we have those 7 inches of travel on those cars but no chassis flex or tire model to complement the huge suspension travel. That's why I think those two features are so important Cheers
Count me in as another who'd like to see historics getting some love. I haven't driven rF2 in four or five years (back very soon though), so I was unaware ANY of the chassis had been given a "flex-factor" at all--good to know. Hello, btw, David Wright: Dunno if you remember me or not, but you sent me some of your Monza maps at one point--it's still on my "to-do" list... ... ...and now, back on point, you are quite right about suspension travel: http://www.pbase.com/9146gt/image/22655400 That one is Vic Elford exiting the very tight and slow Sebring hairpin--a view of the 917 you don't often see as it's usually pictured low at the nose and going very fast..or even lower at the nose and braking like mad. Yeah, it had a flexible chassis. Hard to quantify though, innit? CS
Totally agree with the OP. The historic cars are badly in need of some TLC. I am currently doing a league with the historic F3s and it's not much fun trying to develop a setup with a tyre model like this. I'm wondering if they are doing the chassis flex and the CPM at the same time amd that's why it's taking so long? Maybe they think the one will effect the other?
Yup! Classic cars used to be very very popular some years ago when rf2 was released. Now I don't see as many interest as back in those days. Probably that's because of the lack of love given to them...
