Important things: 1. corner speed 2. car positioning at the moment of handbrake input 3. handbrake input (timing and force aplied) 4. tyres/grip in general 5. road surface (weather and other factors like dust, leaves, ice) Most of these hanbrake mistakes in real life are consequence of carrying to much speed before applying handbrake, which results in to much kinetic energy on the rear of the car, which is not followed by rear tyres and then rear becomes lose, which results in front end heading into corner itself of spining around even. Its better to lack corner speed, than to carry to much speed.
Also, the car setup. Rovanperä once said that his teammates' setups had too much understeer for his driving style and that he needs more rotation, which can lead to spins. In fact, the rally from which his onboard clip comes was the very first one with the new Rally1 machinery, and he struggled a lot with pace until he understood the car's behavior more in the last day of the rally. The white car driven by Sarrazin is no less than the then in-development Yaris WRC, conforming to the 2011-2016 WRC regulations. Maybe they were testing setups and overall car behavior, while during actual rallies WRC teams have already everything studied to try and reduce silly mistakes - there's little time to gain going around the actual hairpin anyway, but a lot to lose. Also, I don't think a car could do roundabouts like the one Loeb was doing without the rear-end wanting to spin away from, at least slightly. An "AWD car that pulls away completely straight and without any trouble with 100% throttle application" will just do that: straighten itself, refusing to snap the rear.
In the world of physics, energy is a key player, and when it comes to a moving car, kinetic energy takes the stage. The relationship between kinetic energy and the use of a handbrake in a car is a fascinating interplay of forces and motion. Let's delve into the intricacies of how the handbrake affects kinetic energy and contributes to bringing a vehicle to a controlled stop. Understanding Kinetic Energy: Kinetic energy is the energy possessed by an object due to its motion. In the case of a car in motion, its kinetic energy is directly tied to the movement of its wheels. The faster the wheels spin, the higher the kinetic energy. The Handbrake's Intervention: Engaging the handbrake initiates a process that alters the car's kinetic energy. When you pull the handbrake lever, it activates a system that applies force to the wheels, resisting their rotation. This force is typically applied to the rear wheels, inducing a controlled deceleration. Conversion of Kinetic Energy: As the handbrake slows down the rotation of the wheels, it converts the car's kinetic energy into other forms. The primary form is heat, generated by the friction between the brake pads and the rotating wheels. This transformation is a crucial aspect of the braking system, effectively reducing the car's kinetic energy. Gradual Deceleration: Unlike slamming on the footbrake, which can cause sudden stops and potential skidding, the handbrake provides a more gradual deceleration. This controlled slowing down allows for smoother handling, especially in situations where precision is paramount, such as parking or navigating tight spaces. Parking and Stability: The handbrake also plays a pivotal role in keeping a parked car stable. When engaged while the car is stationary, it prevents unintended rolling on inclines. This is achieved by locking the rear wheels, adding an extra layer of security beyond relying solely on the transmission in the "park" position. Emergency Situations: In certain emergency situations, such as brake failure, the handbrake can be a crucial tool for slowing down the vehicle. While it might not bring the car to a swift halt, it can buy precious moments and contribute to a safer deceleration. Conclusion: In the intricate dance of forces that govern a moving car, kinetic energy takes center stage. The handbrake, as a mechanism to influence and control this kinetic energy, proves to be a valuable tool. From controlled stops to enhanced stability during parking, the handbrake adds a layer of finesse to the intricate dynamics of a car in motion, showcasing the delicate balance between motion, forces, and energy conversion.
@@jackadams8299It was cool to read, right until you pulled out the handbrake used for parking bit. What?? Why? This isn’t about easing the handbrake to brake more precise or to keep the car stopped, and even so the foot brakes aren’t like, too powerful for that kinda stuff either. Ya got out of it half way through bro
The guys out there on the _RBR Track Building_ Discord server (Jan Kadeřábek, WorkerBee, tomsmalley, etc.) are making big efforts developing Blender plugins and whatnot to improve the graphics and the quality of the stages, being the new Gabiria-Legazpi and Biskupice stages fine examples of that. I guess a few lightweight shaders on top of that would be enough to have lovely graphics! Just watch this beautiful nonsense, made by Jan: ua-cam.com/video/rMWgzyXsuRk/v-deo.html. Here's the Gabiria-Legazpi stage for completeness: ua-cam.com/video/YcZ735o_x7A/v-deo.html. The new shiny games have fancy graphical effects, but no actual realism. And what about the similarity of the stages? They look nothing like the real ones! But look at that Gabiria-Legazpi stage!
Going through the comments this guy really knows what he’s talking about. Its really nice to have a RBR channel like this, i hope more people realize just how embarrassingly unrealistic the other “rally sims” are. Nothing beats RBR
@@Tiltglory I'm no wrc driver, but the traction is hella unpredictable you either have 100% traction or totally none a lot of the times i was surprised that the car didn't went into the turn like i wanted it to
Your constant jerking for RBR is among the most annoying shit in the sim racing community. Yes, we get it. You like RBR. It is a good sim. But so are other games. Stop acting like your shit is superior.
IF one thinks rally drivers never spin out..They've never actually seen rally. Real rally drivers have accidents, including spin outs, constantly. In real rally, finishing all stages in a rally is a feat on its own.
That's Sim racing clown boys for you. They feel they must replicate skill of a professional sidelining the years of practice and experience that driver has. Simulator amateurs want to be professional through simulator so if they constantly make mistakes (oversteer, understeer, roll over) they'd blame the physics engine rather than skill issue 🤣. Clowns have it hardwired in their head that they can do same in real world.
To be fair the Yaris is (apparently, not sure 100% as I don't have access to source) missing the steering controller from the AWD logic. So it won't actually behave correctly. Either way there is no "hairpin physics" and the output is a result of all the systems, which are okay in NGP. Likely better than most of the consumer sims out now.
Joonas Lönn said that Kalle Rovanperä, while they both were trying for hours to create a realistic setup for the Yaris WRC, stated that the car had too much front grip on gravel (!) and that this caused it to want to spin a bit on hairpins. I've seen over there tons of super interesting comments from you, and that you are a physics developer! Could you check in the last video I uploaded if my understanding of the things is somewhat correct? (edit: I deleted it, it's badly edited)
@@zwjna I guess if Yaris is front to rear AWD (I am not sure, but I think it is...?) then not having a reduction of front-split when the wheel is turned could lead to that. Although that just sounds like wrong maps overall. Drivers will not be able to engineer correct maps in a few hours. Or ever.
Great video, it would be nice to make a comparison on asphalt between rbr/ea wrc and reality. I hear a lot of people who, when they come to my house to try rbr with ngp7, tell me that the cars have little grip and are very understeering and that in reality this isn't true but it's exactly like that but they don't understand. It would be nice if you could make a video where you explain these factors well... it would be a nice gift for me to give to those who tell me that rbr isn't real. thanks for your videos they are very nice.
Thank you very much! I definitely want to do a comparison, and in all surfaces. I will soon start with it! But for the time being, I guess people say that NGP has little grip due to many reasons, and here are some of them: 1) This one is the most likely. Those who drove in real-life, even if at least a little bit, might have the impression that in real-life the cars grip more and understeer less simply because they drive too fast in the game without realizing it. It's a fact that the G-forces and adrenaline in real-life can make a pretty slow ride feel pretty fast, while in simulators we get nothing of that. Furthermore, flat screens can't properly give us a correct sense of speed. Technically they can, by picking a very wide FOV, but this is a trade-off: either you chose a wide FOV for the sense of speed, or a narrow FOV for the sense of depth. You can't get both, as opposed to real-life. Here's a trick you can use with that people: if they are playing the simulator with a very narrow FOV, the straight-line speed will feel pretty slow even though the car is going pretty fast. This will of course cause them to get on the throttle fearlessly, not having the slightest clue about how fast the car is actually going. Naturally, they will brake too late as they are underestimating the car's speed, and will understeer or even go off the road; they will feel like the grip is pretty low. If you give them a pretty wide FOV, the sense of speed will be so high that they will be overestimating the car's speed all the time and thus driving slowly everywhere and braking too early; they will feel like the grip is pretty high. Here's more about the FOV in simulators: ua-cam.com/video/hLbGculIpW0/v-deo.html 2) They base their argument purely by watching real-life onboards, but don't understand the concepts about the FOV of the camera that I talked about above. The real WRC cars often use terrible camera setups, with super narrow FOV that makes the car look slow in straight line, and pretty aggressive and grippy on the corners. Watch this video, and compare the onboard at the top with the one at the bottom-left: ua-cam.com/video/xt3p3zcLlX8/v-deo.html. It's day and night. The one at the top looks pretty slow but pretty aggressive in left-to-right movements, and the bottom one is exactly the opposite. The position of the camera also matters, as does the frame rate of the video. While watching a real onboard, the frames per second of the video tend to be much lower than in a game, so the footage might look faster (thus grippier) because the car is moving a bigger distance between frames. In the world of videogames, they try super hard to get as much frames rendered per second as possible, so the footage is much smoother and thus feels slower. 3) Once again, they base their arguments purely on onboard videos, and they see that the real cars are super grippy and stay on the road all the time, and thus that it should be the same in a realistic game. But they fail to realize that the real onboards are showcasing cars driven by world-class drivers with immense skill that fight hard to drive the cars fast whilst keeping them on the road. This is to say, they are totally underestimating the difficulty of the real thing; they have absolutely no idea of what level of skills is required to drive in real-life. They don't realize that they go off the road and "get no grip" because they are not as skilled as the real drivers. I remember a comment made in this video: ua-cam.com/video/QxvbSJPB4go/v-deo.html. Search for it, it's a response to a comment that says "dirt rally anyone ?". The comment said that it looked easier in real-life because it looks not as blisteringly fast and not as understeery as in Dirt Rally. Let's understand what this implies: he is expecting an 8x World Rally Champion like Sébastien Ogier to understeer everywhere like he, a mere gamer, does in the game! Understeer is slow and a mistake, so an 8x champion will do everything to avoid it at all costs, and has the skills to do so. Yet that people totally ignore the fact that it's the immense skill of the real drivers what's keeping the cars on the road, without understeering, and with proper grip. In that comment I reference this: ua-cam.com/video/cxRsaSEM4gA/v-deo.html at 0:36. Show them that huge understeer. That's how the real thing looks like when the drivers fail to drive properly. Hell, even RBR looks super grippy compared to that! Huge understeer! Similarly, some people believe that games like EA WRC are more realistic because their driving looks and feels more like the real onboards. That is to say, the average gamer with little idea about rallying is able to drive like a real WRC driver in such games. This of course is nonense, only possible in an unrealistic and arcade game. This makes the game convincing for them, and once again they are underestimating the difficulty of the real thing or overestimating their own skills. Those games are made exactly with that intention: to make the average person feel like a pro driver, thus ensuring tons of sales.
@@zwjna "1) This one is the most likely. Those who drove in real-life, even if at least a little bit, might have the impression that in real-life the cars grip more and understeer less simply because they drive too fast in the game without realizing it." Yeah, this always happen I feel like when playing games. Going "slow" in some quite hard dirt corner and ending up in the forest. Then you look down at the speed and realize you are going like 100km/h, which would have felt like super speed even on the straights in real life.
if you want to spin less with handbrake i recommend use it before cornering, after braking, just clutch in, handbrake and turn in, the car will be more predictable than if you turn in and use the handbrake, rally drivers use both though get comfortable with first one and later try the other one, in FWD cars you dont need the clutch so you can skip it, too much speed will lead you to hit a tree or spin depending on your setup so be careful
I'll have to play RBR again now that I understand more about how to actually drive a car. I couldn't get past the tutorial last time, though I can't remember if I was trying to play in VR at 15FPS or not. Worth mentioning I don't use the handbrake at all in my WRX on a lot of dirt corners, I prefer to use weight transfer to get the car to rotate, and suspension set up helps too, the cars set up so it gets lift off or brake induced oversteer which helps for initiating corner rotation A LOT. Makes it difficult to pull up sometimes but I'm getting the hang of it IRL more than in simulators. Except for BeamNG drive, I do alright in that somehow.
Coming back to RBR in 2023 and was thinking the same. Shitty hairpin physics. But sometimes it worked out well... so i start to tweak handbrake setting... In the end... this works fine. It's a sim, so you have to put things together to be sucessfull... with the baseline setups its awefull. With the correct settings its a gamechanger. After the release of EA Sports WRC... still the same result... nothing beats RBR.
It's lovely! And at the end of the day, while it is true that there are many differences, the core concepts are the same when it comes to driving fast. The big changes are the kind of places they drive through, and the approach: circuit racing's learning the track and being milimetrically precise vs. rallying's processing the track and predicting and improvising, in real time, with as much precision as you can possibly deliver out of that. Oh, and the variety of surfaces and, thus, driving styles! Some cool examples: - Loose: ua-cam.com/video/cpb-anWr0Dc/v-deo.html - Tarmac: ua-cam.com/video/TRCqDLAomIA/v-deo.html
@@zwjna Im having some problems to run it at the moment and also because i dont have a wheel Last time i played the game i was using a controler wich wasnt that big of a problem (at least wile im using a trabant) But at the time, i wasnt that good with racing games, so it was verry dificult to me to use more intrusting and powerfull cars in toughter stages But now (especially after getting more into rally) i have a new pc that should run the game more smoothly (my old one had a i3-3220) but for some reason im having some problems to use my controler with the game, unfortunatly i still didnt had the proper time to try fix it
@@Ray-bs6qv If you use the rallysimfans version [1], you can use the launcher that comes with it to easily reduce the graphics quality and improve performance. I've seen at least other two users on YT saying they were having trouble with the controller, so maybe you can try to fix those problems searching for info in the rallysimfans' Discord server that you can find at [1] as well, and if there's nothing, you can ask the guys there. You can also try playing with the keyboard! If you look into my channel, you'll see that, at least with FWD and AWD cars and over loose surfaces, it is definitely possible to be fast with it! You can even tune it to your needs, using RBR's builtin filters, to smooth-en the on-off inputs. [1] www.rallysimfans.hu/rbr/download.php?download=rsfrbr
Wait, did people seriously expect that having AWD would negate the effects of momentum? That the car would just stop rotating just because you're spinning all four wheels? Little bros are learning physics from mobile game
If you bad driver and want less spins, do Front diff MAX on throttle and MIN on brake. Less full stops from front axle and more power out when saving a spin.
Also, to save a spin, doing a clutch dump will often do the trick, as it gets the four wheels to rotate at the same speed, pretty much by-passing the differential's work. Here's Sébastien Ogier doing exactly that in real-life at the 0:44 mark: ua-cam.com/video/jo1j4ChiSUc/v-deo.htmlsi=S9dIQ1wfY2zVRkKM&t=44. He was about to spin, but we can pretty clearly hear the engine revving aggressively due to the clutch dump. I in fact do it at 0:35 with the black Fabia R5, at the exit of the corner, to avoid some slight excessive oversteer. For anyone wondering what a clutch dump is, it's about stomping the clutch completely, going full throttle, and once the engine red-lines, drop the clutch quickly. The R5 and specially WRC and Group B engines red-line instantaneously, so it's easy to do. Make sure to be in the right gear.
is better that you learn how handbrake turns work rather than move setups, there are two ways: first one is: 1brake 2clutch in 3handbrake 4turn in this one is.more predictable therefore you spin less and is easier to turn in, in FWD cars clutch is not needed second one 1brakes 2turn in 3clutch in 4 handbrake this one rotates with momentum therefore less predictable you can spin easily, both are used by rally drivers because one can gain more speed than other in certain corners or save you in mistakes, i personaly recommend starting with first one and later move to the other one to understand the differencebetween rotation and momentum rotation
@@zwjnaactually he wasnt about to spin, he was about to completely stop reving the engine helped him to gain that extra speed to make it through the exit, in actual fact if you rev it when you are about to spin you will spin is basics of drifting, when you are uphill drifting you do the same he does, reving to get that extra speed to make it through the exit and entry of the corner because the car lose so much speed it can stall or completely stop if make it to the clutch
@@kouta27 But that car is AWD. Revving it that violently and immediately causes the four (!) wheels to rotate at the same speed, which is not what you get otherwise as the differentials kick in and the front wheels will not receive as much power as the rears, causing the spin.
@@zwjnaAWD and 4WD are different layouts, what you are mentioning is a 4WD layout, though depending on which layout it was made for example a RWD will have more over steer a FWD layout based 4WD or AWD will have more understeer, AWD with a center differential allows you to send more power to the rears or front wheels, beside that the differential also depends on the preference of the driver, a driver can make the wheels rotate at different speeds or same speeds, some drivers let 4 wheels rotate at different speeds to allow oversteer other prefer a more stable car allowing them to overslow and rotate wheels at almost the same speed, also they have a lot of bottons to control that in cars, for example brake bias can be control with a knob, i think differential have a knob too, i dont know about all knobs though is insane the amount of buttons they press to drive
What kills these handbrake turns on AWD cars is too much throttle and how the car works. I learned this the hard way trying to handbrake turn in a Audi Quattro A2. The car is too old and only has a read diff, what can not be disengaged from the AWD drivetrain. Modern rally cars have a mid diff for this. To disconect the rear wheels so they spin at a different speed that the front ones. What happens physics whise using the handbrake? Correct: you lock up the rear wheels or slow down their turning, what leads to the rear end of the car becoming loose. You step on the gas too hard and suddenly have rear tires with no grip but too much throttle applied. This is a delicate place to be in AWD cars and: most drift drivers will tell you to BE GENTLE on the throttle. They too are prone to exactly this. It won't kill their car unless on a tight circuit but it will definitely kill their drift.
Every AWD car does roughly the same. True, the other people that, like me, never drove a WRC car, expect them to not spin because "they are advanced and stable and whatnot". But at the end of the day they are quite normal cars, just very developed and polished. I mean, I've seen engineers and car enthusiasts over there getting surprised by them using McPherson struts or purely mechanical differentials with no center diff at all. The era of truly complex WRC cars is long gone. So, I don't see any reason to expect Rally1 and R5 cars to not spin, and there are plenty of videos (including close calls) that confirm that they in fact do spin.
Just because cars in real life also spin doesn't confirm that the behaviour in RBR is realistic. We would need to compare telemetry input to see how accurate it actually is. In my own opinion, watching a lot of hairpins on videos and real life, sometimes it feels like RBR cars just keep sliding like they are on ice (especially if you get back on the throttle too soon), where as real cars throw the back around much more aggressively and get back on the throttle often even in the middle of the turn without a problem. I think it's certainly more realistic than something like Dirt Rally, but just a little bit too extreme.
@@schmid1.079 Sure, it might be exaggerated. But real-life external footage can also exaggerate it, specially the Hollywood-esque and Fast and Furious-esque recordings they do with tons of cool zooming and panning. The position of the person recording relative to the car and the zoom of the camera can also affect the way in which the car seems to move. This can make the cars look like they grip a lot over hairpins. But then, I've seen pretty few onboard cameras in which the cars seem to be thrown more aggressively than in RBR into the hairpins, and those few probably give that impression of more aggressive rotations due to the inherent lack of speed we get from a videogame with poor graphics on a flat screen and with high framerate. As we know, low quality and framerate makes a video look faster, and WRC onboards oftentimes are like that. But then again, setups might have a lot to do with that, but also the road's camber and banked turns. Down there I've talked about this, the effects of the road camber on the dynamics of the car. Basically, you can or even _might need_ to throw the car aggressively into the hairpin to avoid understeer, even with aggressive and early throttle application. I've discussed with another user this topic a few months ago, and I've made these videos to try and prove my point: - ua-cam.com/video/HeUYz56tfvk/v-deo.html - The real clip is one he used to prove the aggressive ways in which they throw the cars into the corners. Note how aggressive my rotation is, and how the real car in fact launches off quite slowly, and how long he waits to get on the throttle. Below [1] is the original clip so that you can see and hear it properly. The other videos are my response to the same statement, about how in real life "they throw the cars into the corners without care in the world", which is not true, and I proceed to show different approaches with actual zero care (which looks nothing like any real-life hairpin over there) and other approaches also aggressive, but more careful, and that look just like the real ones. - ua-cam.com/video/dQJjEUqUcgg/v-deo.html - This one is an improved version of the other one. I analyzed the technique used by the real driver and tried to imitate it, and the result is a much more similar corner. There's less countersteer as well, similar to the real one. - ua-cam.com/video/Qz93OLwi3Yo/v-deo.html - Big rotation, pedal to the metal mid-corner, though with a bigger radius. [1]: ua-cam.com/video/iBaRHIzVUUY/v-deo.html
@@schmid1.079is not realistic, i mean to be completely realistic you need to find wheels data, aero data, and so on to translate it into the game, even if you manage to do so, the physics wont be realistic because in game some parts of the track have more grip than in real life or vice versa, real rally drivers said it, in sim you have more grip in parts than in real circuit you dont, telemetry wont be accurate anyway though the game helps you to get an idea about how to drive in real life
Even with AWD, if all the load are in the rear it’s still a RWD Specially on uphill hairpin. Still a skill issue if you can’t determine/feel when all four wheels are planted and have traction
I feel like upwards half-helical turns (where elevation starts at apex) naturally lends itself to sudden shift to the front wheels, to the same effect of a sudden weight transfer to front wheels which can increase oversteer when low gear at full throttle
best rally asphalt physics are in assetto corsa, try trento-bondone with a rally car and you'll see how natural it feels, but RBR does a good job as well
I disagree, to me they are not the best for rally cars! The core physics engine was not designed for rally but for circuit racing, so it might well be lacking the necessary calculations to fully support rally car vehicle dynamics for tarmac rally driving. And most importantly, it's well-known that the modded cars often have pretty bad and unrealistic dynamics as their physics parameters are not properly tuned. Meanwhile, NGP is fully dedicated to rally driving, and the cars' physics are designed with real telemetry data and with extreme quality - to the point that even the 3D model must be accurate in order to put that car into the game, as otherwise the physics won't be. That's why, if I'm not mistaken, we still don't have cars like the i20 WRC 2016 since NGP6. What does "natural" mean? Does it mean easy or intuitive? That's not necessarily realistic. They don't feel like what I see from real onboard videos, but RBR/NGP does. Last but not least, Assetto Corsa enthusiasts have felt the need to have rally-specific physics mods, which means the base game is indeed not good enough for rally. Even compared to those, I still think NGP offers the best physics.
@@zwjna AC physics being made for circuits are precisely what makes it realistic for tarmac, the fine tuning of the handling in the modded WRC cars might not be so precise but the overall physics is more realistic than in RBR, also there are rally cars made by kunos and they handle very similar to what you see in the respective irl videos. However, if you have real rally experience, unless you haven't tried AC in the way I said, I will remove my comments.
@@mousinius Why it being made for circuits would make it more realistic? Because they dedicate all their efforts on tarmac physics? But real-time physics engines require simplified models and calculations in order to deliver results within a reasonable amount of frames per second. So it being made for circuits might well mean that Assetto Corsa is lacking the necessary infrastructure and calculations for tarmac rally, vehicle dynamics that circuit cars will never experience due to circuit racing's nature. On the other hand, RBR's NGP physics are in development for over a decade now, and are 100% focused on rallying. There's a physics engineer in the comments here, ArchOfficial, who seconds this. Also: ua-cam.com/video/cNl2QVLEb0w/v-deo.html
@@zwjna there are only one physics in real life. You do not switch from circuit to rally in real life. It is the same with the game, AC has really good tarmac physics. There is literally no difference in calculations needed to make tarmac rally sim and circuit sim, it is surface, tire model, car suspension. And those are the same for both types. Yes developed over decade, but with fraction of budget. The thing I always hear from RBR fanboys (and iceRacing fanboys) is that other games are too grippy. Have you ever driven car on rally slicks? Even regular car on rally slicks? I have and those tires even if they are few years old and noone would use them for competition (because they have "no grip" compared to new slicks) have huge amounts of grip. I have also been driven a few times on shakedown in a car by national champion (because I am his team engineer/mechanic) and the direction changes are insane and I am saying that as someone who thinks about myself as a really good driver, I am doing that for living and I occasionally race in some amateur races.
@@petrsulc1168 You don't switch physics in real life just like you don't switch graphics. But in the world of computers, we don't run the same luck. Our hardware is not able to properly simulate light in real time, and that's considering an expensive computer that only few would have. Since the advent of computer graphics, we had to deal with Rasterization and only recently we are starting to introduce Ray Tracing combined with lots of Rasterization. And Ray Tracing is not even an accurate simulation of light. Path Tracing is better than that, but sure enough, much more expensive. Similarly, you can't accurately simulate physics in a videogame. There _needs_ to be trade-offs and simplifications in order for the game to run smoothly and stable. In your "it is surface, tire model, car suspension" list, replace "car suspension" by "vehicle dynamics". NGP is being developed for over a decade with the solid foundations of RBR. Similarly, people is developing "rally physics" mods for Assetto Corsa using its solid foundations. Guess Assetto Corsa, like Richard Burns Rally, is not good enough for rally. But NGP truly delivers. The other games are too grippy, indeed. Have you ever seen a rally car from the outside? Have you ever seen an onboard video? Yes, I'm giving more importance to watching videos than to actual driving experience anybody might have. Videos show things as they are: if the cars in the games look faster and more grippy than in real life, then the games are irrefutably wrong and no driver with real experience will ever prove otherwise. Real-life's physics can't be switched to record a video and make the games look arcade. What you see is what you get. In the new EA WRC game, a Rally3 looks as fast as a Rally1 car in real-life videos, both external and onboard. Similarly, in that game, a Group B car is able to match a Rally1 car pace-wise and even beat a so-called WRC+ car! All that is nonsense that can't be logically supported. Most likely your perception of grip is getting affected by the lack of sense of speed of a flat screen and the lack of G forces and overall feelings. If your game feels as fast and grippy as your real driving, then that's an indication that the game is arcade. Real onboards will always feel slower than the real thing. In the same vein, gameplay will always feel slower than real driving. On a flat screen, you either get a good sense of straight-line speed, or a good sense of depth. You can't get both as in real life. This is achieved by picking a wide or narrow camera FOV, respectively. What I mean to say is that you feel low grip because your car is going faster than you realize. The old, cartoonish graphics don't help either. Have a look at this video to understand the effect of camera placement and FOV on the feeling of straight-line speed, depth, and grip levels: ua-cam.com/video/xt3p3zcLlX8/v-deo.html.
Yes, real drivers also shift twice immediately when accelerating from the hairpin XD. Anyway, I feel despite the video at 1:05 being strong evidence that 4WD cars could spin out on corner exits, some the videos you use as evidence could be biased in a way, the Rally1 cars in 2022 didn't have an active tuneable centre diff, which could have caused the drivers coming from WRC plus to make the mistakes. In the video at 0:51, the rear right tyre went over a very dirty part of the road which probably caused the spin. The video at 1:19 has something similar where Loeb hit a water puddle with his real left tyre. Although I strongly believe that a lot of it is skill issue in NGP7, (I can prevent the car from spinning in hairpins: ua-cam.com/video/0VT5KJ8b9H4/v-deo.htmlsi=yMBSgnqZFip_lZLI) I still believe that this is still exaggerated especially when I got to drive a cross-kart on dusty tarmac in the FIA Rally Star Asia-Pacific finals. I found more room for an earlier acceleration with that RWD car compared to a race kart or WRC plus cars in NGP7. I also find that although the tyres are slightly grippier than they should be compared to real-life (e.g. ua-cam.com/video/SsqreUfBlDI/v-deo.htmlsi=ynMieVmCVWWI4ejm where I had to use wet tyres to match the real-life speed), the cars are a lot less responsive to steering, it's almost like the car doesn't listen to the front wheels enough and I have to constantly shift the weight way too much for the car to respond only a little bit. A problem I face a lot when trying to have the car turn-in more mid corner on gravel. The cars in Codemasters's rally games seem to do this better (ua-cam.com/video/GLBUXlOV5gs/v-deo.htmlsi=BCCzfGhhhUbi7WBZ) but I can't get over how fake their physics are with the cars rotating around their centre of mass and just snap and rotate like a UFO whenever the suspension is compressed, especially after jumps. I tried to fix this issue in RBR NGP7 by increasing the front and rear lock but it causes the car to spin out too much on when accelerating on uneven surfaces. Any setup tips to fix this? I also heard that real WRC plus cars have centre differentials that are affected by steering and if I'm not wrong there isn't that setup option in NGP now. Could that be one of the factors that cause the cars to spin out so easily on hairpin exits? I know my experience is extremely limited but I'd like to share my views on this topic and know yours as well. Maybe you can educate me a little. Thanks for reading my messy comment!
I would say that WRC drivers making mistakes with the Rally1 cars coming from the WRC+ cars proves how easily real cars can spin, and that it doesn't happens more often because they are world-class and get to master their cars pretty fast. "Mastering" doesn't necessarily means delivering perfect hairpins, but safe ones - not only with careful technique, but also with appropriate setups for the stage, if possible. I'm convinced there's very little time to gain on hairpins by pushing the car during the rotation and the exit, but a lot to lose: spinning, risking a possible engine stall, which can be even worse if the car refuses to restart. Setups are super important. As I said down there, some drivers prefer cars that oversteer more, such as Rovanperä. He said this year during the Croatia rally that he tried to copy his teammates' setups, but that they were too understeery for his driving style and that he needs a car that rotates more. That means it can be more prone to spins. Then, have you ever tried Nikolay Gryazin's tarmac setup for the i20 WRC 2021? That thing is nearly impossible to spin on hairpins, and I even struggle to do proper hairpins with it because it refuses to rotate. After getting used to it, it drives nicely, but then I still totally relate to the words of Rovanperä I just cited: that car feels to understeery to me, I would rather go with the default one! There are significant differences between the real Vesala Shakedown stage and the one from RBR, not only in modelling but most likely in road surface as well: the game's Vesala is a BTB stage at the end of the day, and looks like it's much flatter than the real one, in which the car spends much more time climbing the road (losing, maybe, a bit of time) and then going "downhill" mid-corner, thus requiring the driver to back-off whilst the flatter road in the game allows one to keep the speed; then, RBR has many types of gravel with different levels of grip, just like real life, and the stage designer probably picked the wrong one. Which might be unfair to say, because in real life it's pretty common to hear the drivers saying that the grip was (for example) bad, even though they year before the grip was good according to them on the very same stage and conditions. Nature changes! So that lack of steering response might be due to the lack of grip of the road surface of the stage. And the setup! I have a World Record done on Diamond Creek, which is uploaded to my channel, and here's the brakes view: ua-cam.com/video/OY-eCXSIZeM/v-deo.html. On such fast stages, like the Vesala, I can get the car to rotate drastically more with minimal left-foot-braking, if at all. Also, grippier tyres not necessarily means more responsive steering: ua-cam.com/video/wogqu54-w3A/v-deo.htmlsi=j0T5oOuvn-_X1jok&t=116 at 1:56. Might NGP still lack a bit of responsiveness on the WRC cars? According to what I see from onboards, maybe. There's also Ville Pynnönen*, who said that the R5 cars do lack some responsiveness. * www.youtube.com/@ThePynski/videos Yet, I think EA WRC has too much of it. More specifically, I think the grip is just too high, or maybe even worse, the turn-in behavior is a gimmick and super exaggerated as the front of the car dives into the corner easily and immediately, specially on tarmac. Of course the front will carry with itself the rear, making it slide as if the rear wing disappeared whilst the front aero is intact, but then the rear catches grip out of the blue and the car stays under control easily and on the road. That said, I believe that these things are causing that "pivot" effect feeling, but that there's no actual pivot effect. The game just wants us to slide, because it's cool, and then make it easy for us to control the slide and keep the car on the road by applying some sideways gimmicks that reduce the car's inertia unrealistically as it slides. I have a video about the sideways gimmicks: ua-cam.com/video/TcYu4Gx3iGs/v-deo.html. Read the description for more! Yep, the active diffs are controlled by steering inputs, but also by brake and throttle inputs. Yet I don't know if they can configure the steering input-based behavior. And in general I'm afraid that the active differentials are too scary to me to try to understand them, specially since I'm lazy. To make my gravel setup, I touched some differentials and suspensions numbers, and when it got oversteery but controllable, I was satisfied. But then again, I don't really find the cars to be "so easy to spin on hairpin exits" even with the default setups, and most definitely not with Gryazin's setup; and neither that they lack that much steering responsiveness for me, as I kinda demonstrated with that Diamond Creek video. That setup is good studying material to understand more about those differentials, as it really refuses to spin, for the most part!
@@G.Wee_Rallying Yep, I play with keyboard, and of course with RBR's fantastic input filters. This is how it looks: ua-cam.com/video/KOeTx7aViH0/v-deo.html. I might get a new wheel some day, but inflation has us fucked! I super happily play with the keyboard though, so no problem.
@@zwjna but uphill the front acts easier as pivot point, instead of sliding sideways when downhill. not saying it is the reason of those spins. but for comparison reason it is just bad example
@@vyshi Uphill, the steeper it is, the easier it gets to aggressively throw the rear around and not spin, and at some point it gets necessary to force the rear to step out and slide. If IRL they spin uphill, then they most definitely can also spin downhill, as the rear can easily get a lot more inertia and far less traction than the front, which being the pivot is always going to be pretty much still and with good traction, and thus not receiving much power from the engine. A clutch dump can help there.
The complainers often say that it's "impossible" or "very hard" to do proper hairpins, and that real AWD cars don't spin. Both the in-game and real footage are selected to prove otherwise!
People, including RBR/NGP players. This thread [1] was full of such comments, but the forum is now gone. Most of those 23 pages of comments are complaining about hairpins. [1] web.archive.org/web/20201119001319/www.ly-racing.de/viewtopic.php?t=8840
It's Richard Burns Rally, a game from 2004 but with modern physics and other fantastic plugins that revamp the base game. www.rallysimfans.hu/rbr/download.php?download=rsfrbr
Yep, it was me! Thank you! The game is Richard Burns Rally from around 2004, but revamped by programmers, reverse-engineers, and modders for the modern age. If you wish to try it, this is the best way: www.rallysimfans.hu/rbr/download.php?download=rsfrbr
Turns out that if turn your wheel hard and then pull the handbrake the car does an istant 180, what an outstanding surprise 😂😂, people should try their handbrake in real life at certain Speed to get it
1. It's a mod. 2. RBR asphalt friction was never good. 3.Real footage shows: modern rally car config is trash. Probably because they lack control over differential (or rely on it too much instead) and car's short base. It doesn't show that RBR's physics were good back then. It only show how rally cars became different over time.
Oh, I guess you are talking about the original RBR, whilst I'm talking about RBR with NGP physics. Sure RBR has many things wrong, which is why NGP (and others) exists, leveraging the solid foundations that RBR had regardless. So yes, RBR's asphalt friction isn't good, but NGP's is. The modern WRC car, while more refined, is less sophisticated than the 2000's WRC cars. Regardless, world-class drivers and engineers work together to deliver results. They constantly change the "config" of their cars, as needed. As I said down there, a config (setup) to avoid such spins is perfectly possible both in real life and in NGP, but such a setup won't be nice to drive for some drivers, and for the ones that prefer that, it might not be the fastest one either depending on the stage. A slightly slower but easier to drive setup can render faster times than a slightly faster but more tricky one.
@@MrJinRoh I deleted the comment, rewrote it, and posted it again but after your response, as I didn't get the notification. Now, I still don't know if you mean original RBR or with NGP. I'm sure NGP is quite correct, and that original RBR isn't. But I don't care about original RBR. So, if you mean that NGP is wrong, I would be glad if you could elaborate on it
The first clip isn't a "spin" from Kalle he's about to hit a barrier and stops. RBR physics are not that good, fact. Does it punch above its weight though? Absolutely.
It's clear in the first clip that the rear had excessive rotation, which is what causes spins. At the stage-end interview, he said: _"It's quite tricky in the beginning, and we had a small spin at the start of the stage so we lost a bit of time."_ - www.ewrc-results.com/results/72281-rallye-automobile-monte-carlo-2022/?s=332187
You would qualify it as a spin in a short interview yea, but the reality is, if the barrier isn't there he probably recovers no problem. He isn't stopping because he's beyond the point of no return, it doesn't make sense given how far at the corner exit he is.@@zwjna
@@flammenjc Even if the barrier wasn't there, he still was at the point at which you can no longer apply more throttle -- you need to lift, or clutch-dump, and counter steer. The clip is appropriate for the purpose of the video: if you wrongly rotate or apply throttle, you spin. He was definitely not planning to have his rear rotating that much. That was clearly an overshoot that the subjects of my video deem impossible to happen with real cars. Proof shows otherwise.
@@flammenjc Well, most definitely not. You can see he rotate with the handbrake and hear him not applying any throttle until the car is fully looking straight at the exit. That is, he was waiting for the rear to fully rotate and lose its inertia before applying throttle, to avoid increasing oversteer. But right when he applies throttle, the rear snaps. This happens because the rear has much more inertia and way less traction than the front, and by getting on the throttle you don't let the rear grip and lose its inertia. You can even hear the engine revving very high due to this lack of traction at the rear. Watch the doughnut in which Loeb spins: when properly done, those are only possible to do by having the rear wanting to spin all the time, but avoiding that spin. You need to apply throttle all the time to cause the rear to snap, which is exactly what happened to Kalle: he applied throttle, the rear snapped too much, and he spun. Flooring the throttle would have worsened stuff. Then again, think about doughnuts: keep on the throttle = keep the rear wanting to spin. Eventually, Loeb put too much throttle, and he spun. So there's no way Kalle could have floored the throttle and get away with it.
Because the speedometer is measuring the rotational speed of the wheels, or something along the lines. The real WRC live feed does the same: ua-cam.com/users/livekkz4_BEsKgM?si=JwWhOLlk76aRltII&t=185 at 3:05 right on the jump. Notice how the speed is ~127 km/h right before the jump, reaches ~166 km/h mid air, and then drops back to ~132 km/h on landing. Even smaller elevation changes such as the one at 2:13 make the wheels rotate faster due to the drop of traction, and makes the speedometer show "incorrect" speed. Also, at 2:37 the speed reaches ~80 km/h and then drops to ~60 km/h only to raise to 80 again in no time, even though the speed of the car is only increasing thru the exit of that corner, but not the wheel spin.
They are world-class drivers, you are not. Not a roast, just the reality. There's no other explanation to spinning in every corner. That's just a skill issue. Hairpins in NGP are _not_ hard, just a tad tricky. I almost never spin. It just requires basic understanding of vehicle dynamics and a bit of common sense. If a WRC driver fails to deliver hairpins, he might as well rethink his choices in life, and fully enjoy the opportunity of his life before he gets axed. WRC is the elite, and even those that buy a seat are skilled enough to avoid spins. How? Well, either by having a car setup that avoids spins by having a more dominant front axle, or by being careful on the rotation. There's little time to gain on hairpins during the rotation itself, but a lot to lose. Real rallying, like any other motorsport, is about crafting your pace, about being smart: you not always need to risk precious seconds only to gain a tenth of a second. If you don't feel comfortable with the hairpin ahead, just don't push the car thru it. Otherwise, in your vid to gain a tenth or two, you will spin and lose batshit amounts of time. So, WRC drivers rarely spin because they have the skills and the smartness to do it properly.
I don't spin every corner, because I don't play it haha, but even when I did it is not hard to avoid spin, just no gas or sideways, but power slides in rallying are common thing and in NGP 7 they are not working, so it is not realistic, just accept it. ;)
@@altarf82 _You_ are not making them work. Moreover, powerslides are _not_ common on tarmac rallying; guess why. Here's how you powerslide in NGP, just like in real life: - ua-cam.com/video/HeUYz56tfvk/v-deo.html - ua-cam.com/video/Qz93OLwi3Yo/v-deo.html
So, I've just seen that UA-cam is not showing some of your comments, the ones that contain links; but if I select the "Show latest comments first" option, it shows them. Shit platform. I've seen your comment _"Here is how it works perfect in ngp 3 ua-cam.com/video/0Bmw9i_5y-g/v-deo.htmlsi=wYysdcZNXDddtLTE"_ I guess you want to show me how, in NGP 3, you can throw the cars pretty sideways on the tarmac parts without losing control. But you can do that in NGP 7 as well, just with more care. When you see IRL onboards with that same gravel setup/tarmac road combination, you can see, hear, and feel the cars reluctant to oversteer at times; you will hear from the engine how the drivers are waiting with light throttle application for the car to stabilize enough, which will then allow them to oversteer when getting on the throttle. You can also see and hear them reducing or increasing the oversteer with throttle inputs, not just steering. And this is exactly what you need in NGP 7. Fast gravel setup/tarmac road driving in NGP 7 is totally look-alike to real-life gravel setup/tarmac road driving. Here's my take: ua-cam.com/video/qpt_3vNmQ6c/v-deo.html Note that the real-life spins in my video are exactly like the ones that happen in RBR. Study them carefully. It's quite simple, just like in RBR: if your rear end has too much inertia and little traction, the latter happening when you get on the throttle and you don't let the rear wheels grip laterally, the rear snaps and the car spins. The only reason they don't spin much IRL is because they are just that good, or that careful.
@@wojciech9908 Are you sure you are playing RBR with the NGP physics? On the other hand, Assetto Corsa is made for circuit cars, which are optimized for high-speeds due to circuit racing's nature and wide roads with long corners and to stick to the road massively, and the modded rally cars are definitely not right at all, not even with the rally-physics mods. RBR's NGP are purposely-designed for rally and tested by tons of real-life rally drivers, and they have not that opinion. Here's some drivers: - Nikolay Gryazin: www.youtube.com/@NGryazin/videos - Teemu Suninen: ua-cam.com/video/yNRVTwjmSfE/v-deo.html - Mateusz Sznajderski: www.youtube.com/@Mat3usz77/videos - look at his videos, he drives in real life - Dennis Zetak: www.youtube.com/@DennisZetak/videos - also has videos driving in real life, and he was very critical back in the days with the NGP physics, until he really got satisfied by them Rally cars need to be agile, so naturally they don't stick as much as circuit cars, which means they will drive more loose. Here's proof: ua-cam.com/video/i5xkDskb_7o/v-deo.html
@@wojciech9908 Definitely not better. Real-time physics require heuristics and simplified models and calculations to try and solve everything within the margins of time a game demands to have reasonable FPS, which means that they're _not_ fully simulating our world's physics, nor need to. That would take immense computing power and it won't even be in real-time. Assetto Corsa might well not have the infrastructure to simulate common rally car tarmac dynamics, which circuit cars don't have due to the circuits' and cars' nature, specially knowing the limited amount of rally content the vanilla game has. But I doubt that, because it also has drift cars. Regardless, it's a fact that Assetto modders release cars with shit physics, whilst NGP's car physics are developed by the same engineer that made the NGP engine itself and he won't release physics if he lacks telemetry and data from the real car - and even if the 3D model is not accurate, which is why we don't have cars like, for example and if I'm not mistaken, the i20 WRC from 2016 since NGP6, which raised the bar significantly. Then again, the real drivers approve NGP's tarmac physics, which tells Assetto's rally physics _or_ cars are _not_ better.
Yea... Let's explain everything with "skill issue"... That's so stupid... Most of urs proofs are videos when drivers spun on wet/damp tarmac and on 0:57 u can clearly see that he catch some dirt. U seems to not understand what the issue is. Tyre grip literally disappear beyond some limit when irl there's friction all the time, even when car is sliding - look at Pacejka Magic Formula curves. Same happens in engines. Group N cars should rev to 7000+rpm no problem. They will not make much power beyon 5500rpm but they can. In RBR? Nope.
Wet tarmac is _not_ a problem as long as there's consistency in the grip across all four wheels - it's like in RBR's wet conditions: it's just more slippery than dry, but the car handles the same as the grip is not inconsistent. But certainly Loeb catched a puddle with the DS3, and thus a grip inconsistency. But that only proves my point: the sudden drop of traction encountered on the puddle is comparable to being unable to properly managing the rotation or the throttle during the hairpin. Basically, managing the traction. You all don't get it, but doing a handbrake turn is all about _deliberately_ losing traction at the rear. You are literally killing traction at the rear the moment you pull the handbrake. So Loeb expected a loss of traction on the rears right after he pulled the handbrake, and was expecting to keep that low amount of traction constant throughout the rotation, with the right amount of throttle: more throttle = less traction, more rotation; less throttle = more traction, less rotation. *This lack of traction is what allows the rear to rotate and not straighten the car.* But then the unexpected puddle killed that traction, and the rest is history. This is exactly the same as throwing the rear too much aggressively into the hairpin, exceeding the capabilities of the tyres to grip, or applying too much throttle and thus killing the traction too much (basic law). That is to say: SKILL ISSUE. Now, explain to me the other videos, the ones at 0:29, 1:06, and 1:38. And since you are at it, explain to me these two, too: ua-cam.com/video/hqvLFdKvndQ/v-deo.html. I will explain you the two spins on that last video: those are lower-level drivers. Skill issue.
@@altarf82 The real-life videos prove your equations are applied wrongly. You can watch and listen to the inputs the real drivers put on their real cars. They match NGP 7's very well - as long as you have roughly the same car setup they have on that particular IRL footage you're watching. As I said on many other comments, you can setup NGP's cars to not spin at all. Pick Gryazin's tarmac setup for the i20 WRC 2021 (NGP 7) that comes bundled with the car (rallysimfans distribution), and compare it to the default tarmac setup. It's extremely easy to do hairpin turns with Gryazin's setup, and the required inputs and techniques match those of some IRL drivers. But other drivers don't like such setups, like Rovanperä (as said by him) or me, and we prefer a more oversteery one; more prone to spin - basically, 0:28. Once agaim, I would like explanations as to why the spins at 0:29, 1:06, 1:38, and the other two from here [1], happen. [1] ua-cam.com/video/hqvLFdKvndQ/v-deo.html
@@zwjna ngp 4 5 6 7 is very good but unfortunately overdone and as the guy above says the grip friction gets lost to much but that is more of the rbr physics downside. try my rbr 2020 mod on ngp 3 it is better there, spinning is controllable but still the friction factor is a bit off
You just pulled a straw man while accusing me of doing it. Serious persons or not, the bullshit is still widely claimed, and that's why I made the video.
those wannabe simBoyracers... why dont you just go and race in real life if you are that tryhardly pursuing reality? xD And y'know there are many opportunity for poor people to race... like 'bilcross'
@@johnnyhun1 Thing is, you are not even trying to prove simracers wrong. Truly a simpleton. But you can't deny the facts. Simracers we are infinte steps ahead of you and any brainlet that refuses to accept, or is unable to understand, simracing's power. The mathematical models of the simulations are accurate, and thus the skills are real. Simracers have already proven this on the track with real cars, and even by beating real drivers in there. Real drivers have proven this by going into simracing and demonstrating how the skills transfer - and sometimes, by being unable to keep the cars on the tracks, because some (circuit racing) simulators *are even harder than the real thing,* at least slightly. World-class driver Max Verstappen has some words for you to prove how pathetic your ignorance is: ua-cam.com/video/4ayE2KPPT78/v-deo.html. Just deal with it. Simracers we are orders of magnitude better than the likes of you. *We simply know how to drive cars, but YOU DON'T.* This is irrefutable.
What does that mean? If it means that it is old technology and therefore unrealistic, you are wrong. The game's binaries have been reverse-engineered to the core by the community in order to completely revamp it in several aspects - specially the physics, which have been polished and extended with super accurate calculations that deliver levels of realism that no other game has nor ever had. So basically it's a 2023 game and the absolute gigachad of rally simulators, and you can't prove otherwise. If it means that "it's just a game", you are wrong. World-class and amateur-ish drivers have acknowledged it as the most realistic simulator out there, as being pretty close to reality, and lots of them play it regularly over anything else and some of them even use it to train for real life, like WRC-2 driver Nikolay Gryazin: www.youtube.com/@NGryazin/videos. Long live the lord of rally simulators, RBR.
@@zwjna uau that comment really made me question my life decisions ahahah answer this then why doesn’t a multi million dollar studio does the same ? ( probably u going to say to be acessível ) I just can’t wrap my head around it
@@nunopt4071 Exactly, to be approachable for the average person. Go to any RBR/NGP or simracing forum, and you'll see plenty of people coming from arcade games being frustrated with RBR/NGP. They wonder how they go off the road every single corner; they might even blame the simulator, and say that it's unrealistic because "the real cars in real rally rarely go off the road". The multi-million dollar studios have not achieved that level by coincidence; they know how to make money, and they will target such users by offering them a challenging- and realistic-enough experience that will convince them about its realism, because they can stay on the road "just like the real drivers". That is to say, the players will have it easier to drive like pro drivers and thus feel like one, so that will make the game feel realistic, so there will be tons of sales guaranteed. But real driving is much more difficult, yet it's plenty of exciting due to the adrenaline and G-forces. But behind a flat screen, in a realistic simulator, the average gamer that's not passionate about proper realism will find such simulators frustrating because, when we are novices, we go off the road and crash constantly, which might suck for the average person, or we drive dog-slow to avoid that, which might also suck. Meanwhile, the games AAA companies make feel exciting and frenetic from the get go with their unrealistic speeds, grip levels, and grip gimmicks: ua-cam.com/video/TcYu4Gx3iGs/v-deo.html. There's nothing wrong about that, of course.
@@nunopt4071 Also, re-making a physics engine to be realistic will take tons of time and money, and it might not pay off. There's a reason RBR was picked as the base game to develop the NGP physics and others such as the Real Physics [1]: because it had solid foundations in terms of simulations, even if the cars didn't behaved realistically. Real Physics, if I'm not mistaken, was a program that injected itself into RBR's running process. NGP is a plugin. They are not just game files tweaks - they leverage and extend the original physics engine. [1] ua-cam.com/video/UCPURoyTWqM/v-deo.html
@@nunopt4071 Oh, I just remembered this gem, a fine example of what I'm telling you, of being approachable and accessible: twitter.com/Coco1984225/status/1719495361268715590?t=WAc0ZCC7ZBVfJCvqsmmA1A&s=19
![Customer States & Mechanical Fails [The Best of 2023]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5mH82OA0xbo/mqdefault.jpg)
Loeb clearly experienced unrealistic physics those days.
physics hadnt been updated since the 1600's smh what are the devs doing
Still its for sure not the skill issue
😂😂😂
He must be hacking
Important things:
1. corner speed
2. car positioning at the moment of handbrake input
3. handbrake input (timing and force aplied)
4. tyres/grip in general
5. road surface (weather and other factors like dust, leaves, ice)
Most of these hanbrake mistakes in real life are consequence of carrying to much speed before applying handbrake, which results in to much kinetic energy on the rear of the car, which is not followed by rear tyres and then rear becomes lose, which results in front end heading into corner itself of spining around even. Its better to lack corner speed, than to carry to much speed.
Also, the car setup. Rovanperä once said that his teammates' setups had too much understeer for his driving style and that he needs more rotation, which can lead to spins. In fact, the rally from which his onboard clip comes was the very first one with the new Rally1 machinery, and he struggled a lot with pace until he understood the car's behavior more in the last day of the rally. The white car driven by Sarrazin is no less than the then in-development Yaris WRC, conforming to the 2011-2016 WRC regulations. Maybe they were testing setups and overall car behavior, while during actual rallies WRC teams have already everything studied to try and reduce silly mistakes - there's little time to gain going around the actual hairpin anyway, but a lot to lose. Also, I don't think a car could do roundabouts like the one Loeb was doing without the rear-end wanting to spin away from, at least slightly. An "AWD car that pulls away completely straight and without any trouble with 100% throttle application" will just do that: straighten itself, refusing to snap the rear.
They applied too much throttle too early.
In the world of physics, energy is a key player, and when it comes to a moving car, kinetic energy takes the stage. The relationship between kinetic energy and the use of a handbrake in a car is a fascinating interplay of forces and motion. Let's delve into the intricacies of how the handbrake affects kinetic energy and contributes to bringing a vehicle to a controlled stop.
Understanding Kinetic Energy:
Kinetic energy is the energy possessed by an object due to its motion. In the case of a car in motion, its kinetic energy is directly tied to the movement of its wheels. The faster the wheels spin, the higher the kinetic energy.
The Handbrake's Intervention:
Engaging the handbrake initiates a process that alters the car's kinetic energy. When you pull the handbrake lever, it activates a system that applies force to the wheels, resisting their rotation. This force is typically applied to the rear wheels, inducing a controlled deceleration.
Conversion of Kinetic Energy:
As the handbrake slows down the rotation of the wheels, it converts the car's kinetic energy into other forms. The primary form is heat, generated by the friction between the brake pads and the rotating wheels. This transformation is a crucial aspect of the braking system, effectively reducing the car's kinetic energy.
Gradual Deceleration:
Unlike slamming on the footbrake, which can cause sudden stops and potential skidding, the handbrake provides a more gradual deceleration. This controlled slowing down allows for smoother handling, especially in situations where precision is paramount, such as parking or navigating tight spaces.
Parking and Stability:
The handbrake also plays a pivotal role in keeping a parked car stable. When engaged while the car is stationary, it prevents unintended rolling on inclines. This is achieved by locking the rear wheels, adding an extra layer of security beyond relying solely on the transmission in the "park" position.
Emergency Situations:
In certain emergency situations, such as brake failure, the handbrake can be a crucial tool for slowing down the vehicle. While it might not bring the car to a swift halt, it can buy precious moments and contribute to a safer deceleration.
Conclusion:
In the intricate dance of forces that govern a moving car, kinetic energy takes center stage. The handbrake, as a mechanism to influence and control this kinetic energy, proves to be a valuable tool. From controlled stops to enhanced stability during parking, the handbrake adds a layer of finesse to the intricate dynamics of a car in motion, showcasing the delicate balance between motion, forces, and energy conversion.
@@jackadams8299It was cool to read, right until you pulled out the handbrake used for parking bit. What?? Why? This isn’t about easing the handbrake to brake more precise or to keep the car stopped, and even so the foot brakes aren’t like, too powerful for that kinda stuff either.
Ya got out of it half way through bro
And for the love of god, don’t stick your foot on the gas pedal, tap it to give the car more rotation around the corner
Leave them alone, they only believe what they want to believe. let's put more graphic mods on RBR and get more likes.
The guys out there on the _RBR Track Building_ Discord server (Jan Kadeřábek, WorkerBee, tomsmalley, etc.) are making big efforts developing Blender plugins and whatnot to improve the graphics and the quality of the stages, being the new Gabiria-Legazpi and Biskupice stages fine examples of that. I guess a few lightweight shaders on top of that would be enough to have lovely graphics! Just watch this beautiful nonsense, made by Jan: ua-cam.com/video/rMWgzyXsuRk/v-deo.html. Here's the Gabiria-Legazpi stage for completeness: ua-cam.com/video/YcZ735o_x7A/v-deo.html. The new shiny games have fancy graphical effects, but no actual realism. And what about the similarity of the stages? They look nothing like the real ones! But look at that Gabiria-Legazpi stage!
"leave them alone" but u put a comment anyway xD
Firsen are you stupid or what?
Going through the comments this guy really knows what he’s talking about. Its really nice to have a RBR channel like this, i hope more people realize just how embarrassingly unrealistic the other “rally sims” are. Nothing beats RBR
beamng?
Is the new EA WRC any good?
@@wallasepantsI was about to say that
@@Tiltglory I'm no wrc driver, but the traction is hella unpredictable you either have 100% traction or totally none a lot of the times i was surprised that the car didn't went into the turn like i wanted it to
Your constant jerking for RBR is among the most annoying shit in the sim racing community. Yes, we get it. You like RBR. It is a good sim. But so are other games. Stop acting like your shit is superior.
"you're not a world class wrc driver, jackass"
*doom eternal music in the background*
loved that 🤣🤣🤣
IF one thinks rally drivers never spin out..They've never actually seen rally. Real rally drivers have accidents, including spin outs, constantly. In real rally, finishing all stages in a rally is a feat on its own.
That's Sim racing clown boys for you. They feel they must replicate skill of a professional sidelining the years of practice and experience that driver has.
Simulator amateurs want to be professional through simulator so if they constantly make mistakes (oversteer, understeer, roll over) they'd blame the physics engine rather than skill issue 🤣. Clowns have it hardwired in their head that they can do same in real world.
Yeah. Most rally drivers barrel-roll on at least one stage per Rally.
To be fair the Yaris is (apparently, not sure 100% as I don't have access to source) missing the steering controller from the AWD logic. So it won't actually behave correctly.
Either way there is no "hairpin physics" and the output is a result of all the systems, which are okay in NGP. Likely better than most of the consumer sims out now.
Joonas Lönn said that Kalle Rovanperä, while they both were trying for hours to create a realistic setup for the Yaris WRC, stated that the car had too much front grip on gravel (!) and that this caused it to want to spin a bit on hairpins. I've seen over there tons of super interesting comments from you, and that you are a physics developer! Could you check in the last video I uploaded if my understanding of the things is somewhat correct? (edit: I deleted it, it's badly edited)
@@zwjna I guess if Yaris is front to rear AWD (I am not sure, but I think it is...?) then not having a reduction of front-split when the wheel is turned could lead to that.
Although that just sounds like wrong maps overall. Drivers will not be able to engineer correct maps in a few hours. Or ever.
This is the best video on UA-cam. Thank you.
Great video, it would be nice to make a comparison on asphalt between rbr/ea wrc and reality. I hear a lot of people who, when they come to my house to try rbr with ngp7, tell me that the cars have little grip and are very understeering and that in reality this isn't true but it's exactly like that but they don't understand. It would be nice if you could make a video where you explain these factors well... it would be a nice gift for me to give to those who tell me that rbr isn't real. thanks for your videos they are very nice.
Thank you very much! I definitely want to do a comparison, and in all surfaces. I will soon start with it! But for the time being, I guess people say that NGP has little grip due to many reasons, and here are some of them:
1) This one is the most likely. Those who drove in real-life, even if at least a little bit, might have the impression that in real-life the cars grip more and understeer less simply because they drive too fast in the game without realizing it. It's a fact that the G-forces and adrenaline in real-life can make a pretty slow ride feel pretty fast, while in simulators we get nothing of that. Furthermore, flat screens can't properly give us a correct sense of speed. Technically they can, by picking a very wide FOV, but this is a trade-off: either you chose a wide FOV for the sense of speed, or a narrow FOV for the sense of depth. You can't get both, as opposed to real-life.
Here's a trick you can use with that people: if they are playing the simulator with a very narrow FOV, the straight-line speed will feel pretty slow even though the car is going pretty fast. This will of course cause them to get on the throttle fearlessly, not having the slightest clue about how fast the car is actually going. Naturally, they will brake too late as they are underestimating the car's speed, and will understeer or even go off the road; they will feel like the grip is pretty low. If you give them a pretty wide FOV, the sense of speed will be so high that they will be overestimating the car's speed all the time and thus driving slowly everywhere and braking too early; they will feel like the grip is pretty high. Here's more about the FOV in simulators: ua-cam.com/video/hLbGculIpW0/v-deo.html
2) They base their argument purely by watching real-life onboards, but don't understand the concepts about the FOV of the camera that I talked about above. The real WRC cars often use terrible camera setups, with super narrow FOV that makes the car look slow in straight line, and pretty aggressive and grippy on the corners. Watch this video, and compare the onboard at the top with the one at the bottom-left: ua-cam.com/video/xt3p3zcLlX8/v-deo.html. It's day and night. The one at the top looks pretty slow but pretty aggressive in left-to-right movements, and the bottom one is exactly the opposite. The position of the camera also matters, as does the frame rate of the video. While watching a real onboard, the frames per second of the video tend to be much lower than in a game, so the footage might look faster (thus grippier) because the car is moving a bigger distance between frames. In the world of videogames, they try super hard to get as much frames rendered per second as possible, so the footage is much smoother and thus feels slower.
3) Once again, they base their arguments purely on onboard videos, and they see that the real cars are super grippy and stay on the road all the time, and thus that it should be the same in a realistic game. But they fail to realize that the real onboards are showcasing cars driven by world-class drivers with immense skill that fight hard to drive the cars fast whilst keeping them on the road. This is to say, they are totally underestimating the difficulty of the real thing; they have absolutely no idea of what level of skills is required to drive in real-life. They don't realize that they go off the road and "get no grip" because they are not as skilled as the real drivers.
I remember a comment made in this video: ua-cam.com/video/QxvbSJPB4go/v-deo.html. Search for it, it's a response to a comment that says "dirt rally anyone ?". The comment said that it looked easier in real-life because it looks not as blisteringly fast and not as understeery as in Dirt Rally. Let's understand what this implies: he is expecting an 8x World Rally Champion like Sébastien Ogier to understeer everywhere like he, a mere gamer, does in the game! Understeer is slow and a mistake, so an 8x champion will do everything to avoid it at all costs, and has the skills to do so. Yet that people totally ignore the fact that it's the immense skill of the real drivers what's keeping the cars on the road, without understeering, and with proper grip. In that comment I reference this: ua-cam.com/video/cxRsaSEM4gA/v-deo.html at 0:36. Show them that huge understeer. That's how the real thing looks like when the drivers fail to drive properly. Hell, even RBR looks super grippy compared to that! Huge understeer!
Similarly, some people believe that games like EA WRC are more realistic because their driving looks and feels more like the real onboards. That is to say, the average gamer with little idea about rallying is able to drive like a real WRC driver in such games. This of course is nonense, only possible in an unrealistic and arcade game. This makes the game convincing for them, and once again they are underestimating the difficulty of the real thing or overestimating their own skills. Those games are made exactly with that intention: to make the average person feel like a pro driver, thus ensuring tons of sales.
@@zwjna "1) This one is the most likely. Those who drove in real-life, even if at least a little bit, might have the impression that in real-life the cars grip more and understeer less simply because they drive too fast in the game without realizing it."
Yeah, this always happen I feel like when playing games. Going "slow" in some quite hard dirt corner and ending up in the forest. Then you look down at the speed and realize you are going like 100km/h, which would have felt like super speed even on the straights in real life.
if you want to spin less with handbrake i recommend use it before cornering, after braking, just clutch in, handbrake and turn in, the car will be more predictable than if you turn in and use the handbrake, rally drivers use both though get comfortable with first one and later try the other one, in FWD cars you dont need the clutch so you can skip it, too much speed will lead you to hit a tree or spin depending on your setup so be careful
I'll have to play RBR again now that I understand more about how to actually drive a car. I couldn't get past the tutorial last time, though I can't remember if I was trying to play in VR at 15FPS or not.
Worth mentioning I don't use the handbrake at all in my WRX on a lot of dirt corners, I prefer to use weight transfer to get the car to rotate, and suspension set up helps too, the cars set up so it gets lift off or brake induced oversteer which helps for initiating corner rotation A LOT. Makes it difficult to pull up sometimes but I'm getting the hang of it IRL more than in simulators. Except for BeamNG drive, I do alright in that somehow.
Coming back to RBR in 2023 and was thinking the same. Shitty hairpin physics. But sometimes it worked out well... so i start to tweak handbrake setting... In the end... this works fine. It's a sim, so you have to put things together to be sucessfull... with the baseline setups its awefull. With the correct settings its a gamechanger. After the release of EA Sports WRC... still the same result... nothing beats RBR.
vasgabi setups are usually good
you have to be good tat driving to drive RBR, it's as simple as that. EA, I bet they game will be a 100% arcade inside 2 years.
If only moded rbr had structured singleplayer...
I think there are plans for it.
It is coming... 👀
check out new verision of rallysimfans
All my life Ive exclusively been a closed circuit racer... but rallying seems more interesting day by day.
Might get rbr to test the waters a bit :p
It's lovely! And at the end of the day, while it is true that there are many differences, the core concepts are the same when it comes to driving fast. The big changes are the kind of places they drive through, and the approach: circuit racing's learning the track and being milimetrically precise vs. rallying's processing the track and predicting and improvising, in real time, with as much precision as you can possibly deliver out of that. Oh, and the variety of surfaces and, thus, driving styles! Some cool examples:
- Loose: ua-cam.com/video/cpb-anWr0Dc/v-deo.html
- Tarmac: ua-cam.com/video/TRCqDLAomIA/v-deo.html
God, i wish i could play this game again as it sould be
Why you can't play it, mate?
@@zwjna Im having some problems to run it at the moment and also because i dont have a wheel
Last time i played the game i was using a controler wich wasnt that big of a problem
(at least wile im using a trabant)
But at the time, i wasnt that good with racing games, so it was verry dificult to me to use more intrusting and powerfull cars in toughter stages
But now (especially after getting more into rally) i have a new pc that should run the game more smoothly (my old one had a i3-3220) but for some reason im having some problems to use my controler with the game, unfortunatly i still didnt had the proper time to try fix it
@@Ray-bs6qv If you use the rallysimfans version [1], you can use the launcher that comes with it to easily reduce the graphics quality and improve performance. I've seen at least other two users on YT saying they were having trouble with the controller, so maybe you can try to fix those problems searching for info in the rallysimfans' Discord server that you can find at [1] as well, and if there's nothing, you can ask the guys there. You can also try playing with the keyboard! If you look into my channel, you'll see that, at least with FWD and AWD cars and over loose surfaces, it is definitely possible to be fast with it! You can even tune it to your needs, using RBR's builtin filters, to smooth-en the on-off inputs.
[1] www.rallysimfans.hu/rbr/download.php?download=rsfrbr
i only tapped on the video just to see the fabia in action
Wait, did people seriously expect that having AWD would negate the effects of momentum? That the car would just stop rotating just because you're spinning all four wheels? Little bros are learning physics from mobile game
If you bad driver and want less spins, do Front diff MAX on throttle and MIN on brake.
Less full stops from front axle and more power out when saving a spin.
Also, to save a spin, doing a clutch dump will often do the trick, as it gets the four wheels to rotate at the same speed, pretty much by-passing the differential's work. Here's Sébastien Ogier doing exactly that in real-life at the 0:44 mark: ua-cam.com/video/jo1j4ChiSUc/v-deo.htmlsi=S9dIQ1wfY2zVRkKM&t=44. He was about to spin, but we can pretty clearly hear the engine revving aggressively due to the clutch dump. I in fact do it at 0:35 with the black Fabia R5, at the exit of the corner, to avoid some slight excessive oversteer. For anyone wondering what a clutch dump is, it's about stomping the clutch completely, going full throttle, and once the engine red-lines, drop the clutch quickly. The R5 and specially WRC and Group B engines red-line instantaneously, so it's easy to do. Make sure to be in the right gear.
is better that you learn how handbrake turns work rather than move setups, there are two ways:
first one is:
1brake
2clutch in
3handbrake
4turn in
this one is.more predictable therefore you spin less and is easier to turn in, in FWD cars clutch is not needed
second one
1brakes
2turn in
3clutch in
4 handbrake
this one rotates with momentum therefore less predictable you can spin easily, both are used by rally drivers because one can gain more speed than other in certain corners or save you in mistakes, i personaly recommend starting with first one and later move to the other one to understand the differencebetween rotation and momentum rotation
@@zwjnaactually he wasnt about to spin, he was about to completely stop reving the engine helped him to gain that extra speed to make it through the exit, in actual fact if you rev it when you are about to spin you will spin is basics of drifting, when you are uphill drifting you do the same he does, reving to get that extra speed to make it through the exit and entry of the corner because the car lose so much speed it can stall or completely stop if make it to the clutch
@@kouta27 But that car is AWD. Revving it that violently and immediately causes the four (!) wheels to rotate at the same speed, which is not what you get otherwise as the differentials kick in and the front wheels will not receive as much power as the rears, causing the spin.
@@zwjnaAWD and 4WD are different layouts, what you are mentioning is a 4WD layout, though depending on which layout it was made for example a RWD will have more over steer a FWD layout based 4WD or AWD will have more understeer, AWD with a center differential allows you to send more power to the rears or front wheels, beside that the differential also depends on the preference of the driver, a driver can make the wheels rotate at different speeds or same speeds, some drivers let 4 wheels rotate at different speeds to allow oversteer other prefer a more stable car allowing them to overslow and rotate wheels at almost the same speed, also they have a lot of bottons to control that in cars, for example brake bias can be control with a knob, i think differential have a knob too, i dont know about all knobs though is insane the amount of buttons they press to drive
What kills these handbrake turns on AWD cars is too much throttle and how the car works. I learned this the hard way trying to handbrake turn in a Audi Quattro A2. The car is too old and only has a read diff, what can not be disengaged from the AWD drivetrain.
Modern rally cars have a mid diff for this. To disconect the rear wheels so they spin at a different speed that the front ones. What happens physics whise using the handbrake? Correct: you lock up the rear wheels or slow down their turning, what leads to the rear end of the car becoming loose. You step on the gas too hard and suddenly have rear tires with no grip but too much throttle applied. This is a delicate place to be in AWD cars and: most drift drivers will tell you to BE GENTLE on the throttle. They too are prone to exactly this. It won't kill their car unless on a tight circuit but it will definitely kill their drift.
camber fixes the leaking diffs
Thumbs up for this interesting thing and also fro the Škoda R5 😃🧡
It probably is more skill/setup issue, but in the end it's a bunch of people who have never driven a Rally1/R5 car arguing on both sides.
Every AWD car does roughly the same. True, the other people that, like me, never drove a WRC car, expect them to not spin because "they are advanced and stable and whatnot". But at the end of the day they are quite normal cars, just very developed and polished. I mean, I've seen engineers and car enthusiasts over there getting surprised by them using McPherson struts or purely mechanical differentials with no center diff at all. The era of truly complex WRC cars is long gone. So, I don't see any reason to expect Rally1 and R5 cars to not spin, and there are plenty of videos (including close calls) that confirm that they in fact do spin.
Just because cars in real life also spin doesn't confirm that the behaviour in RBR is realistic.
We would need to compare telemetry input to see how accurate it actually is.
In my own opinion, watching a lot of hairpins on videos and real life, sometimes it feels like RBR cars just keep sliding like they are on ice (especially if you get back on the throttle too soon), where as real cars throw the back around much more aggressively and get back on the throttle often even in the middle of the turn without a problem.
I think it's certainly more realistic than something like Dirt Rally, but just a little bit too extreme.
@@schmid1.079 Sure, it might be exaggerated. But real-life external footage can also exaggerate it, specially the Hollywood-esque and Fast and Furious-esque recordings they do with tons of cool zooming and panning. The position of the person recording relative to the car and the zoom of the camera can also affect the way in which the car seems to move. This can make the cars look like they grip a lot over hairpins. But then, I've seen pretty few onboard cameras in which the cars seem to be thrown more aggressively than in RBR into the hairpins, and those few probably give that impression of more aggressive rotations due to the inherent lack of speed we get from a videogame with poor graphics on a flat screen and with high framerate. As we know, low quality and framerate makes a video look faster, and WRC onboards oftentimes are like that.
But then again, setups might have a lot to do with that, but also the road's camber and banked turns. Down there I've talked about this, the effects of the road camber on the dynamics of the car. Basically, you can or even _might need_ to throw the car aggressively into the hairpin to avoid understeer, even with aggressive and early throttle application.
I've discussed with another user this topic a few months ago, and I've made these videos to try and prove my point:
- ua-cam.com/video/HeUYz56tfvk/v-deo.html - The real clip is one he used to prove the aggressive ways in which they throw the cars into the corners. Note how aggressive my rotation is, and how the real car in fact launches off quite slowly, and how long he waits to get on the throttle. Below [1] is the original clip so that you can see and hear it properly. The other videos are my response to the same statement, about how in real life "they throw the cars into the corners without care in the world", which is not true, and I proceed to show different approaches with actual zero care (which looks nothing like any real-life hairpin over there) and other approaches also aggressive, but more careful, and that look just like the real ones.
- ua-cam.com/video/dQJjEUqUcgg/v-deo.html - This one is an improved version of the other one. I analyzed the technique used by the real driver and tried to imitate it, and the result is a much more similar corner. There's less countersteer as well, similar to the real one.
- ua-cam.com/video/Qz93OLwi3Yo/v-deo.html - Big rotation, pedal to the metal mid-corner, though with a bigger radius.
[1]: ua-cam.com/video/iBaRHIzVUUY/v-deo.html
@@schmid1.079is not realistic, i mean to be completely realistic you need to find wheels data, aero data, and so on to translate it into the game, even if you manage to do so, the physics wont be realistic because in game some parts of the track have more grip than in real life or vice versa, real rally drivers said it, in sim you have more grip in parts than in real circuit you dont, telemetry wont be accurate anyway though the game helps you to get an idea about how to drive in real life
Even with AWD, if all the load are in the rear it’s still a RWD Specially on uphill hairpin.
Still a skill issue if you can’t determine/feel when all four wheels are planted and have traction
I have spun out in other rally games, especially Sébastien Loeb Rally Evo and Art of Rally
Someone needs to make some drift cars forthis game
NGP v1000.1 physics will be spot on i believe
a bit too long :)
No drivetrain is immune to spinning out. Bad weight transfer in turns means the rear is gonna fly out no matter what lol
i swear i had this map in World Racing 2.
I don’t think I ever spun on hairpins with an AWD on RBR. With RWD, that’s a different story, but that’s expected.
*You don't know what day is today? Today is opposite day!" 😂😂😂
I feel like upwards half-helical turns (where elevation starts at apex) naturally lends itself to sudden shift to the front wheels, to the same effect of a sudden weight transfer to front wheels which can increase oversteer when low gear at full throttle
happens to the best of us
best rally asphalt physics are in assetto corsa, try trento-bondone with a rally car and you'll see how natural it feels, but RBR does a good job as well
I disagree, to me they are not the best for rally cars! The core physics engine was not designed for rally but for circuit racing, so it might well be lacking the necessary calculations to fully support rally car vehicle dynamics for tarmac rally driving. And most importantly, it's well-known that the modded cars often have pretty bad and unrealistic dynamics as their physics parameters are not properly tuned. Meanwhile, NGP is fully dedicated to rally driving, and the cars' physics are designed with real telemetry data and with extreme quality - to the point that even the 3D model must be accurate in order to put that car into the game, as otherwise the physics won't be. That's why, if I'm not mistaken, we still don't have cars like the i20 WRC 2016 since NGP6.
What does "natural" mean? Does it mean easy or intuitive? That's not necessarily realistic. They don't feel like what I see from real onboard videos, but RBR/NGP does. Last but not least, Assetto Corsa enthusiasts have felt the need to have rally-specific physics mods, which means the base game is indeed not good enough for rally. Even compared to those, I still think NGP offers the best physics.
@@zwjna AC physics being made for circuits are precisely what makes it realistic for tarmac, the fine tuning of the handling in the modded WRC cars might not be so precise but the overall physics is more realistic than in RBR, also there are rally cars made by kunos and they handle very similar to what you see in the respective irl videos. However, if you have real rally experience, unless you haven't tried AC in the way I said, I will remove my comments.
@@mousinius Why it being made for circuits would make it more realistic? Because they dedicate all their efforts on tarmac physics? But real-time physics engines require simplified models and calculations in order to deliver results within a reasonable amount of frames per second. So it being made for circuits might well mean that Assetto Corsa is lacking the necessary infrastructure and calculations for tarmac rally, vehicle dynamics that circuit cars will never experience due to circuit racing's nature. On the other hand, RBR's NGP physics are in development for over a decade now, and are 100% focused on rallying. There's a physics engineer in the comments here, ArchOfficial, who seconds this. Also: ua-cam.com/video/cNl2QVLEb0w/v-deo.html
@@zwjna there are only one physics in real life. You do not switch from circuit to rally in real life. It is the same with the game, AC has really good tarmac physics. There is literally no difference in calculations needed to make tarmac rally sim and circuit sim, it is surface, tire model, car suspension. And those are the same for both types.
Yes developed over decade, but with fraction of budget.
The thing I always hear from RBR fanboys (and iceRacing fanboys) is that other games are too grippy. Have you ever driven car on rally slicks? Even regular car on rally slicks? I have and those tires even if they are few years old and noone would use them for competition (because they have "no grip" compared to new slicks) have huge amounts of grip.
I have also been driven a few times on shakedown in a car by national champion (because I am his team engineer/mechanic) and the direction changes are insane and I am saying that as someone who thinks about myself as a really good driver, I am doing that for living and I occasionally race in some amateur races.
@@petrsulc1168 You don't switch physics in real life just like you don't switch graphics. But in the world of computers, we don't run the same luck. Our hardware is not able to properly simulate light in real time, and that's considering an expensive computer that only few would have. Since the advent of computer graphics, we had to deal with Rasterization and only recently we are starting to introduce Ray Tracing combined with lots of Rasterization. And Ray Tracing is not even an accurate simulation of light. Path Tracing is better than that, but sure enough, much more expensive. Similarly, you can't accurately simulate physics in a videogame. There _needs_ to be trade-offs and simplifications in order for the game to run smoothly and stable. In your "it is surface, tire model, car suspension" list, replace "car suspension" by "vehicle dynamics".
NGP is being developed for over a decade with the solid foundations of RBR. Similarly, people is developing "rally physics" mods for Assetto Corsa using its solid foundations. Guess Assetto Corsa, like Richard Burns Rally, is not good enough for rally. But NGP truly delivers.
The other games are too grippy, indeed. Have you ever seen a rally car from the outside? Have you ever seen an onboard video? Yes, I'm giving more importance to watching videos than to actual driving experience anybody might have. Videos show things as they are: if the cars in the games look faster and more grippy than in real life, then the games are irrefutably wrong and no driver with real experience will ever prove otherwise. Real-life's physics can't be switched to record a video and make the games look arcade. What you see is what you get. In the new EA WRC game, a Rally3 looks as fast as a Rally1 car in real-life videos, both external and onboard. Similarly, in that game, a Group B car is able to match a Rally1 car pace-wise and even beat a so-called WRC+ car! All that is nonsense that can't be logically supported.
Most likely your perception of grip is getting affected by the lack of sense of speed of a flat screen and the lack of G forces and overall feelings. If your game feels as fast and grippy as your real driving, then that's an indication that the game is arcade. Real onboards will always feel slower than the real thing. In the same vein, gameplay will always feel slower than real driving. On a flat screen, you either get a good sense of straight-line speed, or a good sense of depth. You can't get both as in real life. This is achieved by picking a wide or narrow camera FOV, respectively. What I mean to say is that you feel low grip because your car is going faster than you realize. The old, cartoonish graphics don't help either. Have a look at this video to understand the effect of camera placement and FOV on the feeling of straight-line speed, depth, and grip levels: ua-cam.com/video/xt3p3zcLlX8/v-deo.html.
TMW FWD is underrated because AWD will still whip you right around like a noob in a mustang.
Yes, real drivers also shift twice immediately when accelerating from the hairpin XD. Anyway, I feel despite the video at 1:05 being strong evidence that 4WD cars could spin out on corner exits, some the videos you use as evidence could be biased in a way, the Rally1 cars in 2022 didn't have an active tuneable centre diff, which could have caused the drivers coming from WRC plus to make the mistakes. In the video at 0:51, the rear right tyre went over a very dirty part of the road which probably caused the spin. The video at 1:19 has something similar where Loeb hit a water puddle with his real left tyre. Although I strongly believe that a lot of it is skill issue in NGP7, (I can prevent the car from spinning in hairpins: ua-cam.com/video/0VT5KJ8b9H4/v-deo.htmlsi=yMBSgnqZFip_lZLI) I still believe that this is still exaggerated especially when I got to drive a cross-kart on dusty tarmac in the FIA Rally Star Asia-Pacific finals. I found more room for an earlier acceleration with that RWD car compared to a race kart or WRC plus cars in NGP7. I also find that although the tyres are slightly grippier than they should be compared to real-life (e.g. ua-cam.com/video/SsqreUfBlDI/v-deo.htmlsi=ynMieVmCVWWI4ejm where I had to use wet tyres to match the real-life speed), the cars are a lot less responsive to steering, it's almost like the car doesn't listen to the front wheels enough and I have to constantly shift the weight way too much for the car to respond only a little bit. A problem I face a lot when trying to have the car turn-in more mid corner on gravel. The cars in Codemasters's rally games seem to do this better (ua-cam.com/video/GLBUXlOV5gs/v-deo.htmlsi=BCCzfGhhhUbi7WBZ) but I can't get over how fake their physics are with the cars rotating around their centre of mass and just snap and rotate like a UFO whenever the suspension is compressed, especially after jumps. I tried to fix this issue in RBR NGP7 by increasing the front and rear lock but it causes the car to spin out too much on when accelerating on uneven surfaces. Any setup tips to fix this? I also heard that real WRC plus cars have centre differentials that are affected by steering and if I'm not wrong there isn't that setup option in NGP now. Could that be one of the factors that cause the cars to spin out so easily on hairpin exits? I know my experience is extremely limited but I'd like to share my views on this topic and know yours as well. Maybe you can educate me a little. Thanks for reading my messy comment!
I would say that WRC drivers making mistakes with the Rally1 cars coming from the WRC+ cars proves how easily real cars can spin, and that it doesn't happens more often because they are world-class and get to master their cars pretty fast. "Mastering" doesn't necessarily means delivering perfect hairpins, but safe ones - not only with careful technique, but also with appropriate setups for the stage, if possible. I'm convinced there's very little time to gain on hairpins by pushing the car during the rotation and the exit, but a lot to lose: spinning, risking a possible engine stall, which can be even worse if the car refuses to restart.
Setups are super important. As I said down there, some drivers prefer cars that oversteer more, such as Rovanperä. He said this year during the Croatia rally that he tried to copy his teammates' setups, but that they were too understeery for his driving style and that he needs a car that rotates more. That means it can be more prone to spins. Then, have you ever tried Nikolay Gryazin's tarmac setup for the i20 WRC 2021? That thing is nearly impossible to spin on hairpins, and I even struggle to do proper hairpins with it because it refuses to rotate. After getting used to it, it drives nicely, but then I still totally relate to the words of Rovanperä I just cited: that car feels to understeery to me, I would rather go with the default one!
There are significant differences between the real Vesala Shakedown stage and the one from RBR, not only in modelling but most likely in road surface as well: the game's Vesala is a BTB stage at the end of the day, and looks like it's much flatter than the real one, in which the car spends much more time climbing the road (losing, maybe, a bit of time) and then going "downhill" mid-corner, thus requiring the driver to back-off whilst the flatter road in the game allows one to keep the speed; then, RBR has many types of gravel with different levels of grip, just like real life, and the stage designer probably picked the wrong one. Which might be unfair to say, because in real life it's pretty common to hear the drivers saying that the grip was (for example) bad, even though they year before the grip was good according to them on the very same stage and conditions. Nature changes!
So that lack of steering response might be due to the lack of grip of the road surface of the stage. And the setup! I have a World Record done on Diamond Creek, which is uploaded to my channel, and here's the brakes view: ua-cam.com/video/OY-eCXSIZeM/v-deo.html. On such fast stages, like the Vesala, I can get the car to rotate drastically more with minimal left-foot-braking, if at all. Also, grippier tyres not necessarily means more responsive steering: ua-cam.com/video/wogqu54-w3A/v-deo.htmlsi=j0T5oOuvn-_X1jok&t=116 at 1:56. Might NGP still lack a bit of responsiveness on the WRC cars? According to what I see from onboards, maybe. There's also Ville Pynnönen*, who said that the R5 cars do lack some responsiveness.
* www.youtube.com/@ThePynski/videos
Yet, I think EA WRC has too much of it. More specifically, I think the grip is just too high, or maybe even worse, the turn-in behavior is a gimmick and super exaggerated as the front of the car dives into the corner easily and immediately, specially on tarmac. Of course the front will carry with itself the rear, making it slide as if the rear wing disappeared whilst the front aero is intact, but then the rear catches grip out of the blue and the car stays under control easily and on the road. That said, I believe that these things are causing that "pivot" effect feeling, but that there's no actual pivot effect. The game just wants us to slide, because it's cool, and then make it easy for us to control the slide and keep the car on the road by applying some sideways gimmicks that reduce the car's inertia unrealistically as it slides. I have a video about the sideways gimmicks: ua-cam.com/video/TcYu4Gx3iGs/v-deo.html. Read the description for more!
Yep, the active diffs are controlled by steering inputs, but also by brake and throttle inputs. Yet I don't know if they can configure the steering input-based behavior. And in general I'm afraid that the active differentials are too scary to me to try to understand them, specially since I'm lazy. To make my gravel setup, I touched some differentials and suspensions numbers, and when it got oversteery but controllable, I was satisfied. But then again, I don't really find the cars to be "so easy to spin on hairpin exits" even with the default setups, and most definitely not with Gryazin's setup; and neither that they lack that much steering responsiveness for me, as I kinda demonstrated with that Diamond Creek video. That setup is good studying material to understand more about those differentials, as it really refuses to spin, for the most part!
@@zwjna ah I see, thanks for the info, btw are you playing with a controller/keyboard?
@@G.Wee_Rallying Yep, I play with keyboard, and of course with RBR's fantastic input filters. This is how it looks: ua-cam.com/video/KOeTx7aViH0/v-deo.html. I might get a new wheel some day, but inflation has us fucked! I super happily play with the keyboard though, so no problem.
why do people expect rally cars to move like a hot wheels animation?
Because they do.
@@ElShogoso Wrong: ua-cam.com/video/TcYu4Gx3iGs/v-deo.htmlsi=UUiIXsVIrQmSLlpe
Rbr physics actually seem too grippy here tbh
Yes, compared to those real clips, of course. But when the real drivers nail it, it looks the same.
comparing uphill hairpins irl with downhill in rbr.. just saying
Downhill hairpins are harder. It's a matter of gravity. The inertia on the rear will be bigger and harder to deal with.
@@zwjna but uphill the front acts easier as pivot point, instead of sliding sideways when downhill. not saying it is the reason of those spins. but for comparison reason it is just bad example
@@vyshi Uphill, the steeper it is, the easier it gets to aggressively throw the rear around and not spin, and at some point it gets necessary to force the rear to step out and slide. If IRL they spin uphill, then they most definitely can also spin downhill, as the rear can easily get a lot more inertia and far less traction than the front, which being the pivot is always going to be pretty much still and with good traction, and thus not receiving much power from the engine. A clutch dump can help there.
Speed angle momentum
What an odd question/statement to make!
You can left foot brake and do that but not pulling the ebrake
Both me and the real drivers we are using the ebrake in those clips!
graphics kind of remind me of msc
I love this
In your opinion how does rbr compare to dirt rally realism wise?
I made a video about that! Here it is: ua-cam.com/video/TcYu4Gx3iGs/v-deo.htmlsi=xVUomzRYoo-vdRbb
Does the ingame footage counteract the title of the video or im just too thick to understand?
The complainers often say that it's "impossible" or "very hard" to do proper hairpins, and that real AWD cars don't spin. Both the in-game and real footage are selected to prove otherwise!
W video
alright but who said that at the start
People, including RBR/NGP players. This thread [1] was full of such comments, but the forum is now gone. Most of those 23 pages of comments are complaining about hairpins.
[1] web.archive.org/web/20201119001319/www.ly-racing.de/viewtopic.php?t=8840
Reality vs Virtuality 😄
I mean the car wont straighten out itsself, but its a LOT easier to HP an AWD.
Sure, it's easier than RWD. But still tricky, and in NGP, realistic.
sorry, what game is this? it looks rly fun
It's Richard Burns Rally, a game from 2004 but with modern physics and other fantastic plugins that revamp the base game. www.rallysimfans.hu/rbr/download.php?download=rsfrbr
**doesn't stops speeding at all and spins with AWD car**
"this game sucks."
what a noob quote.
Idk what is this game but i like it.
I love the style of the old grafics and the physics sounds satisfying.
It was you playing the game? Good skills
Yep, it was me! Thank you! The game is Richard Burns Rally from around 2004, but revamped by programmers, reverse-engineers, and modders for the modern age. If you wish to try it, this is the best way: www.rallysimfans.hu/rbr/download.php?download=rsfrbr
I cannot for the life of me figure out what NGP means. Can someone please enlighten me?
It means Next Generation Physics. It's a plugin that leverages, improves and extends the base physics engine.
@@zwjna Thank you!
the way you blip throttle on hairpins seems odd to me.
That's because I was driving with the keyboard. That in fact goes to show how much of an skill issue it is!
@@zwjna Makes sense now ye, get a t300 it's quite excellent with it.
Turns out that if turn your wheel hard and then pull the handbrake the car does an istant 180, what an outstanding surprise 😂😂, people should try their handbrake in real life at certain Speed to get it
Meanwhile, if this was bramng he would have lost the backend, hit the crowed and ended up in a tree.
1. It's a mod. 2. RBR asphalt friction was never good. 3.Real footage shows: modern rally car config is trash. Probably because they lack control over differential (or rely on it too much instead) and car's short base. It doesn't show that RBR's physics were good back then. It only show how rally cars became different over time.
@@zwjnaWhat I meant by that is what i wrote. It only proves that rbr physics are so abysmally bad, that they emulate turning with diff locked.
Oh, I guess you are talking about the original RBR, whilst I'm talking about RBR with NGP physics. Sure RBR has many things wrong, which is why NGP (and others) exists, leveraging the solid foundations that RBR had regardless. So yes, RBR's asphalt friction isn't good, but NGP's is. The modern WRC car, while more refined, is less sophisticated than the 2000's WRC cars. Regardless, world-class drivers and engineers work together to deliver results. They constantly change the "config" of their cars, as needed. As I said down there, a config (setup) to avoid such spins is perfectly possible both in real life and in NGP, but such a setup won't be nice to drive for some drivers, and for the ones that prefer that, it might not be the fastest one either depending on the stage. A slightly slower but easier to drive setup can render faster times than a slightly faster but more tricky one.
@@MrJinRoh I deleted the comment, rewrote it, and posted it again but after your response, as I didn't get the notification. Now, I still don't know if you mean original RBR or with NGP. I'm sure NGP is quite correct, and that original RBR isn't. But I don't care about original RBR. So, if you mean that NGP is wrong, I would be glad if you could elaborate on it
@@MrJinRoh I agree with it totally
Hairpin physics? Are they different from pothole physics? Straight road physics? Interesting.
No, they aren't.
The first clip isn't a "spin" from Kalle he's about to hit a barrier and stops.
RBR physics are not that good, fact. Does it punch above its weight though? Absolutely.
It's clear in the first clip that the rear had excessive rotation, which is what causes spins. At the stage-end interview, he said: _"It's quite tricky in the beginning, and we had a small spin at the start of the stage so we lost a bit of time."_ - www.ewrc-results.com/results/72281-rallye-automobile-monte-carlo-2022/?s=332187
You would qualify it as a spin in a short interview yea, but the reality is, if the barrier isn't there he probably recovers no problem. He isn't stopping because he's beyond the point of no return, it doesn't make sense given how far at the corner exit he is.@@zwjna
@@flammenjc Even if the barrier wasn't there, he still was at the point at which you can no longer apply more throttle -- you need to lift, or clutch-dump, and counter steer. The clip is appropriate for the purpose of the video: if you wrongly rotate or apply throttle, you spin. He was definitely not planning to have his rear rotating that much. That was clearly an overshoot that the subjects of my video deem impossible to happen with real cars. Proof shows otherwise.
I'm saying he can't apply more throttle because he'll hit the barrier, if he had more room he would have kept it floored@@zwjna
@@flammenjc Well, most definitely not. You can see he rotate with the handbrake and hear him not applying any throttle until the car is fully looking straight at the exit. That is, he was waiting for the rear to fully rotate and lose its inertia before applying throttle, to avoid increasing oversteer. But right when he applies throttle, the rear snaps. This happens because the rear has much more inertia and way less traction than the front, and by getting on the throttle you don't let the rear grip and lose its inertia. You can even hear the engine revving very high due to this lack of traction at the rear.
Watch the doughnut in which Loeb spins: when properly done, those are only possible to do by having the rear wanting to spin all the time, but avoiding that spin. You need to apply throttle all the time to cause the rear to snap, which is exactly what happened to Kalle: he applied throttle, the rear snapped too much, and he spun. Flooring the throttle would have worsened stuff. Then again, think about doughnuts: keep on the throttle = keep the rear wanting to spin. Eventually, Loeb put too much throttle, and he spun. So there's no way Kalle could have floored the throttle and get away with it.
Look at those SNES graphics mahhh boooooooyyy
Then why is my car saying that i am going 170 km/h while i am in a ditch ? 😂
Because the speedometer is measuring the rotational speed of the wheels, or something along the lines. The real WRC live feed does the same: ua-cam.com/users/livekkz4_BEsKgM?si=JwWhOLlk76aRltII&t=185 at 3:05 right on the jump. Notice how the speed is ~127 km/h right before the jump, reaches ~166 km/h mid air, and then drops back to ~132 km/h on landing. Even smaller elevation changes such as the one at 2:13 make the wheels rotate faster due to the drop of traction, and makes the speedometer show "incorrect" speed. Also, at 2:37 the speed reaches ~80 km/h and then drops to ~60 km/h only to raise to 80 again in no time, even though the speed of the car is only increasing thru the exit of that corner, but not the wheel spin.
@@zwjna aaahh that makes a lot of sense actually ! Thanks man
Commenter thinks inertia doesn't exist in a 4wd 😅
what game is this?
Rallysimfans' Richard Burns Rally. One can get it from here: www.rallysimfans.hu/rbr/download.php?download=rsfrbr
cmon, they made those mistakes once in few years and in ngp 7 it happens every corner :)
They are world-class drivers, you are not. Not a roast, just the reality. There's no other explanation to spinning in every corner. That's just a skill issue. Hairpins in NGP are _not_ hard, just a tad tricky. I almost never spin. It just requires basic understanding of vehicle dynamics and a bit of common sense. If a WRC driver fails to deliver hairpins, he might as well rethink his choices in life, and fully enjoy the opportunity of his life before he gets axed. WRC is the elite, and even those that buy a seat are skilled enough to avoid spins. How? Well, either by having a car setup that avoids spins by having a more dominant front axle, or by being careful on the rotation. There's little time to gain on hairpins during the rotation itself, but a lot to lose. Real rallying, like any other motorsport, is about crafting your pace, about being smart: you not always need to risk precious seconds only to gain a tenth of a second. If you don't feel comfortable with the hairpin ahead, just don't push the car thru it. Otherwise, in your vid to gain a tenth or two, you will spin and lose batshit amounts of time. So, WRC drivers rarely spin because they have the skills and the smartness to do it properly.
I don't spin every corner, because I don't play it haha, but even when I did it is not hard to avoid spin, just no gas or sideways, but power slides in rallying are common thing and in NGP 7 they are not working, so it is not realistic, just accept it. ;)
@@altarf82 _You_ are not making them work. Moreover, powerslides are _not_ common on tarmac rallying; guess why. Here's how you powerslide in NGP, just like in real life:
- ua-cam.com/video/HeUYz56tfvk/v-deo.html
- ua-cam.com/video/Qz93OLwi3Yo/v-deo.html
Here is how it works perfect in ngp 3 ua-cam.com/video/0Bmw9i_5y-g/v-deo.htmlsi=wYysdcZNXDddtLTE
So, I've just seen that UA-cam is not showing some of your comments, the ones that contain links; but if I select the "Show latest comments first" option, it shows them. Shit platform. I've seen your comment _"Here is how it works perfect in ngp 3 ua-cam.com/video/0Bmw9i_5y-g/v-deo.htmlsi=wYysdcZNXDddtLTE"_
I guess you want to show me how, in NGP 3, you can throw the cars pretty sideways on the tarmac parts without losing control. But you can do that in NGP 7 as well, just with more care. When you see IRL onboards with that same gravel setup/tarmac road combination, you can see, hear, and feel the cars reluctant to oversteer at times; you will hear from the engine how the drivers are waiting with light throttle application for the car to stabilize enough, which will then allow them to oversteer when getting on the throttle. You can also see and hear them reducing or increasing the oversteer with throttle inputs, not just steering. And this is exactly what you need in NGP 7. Fast gravel setup/tarmac road driving in NGP 7 is totally look-alike to real-life gravel setup/tarmac road driving. Here's my take: ua-cam.com/video/qpt_3vNmQ6c/v-deo.html
Note that the real-life spins in my video are exactly like the ones that happen in RBR. Study them carefully. It's quite simple, just like in RBR: if your rear end has too much inertia and little traction, the latter happening when you get on the throttle and you don't let the rear wheels grip laterally, the rear snaps and the car spins. The only reason they don't spin much IRL is because they are just that good, or that careful.
Ok but ... Beamng
No. That's a crash simulator made for youtubers.
@@zwjna the physics man the PHYSICS
@@danlespoir NGP bitchslaps BeamNG' physics driving-wise. NGP is just on another league compared to anything else.
I agree but rbrs tarmac physics definitely arent great
Why not?
@@zwjna feels like youre floating on it rather than having any contact, just feels awkward compared to games like asseto
@@wojciech9908 Are you sure you are playing RBR with the NGP physics? On the other hand, Assetto Corsa is made for circuit cars, which are optimized for high-speeds due to circuit racing's nature and wide roads with long corners and to stick to the road massively, and the modded rally cars are definitely not right at all, not even with the rally-physics mods. RBR's NGP are purposely-designed for rally and tested by tons of real-life rally drivers, and they have not that opinion. Here's some drivers:
- Nikolay Gryazin: www.youtube.com/@NGryazin/videos
- Teemu Suninen: ua-cam.com/video/yNRVTwjmSfE/v-deo.html
- Mateusz Sznajderski: www.youtube.com/@Mat3usz77/videos - look at his videos, he drives in real life
- Dennis Zetak: www.youtube.com/@DennisZetak/videos - also has videos driving in real life, and he was very critical back in the days with the NGP physics, until he really got satisfied by them
Rally cars need to be agile, so naturally they don't stick as much as circuit cars, which means they will drive more loose. Here's proof: ua-cam.com/video/i5xkDskb_7o/v-deo.html
@@zwjna just because assetto is made for circuit racing doesnt mean its tarmac physics are worse, if anything theyre better
@@wojciech9908 Definitely not better. Real-time physics require heuristics and simplified models and calculations to try and solve everything within the margins of time a game demands to have reasonable FPS, which means that they're _not_ fully simulating our world's physics, nor need to. That would take immense computing power and it won't even be in real-time. Assetto Corsa might well not have the infrastructure to simulate common rally car tarmac dynamics, which circuit cars don't have due to the circuits' and cars' nature, specially knowing the limited amount of rally content the vanilla game has. But I doubt that, because it also has drift cars. Regardless, it's a fact that Assetto modders release cars with shit physics, whilst NGP's car physics are developed by the same engineer that made the NGP engine itself and he won't release physics if he lacks telemetry and data from the real car - and even if the 3D model is not accurate, which is why we don't have cars like, for example and if I'm not mistaken, the i20 WRC from 2016 since NGP6, which raised the bar significantly. Then again, the real drivers approve NGP's tarmac physics, which tells Assetto's rally physics _or_ cars are _not_ better.
what game
Rallysimfans' Richard Burns Rally. One can get it from here: www.rallysimfans.hu/rbr/download.php?download=rsfrbr
what's NGP?
It means Next Generation Physics. It's a system that enhances the original physics of RBR, Richard Burns Rally.
@@zwjna ah I see. cool. thank you!
Yea... Let's explain everything with "skill issue"... That's so stupid...
Most of urs proofs are videos when drivers spun on wet/damp tarmac and on 0:57 u can clearly see that he catch some dirt.
U seems to not understand what the issue is. Tyre grip literally disappear beyond some limit when irl there's friction all the time, even when car is sliding - look at Pacejka Magic Formula curves. Same happens in engines. Group N cars should rev to 7000+rpm no problem. They will not make much power beyon 5500rpm but they can. In RBR? Nope.
Wet tarmac is _not_ a problem as long as there's consistency in the grip across all four wheels - it's like in RBR's wet conditions: it's just more slippery than dry, but the car handles the same as the grip is not inconsistent. But certainly Loeb catched a puddle with the DS3, and thus a grip inconsistency. But that only proves my point: the sudden drop of traction encountered on the puddle is comparable to being unable to properly managing the rotation or the throttle during the hairpin. Basically, managing the traction.
You all don't get it, but doing a handbrake turn is all about _deliberately_ losing traction at the rear. You are literally killing traction at the rear the moment you pull the handbrake. So Loeb expected a loss of traction on the rears right after he pulled the handbrake, and was expecting to keep that low amount of traction constant throughout the rotation, with the right amount of throttle: more throttle = less traction, more rotation; less throttle = more traction, less rotation. *This lack of traction is what allows the rear to rotate and not straighten the car.* But then the unexpected puddle killed that traction, and the rest is history. This is exactly the same as throwing the rear too much aggressively into the hairpin, exceeding the capabilities of the tyres to grip, or applying too much throttle and thus killing the traction too much (basic law). That is to say: SKILL ISSUE.
Now, explain to me the other videos, the ones at 0:29, 1:06, and 1:38. And since you are at it, explain to me these two, too: ua-cam.com/video/hqvLFdKvndQ/v-deo.html. I will explain you the two spins on that last video: those are lower-level drivers. Skill issue.
@@zwjna that is very good point and prove that dry friction is not good. I am currently building that in original physics and it feels good so far.
Very true
@@altarf82 The real-life videos prove your equations are applied wrongly. You can watch and listen to the inputs the real drivers put on their real cars. They match NGP 7's very well - as long as you have roughly the same car setup they have on that particular IRL footage you're watching. As I said on many other comments, you can setup NGP's cars to not spin at all. Pick Gryazin's tarmac setup for the i20 WRC 2021 (NGP 7) that comes bundled with the car (rallysimfans distribution), and compare it to the default tarmac setup. It's extremely easy to do hairpin turns with Gryazin's setup, and the required inputs and techniques match those of some IRL drivers. But other drivers don't like such setups, like Rovanperä (as said by him) or me, and we prefer a more oversteery one; more prone to spin - basically, 0:28. Once agaim, I would like explanations as to why the spins at 0:29, 1:06, 1:38, and the other two from here [1], happen.
[1] ua-cam.com/video/hqvLFdKvndQ/v-deo.html
@@zwjna ngp 4 5 6 7 is very good but unfortunately overdone and as the guy above says the grip friction gets lost to much but that is more of the rbr physics downside. try my rbr 2020 mod on ngp 3 it is better there, spinning is controllable but still the friction factor is a bit off
literally no serious person says that, nice strawman lol
You just pulled a straw man while accusing me of doing it. Serious persons or not, the bullshit is still widely claimed, and that's why I made the video.
those wannabe simBoyracers... why dont you just go and race in real life if you are that tryhardly pursuing reality? xD And y'know there are many opportunity for poor people to race... like 'bilcross'
Because the sim experience costs me 0 (zero) argentine pesos. Which is a motherfucking huge lot to say.
@@zwjna but 'simracers' are more cringe than real life ricers :D Trying to prove a non-existing thing with your non-existing skills is just ridiculous
@@johnnyhun1 Thing is, you are not even trying to prove simracers wrong. Truly a simpleton. But you can't deny the facts. Simracers we are infinte steps ahead of you and any brainlet that refuses to accept, or is unable to understand, simracing's power. The mathematical models of the simulations are accurate, and thus the skills are real. Simracers have already proven this on the track with real cars, and even by beating real drivers in there. Real drivers have proven this by going into simracing and demonstrating how the skills transfer - and sometimes, by being unable to keep the cars on the tracks, because some (circuit racing) simulators *are even harder than the real thing,* at least slightly. World-class driver Max Verstappen has some words for you to prove how pathetic your ignorance is: ua-cam.com/video/4ayE2KPPT78/v-deo.html. Just deal with it. Simracers we are orders of magnitude better than the likes of you. *We simply know how to drive cars, but YOU DON'T.* This is irrefutable.
handbrakes are for bad drivers lmao
In arcade games, yes.
@zwjna just shift that weight with the throttle and the brakes!
@@ocdc3261 That sure works, and the top drivers can do it all day. But when going for every tenth of a second, the handbrake Just Works.
@@zwjna balderdash! jk tho I just think it's cooler to weight transfer rather than turning oversteer on and off with a lever lol
u are playing a 2004 game grow up
What does that mean? If it means that it is old technology and therefore unrealistic, you are wrong. The game's binaries have been reverse-engineered to the core by the community in order to completely revamp it in several aspects - specially the physics, which have been polished and extended with super accurate calculations that deliver levels of realism that no other game has nor ever had. So basically it's a 2023 game and the absolute gigachad of rally simulators, and you can't prove otherwise. If it means that "it's just a game", you are wrong. World-class and amateur-ish drivers have acknowledged it as the most realistic simulator out there, as being pretty close to reality, and lots of them play it regularly over anything else and some of them even use it to train for real life, like WRC-2 driver Nikolay Gryazin: www.youtube.com/@NGryazin/videos. Long live the lord of rally simulators, RBR.
@@zwjna uau that comment really made me question my life decisions ahahah answer this then why doesn’t a multi million dollar studio does the same ? ( probably u going to say to be acessível ) I just can’t wrap my head around it
@@nunopt4071 Exactly, to be approachable for the average person. Go to any RBR/NGP or simracing forum, and you'll see plenty of people coming from arcade games being frustrated with RBR/NGP. They wonder how they go off the road every single corner; they might even blame the simulator, and say that it's unrealistic because "the real cars in real rally rarely go off the road". The multi-million dollar studios have not achieved that level by coincidence; they know how to make money, and they will target such users by offering them a challenging- and realistic-enough experience that will convince them about its realism, because they can stay on the road "just like the real drivers". That is to say, the players will have it easier to drive like pro drivers and thus feel like one, so that will make the game feel realistic, so there will be tons of sales guaranteed.
But real driving is much more difficult, yet it's plenty of exciting due to the adrenaline and G-forces. But behind a flat screen, in a realistic simulator, the average gamer that's not passionate about proper realism will find such simulators frustrating because, when we are novices, we go off the road and crash constantly, which might suck for the average person, or we drive dog-slow to avoid that, which might also suck. Meanwhile, the games AAA companies make feel exciting and frenetic from the get go with their unrealistic speeds, grip levels, and grip gimmicks: ua-cam.com/video/TcYu4Gx3iGs/v-deo.html. There's nothing wrong about that, of course.
@@nunopt4071 Also, re-making a physics engine to be realistic will take tons of time and money, and it might not pay off. There's a reason RBR was picked as the base game to develop the NGP physics and others such as the Real Physics [1]: because it had solid foundations in terms of simulations, even if the cars didn't behaved realistically. Real Physics, if I'm not mistaken, was a program that injected itself into RBR's running process. NGP is a plugin. They are not just game files tweaks - they leverage and extend the original physics engine.
[1] ua-cam.com/video/UCPURoyTWqM/v-deo.html
@@nunopt4071 Oh, I just remembered this gem, a fine example of what I'm telling you, of being approachable and accessible: twitter.com/Coco1984225/status/1719495361268715590?t=WAc0ZCC7ZBVfJCvqsmmA1A&s=19
EA WRC is much more realistic 😡😡😡
Nope! ua-cam.com/video/TcYu4Gx3iGs/v-deo.htmlsi=87prqfZaLioV_LRR
With realistic glitches 😂