Karts - Steering range and spinning easily?

ok...

 

The irony.

 

OK, I am wrong. They do exactly the same thing. I have no idea why anyone, especially me, would be unclear about how to optimize the configuration and set-up of rF2!

 

I guess I am late to this party, but since I raced Karts 14 years ago, and was crew chief for my son who culminated by racing competitively on the national level , I think I can help a little. First I think rF2 Karts are amazingly accurate. They are admittedly missing some of the needed adjustments that will come later (axle stiffness, track, hub stiffness), but I think they are great right now.

Second, caster in a Kart is used, in combination with the huge scrub radius in Karts (about 3 to 6 inches or so), to produce the wheel height jacking needed to put the Kart on 3 wheels on turn-in, then the Kart goes through the rest of the turn on 3 wheels. If the inside rear doesn't get unloaded, the Kart pushes huge because of the solid rear axle. This causes the need for the turn - correct - turn referred to by Spinelli. This, combined with the super tight steering ratio, produces very high steering forces - you get a huge upper body workout racing one. Bottom line: you don't adjust caster for the same reasons as you do in a car. The jacking is used to tune turn-in and then the remainder of the Kart is tuned for the mid-turn and track-out. In fact most of the tuning for a Kart is the reverse of a car. In a Kart one is constantly fighting too much grip! This is referred to as "tight". A tight Kart wastes too much power turning and it is slow. Karts are amazingly sensitive to the rubbering of the track through the race. A properly set-up Kart will start the race loose and tighten up just the right amount as the Kart "comes in" near the finish.

Anyway, this would take a book (there are many out their for proper Kart set-up). The other bottom line is that these Karts will never feel like cars because they are totally different from cars. I suggest keeping the steering wheel rotation degrees as is because you will need this quickness to catch the Kart before the slip angle gets large killing speed on turn-in. What is the same as cars is that the front should turn and the rear should follow, but how to get there is completely different. Enjoy the Karts, they are a blast!

 

Bam +1

 

Your posts are beginning to seem a little absurd.

I feel like I've said as clearly as I can what should be adjusted, and that you can tweak things. I said the minimum torque, primarily. You mentioned adjusting caster. I said, if you want to just caster (in the context of not being satisfied with the feeling you can get from doing as you're actually being told to), fine. But then I also said that I am sure caster adjustments will join the list of things we end up having to tell people not to do over the next few years, because folks like you have decided it should be the focal point of what ffb is, and how ffb works. Nobody said that, except you. What you actually managed to do is turn my negativity towards you making caster adjustments into me somehow advising you that it should be your primary adjustment. As you said, it would be nice if posts were read.

Again - last time - the DW12 feels weaker at minimum strength because it's maximum force is stronger. To allow you to feel a difference between the levels of strength, the entire graph is fitted into what your wheel can give you. The same is done for the Clio, which because it doesn't have forces as high as the DW12, can fit it's entire strength graph in without having to make the weaker forces feel as weak. You can adjust minimum torque to raise the minimum torque that our ffb uses, so that no car should feel particularly weak. If you suggesting that the DW12 should feel strong, and the Clio (and most other cars) should have no feeling, instead? We disagree. We want all cars to have similar force levels across the full range for those enjoying their pretend race cars. We don't do a per-car setting for that reason, because without the full range, you don't know what is light feedback, or heavy feedback. It would be heavy, heavier, clipped, clipped, clipped... If I wanted individual per-car setups, and was in your position, I'd probably setup a few bat files to copy in or out whatever json file I wanted. You have the minimum steering torque option. If YOU think adjusting caster makes you happy, YOU do it - which is all I said previously.

 

It's dynamic range. No different than speakers. If you still want big differences between your very, very low-volume sounds and your very high-volume sounds but you aren't capable of playing your speakers at high volumes for whatever reason, then those very low volume sounds will sound more like very, very, very, very low volume sounds because your max volume sound isn't high to begin with tberefore your real low volume sounds will need to be super duper low volume in order to keep that same difference-ratio between your lowest volume sounds and your highest volume sounds (and everything in between).


That's why soundcards, receivers, TVs, etc. have a setting called something like "volume equalization", or "night mode", or whatever. If you click them, sometimes you'll notice the sounds get louder, well what actually happens is the super low volume sounds (and everything in between) are now being boosted so that they are all the same volume (or thereabouts) as the max volume you currently have set. This kills all the range. Everything will sound almost the same, volume wise - from the drop of a pin to an explosion - so that people who are unable to have high volume level (cheap speakers, night time, etc.) can still hear all the real low volume stuff.

Think of our wheels as speakers with low volume levels. We want to keep the same 1:1 ratio of "volume" differences between all the FFB forces. So if our wheel can only put out a very low amount of max FFB "volume" (torque), then all the very weak forces and everything in between will be very, very low volume because the ratio-difference between all those forces must remain 1:1. This is partly why people are always looking for more powerful wheels like (e.g.) the OpenSimwheel.


You could make the argument that - just like for people with low volume speakers (or require their volume levels set low) - that ISI could give a dynamic- range-killing option like (e.g.) "night mode" for speakers. Or maybe an adjustment from 1-10 (10 being true 1:1 dynamic range, 1 being the least). An example of this would be the Battlefield first-person shooter games. I'm fairly certain that their different audio modes "TV", "HiFi", and "Home Theatre" are basically just volume-dynamic-range adjustments ("TV" the most boosted, "Home Theatre" the least boosted with the most range which is by far the best if you have fairly loud speakers). In ISI's defends though, they do offer options that can help like (e.g.) the STM (steering torque maximum), and STS (steering torque sensitivity). Furthermore, we also have the ability to raise our FFB levels above "100%". I'm pretty sure that with (e.g.) the Thrustmaster T500RS and TX/T300RS wheels, raising their overall FFB levels above their respective true 100% levels (60% for the T500RS, 75% for the TX/T300RS) is another way to boost lower forces while not increasing max force. I could be wrong, maybe raising their FFB levels also increases the max FFB as well but I think it doesn't from what I've read (then again, it could differ between wheels and even different firmwares).

 

No, in my view ISI should not be packaging a default setup that doesn't reflect a real setup or follow what the real cars use. That suggestion just isn't fitting IMO.

All we need is a "per car" FFB minimum torque setting in the UI, that would be perfect then. Like the per car FFB Multiplier. Hopefully with the UI stuff that's been going on, the devs can find a small gap in their workload to add it in at some point.
Then we can all do what we want and make the sim feel how we want XD

 

I heartily disagree. Steering Torque Minimum should be tuned to your particular FFB wheel to remove the 'deadzone' where the incoming force isn't actually enough to move the wheel. It should not vary per car.

 

I meant as a help in this kind of issue. Where someone may want a single car tweaked, but leave the FFB for the other cars which feel fine alone. You don't see that as helpful in this situation?

 

i know many of you don't regard my posts as credible writings. But I'm in agreeance with marc here.

I know ISI are trying to create the cars as realistic as possible and i totally get that, why fudge some cars and not others. I would be the same. But in this case (and the f2) the toy wheels does not translate this ffb range very well at all.

I think Tims solution of the the min torque, whilst it does work for the issues we are having, doesn't work for the sim as a whole. Ive tried it, stick the stn at 2.0 and its perfect for the dw12, then try and drive a clio or kart, its impossible!!!.

An extra option under car specific ffb for car specific STM (torque minimum ) would be perfect and probably would fix 99% of the issues were having with the poorer ISI cars i.e.: f2, fr35. The thing that this issue has been mentioned a lot of times before and is surely indicative of the need of some sort of option.

I really hope ISI reconsider this option, as in this case STM does help with weak lower steer forces, regardless if its meant to or not. Suppose like the caster fix isnt meant to.. but the fact we have to tweak a car setup option to fix the ffb, is like something i would expect to do in race room experience with their awful ffb, or NFS shift (extreme example) NOT RF2?! Id rather leave car setups and extreme values alone, because we dont really know how its affecting the car handling etc.

Dan

 

I read just about everything written here and have opinions on most of it, but those opinions are not really scientific or not in a way I can further explain to others so I tend to keep quiet and observe.

When I first saw the vocal issues about the F2 on release, it was hard for me to comprehend because I could understand what they were saying and feeling, but I wasn't feeling the same. That was with the G27.
Let me state that I was very happy with the wheel and saw no reason to upgrade. It's just Fanatec had a deal on I couldn't refuse, free pedals basically. The reason I mention this is there was a huge adjustment going to another wheel.
So things I had to relearn, some I tried to force to behave like the logitech did. The F2 felt fantastic then and it feels fantastic to me now.

A lot of the complainers seemed to own Thrustmaster gear, so I've wondered if their controllers logic algorithms interprets raw data the same as others do?

What I did in the end was let the wheel talk to me... No no no, not like the wheel whisperer! I let it teach me where it wanted to go and what it wanted to do.
Regardless of anything you have ever said here, I feel I could guarantee you that if you were racing with me in this room using my stuff, you wouldn't say half the things you do.
It's not wrong to you if you believe it, but it is wrong to me. Over and over in my mind I'm saying to your posts, you are clipping badly, there is no fidelity, it's why you can't distinguish the huge gulf between GSC and rF2.

A lot of it is lost in text, I know. When I mentioned about the light wheel, the subsequent comments made it seem like I have no force, or very little. This is not the case at all, it's the right amount of force at the time it is required the most.

/Written under the influence, so I'll apologise if it's a swing and a miss.

 

massively appreciate where your coming from mate...

Regarding the clipping issue, i use the pedal overlay to show clipping, and i can assure you im not clipping on my t300. If anything my t300 has been stronger than the DFGT and the g27 i had before. So if the t300 feels weeks with certain cars i can guarantee the gear driven wheel would of been weaker. However i cant comment on fanatec gear as ive never tried any.

i still beleive that the natural steer force in all the open wheelers on RF2 are off, but Tim.W more than once has explained the reason for this (which i understand). But also i think this calls for a STM option per car.

I do can sometimes see the difference between GSC and Rf2. i just wanted more information as to what exactly is the physical difference rather than what people think/can feel.

Dan

 

STM is not designed to be tweaked per car, that is not what it's for. As previously mentioned it is to remove the 'deadzone' in the FFB wheel response to very low torque values. Which car is in use should have absolutely no impact on the 'correct' STM to use for each particular FFB wheel - it is entirely down to each individual FFB wheels response to very low input torque.

The comment in Controller.JSON for STM is: "Minimum torque to apply in either direction to overcome steering wheel's 'FFB deadzone' caused by friction"

For example, if the wheel doesn't start actually moving until the incoming force reaches 2.5% then STM should bet set at 2.5% (0.025). The sim will then ensure that if it's sending a non-zero force to the wheel that force will be at least 2.5% and therefore move the wheel.

Which car is in use is completely irrelevant, all that matters when setting the STM correctly is how much force the FFB wheel needs to start to move (i.e. overcome it's internal friction).

The 'problem' as it's being perceived is that with the default settings the DW12's steering is too light. I won't try to explain why that perception is wrong, Tim & Spinelli have already done that satisfactorily.

 

omg!!

no ones saying that what ISI have done is incorrect, we all understand why some cars are lighter than others. What we do need is for ISI to create an option so people that haven't got the super expensive wheels that can handle the high ranges of ffb in certain cars, can still drive these cars with a decent amount of feel and not like your on ice, unless you have to make extreme car setup options.

Being told over that STM fixes that, is correct it does but breaks the whole sim. So its not really a viable option globally.

STM is something that does help the lighter wheels, so REGARDLESS if its proper or whatever you want to say, it works for the majority of us.

i cant see whats so hard to understand what people are getting at. Saying which car your using is irrelevent is totally untrue because it obviously is! Using higher stm fixes dw12 but render most other cars useless. Tim himself told me that stm would fix that. Suppose in truth isnt stm fixing the friction deadzone that the dw12 has? so stm is the perfect antedote for the dw12.

 

Which is in effect just compressing the range of forces the wheel is putting out towards the higher end...I've not tried it, Dan and Marc I think have, they seem to like it, but only for the DW12. Bring in car specific version, surely their problem is "solved" for them.
That may be what the label says, but the effect seems the same to me...

I am perfectly fine with the standard FFB, I love having that range of feedback, even if it may be light to some. It gives me such great detail in what the car is doing and how it's loading. I just have managed to get used to it and use it. Some can't, or don't like it.

 

Take it for what you will, but I stopped using it due to inconsistencies between what I was seeing and what I felt.

 

Does anyone who has belt wheel, hear when the wheel clip? I just get like a low flat buzz as if all the ffb is just flattened. That seems to coincide with the pedal bar going red.

Dan

p.s im not sure people can race with a light wheel like the dw12, it just doesnt feel real or natural.

 

My thoughts exactly.

Really? It sounds like that's exactly what Marc is saying.

Those options already exist, you have the per-car FFB multiplier to do exactly that. I could understand a request for a per-car Steering Torque Sensitivity option, that's what should really be used if you want to compress the lower forces into a higher range, not STM.

I don't know why Tim keeps mentioning STM, that is NOT the correct option for this, you should be either increasing the FFB multiplier or increasing Steering Torque Sensitivity, not STM.

Please re-read and try to understand what I'm getting at and you'll understand why I say STM is vehicle agnostic. STM is NOT the right way to increase lower forces, either use the per-car mutliplier, STS or increase the overall force in your wheel's control panel (if you have a wheel that boosts lower end forces over a certain force setting, such as Logitech and Thrustmaster devices).

Just because a few people are increasing the STM and finding they like the result does not make it the mathematically or theoretically correct.

 

In my findings, the car specific FFB, will boost the whole range. So where the default 1.0 is fine for the dw12, at top end for instance going around oval bends (so much that my wheel almost clips) but the low end is just too loose. If i boosted that so low end was, "what i was looking for" i wouldnt beable to turn on the banks of mountain pass?!

I believe the STM (and again in my findings) alters torque at its minimum, and doesnt touch the top end of forces. Hence why it fixes the dw12. STS, ill admit i havent tried yet, but im eager to test.

"Just because a few people are increasing the STM and finding they like the result does not make it the mathematically or theoretically correct."

neither does increasing the caster to 8, from default of 6, but it works. You own a PC ,this theory u must know by now, doesnt always apply lol