F1technical.net

I'm not entirely sure what the core differences are between rFactor and rFactor Pro to be honest. But just because they have similar names doesn't necessarily mean they share the same core simulation code.

Might just use the same visual display for all we know.

Jersey Tom wrote:I'm not entirely sure what the core differences are between rFactor and rFactor Pro to be honest. But just because they have similar names doesn't necessarily mean they share the same core simulation code.

Might just use the same visual display for all we know.

From what I know the main difference between Rfactor and Rfactor Pro is middleware, plug in capability, flexibility and the fidelity of simulated variables. Rfactor is coded to run on home pc's. Rfactor Pro requires much more ram because of all the middleware.

You can adjust component variables on the fly in Pro, add a new rear wing, or parts to the vehicle model on the fly. Redbull do use Rfactor Pro and use PTWinSim for this I think but I am not sure. But driving the hydraulics is the easy part, that's probably just Xsim software. Many home hydraulics sim builders also use Xsim to drive the hydraulics.

So yeah all in all the line between professional sim and videogames is very blurry. Although I would definitely not call Rfactor (non-pro) just a videogame but rather a non-professional simulator. It is lightyears ahead of commercial titles (like F1's official videogame title by codemasters). Those commercial titles are definitely just games and handle nothing like real life.

gold333 wrote:

Jersey Tom wrote:I'm not entirely sure what the core differences are between rFactor and rFactor Pro to be honest. But just because they have similar names doesn't necessarily mean they share the same core simulation code.

Might just use the same visual display for all we know.

From what I know the main difference between Rfactor and Rfactor Pro is middleware, plug in capability, flexibility and the fidelity of simulated variables. Rfactor is coded to run on home pc's. Rfactor Pro requires much more ram because of all the middleware.

You can adjust component variables on the fly in Pro, add a new rear wing, or parts to the vehicle model on the fly. Redbull do use Rfactor Pro and use PTWinSim for this I think but I am not sure. But driving the hydraulics is the easy part, that's probably just Xsim software. Many home hydraulics sim builders also use Xsim to drive the hydraulics.

So yeah all in all the line between professional sim and videogames is very blurry. Although I would definitely not call Rfactor (non-pro) just a videogame but rather a non-professional simulator. It is lightyears ahead of commercial titles (like F1's official videogame title by codemasters). Those commercial titles are definitely just games and handle nothing like real life.

I would suggest trying iRacing out. Its the closest thing in a commercial sim. They actually have a tire model, and its the same one for LMP, F1, Stock Cars, or road cars, and produces true to life lap times on laser and gps scanned tracks. I raced with Bobby Labonte on there, who was using iRacing to freshen his circuit racing chops in preparation for the Rolex 24.

It was pretty cool for an armchair like me to be turning laps with someone using my favorite game as a bonafide tool for their racing career.

Of course it still lacks, but it is far more than a game at this point.

rFactor Pro also benefits from the fact that it does have its root in a "game" since the visual components is a lot more polished. Company I work for recently acquired a simulator developed with Mechanical Simulation(people behind Carsim), the model behind it is robust, but lacks much of the polish of any modern "game" which takes away some of the immersion for the user. There are still many issue to work out and it is still a work in progress. The story I've heard from engineers who works on the simulator is that MSc ended up hiring some people from gaming industry to completely redo the visual of the program...

Giblet wrote:

gold333 wrote:

Jersey Tom wrote:I'm not entirely sure what the core differences are between rFactor and rFactor Pro to be honest. But just because they have similar names doesn't necessarily mean they share the same core simulation code.

Might just use the same visual display for all we know.

From what I know the main difference between Rfactor and Rfactor Pro is middleware, plug in capability, flexibility and the fidelity of simulated variables. Rfactor is coded to run on home pc's. Rfactor Pro requires much more ram because of all the middleware.

You can adjust component variables on the fly in Pro, add a new rear wing, or parts to the vehicle model on the fly. Redbull do use Rfactor Pro and use PTWinSim for this I think but I am not sure. But driving the hydraulics is the easy part, that's probably just Xsim software. Many home hydraulics sim builders also use Xsim to drive the hydraulics.

So yeah all in all the line between professional sim and videogames is very blurry. Although I would definitely not call Rfactor (non-pro) just a videogame but rather a non-professional simulator. It is lightyears ahead of commercial titles (like F1's official videogame title by codemasters). Those commercial titles are definitely just games and handle nothing like real life.

I would suggest trying iRacing out. Its the closest thing in a commercial sim. They actually have a tire model, and its the same one for LMP, F1, Stock Cars, or road cars, and produces true to life lap times on laser and gps scanned tracks. I raced with Bobby Labonte on there, who was using iRacing to freshen his circuit racing chops in preparation for the Rolex 24.

It was pretty cool for an armchair like me to be turning laps with someone using my favorite game as a bonafide tool for their racing career.

Of course it still lacks, but it is far more than a game at this point.

Yeah I racing is great and their 2.0 tire model is very very good. Although I hate iRacing's pre gear select, where you can select the gear you want (even if the real car wouldn't engage the gear at those rpm and just grind, iRacing just lets you shift but does nothing until the rpm's match. Then magically (after a second) you get the gear you selected. That's unrealistic

Try rFactor using grinding tranny mod and 1991 HE, it's an F1 sim of the 1991 season that was developed with actual F1 drivers of the day. In that you have to match rpm's on heel & toe perfectly when shifting or you get grinding. (sound and a missed gear, not actual grinding in your driving gear setup obviously) Unless you have a simconmotion 3,000$ FFB gear lever

@Racing maniac: Yeah the RedBull sim for monaco just uses the Alexandre Monaco 1.01 track, you can run it yourself in rFactor.

I notice the size of this simulator's X,Y axis movement when watching a report on driving and cell phone usage.

Lexus's 'world's most advanced' driving simulator.

The system can simulate speeds of up to 186 mph (299 km/h) and turn angles of up to 330 degrees.

http://www.gizmag.com/lexus-unveils-dri ... tor/16630/

Brian

I can simulate speed and angle sitting here at my desk.. since there's really no sensation associated with them.

It's an interesting contrast to McLaren's setup, which I suppose reflects the different priorities of the two companies. Lexus is more interested in the subjective experience of driving their cars, so the physical realism of the simulator is tantamount; whereas McLaren are focused on what the software tells them about the car's performance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9c-gWcET6Y

Can I get one for b-day

The Lexas driving simulator can simulate speeds of up to 186 mph (299 km/h) and turn angles of up to 330 degrees. It uses very large (size of a football field) X,Y movements compared to the very small movements of the simulators that we have discussed earlier in this thread. What would be the advantage of such a large system?

http://www.gizmag.com/lexus-unveils-dri ... tor/16630/

Brian

It can better replicate linear acceleration, and thus is less dependent upon triggering the brain and vestibular systems to 'feel' the linear acceleration with graphics and higher-freq movement.

Pup wrote:It's an interesting contrast to McLaren's setup, which I suppose reflects the different priorities of the two companies. Lexus is more interested in the subjective experience of driving their cars, so the physical realism of the simulator is tantamount; whereas McLaren are focused on what the software tells them about the car's performance.

Make no mistake, though: the F1 simulators are also evaluating handling based on driver feedback, which can be done as long as they get the basic cues (perhaps some acceleration but mainly jerk in pitch/roll/yaw/lat/long) in the right order and proportion.

But I imagine that you are onto something here: that Lexus is also evaluating *ride* which probably demands all of the above *plus* fairly accurate magnitudes of each cue.

compare it to another of toyota's simulators, the f1 one in cologne, italy

I was just wondering if the simulators used by teams, are built in house or from a commercial supplier?

Either answer...........what do they cost?

I don't know who builds the ones for the teams, but customer available simulators go for at least $30.000, so I'd reckon a F1 team simulator runs a minimum of $75.000