not going to get into a pissing contest but what is the base package if not non profit content .... did everyone have a shitty christmas or what? fluff and stuff Andi
This is a good point actually, maybe that's the logic behind it. A 1 click setting doesn't have to mean absolutely no downforce at the rear. Maybe it's at the lowest usable angle the GT3 cars are ran at.
Before the patch which included the DSP, I played a little bit with the rear wing settings during the DTM '15 Championship, and I clearly remember that if I set the rear wing too low, the back of the car was unstable. Same stuff with the springs & WTCC: if I modified (or swapped the front & rear) spring & toe values, the car behaved very different. So, I think this kind of setup fits for your driving style @PRC_James .
You're still missing the point. Scroll through the thread, and you'll see plenty of people who think this magical set-up is not only slower, but borders on being undrivable. And these are people who are a ) faster than I am, and b ) far more competitive than I am, and yet they seem unwilling to use this nefarious set-up that gives you special powers. Well, no sim is a true sim. There will be approximations simply due to the number factors that influence the real-world counter-parts. We're in complete agreement there. My question is, since we both agree to that being the case, what's the difference between AC and R3E? If neither of them are true sims in the first place, why go out of your way to state that you refuse to acknowledge R3E as a true sim. It seems a little redundant. The R3E base-package is free. But you're missing the point (again, I might add). None of the companies involved do anything to advance the sim-racing community alone, these are not altruistic companies. Furthermore, seeing as both AC and rF are heavily reliant on 3rd party mods, you could argue that these companies have volunteers doing their work for them for free. Now, as to what sim gives you the most bang for your buck, we can argue that till the cows come home. Personally, I have GTR2, Race07, GSC, rF1, rF2, AC, R3E and pCars all sitting on my HDD, and I can find pros and cons with each and every one of them. So if you think either AC or rF2 gives you a better experience, that's absolutely fine. Go forth and have fun. But if you think any sim-racing company releases anything out of the goodness of their hearts, you're quite frankly naive.
Bump^ I happened to stumble to Austin's post concerning the "exploit setup" in the Racedepartment's IMSA preview -thread: http://www.racedepartment.com/threads/r3e-new-gto-class-previews.116074/page-3#post-2166107 Although my own short testing with FR2 didn't confirm the bug in setup, it seems that there is something wrong after all. If S3S has indeed confirmed the bug to Austin, it would be great to hear something about the nature of the setup bug from the devs and what is to be expected about fixing it. It certainly doesn't have big effect on my single player racing, but if R3E someday is considered as an alternative within competitive league circles, this kind of stuff usually is a deal braker, I believe.
Basiclly what I think should happen with the frount this soft is that the car should becom very unresponsive on turn in and it should bottom out over bumps(which can lead to snap oversteer especially on low downforce cars). While the first definetly happens it is just not strong enough to counteract the aditional turn you get, this just seems like a bit of tweaking is necessary. The bottoming is more worrying to me because i dont feel it at all perhaps thats just me though.
For a sim to be realistic you should be given a realistic range of setup values. You shouldn't be offered springs softer than used in the real world. Soft springs and roll bars are very good for mechanical grip. A low ride height is good for mechanical grip and is usually beneficial for diffuser downforce. Soft springs and low ride-height fit well with a low-downforce setting because the low downforce won't compress the suspension as much as a high downforce setup. The only issue I see here is that apparently the low downforce set-up is always quicker than a medium or high downforce setup at all cicuits. This would imply that the lift/drag at various wing/splitter settings needs adjusting.
Not sure if it's possible to bottoming out in R3E? I know @Anthony Monteil wrote about a sound being added / worked on for when the chassis touch the road, don't know what happened to that. But hopefully this will be applied at some point with a negative effect along with sparks.
no the problem is not the low downforce setup (in fact that is quite normal for a gt3 car). I have always had a version of this setup i have used. With the old physics and with the new. The only three things that are the same in both is: 'ride hight'=min, 'frount suspension stiffness'=min, 'frount arbs'=min. every version of the game this has been the fastest. in fact this min ride height setup can also be applied to cars with no downforce settings such as dtm 1992 and touring classics.
While we are heavily influenced by F1 coverage where of course the cars do bottom out, GT and touring cars are not designed to bottom out where the chassis touches the ground. Rather the suspension bottom outs on the bump rubbers before the chassis touches the ground.
Indeed, which results in the suspension going from very soft to incredibly hard. Rather than trying to make the cars bottom onto the road surface, I'd like to see the game add some simulation of the car hitting the bump stops
hm, not sure, but when I'm going to hard over the curbes in the second chicane @Zolder I can hear something that sounds like touching the ground...
Well I tryed this so caled exploit out on spa leaderboard with GT3 car ruf and chalanged my previous time and gues what, I faild missrable yes I could outrun my self on the straights but when it came to the cornering I lost it and yea I did make some progress after a 20-30 tries. As probably someone already said setup is very individual what you like and what works with your hardware wheel setup FFB and all that.... I do have a real driving licence and have nolage of driving real race cars... and there is no exploits for my simracing hardware setup.. So for me this exploit is pure bulshit...
I agreed with it at first but was new to this game, getting into the game and used to the driving nuances i find it better\easier to drive with a tight front and rear pretty much on every track making ride height and susp allowances for bumpy or high kerbed tracks. Soft low front and rear is drivable but there is no drive, with the tighter front i feel better turning in with a tight rear i can get the power down quicker occasionally get a niceish slide going and definitely have a better feel for what the car is doing or is about to do.
Bump stops may not be as hard as you imagine. In GTR2, GTR Evo and on rFactor's Panoz GT1 the initial spring rate of the bump stop is softer than the spring rate of the suspension. Of course the two combine to produce significantly stiffer resistance than purely from the springs but not really the "very soft" to "incredibly hard" you suggest. Since R3E's physics is a development of ISIMotor2 physics which certainly simulates bump rubbers, I'm sure it does simulate the car hitting the bump stops.
yet R3E physics seems to be simplified when comparing to GTR Evo or GTR2 .. so who really know? (well I know who knows but he ain`t gonna tell us )
I tried the setup, and I certainly blew my ghost car away on the straight. I think the setup is quite controllable even for me as a noob in simracing, but still I'm slower than about half of other people on the leaderboard :| I've seen people claiming the opposite. Man reality really seems to be an illusion!