Another word on realism, this is a phenomenon that’s been seen over and over in WWII flight sims especially: Twitchier, trickier, more difficult flight models feel more “realistic” to gamers, intuitively the harder it is the more “realistic”. Then a real pilot will try it and be like “LMAO that’s crazy, nah it was easier to fly than that.” I understand that a similar phenomenon occurred during lockdown with real pro drivers and a certain racing sim…
True. Harder isn't more realistic. Back in the days drivers were able to keep a car on track for 24 hours which wouldn't be possible if the car would slide all over the place. Or as Jackie Stewart put it " I always wanted the car that the easiest to drive".
Also depends on your driving style/aggression. Its common to push on the limit 100% of the time in a sim, where in reality you would race much more cautiously/conservatively. The cars are a lot easier to drive even 5% under the limit.
@@GPLaps Not really true in the way people think about it ie: "they just drive slower in real life". It is very much so true for amateurs; not for good professionals. The only area real drivers typically struggle in compared to sim is braking at the very-very limit in extremely fast cars like prototypes. You can pretty easily compare limit behavior in cornering situations via telemetry, video feed and opinions in most situations.
@@GPLaps Indeed we are always looking for the higher difficulty levels when in reality things were often different and not so hard nor the drivers used to push so much. A mistake could mean death ... not reload.
I race at my local track. Assetto corsas handling physics feel pretty great. Sometimes front wheel drive cars can feel alittle strange though, like their characteristics are over exaggerated.
Hey Jake, thanks for the shout out. I'm at work and YT starts sending me new subscriber notifications and I was wondering where are all these new subscribers are coming from. Great video as always! I'm hoping to send you some Beta versions of the cars I've been working on soon.
I think AC simulates vintage race cars the best if you compare it to the other modern sims. Especially if you take PC2 or AMS2 where the vintage cars feel much too sticky. In AC you feel the weight and the weak brakes. A thing that the Power and Glory mod also does very well. And sinc I had the privilege to drive a vintage Porsche RS on a track I can say that AC does a good job.
I was going to mention Power and Glory mod, would be good to see him try it out. For me the best mix would be Solitude with the Ferrari 275, one of my favourite combinations in sim racing.
I generally agree, but AMS2 and pCars 2 also put modern tyres on their cars while AC simulates old tyre-compound. That's a huge difference. Former DTM-driver Volker Strycek was driving his Opel Omega DTM at the Norrisring after the car didn't move for 20 years. He just put new tyres on, new brake fluids and was 4 sec. quicker than 20 years before (1:04 vs 1:00) on a track with basically four corners, a less competitive environment and two decades in retirement. And than you get always fresh tyres on the rim in sim-racing even if just changing setup. In AMS2 the handling can change dramatically in some cars once the sticky layer is off and I already suggested recently to give us a used-tyre-option since basically every racing-team I know is practising with old tyres first.
I use 95% grip most of the time, it's a nice sweet spot. Also default grip in data/surfaces.ini can vary a lot from track to track, same grip settings in UI will not have the same results in-game on every track
I came late to AC and only got it a few weeks a go. Personally I think it's better in the physics department than iRacing. AC seems to have matured into the best all round sim available today.
From what people tell me, and what I read online, it's the force feedback that turns them away. They don't like how the wheel feels at all, so trying to convince them to try different mods or adjusting settings in content manager falls on deaf ears, because their response is "It won't matter, it'll always feel terrible/bland/washy/numb/ect." Which sucks, because the amount of old cars and tracks available in AC is unmatched, but none of my sim racing friends want anything to do with it.
It is true that vanilla AC has a really bad SAT curve in the tires. It does indeed go light too soon. It doesn't *really* affect the driving physics, but it doesn't feel correct. Some cars with low caster trail suffer pretty badly from that. It's still better than canned FFB that gMotor sims without RealFeel have, but it could have been better. I'm unsure why KS did it how they did, maybe to give "more feel" as a gamey thing. I don't really agree with that approach; wheel torque would ideally be 1:1 to IRL. Cphys does add much better SAT by default and you can tweak it if you really want to but the majority of content doesn't use Cphys at all. Also, most cars that people will have driven have powersteering, which feels entirely different from manual steering. It has that "always stiff no matter what" feel and you can't feel the SAT dropoff *at all*, so to people who have never driven a manual rack, the very presence of SAT to begin with will feel wrong. Extra wrong if it's biased towards being too light. It might be one reason why people think cars are always understeering in AC, when the tires aren't even on the limit yet! If you want an idea of what a manual rack on reasonable tires can feel like in AC, download the NSX from RD, and make sure to get the hotfix. I implemented most of the relevant suspension and tire Cphys features.
@@lxvideostuff7200 I was going to say the same, need to cut a bit of high frequency to make it comfy on headphones. Other than that I do think they are good.
You have a very unique and pleasant voice to listen to. Although I'm not a big fan of historic cars, I enjoy your videos very much, and have started driving them once again.
I really love your content. If I may I'd love to make a very small suggestion: It appears you use talkover compression with your microphone and I'm under the impression you set it a litte bit too hard. Maybe my ears are just really really sensible but every time your voice starts I feel like there's a little "hole" right after. thx
Well feel like an off the beaten path unicorn when it's mentioned that only few play around with track conditions. That was the very first parameter I played with, aquiring AC 7 years ago, driving out for a practice run. Think I've only raced the 'Optimum' choice participating online lobbies.
A pleasant surprise here. Used to racd go karts here, usually on the short track. Was clocked at 107 mph one day when we were practicing and Bruce McLaren was there with traps setup under the. This on a single engine kart. This goes back go the mid 60's time frame. Thank you.
ooh man i love GTR2 I did think i was the only one playing it mid 2021 but then this channel pops up on my recommended (sry if some words are a little bit bad,english is not my main language)
Main issue is that, in AC, once tires lose grip they tend to regain it way too easily. In a real car, once you lose the rear, you have to act *fast* to get those slip angles under control so the tire will grip up again (maybe). It’s pretty easy to fuck this up. In AC, it’s child’s play. The tires, even during a lurid powerslide (or hammering over a high kerb), just grip right back up the moment the speed comes down a bit. This is not how it is IRL. Most people will either over or under-correct the slide, and end up either spinning (under correct) or in a tank-slapper (over correct). I moved on to rF2 and (surprisingly) the latest iteration of RaceRoom. These are properly somewhat unforgiving of sliding around too much. IMHO, AC was made to make everyone think they can drift ;)
Well, the limit of dynamic friction is significantly lower than the limit of static friction in almost all cases, certainly with tires. Once a wheel spins, it wont stop spinning, until the force the road surface exerts on it becomes significantly lower (ie you step off the accelerator for a while). And Im absolutely certain this is modelled in AC, its such a basic rule of physics and car handling. If you feel like the specific values used are too forgiving, well, just mod them.
Ayyyy! Good ol' riverside! My gramps crashed there in 1969 or so driving a LeGrand. I love to hear his stories about it! Keep up the awesome content!!!
I used to love punting the McLaren M8 around Watkins Glen in Assetto Corsa. It felt so nice to have only four gears and have to haul it to a stop twice as far from the corner as you would in a modern GT3 car. I unfortunately lost all my mods when I downloaded one that corrupted my whole hard drive 😖 These days I get a similar feeling driving a NASCAR class C truck in iRacing, but slower! Those things are fun to try get around a road course. And it’s good to see your channel growing mate! You make some wonderful content. Keep it up 👍
Well noticed, usually the higher the peak of grip goes in reference to average grip, the more challenging it becomes to drive at the limit, as in most cases it will peak sharper and faster, and fall just the same way. Thats true for a lot of other dynamics, like aero, tires...
I enjoy green track for a racing weekend too or if I drive a longer race, like an hour or so. In a long race you can really feel the grip progress and then drop down, because your tyres are kicking the bucket :D
I never felt comfortable with cars in Assetto Corsa, whereas I can pick up gmotor / pmotor games after a break of multiple years and feel comfortable immediately.
To me ac feels extremely progressive and intuitive to drive. A bit too forgiving but there are mods that are very good to drive and have more limit. What I mean by that is that the cars are not as slidey at the limit but still not on/off like I feel gmotor sims feel to me. Overall I feel ac is too slidey and if you are not comfortable with the car sliding and want more on rails experience (like raceroom) then ac will feel odd. To me gmotor games (ams1, rf2 and raceroom) have much much more pronounced and clear limit and generally once you go over it is a lot more about saving it than controlling it like in ac. In ac if I slide I can generally feel whether I am above or below the limit. Just like in real life the car can slide will still being under the limit. After all the peak grip is generated at certain slip angle. In gmotor sims when I slide the car it feels like it is already beyond the peak slip angle instantly. I have always struggeled to really feel the cars in any and all gmotor sims. The limit is just so much narrower and once you go over the limit the car behaviour becomes super nervous and the throttle just doesn't do much. It is all about just steering the exact right amount to stop it spinning and stop it from doing a tank slapper. In ac I feel the throttle is more important than the steering.
I too enjoy the classics and I collect them wherever I find them and I have several. I’m also a stickler for good physics. I want the experience to be as close to real as possible. Maybe I will see you in a race one day. I have tried some of the settings you mentioned but not the dusty one but I will.
Honest question: are sim racers generally thinking AC is not so great anymore? I was under the impression that it was one of the most highly rated sims in terms of experience and physics. What would the "better" sims be? ACC is the only candidate I can think of, but it is restricted to one class (well, 2). I'm battling to think what the tier above AC would be if folks are unhappy with it, and also why they would be unhappy with AC in the first place? Great video though!
No, AC is still regareded as one of the best sims. Of course there are people who prefer another sim over AC, but it's the very same the other way round. I have no idea what Jake was up to when he tried to talk AC's physics down.
Its elitism. And the people talking about it usually have no idea about the underlying systems. But the level above AC is simulating tires as 3D softbody objects, with deformation due to load, and unequal load and grip across the surface cculated in real time, as well as location based wear and temperarure modeling. I know BeamNG does some of that (the former sertainly, the latter I believe in part), but I dont think any of the "hardcore racinf sims" do it. All they have is a handling model tuned to be less forgiving, which makes people automatically assume they must be more realistic.
Awesome video, Jake. Thank you. Like you, GPL is still at the top of my list. One of the things I have not figured out is how to use multiple USB devices in GPL … my pedals, steering wheel and button box use individual USB inputs. At some point, advice with the hardware side of the older sims would be much appreciated. Thanks again.
Thank you for this video. A lot of thought I never had. It's a bit like these all time comparisons between GPL and the GPL mod for AC. How much grip is realistic. Of course we all don't really know. But I think - watching a lot of videos from that time - AC get's it very good.
Jag är bland dom snabbaste förarna i F1pc världen/gpl gtr2. Har tagit snabbaste varv av alla på alla banor. Du och jag skulle göra en delad långkörning mot dom "bästa" med riktiga racers en 24timmars i LeMans. Du är nog en som kan hålla placeringen när jag inte kör.
Excellent video as usual, but why not try the "old" grip? I think it was very suitable, right? I'm also a fan of vintage, the funniest cars to drive. I had tried the "old" setting for a while and was very happy with it (I only drive pre-1975 cars). But we always want to go faster ^^ And when I started a 1975 F1 championship, I returned to "optimal". Your video reminds me though that it will always be more fun and satisfying in every way to ride with vintage grip as well. Thank you for these wise arguments. I'm going to go slower but I'm going to have even more fun. I knew it, but we always want to go faster ^^ So, back to "old" mode.
Very nice, thanks! I was wondering about how could that work but hadn't tried yet! Gonna use the Green option for my next race the Great 12 Hours of Le Mans in my WSC 1970 Project that will be the 8th Round, celebrating 50 years of Le Mans film! But I think that it's not going to affect the evolution of the track because will be pouring rain during the major part of the event! Cheers!
Now this is synchronous, I recently started setting the track to “old” in all cases. Still, as far as physics go I’m finding If you can drive AC you can drive BeamNG and vis versa…*shrug*. It’s the same with the flight/air combat sims I’ve played for 20 years, if you can fly say a WWII prop fighter in one sim you can do it in another.
I don't do Assetto Corsa, (in case you're wondering, I'm into the rFactor 1 side of things), so I don't really had that kind of thing in rFactor, but I also think the lower track grip levels you're suggesting for older race cars is also historically accurate. I think, race tracks nowadays were, surface-wise, more on the "optimal" setting you tested there. Normally smooth surface and better construction of the road surface ensures high grip levels throughout. But in period, it is different. The tracks back then were imitating real-world roads, in almost every way, save potholes. Even if the track, by chance, is relatively smooth, I don't think the surface would be consistent throughout. Some tracks even have concrete surfaces in some parts, giving varied grip levels. I might be rambling a bit, but I hope people got my point...
I think i get what you’re. Some of these tracks aren’t realistic to the time period because theyre far too smooth, but the settings still help complement the experience.
@@GenuineRage Yeah, and also, in case someone tries more modern cars to period tracks. That situation is more or less only a one-edged sword; older cars work well in newer, smoother tracks, less bumps to worry about, but the newer cars would struggle on period, bumpy, and possibly dirty road surfaces of period tracks, since their stiffer suspension would make them buck all over the place I think...
@@jcgabriel1569 yeah that makes sense as well. Im still new to simulators and i run AC and ACC because theyre the easiest for me to get into and mostly because of the modding capabilities, not necessarily the extreme realism aspects, but thats still very important to people who really take sims seriously. Cheers.
My rear gets loose every time under braking when driving these vintage cars and its impossible to brake if the braking zone isn't straight like the first corner of daytona. I just spin the moment I press the brakes. Any tips on how to avoid this. I use bb 60-64%
Oh, finally someone talking of AC's tarmac options. ps: does anybody other thinks that Trento-Bondone's tarmac is fixed on old? I unfortunately have no time to learn AC's modding, but, this may be a nice idea to improve addon hillclimbs. Also a duster road grip should be added near asphalt strip boundaries. Let's improve Assetto only in tarmac hillclimbs and closed track!
Tbh these cars feel way eazier to drive than modern ones or obvioulsy f1, maybe the floatiness of them makes it eazy for me to see what the car gonna do
I stopped playing AC because the scaling in VR seems wrong to me and i haven't been able to figure out how to change it. Giant hands and tiny cars it feels like
I see a Ferrari P4, I click like. I'm a simple man. That said, this was super interesting and something I'd been wanting to experiment with for a while. I didn't realise there were so many extra options, I thought 'fast' 'slow' etc were simple modifiers, the lap gain and so on is all new to me. As I always do 'Weekends' in the game, this is really interesting to know. Much appreciated video thanks. By the way, when you say grip gain is after 30/300/XX laps, do you know if that includes AI cars lapping? So with 15 cars on track and a setting of '30', that would only be 2 laps?
iRacing is really not very accurate at all. Their data is probably good especially for the suspensions, but the tire model appears to be impossible to correlate at all, even if they're able to tweak the curves after the fact. Thermals are still bad, which is a step-up from terrible that it used to be. If this has to do with the model or the parameters they put in, I don't really know. Certainly they do a lot of tire testing so it should not be much of a data issue so I am inclined to believe the model has issues. rF2 and it appears Pcars/AMS2 has much of the same problem. If you care about making a sim car for driver training or setup testing, you should use AC with CSP if you must use a consumer sim. Your lack of data will limit you much more than the sim ever will, at least for typical road-race applications. I'm sure gMotor 2.55 and the Reiza version (rFactor1, AMS1) are good; I am not too sure about gMotor 2.10 (SimBin titles). I have bad memories of GTR2 and I've talked smack about it in the past but it can be 100% just bad parameters (It was years ago!) so I will refrain from giving any real opinion. I think the main difference in the new gMotor versions is largely feature additions, not changes to the actual modeling, but I am unsure if Reiza changed some of the more esoteric parts of the modeling. The gMotor used in rFactor 2 is significantly different tire-wise and should be avoided for any sim stuff.
Yeah, I was wondering what sims he was talking about hardcore sim racers moving on to. There aren't many newer ones. I've heard good and bad opinions about all of them. Assetto Corsa Competizione, Automobolista 2? Certainly not PCars 2? RaceRoom, rFactor 2, and iRacing are as old as AC too.
@@Dethmeister People generally get swayed by the sensationalist marketing talk about physical tire models in rF2/iR/AMS2/PCars so I'm gonna assume it's one of those. They say it's clearly better than the empirical brush style models but can't elaborate how nor am I too sure they have ever even thought about it. The other side of the coin is the people who don't like physical tire models, but don't really understand empirical brush models either and just go by how many load contact points the model has. I assume they will prefer a model with 10 points that just averages the load compared to an actual good model with 5 just because 10 is twice as big as 5. The people who actually know what they're doing and want to build a sim car just use rF1/AMS1 or AC.
Do any models with real time softbody tire simulation exist yet, or is that still beyond the capability of consumer processors? One ought to think unloading it to GPU should be enough.
@@ImpliedVolatility704 At the time I was running iRacing, which was years ago, it didn't model dirty tires. If you cut the course, you would get an on-track slow down penalty. Later, they would issue warnings and after so many warnings you could be be disqualified. Maybe its changed by now. I always found it unrealistic that the fastest drivers were always testing the limits of the track boundaries beyond all reason and find spots where they could cut the course and in doing so run over dirt or grass and suffer no loss of grip in the process.
I have been (seemingly) automatically unsubbed for the second time now. I thought it may have been an accident on my part the first time, but I'm not so sure now. I really hope this isn't an ongoing issue and I really hope it's just me.
I don't really know where this idea that AC is a casual sim comes from and why it has been allowed to become accepted. Judging by the tone of your voice you seem to also believe it, so I feel that I need to comment. The sims people compare it to all correlate quite worse than even vanilla AC does so I'm not sure why it's even a discussion. It's not worth comparing to you-know-what-sims although I will be honest and say it *can* be a parameter issue in them too. I just doubt it. The actual discussion should be rF1/AMS1 vs AC, and vanilla AC even has some advantages over the quite reasonable rFactor1/AMS1 gMotor with the empiric tire model. AC with CSP's physics additions is closer to a professional simulator and is *easily* the best sim out of anything the consumer can get their hands on. The gap is massive. If you really care about realism for cars driving on road-racing tracks then there isn't any reason to develop car models for anything other than AC + CSP right now when it comes to consumer sims. rF1/AMS1 has some niche advantages in suspension modeling (Right now, that will likely change in the future) but the tire can't really be compared, especially when you introduce thermals to the mix. The main reason is probably the poor quality of most content in AC. Although the quality is not incredible anywhere else either, there have been some sim-lite cars (And a few genuine sim cars!) released for AC that blow anything any other sim has done right out of the water. AC with the CSP physics is currently being used as a professional simulator in a few series so there is some proof of concept in a non-commercial setting as well. In terms of average content, AC appears to be somewhat weak and this is probably where people's impressions of it end seeing as the average simmer doesn't really know anything about simulation that they can use to gauge the products. I just wish people would make an attempt to separate the parameters from the program.
All of it is an illusion. No mod can fix the empirical one-point tyre model that cannot ever capture in a realistic way the old bias-ply tyres. So instead people just claim that "whatever feels good to me" = "realism".
@@azarisLP If you'd ever read a paper on brush-type tire models you'd understand in the early chapters why that's not relevant. There is negligible to no difference in results between a single point vs multi-point brush model when the track surface is relatively flat ie: when driving over anything that's not a significant kerb or pothole or something. The real advantage you get from multiple load contact points on a brush-type model is being able to more accurately represent the loads the tire is under when traveling over an un-even surface. There's a reason many non-realtime brush models are a single disc. You can correlate bias-ply tires just as closely as you want irregardless to load contact points. There will however be some error in all single load contact point brush model tires when ΔFZ is higher than it would be in real life ie: when driving on and off some kerbs. There's also a bit more going on there than just averaging out the loads between the points that you would want to appreciate to get accurate behavior. By the way, a bad multi-point model implementation will offer little to no advantage over a single-point model and might even be worse in some situations, just in a different way. You can guess what I am referring to.
@@azarisLP Oh, I noticed you also have "empirical" in there. They're far better and much more usable than physical based models right now so I don't know why you added that in. It's not really possible to correlate tires on a physical model due to the great interactivity and esoteric nature of some of the inputs (Similar to some arbitrary values used in good old Magic Formula) hence why to my knowledge no actual sim uses them. The only exception would be if you generate the tire physically, then just manually tweak the curves one by one, but that's not much of a physical tire model now is it. I suspect for the time being they're limited to theoretical development for tire companies only.
People are too obsessed with which sim is most realistic. None of them are realistic because of 2 factors. 1. Some things just can't be simulated accurately. (weight transfer, Gs, heat, scents, track surface imperfections, tire behaviour etc...) 2. They are GAMES and games need to move units. Therefore all of them have to have a degree of mass market appeal determined by accounting and marketing. If you are too obsessed with "x is more realistic than y," you should put up or shut up and go racing for real. Karts are cheap, autocross is cheap, time attack can be cheap depending on your class, arrive and drive is a thing, and you can rent race cars to take part in actual races (à la RCN). Just play whichever game you like the most because all of them are realistic enough.
Load transfer can't be simulated accurately? That's one of the easy things that you can get 100% absolutely correct. It is not that difficult to code a kinematic solver that works and is correct, compared to coding one that works but is incorrect. This must be the one thing that all decent sims do exactly right. So are G's; the math is not terribly complicated. Nothing is preventing you from getting exact~ G's and cornering speeds around any given track. In an empiric tire model, you just put in the curves you want and the correct result will come out. Now I will be honest and say that no consumer sim has correct elastokinematics and flex for suspension/chassis components, and those will affect your wheel angles and roll stiffness distribution. Those are more like missing features than the sim being inaccurate. They typically don't matter until your car is already at a high professional level and I think most pro sims don't even support them, but it's a reality. You can't really make a kart into a typical hard-body sim because they rely on the component flex for springing. Tire behavior is more or less accurate in AC + CSP, you can correlate a tire set basically exactly even a good bit over the limit and that's with heat included to a reasonable range. Some minor interactions are missing, but it doesn't really show up on telemetry nor is it humanly possible to feel. Older gMotor has quite good tire behavior too although heat is bad like in every other sim apart from AC with CSP. Thermals wise, none of the consumer sims really do a good job, not even vanilla AC, but you can get a really good simulation if you use AC + CSP. You can get temperatures to very closely match even a bit outside of typical driving parameters, like when sliding a lot and over-driving, or just rolling down the highway. They cool down correctly too. That goes for brakes too. Of course, the tire damage and whatnot is more complex IRL than in any of the sims, but the heating/cooling/grip relationship can be very precisely replicated in AC + CSP. No sim that I know of can yet truly do temps while drifting right, where the surface is 300 - 500c but the carcass isn't heating up too much, but you can emulate it with some temp/slip interactivity in AC + CSP. I don't exactly foresee a technical limitation for simulating this correctly, but getting usable data from a tire at 500c can be quite challenging. I don't know where this idea came from that some things "can't" be simulated accurately. It's really more an issue that developers don't have good enough data to use as a reference; but some developers do and they can make an accurate simulation. The main reason most consumer sims are not accurate is because the data used to build the cars with is not accurate. A large part of it is guessed. Sometimes devs just make subpar implementations too. It doesn't necessarily mean the sims *can't* be accurate if good data and a skilled engineer is used.
@@rideroundandstuff Ah yes, that video. The one that people keep using as a reference even though it's wrong. I'd guess and say that Emptybox hasn't developed a simulation model for a car before either so it's not like he is speaking from experience. It might be relevant for 10+ years ago when all of the consumer sim tire models were junk and all the peripherals were junk so you could just give up trying to make accurate models. You can get very, very realistic car models done nowadays if you use the right software and there is very little question about that. It's not a subjective thing at all. Even the consumer hardware peripherals are becoming somewhat usable for simulation purposes. Of course the very nitty gritty stuff is difficult to match to IRL and most models don't actually do the tire dynamics exactly like IRL (You don't have to, though. Makes almost no difference to the point where it's okay to just use slipvelocity and a simple flex model for example) so there will always be some subjective aspect to it when you're correlating the car with your drivers. Indeed the seat, steering wheel, graphics, sounds etc. will affect how accurately the information from the sim is communicated compared to the real car. However just because correlating a car accurately is difficult doesn't mean it's impossible, or that it comes down to subjective beliefs as opposed to quantifiable outputs.
@@ArchOfficial Tires and road surface will stay guesswork for a lot of years and you're delusional if you think otherwise. Oh you have super fancy data sheets that are 100% accurate? Take a look at them again in 10 years and have a good laugh about how "100% accurate" there were.
@@rideroundandstuff Have you actually built a car model or are you just parroting some stuff you've heard? Maybe for consumer sim game developers it's guesswork now and it'll remain guesswork in the future, but that's just a lack of data and in some cases knowledge and ability. Consumer products are not simulations, they're 'realistic' games. Nobody will use the time to actually correlate a car or a set of tires. A car correlated to high accuracy in 2021 will be just as accurate in 2031. Are you saying that models depreciate with time?
Simulators evolved like thus: more grip, more grip, even more grip to the point, where fun to drive completely dissapeared. I'm talking about Assetto Corsa Competizione, trains on rails simulator, one of the most boring racing game I've ever played. Yes, maybe real modern GT3/4 cars do drive like trains and almost impossible to spin (or maybe not, I bet nobody from Kunos drove real GT3 car). Is it interesting to play? Nope. For me the best sim is Forza Motorsport 2: lots of production cars, fun physics and every single car drove diffirently. Every single one, even Lotus Elise and Opel Speedster were different. In FM7 due to "more grip evolution" a lot of nuances were gone, which is sad. But still unlike ACC every GT3 car has its own character.
Even the GT3-cars in AC are more fun to drive compare to ACC, but both have in common, that the (non-dynamic) rubber-line is by far quicker. That's what makes vintage cars more difficult to drive because they go more wide and more often land with one or two tyres on the slippy part of the track.
Video games weren't meant or designed to be realistic so Idk why people are obsessing over it when the more important thing is breaking away from reality and playing however you see fit in the game. Even if it means older cars having ridiculously high amounts of grip.
I've been sim racing for years, I own and play on a daily basis different racing simulators and all I can say is that they are all flawed in some way. That being said I always find a bit redundant the "realism" discussion because in some aspects it's highly subjective. All racing simulators have details in which they shine and some other's not as much. But they are all in some way brilliant when everything click's.
Another word on realism, this is a phenomenon that’s been seen over and over in WWII flight sims especially: Twitchier, trickier, more difficult flight models feel more “realistic” to gamers, intuitively the harder it is the more “realistic”. Then a real pilot will try it and be like “LMAO that’s crazy, nah it was easier to fly than that.” I understand that a similar phenomenon occurred during lockdown with real pro drivers and a certain racing sim…
True. Harder isn't more realistic. Back in the days drivers were able to keep a car on track for 24 hours which wouldn't be possible if the car would slide all over the place. Or as Jackie Stewart put it " I always wanted the car that the easiest to drive".
Also depends on your driving style/aggression. Its common to push on the limit 100% of the time in a sim, where in reality you would race much more cautiously/conservatively. The cars are a lot easier to drive even 5% under the limit.
@@GPLaps Not really true in the way people think about it ie: "they just drive slower in real life". It is very much so true for amateurs; not for good professionals.
The only area real drivers typically struggle in compared to sim is braking at the very-very limit in extremely fast cars like prototypes. You can pretty easily compare limit behavior in cornering situations via telemetry, video feed and opinions in most situations.
@@GPLaps Indeed we are always looking for the higher difficulty levels when in reality things were often different and not so hard nor the drivers used to push so much. A mistake could mean death ... not reload.
@@jamesbehra2690 correct
It may be a bit off topic but if you like pre-war cars for AC then I'd suggest looking at the Delage 15S8 that was just released on Race Department
He did a video on it; it’s an amazing car!
Different car! Its on my list
@@TheTotallyRealXiJinping this is a new Delage from 1927, the Delage already reviewed was from nicecupatea's 1923 season pack.
I race at my local track. Assetto corsas handling physics feel pretty great. Sometimes front wheel drive cars can feel alittle strange though, like their characteristics are over exaggerated.
Weirdly, gas karts felt like modded forcefeedback from project cars 2, similar to rfactor 2 but I can't get anyone else to agree
Hey Jake, thanks for the shout out. I'm at work and YT starts sending me new subscriber notifications and I was wondering where are all these new subscribers are coming from.
Great video as always!
I'm hoping to send you some Beta versions of the cars I've been working on soon.
ooh that sounds exciting. Can’t wait!
I think AC simulates vintage race cars the best if you compare it to the other modern sims. Especially if you take PC2 or AMS2 where the vintage cars feel much too sticky. In AC you feel the weight and the weak brakes. A thing that the Power and Glory mod also does very well. And sinc I had the privilege to drive a vintage Porsche RS on a track I can say that AC does a good job.
I was going to mention Power and Glory mod, would be good to see him try it out. For me the best mix would be Solitude with the Ferrari 275, one of my favourite combinations in sim racing.
@@carlosfandango2419 , He's uses Power & Glory mod for some of his videos. The 1000km Monza 1966 video he did recently is one.
@@Dethmeister OK, cheers for that.
I generally agree, but AMS2 and pCars 2 also put modern tyres on their cars while AC simulates old tyre-compound. That's a huge difference. Former DTM-driver Volker Strycek was driving his Opel Omega DTM at the Norrisring after the car didn't move for 20 years. He just put new tyres on, new brake fluids and was 4 sec. quicker than 20 years before (1:04 vs 1:00) on a track with basically four corners, a less competitive environment and two decades in retirement. And than you get always fresh tyres on the rim in sim-racing even if just changing setup. In AMS2 the handling can change dramatically in some cars once the sticky layer is off and I already suggested recently to give us a used-tyre-option since basically every racing-team I know is practising with old tyres first.
@@Leynad778
AMS2 should implement vintage compounds which are less grippy
I use 95% grip most of the time, it's a nice sweet spot.
Also default grip in data/surfaces.ini can vary a lot from track to track, same grip settings in UI will not have the same results in-game on every track
I came late to AC and only got it a few weeks a go. Personally I think it's better in the physics department than iRacing. AC seems to have matured into the best all round sim available today.
From what people tell me, and what I read online, it's the force feedback that turns them away. They don't like how the wheel feels at all, so trying to convince them to try different mods or adjusting settings in content manager falls on deaf ears, because their response is "It won't matter, it'll always feel terrible/bland/washy/numb/ect." Which sucks, because the amount of old cars and tracks available in AC is unmatched, but none of my sim racing friends want anything to do with it.
It is true that vanilla AC has a really bad SAT curve in the tires. It does indeed go light too soon. It doesn't *really* affect the driving physics, but it doesn't feel correct. Some cars with low caster trail suffer pretty badly from that. It's still better than canned FFB that gMotor sims without RealFeel have, but it could have been better. I'm unsure why KS did it how they did, maybe to give "more feel" as a gamey thing. I don't really agree with that approach; wheel torque would ideally be 1:1 to IRL.
Cphys does add much better SAT by default and you can tweak it if you really want to but the majority of content doesn't use Cphys at all.
Also, most cars that people will have driven have powersteering, which feels entirely different from manual steering. It has that "always stiff no matter what" feel and you can't feel the SAT dropoff *at all*, so to people who have never driven a manual rack, the very presence of SAT to begin with will feel wrong. Extra wrong if it's biased towards being too light. It might be one reason why people think cars are always understeering in AC, when the tires aren't even on the limit yet!
If you want an idea of what a manual rack on reasonable tires can feel like in AC, download the NSX from RD, and make sure to get the hotfix. I implemented most of the relevant suspension and tire Cphys features.
@@ArchOfficial sounds like you know what you are talking about. tell me how to make ac better, as i dont really get it from the text above
Your production quality is brilliant. I love your videos, thanks GP Laps!
no. the mic compression is hurting my ears.
@@lxvideostuff7200 I was going to say the same, need to cut a bit of high frequency to make it comfy on headphones. Other than that I do think they are good.
I'd never thought to change that setting, but I've absolutely got to try this.
That Riverside is a fun track 👍
The Can-Am variant of the 330 P4 (350) definitely raced at Riverside 👍
GP, love the vibe of all your videos. Thanks for the upload
You have a very unique and pleasant voice to listen to. Although I'm not a big fan of historic cars, I enjoy your videos very much, and have started driving them once again.
I really love your content. If I may I'd love to make a very small suggestion: It appears you use talkover compression with your microphone and I'm under the impression you set it a litte bit too hard. Maybe my ears are just really really sensible but every time your voice starts I feel like there's a little "hole" right after.
thx
Well feel like an off the beaten path unicorn when it's mentioned that only few play around with track conditions. That was the very first parameter I played with, aquiring AC 7 years ago, driving out for a practice run. Think I've only raced the 'Optimum' choice participating online lobbies.
A pleasant surprise here. Used to racd go karts here, usually on the short track. Was clocked at 107 mph one day when we were practicing and Bruce McLaren was there with traps setup under the. This on a single engine kart. This goes back go the mid 60's time frame. Thank you.
Honestly I fell in love with classic cars in assetto corsa, my two favorite classics, are the Shelby Cobra 427 and the Alfa Romeo GTA.
AC is by far my favorite sim since 2015! Nice video! :)
I wonder how the old setting would turn out for an oval track, e.g. Trenton, Brooklands, old IMS, even Fontana for it never having been repaved.
It depends mostly on how much it has been driven in, since (I think) assetto doesn't change the surface itself depending on the setting
Thumb up in a heartbeat: content, editing, voice, knowledge.
ooh man i love GTR2 I did think i was the only one playing it mid 2021 but then this channel pops up on my recommended (sry if some words are a little bit bad,english is not my main language)
Main issue is that, in AC, once tires lose grip they tend to regain it way too easily. In a real car, once you lose the rear, you have to act *fast* to get those slip angles under control so the tire will grip up again (maybe). It’s pretty easy to fuck this up. In AC, it’s child’s play. The tires, even during a lurid powerslide (or hammering over a high kerb), just grip right back up the moment the speed comes down a bit. This is not how it is IRL. Most people will either over or under-correct the slide, and end up either spinning (under correct) or in a tank-slapper (over correct). I moved on to rF2 and (surprisingly) the latest iteration of RaceRoom. These are properly somewhat unforgiving of sliding around too much. IMHO, AC was made to make everyone think they can drift ;)
Well, the limit of dynamic friction is significantly lower than the limit of static friction in almost all cases, certainly with tires. Once a wheel spins, it wont stop spinning, until the force the road surface exerts on it becomes significantly lower (ie you step off the accelerator for a while). And Im absolutely certain this is modelled in AC, its such a basic rule of physics and car handling.
If you feel like the specific values used are too forgiving, well, just mod them.
This video persuaded me to get back into sim racing after a break if more than a decade. It was a good call! 😁
wow! thank you, glad i could help :)
Ayyyy! Good ol' riverside! My gramps crashed there in 1969 or so driving a LeGrand. I love to hear his stories about it! Keep up the awesome content!!!
a mk 17 Legrand??
I used to love punting the McLaren M8 around Watkins Glen in Assetto Corsa. It felt so nice to have only four gears and have to haul it to a stop twice as far from the corner as you would in a modern GT3 car. I unfortunately lost all my mods when I downloaded one that corrupted my whole hard drive 😖
These days I get a similar feeling driving a NASCAR class C truck in iRacing, but slower! Those things are fun to try get around a road course.
And it’s good to see your channel growing mate! You make some wonderful content. Keep it up 👍
Well noticed, usually the higher the peak of grip goes in reference to average grip, the more challenging it becomes to drive at the limit, as in most cases it will peak sharper and faster, and fall just the same way. Thats true for a lot of other dynamics, like aero, tires...
Fascinating. I must check this setting out for AC, I never knew what this setting did.
Bad mods are the only issue. In AMS2 there are not mods yet, and old cars are great!
Vintage is always ahead of everything else. I love classic sim racing, and Riverside looks absolutely gorgeous. Good experiment.
excellent advice.green is my new track state for racing.
Epic slide out of the final bend on the green lap. Would of been cool to be a track-side for that one.
I've never actually tried this, so nice 1 for the explanation. Gonna go slide some more right now!
I enjoy green track for a racing weekend too or if I drive a longer race, like an hour or so. In a long race you can really feel the grip progress and then drop down, because your tyres are kicking the bucket :D
Your videos are masterpieces
Thank you for another fine video. i use the Green setting because the grip progression gives character to the track surface.
Excellent video, I could watch you do laps at this stunning track, in this beautiful car all day!👍🏁
Great video ! Nice job in every way.Cheers Mate.
I never felt comfortable with cars in Assetto Corsa, whereas I can pick up gmotor / pmotor games after a break of multiple years and feel comfortable immediately.
To me ac feels extremely progressive and intuitive to drive. A bit too forgiving but there are mods that are very good to drive and have more limit. What I mean by that is that the cars are not as slidey at the limit but still not on/off like I feel gmotor sims feel to me. Overall I feel ac is too slidey and if you are not comfortable with the car sliding and want more on rails experience (like raceroom) then ac will feel odd.
To me gmotor games (ams1, rf2 and raceroom) have much much more pronounced and clear limit and generally once you go over it is a lot more about saving it than controlling it like in ac. In ac if I slide I can generally feel whether I am above or below the limit. Just like in real life the car can slide will still being under the limit. After all the peak grip is generated at certain slip angle. In gmotor sims when I slide the car it feels like it is already beyond the peak slip angle instantly.
I have always struggeled to really feel the cars in any and all gmotor sims. The limit is just so much narrower and once you go over the limit the car behaviour becomes super nervous and the throttle just doesn't do much. It is all about just steering the exact right amount to stop it spinning and stop it from doing a tank slapper. In ac I feel the throttle is more important than the steering.
@@erwinlommer197
Thank you for your feedback!
Keep up the good work! Love your channel 😁
Love content like this, learning more about the finer details. this channel has really helped fuel my love for sim racing
Great depth of knowledge, and your usual engaging presentation style. Always a pleasure to watch.
Great and informative video Brother thank you!!!
I too enjoy the classics and I collect them wherever I find them and I have several. I’m also a stickler for good physics. I want the experience to be as close to real as possible.
Maybe I will see you in a race one day. I have tried some of the settings you mentioned but not the dusty one but I will.
Love the channel. I am envious of your knowledge of motorsport.
Great video, would have loved to see you mix it up with some like-era cars, thanks for the video. I grew up just down the road from RIverside...
I appreciate the passion from your videos.
Honest question: are sim racers generally thinking AC is not so great anymore? I was under the impression that it was one of the most highly rated sims in terms of experience and physics. What would the "better" sims be? ACC is the only candidate I can think of, but it is restricted to one class (well, 2). I'm battling to think what the tier above AC would be if folks are unhappy with it, and also why they would be unhappy with AC in the first place?
Great video though!
Definitely iRacing, RFactor maybe 🤷. I don't know. I love AC
No, AC is still regareded as one of the best sims. Of course there are people who prefer another sim over AC, but it's the very same the other way round. I have no idea what Jake was up to when he tried to talk AC's physics down.
Its elitism. And the people talking about it usually have no idea about the underlying systems.
But the level above AC is simulating tires as 3D softbody objects, with deformation due to load, and unequal load and grip across the surface cculated in real time, as well as location based wear and temperarure modeling.
I know BeamNG does some of that (the former sertainly, the latter I believe in part), but I dont think any of the "hardcore racinf sims" do it. All they have is a handling model tuned to be less forgiving, which makes people automatically assume they must be more realistic.
Awesome video, Jake. Thank you. Like you, GPL is still at the top of my list. One of the things I have not figured out is how to use multiple USB devices in GPL … my pedals, steering wheel and button box use individual USB inputs. At some point, advice with the hardware side of the older sims would be much appreciated. Thanks again.
It may also be somewhat off topic but that hat fucking rules. Well done, sir.
My favourite car of all time. Was the first car I saved for in GT sport.
So what sims have the hardest core sim racers moved onto? rFactor 2? AMS2?
I'd trust you to drive my car. I so enjoy watching you. Thank You.
Thank you for this video. A lot of thought I never had.
It's a bit like these all time comparisons between GPL and the GPL mod for AC. How much grip is realistic. Of course we all don't really know. But I think - watching a lot of videos from that time - AC get's it very good.
Jag är bland dom snabbaste förarna i F1pc världen/gpl gtr2. Har tagit snabbaste varv av alla på alla banor. Du och jag skulle göra en delad långkörning mot dom "bästa" med riktiga racers en 24timmars i LeMans. Du är nog en som kan hålla placeringen när jag inte kör.
That cap spreads Dr-Sid-Watkins-vibes. :D
Excellent video as usual, but why not try the "old" grip?
I think it was very suitable, right?
I'm also a fan of vintage, the funniest cars to drive.
I had tried the "old" setting for a while and was very happy with it (I only drive pre-1975 cars).
But we always want to go faster ^^
And when I started a 1975 F1 championship, I returned to "optimal".
Your video reminds me though that it will always be more fun and satisfying in every way to ride with vintage grip as well.
Thank you for these wise arguments.
I'm going to go slower but I'm going to have even more fun.
I knew it, but we always want to go faster ^^
So, back to "old" mode.
Very nice, thanks! I was wondering about how could that work but hadn't tried yet!
Gonna use the Green option for my next race the Great 12 Hours of Le Mans in my WSC 1970 Project that will be the 8th Round, celebrating 50 years of Le Mans film!
But I think that it's not going to affect the evolution of the track because will be pouring rain during the major part of the event!
Cheers!
There are a lot of classic f1 cars out there. You should try them!
Love this kind of content!
awesome video, thanks! Always great to see slow fly over shots. Can you help what do I need to use in order to have same slow speed fly overs?
I use the camera in free cam mod (F7) and record those shots
@@GPLaps thanks. As simple as that :)
After driving the fh21 for 4000km I find it hard to drive any road car (in ac). It's just incredibly floaty
Now this is synchronous, I recently started setting the track to “old” in all cases. Still, as far as physics go I’m finding If you can drive AC you can drive BeamNG and vis versa…*shrug*. It’s the same with the flight/air combat sims I’ve played for 20 years, if you can fly say a WWII prop fighter in one sim you can do it in another.
So I’m thinking less track grip can help certain cars because you can induce oversteer rather than be stuck with understeer, is this correct?
I don't do Assetto Corsa, (in case you're wondering, I'm into the rFactor 1 side of things), so I don't really had that kind of thing in rFactor, but I also think the lower track grip levels you're suggesting for older race cars is also historically accurate.
I think, race tracks nowadays were, surface-wise, more on the "optimal" setting you tested there. Normally smooth surface and better construction of the road surface ensures high grip levels throughout.
But in period, it is different. The tracks back then were imitating real-world roads, in almost every way, save potholes. Even if the track, by chance, is relatively smooth, I don't think the surface would be consistent throughout. Some tracks even have concrete surfaces in some parts, giving varied grip levels.
I might be rambling a bit, but I hope people got my point...
I think i get what you’re. Some of these tracks aren’t realistic to the time period because theyre far too smooth, but the settings still help complement the experience.
@@GenuineRage Yeah, and also, in case someone tries more modern cars to period tracks. That situation is more or less only a one-edged sword; older cars work well in newer, smoother tracks, less bumps to worry about, but the newer cars would struggle on period, bumpy, and possibly dirty road surfaces of period tracks, since their stiffer suspension would make them buck all over the place I think...
@@jcgabriel1569 yeah that makes sense as well. Im still new to simulators and i run AC and ACC because theyre the easiest for me to get into and mostly because of the modding capabilities, not necessarily the extreme realism aspects, but thats still very important to people who really take sims seriously. Cheers.
Is there a video with the wheel and setting you use ?
I have a t300rs and I often feel frustrated by the reaction of old cars. And newer to be fair.
Think the noise reduction on your mic track here might've been a bit too aggressive. Has that hint of tinniness to it that smacks of that.
My rear gets loose every time under braking when driving these vintage cars and its impossible to brake if the braking zone isn't straight like the first corner of daytona. I just spin the moment I press the brakes. Any tips on how to avoid this. I use bb 60-64%
Oh, finally someone talking of AC's tarmac options.
ps: does anybody other thinks that Trento-Bondone's tarmac is fixed on old? I unfortunately have no time to learn AC's modding, but, this may be a nice idea to improve addon hillclimbs. Also a duster road grip should be added near asphalt strip boundaries.
Let's improve Assetto only in tarmac hillclimbs and closed track!
Tbh these cars feel way eazier to drive than modern ones or obvioulsy f1, maybe the floatiness of them makes it eazy for me to see what the car gonna do
I stopped playing AC because the scaling in VR seems wrong to me and i haven't been able to figure out how to change it. Giant hands and tiny cars it feels like
Scaling feels ok to me, but, you can change the world scale on a 'per application' basis in SteamVR
I want a t-shirt with "ooahh" on it.
I see a Ferrari P4, I click like. I'm a simple man. That said, this was super interesting and something I'd been wanting to experiment with for a while. I didn't realise there were so many extra options, I thought 'fast' 'slow' etc were simple modifiers, the lap gain and so on is all new to me. As I always do 'Weekends' in the game, this is really interesting to know.
Much appreciated video thanks.
By the way, when you say grip gain is after 30/300/XX laps, do you know if that includes AI cars lapping? So with 15 cars on track and a setting of '30', that would only be 2 laps?
That hat was made for you.
What is the mod with the pit board you have?
Nice guitar in the background 👀
let the midnight speciaaaal
shine a light on meeeeeeee
What are considered to be the most accurate sims these days, outside of iracing?
iRacing is really not very accurate at all. Their data is probably good especially for the suspensions, but the tire model appears to be impossible to correlate at all, even if they're able to tweak the curves after the fact. Thermals are still bad, which is a step-up from terrible that it used to be.
If this has to do with the model or the parameters they put in, I don't really know. Certainly they do a lot of tire testing so it should not be much of a data issue so I am inclined to believe the model has issues. rF2 and it appears Pcars/AMS2 has much of the same problem.
If you care about making a sim car for driver training or setup testing, you should use AC with CSP if you must use a consumer sim. Your lack of data will limit you much more than the sim ever will, at least for typical road-race applications.
I'm sure gMotor 2.55 and the Reiza version (rFactor1, AMS1) are good; I am not too sure about gMotor 2.10 (SimBin titles). I have bad memories of GTR2 and I've talked smack about it in the past but it can be 100% just bad parameters (It was years ago!) so I will refrain from giving any real opinion. I think the main difference in the new gMotor versions is largely feature additions, not changes to the actual modeling, but I am unsure if Reiza changed some of the more esoteric parts of the modeling.
The gMotor used in rFactor 2 is significantly different tire-wise and should be avoided for any sim stuff.
Yeah, I was wondering what sims he was talking about hardcore sim racers moving on to. There aren't many newer ones. I've heard good and bad opinions about all of them. Assetto Corsa Competizione, Automobolista 2? Certainly not PCars 2? RaceRoom, rFactor 2, and iRacing are as old as AC too.
@@Dethmeister People generally get swayed by the sensationalist marketing talk about physical tire models in rF2/iR/AMS2/PCars so I'm gonna assume it's one of those. They say it's clearly better than the empirical brush style models but can't elaborate how nor am I too sure they have ever even thought about it.
The other side of the coin is the people who don't like physical tire models, but don't really understand empirical brush models either and just go by how many load contact points the model has. I assume they will prefer a model with 10 points that just averages the load compared to an actual good model with 5 just because 10 is twice as big as 5.
The people who actually know what they're doing and want to build a sim car just use rF1/AMS1 or AC.
Do any models with real time softbody tire simulation exist yet, or is that still beyond the capability of consumer processors? One ought to think unloading it to GPU should be enough.
@@egoalter1276 BeamNG, but it doesn't feel the most accurate compared to things like AC or rFactor2
so if you have 10 cars and slow track setting ... will it only take 30 laps to break in due to there being more cars?
yes!
@@GPLaps AWESOME! thank you, enjoy the videos, enjoy your style. no one else is doing what you do and it is inspiring.
AC HAS THE SHARPEST CARS
Is this game mod available in 2024?
Do any sims simulate dirty tires when you run off track?
All of the modern sims do as far as I know. Even Gran Turismo Sport simulates that and it's not a "hardcore" sim.
AC does.
@@ImpliedVolatility704 At the time I was running iRacing, which was years ago, it didn't model dirty tires. If you cut the course, you would get an on-track slow down penalty. Later, they would issue warnings and after so many warnings you could be be disqualified. Maybe its changed by now.
I always found it unrealistic that the fastest drivers were always testing the limits of the track boundaries beyond all reason and find spots where they could cut the course and in doing so run over dirt or grass and suffer no loss of grip in the process.
God damnit, I want to play Assetto Corsa but I can't run it
What steering wheel can anyone recommend for under $250?
Logitech G29 should be on sale right now and is definitely the best entry wheel!
I have been (seemingly) automatically unsubbed for the second time now. I thought it may have been an accident on my part the first time, but I'm not so sure now. I really hope this isn't an ongoing issue and I really hope it's just me.
Less grip is more fun (to an extent).
Yup, ‘ice rink’ is not fun.
I don't really know where this idea that AC is a casual sim comes from and why it has been allowed to become accepted. Judging by the tone of your voice you seem to also believe it, so I feel that I need to comment.
The sims people compare it to all correlate quite worse than even vanilla AC does so I'm not sure why it's even a discussion. It's not worth comparing to you-know-what-sims although I will be honest and say it *can* be a parameter issue in them too. I just doubt it. The actual discussion should be rF1/AMS1 vs AC, and vanilla AC even has some advantages over the quite reasonable rFactor1/AMS1 gMotor with the empiric tire model.
AC with CSP's physics additions is closer to a professional simulator and is *easily* the best sim out of anything the consumer can get their hands on. The gap is massive. If you really care about realism for cars driving on road-racing tracks then there isn't any reason to develop car models for anything other than AC + CSP right now when it comes to consumer sims. rF1/AMS1 has some niche advantages in suspension modeling (Right now, that will likely change in the future) but the tire can't really be compared, especially when you introduce thermals to the mix.
The main reason is probably the poor quality of most content in AC. Although the quality is not incredible anywhere else either, there have been some sim-lite cars (And a few genuine sim cars!) released for AC that blow anything any other sim has done right out of the water. AC with the CSP physics is currently being used as a professional simulator in a few series so there is some proof of concept in a non-commercial setting as well.
In terms of average content, AC appears to be somewhat weak and this is probably where people's impressions of it end seeing as the average simmer doesn't really know anything about simulation that they can use to gauge the products. I just wish people would make an attempt to separate the parameters from the program.
All of it is an illusion. No mod can fix the empirical one-point tyre model that cannot ever capture in a realistic way the old bias-ply tyres. So instead people just claim that "whatever feels good to me" = "realism".
@@azarisLP If you'd ever read a paper on brush-type tire models you'd understand in the early chapters why that's not relevant.
There is negligible to no difference in results between a single point vs multi-point brush model when the track surface is relatively flat ie: when driving over anything that's not a significant kerb or pothole or something.
The real advantage you get from multiple load contact points on a brush-type model is being able to more accurately represent the loads the tire is under when traveling over an un-even surface. There's a reason many non-realtime brush models are a single disc.
You can correlate bias-ply tires just as closely as you want irregardless to load contact points. There will however be some error in all single load contact point brush model tires when ΔFZ is higher than it would be in real life ie: when driving on and off some kerbs. There's also a bit more going on there than just averaging out the loads between the points that you would want to appreciate to get accurate behavior.
By the way, a bad multi-point model implementation will offer little to no advantage over a single-point model and might even be worse in some situations, just in a different way. You can guess what I am referring to.
@@azarisLP Oh, I noticed you also have "empirical" in there. They're far better and much more usable than physical based models right now so I don't know why you added that in. It's not really possible to correlate tires on a physical model due to the great interactivity and esoteric nature of some of the inputs (Similar to some arbitrary values used in good old Magic Formula) hence why to my knowledge no actual sim uses them. The only exception would be if you generate the tire physically, then just manually tweak the curves one by one, but that's not much of a physical tire model now is it.
I suspect for the time being they're limited to theoretical development for tire companies only.
Oldschool tyres my dude....these things had more grip than modern tyres, yet they get overheated VERY easily. You dont want to slip them AT ALL!
Everything you just said was completely incorrect
People are too obsessed with which sim is most realistic. None of them are realistic because of 2 factors.
1. Some things just can't be simulated accurately. (weight transfer, Gs, heat, scents, track surface imperfections, tire behaviour etc...)
2. They are GAMES and games need to move units. Therefore all of them have to have a degree of mass market appeal determined by accounting and marketing.
If you are too obsessed with "x is more realistic than y," you should put up or shut up and go racing for real. Karts are cheap, autocross is cheap, time attack can be cheap depending on your class, arrive and drive is a thing, and you can rent race cars to take part in actual races (à la RCN). Just play whichever game you like the most because all of them are realistic enough.
Load transfer can't be simulated accurately? That's one of the easy things that you can get 100% absolutely correct. It is not that difficult to code a kinematic solver that works and is correct, compared to coding one that works but is incorrect. This must be the one thing that all decent sims do exactly right.
So are G's; the math is not terribly complicated. Nothing is preventing you from getting exact~ G's and cornering speeds around any given track. In an empiric tire model, you just put in the curves you want and the correct result will come out.
Now I will be honest and say that no consumer sim has correct elastokinematics and flex for suspension/chassis components, and those will affect your wheel angles and roll stiffness distribution. Those are more like missing features than the sim being inaccurate. They typically don't matter until your car is already at a high professional level and I think most pro sims don't even support them, but it's a reality. You can't really make a kart into a typical hard-body sim because they rely on the component flex for springing.
Tire behavior is more or less accurate in AC + CSP, you can correlate a tire set basically exactly even a good bit over the limit and that's with heat included to a reasonable range. Some minor interactions are missing, but it doesn't really show up on telemetry nor is it humanly possible to feel. Older gMotor has quite good tire behavior too although heat is bad like in every other sim apart from AC with CSP.
Thermals wise, none of the consumer sims really do a good job, not even vanilla AC, but you can get a really good simulation if you use AC + CSP. You can get temperatures to very closely match even a bit outside of typical driving parameters, like when sliding a lot and over-driving, or just rolling down the highway. They cool down correctly too. That goes for brakes too.
Of course, the tire damage and whatnot is more complex IRL than in any of the sims, but the heating/cooling/grip relationship can be very precisely replicated in AC + CSP.
No sim that I know of can yet truly do temps while drifting right, where the surface is 300 - 500c but the carcass isn't heating up too much, but you can emulate it with some temp/slip interactivity in AC + CSP. I don't exactly foresee a technical limitation for simulating this correctly, but getting usable data from a tire at 500c can be quite challenging.
I don't know where this idea came from that some things "can't" be simulated accurately. It's really more an issue that developers don't have good enough data to use as a reference; but some developers do and they can make an accurate simulation. The main reason most consumer sims are not accurate is because the data used to build the cars with is not accurate. A large part of it is guessed. Sometimes devs just make subpar implementations too.
It doesn't necessarily mean the sims *can't* be accurate if good data and a skilled engineer is used.
Absolutely. Empty Box made a great video about that, it's called "Perception and Feel - "Sim" is a Lie."
@@rideroundandstuff Ah yes, that video. The one that people keep using as a reference even though it's wrong. I'd guess and say that Emptybox hasn't developed a simulation model for a car before either so it's not like he is speaking from experience.
It might be relevant for 10+ years ago when all of the consumer sim tire models were junk and all the peripherals were junk so you could just give up trying to make accurate models. You can get very, very realistic car models done nowadays if you use the right software and there is very little question about that. It's not a subjective thing at all. Even the consumer hardware peripherals are becoming somewhat usable for simulation purposes.
Of course the very nitty gritty stuff is difficult to match to IRL and most models don't actually do the tire dynamics exactly like IRL (You don't have to, though. Makes almost no difference to the point where it's okay to just use slipvelocity and a simple flex model for example) so there will always be some subjective aspect to it when you're correlating the car with your drivers. Indeed the seat, steering wheel, graphics, sounds etc. will affect how accurately the information from the sim is communicated compared to the real car.
However just because correlating a car accurately is difficult doesn't mean it's impossible, or that it comes down to subjective beliefs as opposed to quantifiable outputs.
@@ArchOfficial Tires and road surface will stay guesswork for a lot of years and you're delusional if you think otherwise.
Oh you have super fancy data sheets that are 100% accurate? Take a look at them again in 10 years and have a good laugh about how "100% accurate" there were.
@@rideroundandstuff Have you actually built a car model or are you just parroting some stuff you've heard? Maybe for consumer sim game developers it's guesswork now and it'll remain guesswork in the future, but that's just a lack of data and in some cases knowledge and ability.
Consumer products are not simulations, they're 'realistic' games. Nobody will use the time to actually correlate a car or a set of tires.
A car correlated to high accuracy in 2021 will be just as accurate in 2031. Are you saying that models depreciate with time?
Simulators evolved like thus: more grip, more grip, even more grip to the point, where fun to drive completely dissapeared. I'm talking about Assetto Corsa Competizione, trains on rails simulator, one of the most boring racing game I've ever played.
Yes, maybe real modern GT3/4 cars do drive like trains and almost impossible to spin (or maybe not, I bet nobody from Kunos drove real GT3 car). Is it interesting to play? Nope.
For me the best sim is Forza Motorsport 2: lots of production cars, fun physics and every single car drove diffirently. Every single one, even Lotus Elise and Opel Speedster were different. In FM7 due to "more grip evolution" a lot of nuances were gone, which is sad. But still unlike ACC every GT3 car has its own character.
Even the GT3-cars in AC are more fun to drive compare to ACC, but both have in common, that the (non-dynamic) rubber-line is by far quicker. That's what makes vintage cars more difficult to drive because they go more wide and more often land with one or two tyres on the slippy part of the track.
Video games weren't meant or designed to be realistic so Idk why people are obsessing over it when the more important thing is breaking away from reality and playing however you see fit in the game. Even if it means older cars having ridiculously high amounts of grip.
I've been sim racing for years, I own and play on a daily basis different racing simulators and all I can say is that they are all flawed in some way. That being said I always find a bit redundant the "realism" discussion because in some aspects it's highly subjective. All racing simulators have details in which they shine and some other's not as much. But they are all in some way brilliant when everything click's.
It is kind of weird when you realize just how trash these old cars actually are but they were considered rocket ships in their day
some people’s trash are other’s treasures
50 years from now, we'll say the same thing about today's race cars.