If you have a G25 (I think you do), you set it to 900 degrees in profiler and 900 in iRacing (when calibrating turn it till it reads 900). iRacing will give you the right rotation for each car. I think the Mazda has 450 anyway. If you set the rotation in iRacing to less than 900 degrees you end up with speed sensitive steering to compensate (lol).
As for FFB, I use 103% in profiler for all games, 0 damper and spring. In iRacing I use 8 or 9 in the Mazda I think with high caster.
Whether or not it's realistic to be such, the default setups for most of the cars, especially the Mazda and Dallara have crazy understeer. I found I had to really soften the front up, lower pressures, lower ARB, soften springs etc to get it to turn in properly (which then makes it impossible to drive on the limit due to the snappiness I've been speaking about).
Edit: Yeah the sound of the Mazda is indeed horrible. It's missing the rawness and sounds very synthetic (an achievement for sampled sounds). Thankfully the other cars sound better, especially the new Corvette and Dallara.
Yeah I agree. I'd prefer a much more "solid" bumpstop which only worked over a smaller amount of suspension travel, say 1 or 2 cm, then it could be put to better use with lower rideheights.
Edit: 1 or 2 mm rather.
Last edited by DaveWS, .
At least the Dallara isn't as bad as the Mazda I guess. Here is a particularly violent snap I had in the Mazda at Mosport, during my first few laps around there. (It's just a 10 second cut)
I might give the Dallara another go sometime tonight, maybe some more setup work (increasing the bump stop gaps perhaps at the front to get rid of the understeer) and it'll start to work for me, despite *cough* the inertia issues I still believe the car has.
I might give the Dallara another go sometime tonight, maybe some more setup work (increasing the bump stop gaps perhaps at the front to get rid of the understeer) and it'll start to work for me, despite *cough* the inertia issues I still believe the car has.
Do you think you could post (zip I guess) a replay of you driving the Dallara with a particularly loose setup to demonstrate? I have had many "correct once = snap the other way at 1000 mph into a barrier" moments like in the Mazda. I'll post a quick replay of a particularly bad one at mosport when I get home (30 mins or so). No doubt I'll get told I'm overcorrecting etc.
Very nice lap Crommi, are you using Volkers setup? It's always front grip limited as can be seen in your lap, you never once have to correct for oversteer, it's on rails. GP4 anyone? /me runs
Looking forward to hearing what you think. You can test any car and track in "test" mode offline. To race them online like Gabkicks says you need a certain safety rating. As much as I despise the safety rating system myself you can get up to the rating you need to race the Mazda with others online quite quickly since you now get promoted to the next license instantly when you meet the requirements. You'll need to fulfill the MPR requirements (4 races I think in a rookie car) as well as driving without picking up incidents.
Well both the GTR class in LFS and the C6R in rFactor feel more weighty and generally seem like there is more rotational inertia compared to iRacing, and you have more time to react to what the car / tyres are doing. Of course rFactor feels pretty numb and the tyres aren't great either, but as we know it hasn't got the best physics engine in the world nor the best modders bar some. In LFS the tyres allow for driving past the peak slip angles without losing out on laptime too much, and sometimes in fact gaining time. I'm pretty sure though
that the new tyre model improvements on the horizon will feel much much better, and punish over aggressive driving more.Presumably iRacing doesn't full into the category of too high. LFS feels just about right regarding the general weight and feel (bar how the tyres feel). Interesting how simultaneous pitch and roll might differ, my understanding of physics starts to be stretched here...
Do it! It's a little cheaper now, and I'm getting fed up with the fanboys over there who keep telling me I'm wrong and it's all perfect etc. Make sure you try the Formula Mazda out or the Dallara IndyCar cos those are the ones which feel too snappy to me (once you get rid of the understeer).
Which might be how they've claimed to have done it, but they must've cocked up their calculations somewhere..
Just don't seem right at all to me. Thanks for pointing the article out though by the way.But in terms of moment of inertia of the 2 cars, I can't see them being too different. The Corvette is lighter, but at the same time it has a longer wheelbase. At the moment the Corvette in iRacing is more responsive in direction change than a Kart for me. Of course it's a terribly crude way to test the theory as like you say suspension plays a part etc. It would be interesting to know how values of rotational inertia are obtained for sims, because TBH I wouldn't be suprised if iRacing were making do with poorly education guesses ATM, and as I said it makes a huge difference in rFactor for example.
If you want to test this for yourself I'll explain. Basically take any iRacing car, say the Mazda, to the skid pad as it loads quickly and is completely flat. Then bring the car to 100 mph or so, and start weaving from side to side (drive lengths across the diameter of the skid pad not around it) until you find the cars natural "weaving" frequency. You should feel the weight of the car moving with you. In the Mazda you'll find this is at a very very high rate, the car changes direction extremely fast.
Now try in the Skippy. You should find that the natural side to side motion the car naturally falls in is much slower. Why is that? Does the Skippy have significantly higher rotational inertia IRL than the Mazda? I doubt it, but there is no doubt that in iRacing the Mazda has extremely little. Try the Corvette out as well, a pretty hefty GT car with a huge V8 out at the front. Surely this means it would have a high moment of inertia? Obviously not in iRacing, as it changes direction almost on par with the Mazda. The Solstice on the other hand, a smaller car, smaller engine, yet this has a calm whale like weaving action in comparison. Compare with other sims if you want.
Now try in the Skippy. You should find that the natural side to side motion the car naturally falls in is much slower. Why is that? Does the Skippy have significantly higher rotational inertia IRL than the Mazda? I doubt it, but there is no doubt that in iRacing the Mazda has extremely little. Try the Corvette out as well, a pretty hefty GT car with a huge V8 out at the front. Surely this means it would have a high moment of inertia? Obviously not in iRacing, as it changes direction almost on par with the Mazda. The Solstice on the other hand, a smaller car, smaller engine, yet this has a calm whale like weaving action in comparison. Compare with other sims if you want.
I don't have to be Will Power to be able to tell you an opinion of whether or not a virtual car that I've never driven IRL is realistic or not. More often than not the "feedback" from real drivers regarding how realistic a sim car is is often not very accurate at all. Most real drivers are often not experienced enough with sims to know the subtle differences between ones which are currently available, as they don't have the time I guess to really sit down and get fully connected with the difference in feel at a basic level, and really get close to the limit. Regardless of how realistic a sim is, your brain will not be relying on the same feedback you get in RL in the sim. Obviously there are exceptions, say Dale Jr, who has got to the level where he is just as capable in a sim as in real life, but obviously he has a reason to be careful of what opinions he has of how the cars drive. Most real racers try a sim and as long as the feel is vaguely correct, the sound is accurate, the graphics are good and it will go round the track, it's therefore brilliant and as accurate as could be on a PC.
To me, given my experience trying various different sims and noticing the subtle differences each one has, comparing that to my limited real life experience, as well as studying many many onboard videos of various forms of racing, I think my opinion is just as valid as Will Powers.
P.S. I did some testing in rFactor which is obviously moddable. In the hdv files where all the physics data is stored, there are 3 values for rotational inertia, presumably each one assigned to a rotation axis (pitch, yaw and roll). These are independant (I think) from the overal vehicle mass, which only affects non-angular acceleration of the car. I tried reducing the values, which would indicate most of the mass of the car is very near the center of mass, and understandably the car became very very responsive to changes in direction. When pushing near to the limit, the car was very very tricky to balance as you had very little time to react. Sounds like iRacing to me. Likewise when I tried larger values, which would simulate the mass of the car being spread out away from the center of mass, the car was less responsive, but much much more controllable and less snappy. I'd like to know how realistic values of rotational inertia from real cars are obtained? Because I'm getting more and more convinced iRacing has this way off currently...
Thought this might be of some interest: http://www.formula1.com/result ... 23/6699/fastest_laps.html
Just 1 second seperating the top 18 fastest laps of the race. F1 has become so competitive.
Just 1 second seperating the top 18 fastest laps of the race. F1 has become so competitive.
And now I do. Having driven a couple more hours in the thing around Barber, my opinion has changed. It's a complete and utter unrealistic piece of shit to drive anywhere near the limit. No really, I can't stand it anymore.
The server that I was racing on pretty much confirmed my thoughts for this car, and many others (Mazda, Corvette, to name some). The server was spin central. I span many many times myself. Since when does a car result in an instant spin the minute you have some oversteer? OK maybe you can save it 20% of the time, but normally it feels like luck alone. I'm in disbelief at the number of people who think it's realistic to have an unsavable spin so easily so often.
I really am starting to doubt how much "real world" data iRacing have available to them. Recently they reduced the engine braking effect in a few cars considerably. If they had lots of data available why would they get something so vital completely wrong first time round? I wouldn't be suprised if quite a lot of physical information is just made up TBH. One thing in particular though which stands out for me ATM is that everything in iRacing seems to have far too little inertia. Now I could be talking complete bollocks here, but I'll carry on anyway. To start with the engines rev from idle to redline in neutral extremely quickly, take the Jetta for example, a lazy diesel engine which probably has a fairly hefty flywheel. Then there is the general feel to some of the slick tyre shod cars, such as the Mazda and the Dallara. It's as if they have very very low reluctancy to suddenly switch direction, especially in rotation. To me it seems the moment of inertia for the cars are far too low. Would this explain the apparant snappiness in a lot of the cars? Maybe if the cars had higher moment of inertia in the yaw direction they wouldn't swap ends so violently and quickly? Do physics engines even have specified inertia values or are they calculated based on the spread of mass etc throughout the vehicle?
In the meantime I'm sticking to the Skippy since that's currently the most exciting car in the sim which feels even remotely realistic to me.
If you want to find a reason for the majority of the race being boring it's surely down to Hamilton having to retire. I was looking forward to watching him trying to keep the Red Bulls behind him. The circuit ain't much of a drivers track, but it's certainly not a bad circuit in terms of overtaking / racing opportunities. TBH I agree with Blueflame on this one, a race doesn't need a million overtaking manouvers to be interesting for ****s sake.
Of course I don't know, but I can be pretty sure. We've had many threads on these forums with Todd Wasson's expertise, who has clearly explained how LFS is pretty close to real tyres regarding slip angles and lateral force and such. I'm well aware things can be improved, but at the moment it feels to me like iRacing is at one side of the realism line, while LFS is an equal amount the other side, which makes it difficult if you want to race on both sims equally.
Thats the thing. I find I have to stick in crazy values in order to get rid of the natural understeer most of the cars display. I'm looking forward to seeing what the community can come up with setupwise.
Try the rapidshare mirror: http://rapidshare.com/files/68 ... Full_CSR_SoundPack_v2.rar
I agree. Almost all default setups in iRacing are understeer central. The first thing I did in the Dallara was remove the front ARB and reduce the front tyre pressures. Whether or not it's realistic to have to make such adjustments is a different matter... Either way, the Dallara has enough setup options to keep Einstein busy for a year.
Now had a drive in the Dallara. Oh my god. This thing is ****ing awesome. I have nothing more to say. 
I've only had a go in the Corvette so far. I'll start with the positives. The sound is absolutely wicked. Awesome, I love it. The modelling is great, and the immersion factor is probably the best in a sim yet.
The negatives for me are the tyres. I'm probably going to be alone in this as usual, but for me it feels like rFactor gave them their tyre model for this car. It feels like the max slip angles are at around 2 degrees. You can feel it through the FFB, in the way the centering force goes up from nothing to max with only a tiny amount of steering. The car is either constantly in understeer mode, or suddenly turning into uncontrollable oversteer without any warning. There is no middle zone. This is most apparant when testing on the skidpad. I tried to set every value in the setup to an extreme oversteer bias, and only then does it show a tiny amount of balance during cornering. However it's impossible to run with this kind of setup as you'd expect, as if you get the car to slide with more than 5 degrees of yaw, it's game over. It's rFactor all over again.
The modelling is great, and the immersion factor is probably the best in a sim yet.The negatives for me are the tyres. I'm probably going to be alone in this as usual, but for me it feels like rFactor gave them their tyre model for this car. It feels like the max slip angles are at around 2 degrees. You can feel it through the FFB, in the way the centering force goes up from nothing to max with only a tiny amount of steering. The car is either constantly in understeer mode, or suddenly turning into uncontrollable oversteer without any warning. There is no middle zone. This is most apparant when testing on the skidpad. I tried to set every value in the setup to an extreme oversteer bias, and only then does it show a tiny amount of balance during cornering. However it's impossible to run with this kind of setup as you'd expect, as if you get the car to slide with more than 5 degrees of yaw, it's game over. It's rFactor all over again.
Correct.
I decided to remove my videos regarding physics complaints etc since they've been up long enough, and are now out of date. Plus I look like a spoil sport who crashes all the time. Man I can't wait for the corvette, I just hope it's as good to drive as it looks and hopefully will sound!
I'd also like to hear his view, specifically on the Mazda. At the moment I'm more or less on my own it seems with my opinion!
But yeah thanks for pointing the thread / post out to me.It's also interesting that you don't feel as connected.. what FPS do you run at normally? Do you have a good wheel? I find it completely understandable that a driver who is used to feedback from driving IRL will suffer initially through losing a lot of feel, but eventually your brain gets used to it no? Everyone is different I guess.
I think once you've gotten used to the difference in or lack of feedback that a sim provides compared to real life the excuse of "real drivers can feel everything" no longer applies. I know for me that I feel as connected with the car in a sim as I do IRL. I think as long as you have a very high fps and therefore no steering lag, and a good ffb wheel, there is enough feedback for your brain to be able to respond as well as it would in the real thing. I have no problem with car control in the other cars in iRacing, some of them such as the Skippy and the SK, are a joy to balance on the limit. Likewise in LFS I have no problem with the rear end getting a little loose, although LFS is perhaps a little too forgiving there.
Regarding what makes the aliens in iRacing so fast, as I've said they just set the car up so that the front will always wash out before the rear does. I can do the same, and get pretty similar laptimes, but it's just not fun when you have to change your driving completely to compete. I'm just praying the Corvette turns out to be a sweetly balanced car like the Skippy and SK are. (A road car which drove like the SK takes left handers would be awesome...)
Interesting you say that, because I've heard the opposite from other drivers. IIRC Greger Huttu uses 60(?) degrees FOV.
Thanks for that. While its good to hear positive thoughts from a driver who races the real thing, I still there is something fudumentally wrong somewhere, be it with the tyre physics or something else.
Having had a go with the new Mazda, the FFB feels better, but TBH not that much is different IMO. I think alot of people are getting a placebo like effect.
My problem with the Mazda has only ever been with the snappiness of the car after correcting a slide. I went Karting again yesterday, and in a vehicle which weighs much much less, has no suspension to speak of and has no doubt a much smaller moment of inertia (resisting yaw), I was able to happily throw it around from side to side through chicanes with relative ease. The Mazda still(!) has no transient phase after correcting a slide, the car just snaps the other way instantly.
I'm sure there are people out there who would say to me, "hey I've corrected very loose moments in the Mazda without problems.." to which I'd respond, so have I! That's the stupid thing about it, sometimes you can get it completely sideways by mistake and recover no problem, it's just a lottery.
The way you are forced to set the car up is to keep the rear planted at all times, and at least in iRacing it is naturally a very very understeery car, which seems to suit the majority of iracers very much. I on the other hand like to build a fair amount of oversteer into the suspension (as 99% of cars in iRacing bar the skippy have midcorner understeer), so that the car is neutral mid corner and you spend your time feeling the tyres front and back through the steering and making subconsious adjustments as you go through. The way the Mazda is currently driven in iRacing is limited by the grip at the fronts, so more often than not you just turn in and wait. Watch any onboard video from the star Mazda site, and you can see how the car allows the driver to balance the car much more through the steering wheel.
http://www.starmazda.com/multimedia/video.htm#
Edit: Specifically notice how in the Sebring lap the driver has to correct twice exiting the final corner. I would not be able to do such a thing in iRacing without it snapping back the other way in a matter of milliseconds and throwing me into the wall.
The VIR (virginia) lap demonstrates it even better. The driver is balancing the car midcorner all the way through the lap. Again, not possible to drive like this in the iRacing version.
Last edited by DaveWS, .
What FPS are you getting? Anything below ~40 FPS will start to show noticable input lag.
My post wasn't directed at you in particular, since you understand the obvious concept (albeit after having it explained).FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG