Quote from DAG00BER :

then all the crashes would be up at the front and take EVERYBODY out lol.

goes a bit against the logic of "dangers you can spot ahead of time don't represent a risk as high as not being able to see what hits you".
In other words: just evade those bangers and drive on, then -> you'll be the leading racer in under a lap!

funny that this experience will be forever your own (and a very few others') exclusive piece of memory since I am not going to pay a single dime to those who won't give me a comprehensive try first, to test out if what they are claiming is "realistic"

FYI:
GTR2 put me off once before with an not-selectable (greyed-out) "sim"-option on their demo
-> and buying that piece of boredom after it dropped below 10€, I now have the confirmation first-hand why it has never been worth more than that (to me at least).
I actually don't dislike iRacing's claim to receive a continous amount of money from their user-base in order to keep development on par with the users' demands and overall competetive standards. Just the pay-before-you-try puts me off quite effectively: that's exactly not the way to attract my attention. Regarding that other people have come a long way before without resorting to such idiocity - they should seriously reconsider their attitude towards the market

...well one advice I have, though:

try to memorize your weak spots on the track, then have a couple ofminutes pause.
When you restart you next run, try to to think about weight-distribution and such. WHAT EXACTLY is going on with the weight of the body, which wheels are on the ground, which spring is compressed/decompressed, which piece of rubber is actually gripping on the road, what kind of deformation would tyre w,x,y,z suffer at right now, how does that affect grip?

and lastly: if this brings no clue to what is the key-difference to the faster drivers: start drifting on purpose throughout, at the beginning /at the end of such a problematic corner -> again, rethink your vehicle-dynamics as stated above -> notice any difference in anticipation and real (re)action? If so then there might be a lack of track-knowledge, that didn't yet cross you sight -> check it out.

Knowing how to lose traction and when gave me a better understanding of the force-feedback - although I'm no newbie to lfs, at all. I can now utilize a more precise steering- and pedal-input, weight-transition is now my key-focus --> made me able to apply throttle earlier, brake later find a more stable line through the corners

and - yeah - I rarely use foreign setups if I can avoid it. Messing with you own stuff is one of my key joys in lfs. But I reckon you are just getting there, too

Good luck!

what about the most simple measure the human racing-world knows:

reversed starting-grid


?

Quote from z-ro 8 :

what kills Race2 participation is the lenght of the races.
the majority of ppl in ctra are too impatient for more than 7 or so laps.

that might be especially the case on the JnB, yes.

Quote :

b-n-j recently saw a huge increase in participation, but since the laps have been nearly doubled in most tracks, ppl dont join. or cannot wait long enough for next race. or burn up their tires too soon and get frustrated and leave.

maybe it's more the beginners crowd that behaves like that - don't think long-term fans will be put off it that way.
One problem which still remains, though, is the false race-length at the beginning of some combos (or was it just that what you are on about?). First one has to race start-to-finish like 9 laps of a certain combo and then when the system restarts the next race the message appears: "fuel-warning: new race-length 3 laps", which I think is a rather hilariously paradox message - but well, to laugh more frequently means to live a healthier life

Quote :

i've seen the same thing in race2, done it myself.
i say keep the license restrictions on race2, but shorten the races.
but then again, who cares what i say....

I really do not see this as the greatest flaw of that server. Hey, don't you think the lack of sincere competition is putting people off more than a simple wait (mid-race join in order to practice/get warm with the track would still be possible, don't you think?).

However, race-length in general is not what I would describe as a fun-killer. The opposite is the case: ridiculously modified setups then will ensure a 'sudden-death' to all those hotlap-mode fast-pacers with no functioning eyes either right nor left, front or back - mostly after 3-4 laps.
Talking of a reason why probably too short a race-distance was taken care of. Really, if you want clean and enjoyable, rewarding races for everyone you should stay clear of any tempting variables such as too short race-distances that provoke aggressive behaviour. If a race is long enough to fight back in a clean and well-regarded manner then people will refrain from taking irresponsible and ill-behaved actions in the first place.

JnB though, is another story, of course!


edit:

GREAT IDEA:
just make up a thread in the lfsforum.net / ctra section like a
" CTRA Race 2 TBO activity - bouncer-counter "

Step-1 :
log-on to lfsforum.net

Step-2 :
fire-up lfs, join the potentially still empty 'CTRA Race 2' server

Step-3 :
find the bouncer-counter-whatever thread I just thought of and state that you are willing to accept any fellow moving targets to shoot off the track at will

Step-4 :
don't bother my ridiculous humor and just enjoy some good and clean racing with (hopefully) more than the thin and still virtual air involved on Race 2 server

How about that?

Greets
DrBen

Last edited by DrBen, Tue, 9 Dec 2008 02:20. Reason : great idea:

If that prohibits people building ultra-tight, ultra-close gear-ratios they sometimes use to overcome excessive clutch-heat when flat-shiftingly-accelerating on auto-cross layouts -> then I am +1 for limited options on gear ratios. hope I didn't encourage other racers to adapt this unrealistic and painfull (to my ears) method, now

However I personally didn't find anything wrong with the current system apart from the auto-x issue as of yet.

thing is,
Logitech replaced the original DFP with the driving force GT, which is priced at an equal recommended resale value (or whatever the english equivalent of "UVP" ((i.e.: unverbindliche Preisempfehlung)) is). It should have faster FFB than it's predecessor and it has a sequential shifter on the side so it would suffice for some steering abuse quite well, I guess.
The Fanatec "Carrera" variant that is due to arrive to the shops some time next year would be the offer of the competition I think.

Drifitng with mouse would be the way to go when waiting for the latter to be "buy-able" Using the turbo-lag on the xrt it is in some way "not-impossible" to do so even with digital throttle/brakes ;-)

edit:
BUT I should add that for full control over everything a decent set of pedals (with clutch pedal) and maybe an optional analogue handbrake (for example a cheap joystick) would probably be both needed. Like what Sushi-man ("drift-king") calls 'shift-lock' is only possible with some decent amount of control over the clutch

and no I am not a pro-drifter - even if I tried some stuff for fun the past couple of days

Last edited by DrBen, Mon, 8 Dec 2008 22:51.

how about a simple 2-column expanded view option that is clickable to sort them setups by either of them {date-created | date-modified} (and clickable name-column, too so you could still go back to letter-by-letter search)

Quote from Becky Rose :

Dont trivialise the licence.

One fair point: why not do random car classes on the higher servers as well? On the Race2 I could clearly picture like STD and TBO together in a race as well as I could imagine, say, TBO and LX6 on Race3. Interchanging randomly with the current GT2/GT1 combos.

I don't know what way the license-restriction is implemented. By my understanding this is done by car? Then the above would face the problem of an incompatible implementation. If it is differenciated by server and you only can join a server you have a valid license for (and then sub-differenciate by licensed car-class) -> then you would get clean multi-class racing on the higher server and all those lost souls that remember the fun they had in e.g. TBO in the old days but now have platinum or higher licenses would be given back the fun, again Best of both worlds so-to-speak, if you make the randomizer constantly chose a combo of the other classes-group every time it changes track.

Feel free to call me a 'fake genius' - as I know that those currently more-than-happy with all the slick-tyred cars (and exclusively them only) on the gold/platinum/titanium Race3 server would most-probably wish me a most painful of all deaths.

This would also adress the core problem the OP of this thread:
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=51160
came across - to a certain degree.

I personally miss the good fun with those TBOs, too - especially when at the time there were enough capable and highly skilled racers still driving them, since there was no higher-class server to evade to. Yes I know in an analogy to RW-racing, where "F1 is king" and every racer feels honored when even invited to a team-test-drive of one of them machines;
Well guess what, money talks!

I personally know quite a few people saying: "F1? not interested, 'cause they neither look like cars nor are they in any way even near 'beautiful to look at." And I am one of them (no offence, SiSe-lovers!). On the other hand e.g. DTM would be a lot more interesting if they used cars nearer in construction and appearance to the production model - which they clearly don't. They use kind of wide-body GT-chassis with an upper shell remotely resembling a real car. And by doing that they spoil the "original" looks and make em - again - not nice to look at: Great!

My point is: is it really a minority that thinks TBO-class on the right tracks can be just as demanding of a driver as the higher-up slick-tyred monsters are? Or is it rather the construction of the license-system and the choice of points- and server-differenciation installed by the CTRA in recent times that lead to a dying usage of TBO? I am not the only one frequently joining the Race1 "beginner-grade" server just because of the chosen car class that can be raced on them. I do most of the time see other gold/platinum racers on there, too - even titanium users for that matter.
Hmmm... ...guess I am just going overboard with all these letters I hack into the keyboard.
Sorry - wasn't my intention to annoy the crap out of you guys, if that's what this is doing.
For those that give my critique some thought I say: "Thank you very much."

to all fellow racers out there:
have a good time (in lfs, too)
DrBen

Last edited by DrBen, Mon, 8 Dec 2008 22:20.

Quote from TAYLOR-MANIA :

Well i agree with practically all of what's been said here (especially the first post) & i didn't properly read the whole thread, but anyway... i have a question...

How realistic is it of us to expect such environmental changes that's been mentioned? I mean surely these things can't have been overlooked in the quest of making the most realistic racing sim, so why have they been [seemingly] overlooked by all sim developers? Will we ever see such detail i wonder...?

Quote from Toddshooter :

I imagine they haven't been implimented because it would be a monumental task to code. Shifting weather patterns and track temp changes seem to me to be a very complicated thing. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)

well at least - judging by what has been said in this thread from people with insight in programming - it would be another grand, yet not undoable and thus reasonably achievable thing to start doing.

Quote from NightShift :

On a sidenote, this has been my thought for quite some time. We have a wind setting within a limited aero model, so why not introduce a temperature setting too?

If you leave a car sitting in the pits for some time, the tyres will cool down so LFS is already aware of an ambient temperature in its innards.

It would be great on servers with random conditions (e.g. CTRA). During hot 'days', people would be forced to play with tyre pressures or switch to R2 or Road Normal from R1 and Supers, while cold days would require a little more attention because of reduced grip.

As an immediate consequence, drivers would need to be more careful and develop a little flexibility when it comes to track conditions, effectively countering the sealed-set/drive-always-the-same approach which is common now.

In short, it would be a first important step towards a truly dynamic environment, in terms of player development.

I guess that this reflects most of Becky's thoughts from the open letter quite nicely and in order. And actually I feel about the same way. The challenge should be placed further away from finding that "perfect setup" and focus on driving and driving skills a lot more than at today's state.

Quote from TAYLOR-MANIA :

Yeah i see what you mean about the low grip situations in dry conditions...
Quite frankly though, that level of detail is just so far from anything we currently have that i really struggle to see it becoming a reality.

Not that I don't wish for such detail, or that it's the wrong path to take, or that it will never happen... but it's such a massive leap (almost revolutionary!) to add such a great deal of depth to the sim racing experience.
It's totally beyond todays sim standards & developing mentality... it seems so far beyond i'd say that it's out of reach right now.

For it to be achieved would require a fairly considerable shift in mentality (and hard work) from developers to even begin paying attention to the most basic of environmental factors.
Until they do focus on & get the basics sorted, the details you're talking about seem rather inaccessible to me.

I think you're spot-on stating that mentality in development is still so far off these ideas. But I disagree that it is about the projected work one has realised would bee un-doable with today's technology.

It has been mentioned before: the way how a slippery (meant: changing) condition is derived in detail does not matter much. It doesn't have to be a super-computer-exclusive real-time computation but can be pretty much simplified in it's details allowing for standard system with reasonable computing power to cope just well.
In the bottom line it's the resulting influence on the drivers and the whole race that really matters. We want to have these "effects" to "behave" as close to real life as possible in order to give us a racing experience as close to RL as possible.

After all when driving lfs for a longer periode of time there will eventually come a point where you think: "this pace, that the WR-holder puts into a combo is just unreal. If I was to challenge that track-time I would have to depart from a realistic driving-style and just hunt for the flaws in the physics/environment department - just like that other bloke does it."

A dynamic environment would not only change that condition for the better but at the same time have it's effects on online racing as it would then prove impossible to race with a hotlap set as they tend to be a LOT trickier to handle under not-ideal (clear "fast-line") conditions in a race. It would bring the fast hotlappers back closer to the ones focusing on the racing action: it would simply improve online-racing culture to resemble much better to the real thing.

The reason that sim-developers didn't come across a positive decision to try this is - in my eyes - very simple:
MONEY. It would certainly cost the part to develope such a thing. Since sim-racing is still a very young "sport" people buying a sim tended to be short-time-users, as they frequently moved on to the next-in-line "hot-product" after a few months or maybe years. Hence the return on investment would be limited given that the market (IMO with good reason) would simply reject any heavily over-prised product to hit the shelves.

With the introduction of sims like LFS, rFactor or even iRacing this thinking might prove to become a thing of a past. So maybe Becky's "open letter" is just a redundant bit of information that the devs themselves are already "on" as we speak. Or maybe not. How would we know?
However, in my opinion, this certainly is the way to strive for in future attempts. I simply won't buy any new "hot product" anymore just because it may have some nicer graphics or a better sound system. And that's because I have got so fond of actually racing a "Virtual Car" that those aspects, most magazines and review-sites happen to bark about most times, are just heavily irrelevant when adressing the real fun found in racing.

Way to go - yes.
And I believe it will be worth it big-time! As soon as the first one is to achieve a reasonably well-working product giving us all of the above-mentioned, they will have the ability to make some money out of it. It's just that they would be the ones to take the gamble of financing the whole development and the PR first - and against all these glossy magazines which just focus on graphics and such, since you cannot "sreen-shoot" the experience and fun of a real driving-challenge.

My 2 cents
DrBen

Last edited by DrBen, Sun, 7 Dec 2008 17:43. Reason : sometimes I forget about the final argument about on paragraph... PM me if anything else is still unclear :D

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

I've never once had the need for more buttons on my racing wheel. I use the two buttons for look left/right and that's all I need. There's more than enough buttons on the shifter unit. I'm replacing my wheel with a Sparco 270 in the coming months, and I bet I'll be able to live without the look left/right on the wheel - I'll just reassign them to the HAT button on the shifter.

Yeah, my critique is not about the number of buttons, rather their positioning as well as their alignment. They might work well with the shifter-unit mounted to someplace level with your seat - on the desk though (which is where I have the only space to mount it to) I barely use any of them except the outer-right of the 4 red ones for a button - E-brake. Those others are just too much a hassle to reach when acutally racing.
Other than that I really like the wheel itself. It seems sturdy and reliable. Same goes for the pedals (up to now). Only the shifter broke down on me once, having to send in the whole set because of it, waiting like 2 and a half months for the dealer to get a fresh replacement (german warranty/legal issues, you know - they really suck!). Many thank yous to all those playstation arcarde-gamers in the need of a 900° g25 at this point, hehe.

All in all, had fanatec hurried up with building and delivering the GT3-RS-Wheel, I might have reconsidered buying one with the clubsport pedals - and then probably expanded to the clubsport pedal-shifters which, as you can see, would/will cost a whole lot more than the G25.

It's just that the idea is spot-on, unfortunately though the world wasn't ready for(with) it, at the time (quoting some Tocotronic there).

Have fun - regardless of your buying decision
-- please continue to drive cleanly --

DrBen

Last edited by DrBen, Sun, 7 Dec 2008 14:51.

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

Yes that. I wouldn't buy the G27 looking like that.

That "photoshop-ed" (why not "GimP-ed" ?) really doesn't look like a quality job: just imagine the tiny size of those 6 buttons put on the current G25 / or the "super-size me" wheel it'd be if to accomodate all those buttons.

I think it was just simply the genius idea of yet another G25 buyer who was - just like me quite frankly -bored to tears by the fact that the much cheaper Playsi-wheels are so more versatile when it comes to reach and usability of their button allignment!

And of course the fact that if you use the shifter-switch a little more often that crucial accessory is just bound to break very soon-ish because of its all-round inferiour bild-quality and construction (when compared to the rest of the pack).

Anyway -> I just think they are planning another "toy" in order to not lose their market share to the surprisingly strong competitsion they are facing by the guys from fanatic. They just happened to surprise everyone, me too e.g. talking their new clubsport-pedals that come either in bundle AND/OR independent USB-guise.

Just think about it: They JUST HAD to react in order to not bore people into the hands of their competitors. Showing that real competition does matter quite a deal!

Greets & have fun when you purchase whichever wheel you favour!
DrBen

Quote :

For clarity though i'm not just talking about track temperature, but dust/sand and dirt being dragged onto the track

good point there. up until now we only have dirt as a very individual hinderance on the car's tyres -> quite simply a temporary loss of peak-traction capability. The surface itself is utterly static.

However thinking about how limited the potential sources of dirt are on a track I think that there can be something done using a good amount of approximation. We already have visual dust spread when a car's tyre goes slightly off the tarmac. So I suppose the information on where the dust falls down is already there. Now one would have to somehow develop a kind of "real-time dust-capacity per square meter" + the aforementioned temperature for the ground to introduce some new values for grip-limitation on the ground-surface side of things in addition to the tyres.

Oooops: here we go again: unfinished tyre model. So without changing this we don't get the other. You guys got me thinking

Plus this would present the need to be communicated throughout the connected clients and the host: so do I sense a major rework in netcode, here? Is it at all possible to achieve sufficient speed at communicating these values when racing online?

Anyway - although just losely connected with LFS - there are some interesting thoughts in this thread.

Disclaimer: no I am in no way a skilled programmer -> so please do not hesitate telling me if I'm way off the point here.

Hi again,

what OmniMoAK told you is more or less the basics of all driving:
The correct braking technique:
threshhold -> applying full brake-force until turn-in.
trailbrake -> losening the brake in a smooth way from 100% to 0 while at all times applying as much braking-power as the wheels can take without locking when turning into and throughout a corner.

Trailbrake is usually used from turn-in up to hitting the apex of a corner. The lack in feel in your braking foot is compensated by
a) your force-feedback wheel making you eperience a lightened steering-force when oversteering/overbraking
b) your ingame-sound telling you one or more tyres are skidding at the edge of traction

a) usually won't come in a sudden burst and can be felt before b) gets serious. It is a fine line but with practice you will develop a feel for that.

Keep in mind that the XFG is front-wheel-drive. This means the front-tyres' grip is needed for both: acceleration/braking AND steering. You can only steer as effectively as the difference in
[ maximum traction _minus_ brake-force ] leaves you to do this. If your steering angle is spot-on but you understeer then release the brake a little more.

When brake-balance is set to less than 70%-ish at Front then the brake might help a little at turn-in under braking but on the other hand will make the car suffer oversteer when over-braking and the minimum stopping-distance in a straight line is prolonged to some (minor) degree. This is the first thing to learn when adjusting one's set-up. Try different settings for the brake-balance -> although anything out of the 60%...75% - front-based range will probably not be wise on tarmac racing

Some people mount skiddier intermediate-tyres on the rear axle to allow for less understeer on windy tracks. I wouldn't recommend that for anything other than hotlapping on blackwood. Stability will suffer since those tyres will heat up a lot faster than the standard-road-tyres after a few laps!

Keep on going fast and smooth
DrBen

have fun "re-learning" to drive.
It'll sure take some time. Don't try too hard, though. Switching to a wheel takes some time to get the feel right.
Also make sure to try full-linear steering ( there is an option in the driver's / control called ""Wheel turn compensation")
Try to deactivate any sort of this input-modulation. I started using a wheel with this setting ON because I blindly copied some recommended settings and didn't think about it for myself.
Chances are - seeing you have been using mouse-steer for some time- you never used that option, anyway. In that case don't bother.

But if you had that ON, you might want to test it out:
When I eventually changed that to 'completely OFF' (I think a value of 0.0 did the trick) I was catching the counter-steer so much easier than before. A linear steering really does help there!

On the downside it means a very direct (thus sharp) steering around center though. In my opinion you couldn't care less except when cruising at walking-pace.
Others say it is due to personal preference, though

Happy racing
&
don't slam you wheel against the wall if the fast times still take a few more laps to come by!

Cheers

Quote from wsinda :

The human eye has a small part -- the area of focus -- where you can see in good detail, and the rest is peripheral vision with a wide FOV. Compare that to an LCD monitor (...)

Think about putting on a full-face helmet with a pull-down screen. I only once in my life (only recently) sat in a kart going for my fist ever couple of RL-laps and the first impression was: "What's up with my vision/FOV". Luckily I could leave the screen open since it was just a small indoor track. I seriously doubt that anyone wearing such a device will ever get a vision close to what you get in a street car. I think a reasonably modern PC-rig with a large wide-screen display running at 1680x1050 or even 1920x1200 -tuned at the right viewing angle- will give you a much larger fov (in lfs) than what you can experience in RL when wearing a helmet.

Quote :

(With nondynamic tracks it's not so important, because you can drive by memory: you don't so much see where the bumps are, you remember them.)

Isn't this partly the core of racing on a circuit: getting a quick and mostly accurate grasp of the track and actually remembering the potential go's and no-go's so-to-speak?
I say you do have a point there saying the level of difficulty controling a car on an ever-changing surface / dynamicly open piece of track will increase by some margin. But that would apply for all of the players. And that would mean for them to adjust in the most obvious ways:

-> they'd begin to use more all-round capable setups with less limited handling characteristics, thus making it possible to use a different line here and there in order to circumvent occuring inconveniences when racing in a more dynamic environment. Put in simple terms: the number of drivers using hotlap-setups in a race will decrease
-> they'd change their driving style to being more alert to forthcoming dangers & take less risks in on-the-edge dogfights, because racing-lines and track conditions are less predictable. It just might take some time for this change to happen. Cleaner racing - I agre with Becky on this - would be one of it's by-products.
If this projection is correct, then I honestly can't wait for it to hit lfs. It'll be well wroth the time waiting for.

status-quo:
But on the other hand: When I read that the sim-makers really spend too much thought on the car and it's mechanical systems then I can think of a perfectly good reason for this:
It's mostly the teenagers and car-lovers that are attracted to this kind of computer-game/sport up until this day. And of course THEY tend to focus on exactly that: "What does the car do when...?" "How am I going to master this or that car?".

wher to aim at?
What simulating actual motor-racing does or will be doing is going far beyond that. And here I do agree with Becky 100%: If the vehicl dynamics are at a point of refinement that is -judged by itself- this good and at the same time the overall racing feel is this far behind in almost all other aspects: then to take away the focus from the cars might really mean a giant step in the right direction!
That's not to say: "Don't finish the job on the tyres mate, they're good-enough"
To go with this example: Actually I think they are -quite frankly- good enough for Stage 2, now. As perfection is and will always be hard to achieve, stepping away from them for a bit and focusing the attention on other parts of the sim might just be a good idea once in a while.

After all the question is: (might drift off the main topic a little)
With what product will the more driving-focused user stick with? Or is it that this type of simrace does only exist in small numbers and the big money will be with those that just pose to be a driving sim? If so then the future of LFS or any other seriously thought-through sim is in BIG TROUBLE. Because there is no point in working on a product that isn't going to sell at all.
I for one waited with trying the GTR2 game until it became part of the low-budget sell-out mass at our local supermarket. The thing that put me off there was the domonstration version that didn't allow me to try the simulation-mode although it was purely out there to promote a driving-simulation. That's sort of paradox, isn't it? And it is the same story with rFactor. Just that I kind of read the other day that there now is a version out there allowing some mod-content to be tested for a limited time. Great. Just now I really lost interest for far too long in order to aproach that product again. To cut a long story short: I didn't like what I saw/felt/turned-my-wheel-at, so that was that (admittedly it has to do with driving-physics, there)

But then again: all the major magazines and journalists alike rather point at those mainstream-titles with official licenses of car-models, tracks and whole RL racing-leagues. And they do it for a reason: Those at the end of the supply-chain gain public awareness with it. And the more people play, the better they and their products will be recognised by the crowd. And connecting a new product with an "image" that has spread the world before never was a bad idea: called 'Marketing'. And it works because it is easy and thereby cost-effective to satisfy those who do not have too high expectations. Serious driving simply is not for everybody.


When I turn my head again and look at lfs which is still there, taking on this competition, I feel amazed - and immensely lucky at the same time...
...it gives me something I really like: a racing simulation that does what it should better and better, every time I start it. With enough players online that I can have a good race or two when I feel like it. A very straight-forward interface to all its settings that no other program I ever run could offer that even lets me acutally see what I do to the car when tuning its set-up.
Hope it'll survive the competition of that money- crazy i-Racing stuff and the advances of the ever more photo-realistic, "plastic-fantastic" arcade-genre that we are facing these days.

It will be interesting in what way improvements on dynamic environments will have an impact on lfs - when they come. I think one of it's real advantages has always been the small demand of system-specs and resources allowing for almost anybody to join end enjoy lfs online-racing. I can still use my 4y old laptop (P-M 1.4/ati-M11-64M) with lfs. What competing product even comes close?

Quote from spenceris :

i just cant stand it anymore... shes coming back from work and shes pretending to be tired i mean c'mon... she said were going to get it tommorow.. and i said to her today is tommorow so..

Patience. She's only human, you know?

Quote :

Im talking about my mom here

Well if that's going on for a couple of days you might just be a little nice to her & maybe point out that an S2 license would really make you happy putting the new wheel to some good use.
Alternatively RBR is like 5€ nowadays. Doesn't feature no single-seaters but surely hast a very rewarding driving-school and nice tracks&graphics! Works well with the Momo-black, as well.

Good luck!

I guess the 2 semi-auto GTRs have it as well. I usually drive the FZR (manual bg). I know that the F08 and the BF1 (two big SS) do not interfer in the same way. The Fox (mid-level SS) neither. But the MRT is equiped with a switch as well.
But don't worry: with analogue gas&brake that will be solved after about 5 minutes of getting used to it.

Sweet dreams:auto:

DrBen

Quote :

i understand that. when i use auto gear on fbm its not neccesary to lift off the throttle button, but if i use manual gearing i have to lift off the throttle. simple as that.

For the FBM that is exactly right - that car has an electronic "switch" connected to the throttle that will prevent shifting with more than 2/3rds of applied power - and that is one of the reasons I do not like it that much when using mouse. Still I consider this a good way of having beginners not ruin their racing-rig right-away. After all this is a feature of the real car after which the fbm is modelled.

But there are cars in lfs that you can abuse with wrong shifting. And then the clutch will fry and your speed decline. Even Auto-clutch will not help you there when neglecting the the right use of the throttle. But then again: no freaking switch there, so it depends on the driver to match revs accurately - an that is much more rewarding & fun than semi-automatic harnesses in my believe.

Quote from G!NhO :

only in rallying its quicker to powerslide through a corner, i think because of the 4wd and the lack of grip.

That's what it is. A 4wd Rally-Car will always be quicker slow-in and the max-power-out of a corner (as will almost every other car btw.)

It's because of the relatively low lateral grip on loose surfaces and due to the fact that a 4WD car will allways resemble a a front-wheel-drive at the entrance of a corner more than a RWD. Depending on how you set up the drive this will eventually translate into slight oversteer on the exit under power. But going into a corner too fast will unly result in locking up the front wheels and thus heavy understeer under braking (consider the plus in weight over a 2WD as well).

Bottom line: Powering through a corner in a well set-up 4WD at exactly the right entrance-speed and turn-in will "pull" the car around a lot better than trying to recover traction from (too)heavy braking.

That's why a 4wd might need a little "feint" steering input before going sideways that an rwd usually will do without.

auto-clutch means that an electric motor operates the clutch and the gearbox when asked for a gear. You will still have to lilft the throttle or blib it to match revs.

Auto-clutch != (IS NOT) automatic transmission.

Bottom line: "no"
Reason:
It doesn't come with a clutch pedal nor with an h-shifter
so you will have to stick to auto-clutch. And with that not using your left foot on the brake is rather absurd.

BTW. When competing online I hardly use h-shifter&clutch although I could with the G25. It's just not fast enough compared to the insanely fast aut-clutch.
Let alone the single-seaters that usually have an auto-clutch built in in RL, as well

btw. I edited my post in the other thread.

about heel&toe:

that is a techniqe on manual road-cars (with h-shifter and clutch) where your left foot is occupied by the clutch-pedal. It is the technical term of down-shifting while braking. The right foot is then used for braking (as in a normal car) while simultaneously blipping the throttle with its heel for a split-second just before releasing the clutch and letting the gear "come". It is used to match the higher revs of the engine with the lower gear when downshifting.
If you don't do so you're clutch will not live long in a manual car.

On single-seaters you usually use right foot for gas and left foot for braking - as in a cart. Just that on "grown-up" racers you don't just have a rear-brake to trigger

You're planning to burn it after just half a year?
If you don't kick it around you house too often it should last quite a bit longer than that!
I don't know about your local dealers but the recommended sales price of both of these Logitech wheels are identical.
EUR 149,- in GER
However retail-prices here have been jumping around 90-100EUR for the Momo and the predecessor of the GT (the good-old "driving-force-pro").
I can imagine given the recent introduction of the new GT-model that there are some gap between street-prices, now.

That said, if you can get a black momo for under 100EUR (or the relative equivalent price-point where you are living/shopping) then it is a good deal for a fairly good wheel


EDIT: the most signifficant impact a wheel will have on your driving is with the analogue throttle and brake - pedals. Not with the steering since you learned quite a bit about that when perfecting mouse-steer.
The Force-Feedback however will give you an advantage especially on mid- to long-distance races. You will be able to feel when the ride suffers from touches and crashes before you change your direction. You will be able to react quicker, much less depending on visual feedback. For a beginner's wheel I still consider the black momo very capable. Given that you like the single-seaters most of all, it should suffice just fine.

Last edited by DrBen, Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:05.

You're right about the cost *what was I thinking*

However the Momo isn't exactly rubbish. In fact it is very nice for a wheel with only 240° of steering lock. It is a comfortable thing to hold in your hands and the 6 buttons + 2 shift-paddles on the wheel are just about enough for what you'll do with them.
It's just the pedal-unit that came with it that let me down with the wheel itself being not even half way through it's life.
Second minor disadvantage with the black Momo is its motor-resistance. The high gearing inside of the mechanism means additional physical resistance when counter-steering quickly. That said, with enough force applied, it is still way quicker to counter-steer a wheel at 240° lock than it is to do this on a 1080° car in real life. The motor-resistance on the other hand takes away some feel and with that accuracy.

So if you hadn't already ordered the momo I'd have seriously suggested the Driving-Force-GT (Playstation3-wheel).