RFactor 2: Best overall physics in simracing... FR3.5: ATM, one of the worst sim-cars

But anyway the point was that when you drive below the cars potential, you don't "upset" the car as much as when you do, and in that video I would think that it's an ok behaviour if he was pushing the car, as certainly the weight would have moved forward more drastically.

But I am again with Spinelli, despite these little things the physics are impressive.

 

Mate, slip angles are out of whack...terrible understeer, look at the front wheels...and the night racing is broken too XD

 

One thing I am thinking though, is that when you are in a lower gear, you can have far more impact on the longitudinal weight transfer. Think of a bike where you can be wheelieing in say first and second gear. All the weight can be sent onto the rear tyre in that case, depending on your input. 6th gear, no. Then the speed of your inputs and the momentum of the weight transfer has a big impact too, in what the car will do.

I'm not going to say anything about that video though. Data. Need data. If the user can reproduce that and then record it from the monitor, I think you have throttle positions, speed and G forces visible there. That would give some indication of what is really going on.

 

Is there a problem producing motec data?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

Excellent. I think this will put an end on that discussion.

I hate these kind of long replies when someone quote fragments about what has been said and put another wall text and next one do the same, and the next....

 

This thread is gold.

 

lose control is very easy

 

From Motec data taken from another OW car that reports ride eights, there is no hidden bump that upsets suspensions before or in that curve (sorry no data available for FR3.5).
It is a slow corner 90-100 km/h it would be surprising that you ride on bumpers or bottom (braking is finished at this moment).
Comparing between default setup and RD's with Motec, front end is much more sure footed for the last one, so you can enter enter turn 3 with more speed and then load rear by accelerating (precise moment when you loose car with default setup, when you think you can begin to regain speed you loose rear end). Default setup doesn't like pianos or kerbs.
But even with default setup, with careful driving you can take turn 3 (it is not an automated spin machine).
Cheers.

P.S.

The very light FFB at slow speeds remarked by many on the FR 3.5 is setup induced (increasing caster alone doesn't do the trick).

 

FR 3.5 reports imcomplete data to Motec (ride height 0.0 all over the track). So it's no the end of the discussion.

 

1. No one said racecars don't spin or loose control.


2. The driver makes a very hard throttle input, then let's off, then makes a hard second throttle input. The 2nd throttle input was too much for whatever state the car/tyres were in at that precise, exact moment, and therefore made the rear tyres start loosing grip - completely normal.

Then, in terms of what happens after the initial moment of rear-tyre slip, well, the driver is...
A. terribly late in applying initial steering correction
B. applies the steering correction at a very slow rate/speed


3. The spin in the 2nd clip was due to the driver being absolutely, completely clueless with regards to downshifting, in-fact you can even see it in the first clip - or the car was broken (I doubt it but it's technically possible).


4. Going back to the 1st clip - according to some people in this thread, the driver should have spun upon the 1st hard throttle application since it was "aggressive" (he got in real trouble with the 2nd throttle application, not the 1st).

1. According to people in this thread, the driver in the 2nd video should have spun about 650 times since he is not only constantly applying very aggressive steering inputs, but aggressive throttle inputs as well


2. There are about 4, or so, visible oversteer moments in that clip; notice how the car never does the way over-exaggerated (in-game) "stop-original-direction-of-travel,-then-continue-travelling-towards-the-drection-the-front-end-points-to" thing.



Your videos are only underlying my points further

 

Thanks. I knew there had to be a reason but wasn't up to sifting through the thread again.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

That second video was of a car setup for autox which is entirely different from how you setup a car for a track. It can't be compared to a skippy. That video was a very bad example. In the first video it very clearly displays the ISI physics bug #1. A car would never go off the inside of the track like that. Oh wait, that was real life?

 

When people talk about weight transfer they are referring to longitudinal transfer not lateral. Speed doesn't impact longitudinal transfer. Throttle and brakes do that.

I think what your trying to say is that when your not cornering hard you should be able to treat the car however you want. The skippy example video has no data other the steering and throttle. So it's hard to say how fast he was going or how loaded the tires were. I agree he wasn't pushing hard but I disagree that it wasn't loaded at all.

 

Btw, 4500rpm in 1st on the skippy is 45mph.

 

I believe I was clear enough:

 

Oh, my, goodness....

There is a particular reason why the car starts arcing in sharper than usual in the first spin. Try watching the video again. Can you see why? Watch it again. I want you to try to figure it out without me having to explain everything.

I think you keep looking for any little thing so as to keep "throwing gasoline into the fire". You seem to just be on a personal mission now.


P.S. The thing you just wrote about longitudinal grip was the only by-and-large-correct thing you've said in this entire thread.

 

RFactor 2: Best overall physics in simracing... FR3.5: ATM, one of the worst ...

Yay!!! The teacher gave me a check mark. Wahoo!



Maybe I am having a hard time comprehending your argument about point #1. If I understand correctly you feel that when a car looses the back end it should not change direction and start heading toward the inside of the track. Yet 75% of the spins posted her show exactly that happening.

 

90% of the real-life spins, including the ones posted in this thread don't do it anywhere as harshly and over-exaggerated as the game - not anywhere close. By far, most oversteer moments - even if they're saved, saved large moments, saved quick small moments, purpose "drifting", whatever - don't do it anywhere near as extreme.

No physics engine is perfect, of course, but these aren't minute amounts that need a calculator/engineer/telemetry to be noticed; it's a major core flaw which affects the core driving experience, to a certain extent, in absolutely every single car, going back to at-least F1 2002. It can be sensed in every car while driving, and visually as well - including from external cams (eg. trackside/TV cams which may help you better see the issue). Many, many have mentioned it over the years.

It really needs to be fixed. It's slightly better in RF2 than any previous engine, but still there as a large standout issue.

 

My head hurts.

 

Let we assume you are right.
Now to confirm your theory you have to plan an experiment and demonstrate by the numbers that the the calcuations made by rF2 are wrong.

It is definitely possible to do, it is just newtonian mechanics, not Antropogenic Global Warming.

Either this or concede other people to have different opinions.