Race teams use specialized simulators for track testing offline, which iRacing doesn't provide. Racing teams use special equipment and sometimes modify or make their own physics models, and those teams want something like rFactor Pro, a professional and customizable version (teams can tweak or replace the physics model) of rFactor, or the equivalent, meant for that purpose.
Although you'll find real racing drivers participating in iRacing events, it's an individual thing, iRacing is not a tool for racing teams.
At what level of racing do you estimate that teams have the financial means and other resources to build specialized simulators / special equipment and develop their own physics models? In the AutoSimSport article Chris Hoyle mentioned that "automotive manufacturers and high-budget teams" would have their own vehicle models, and it seemed like iR and rFactor-Pro are tapping into quite a bit different segments within the real world racing scene.
Android, I dunno why all these people even use the profiler TBH. In the 4/5 years I've owned Logitech wheels, all I've ever installed is the drivers (which includes the panels in Game Controllers control panel), and everything has been smooth as ice for me. It does seem that people who do use the Profiler to bind buttons to "Wipe ass (3 strokes)" have all the problems, not just with iRacing but games in general.
That same AutoSimSport article also mentions the ARC team simulators, which is the specialized equipment (hardware). Then a product like rFactor Pro is used to provide the software, using modified physics (to match the team's car specs) or a new physics model. Obviously this costs a lot more than iRacing, but it's not prohibitive for a lot of racing teams (well at least until this year when the economy went bad).
If all a driver wants it a general knowlege of a car and track combination, rFactor is currently a better choice because of the sheer number of tracks and cars available via add-ons. The actual physics isn't that critical, because no sim is that accurate, one glaring bit of evidence of this is that the braking points for real car and track combinations rarely end up being the same in any consumer type simulator, including iRacing.
I had a go with the solstice at Lime Rock yesterday... trying to drift it!
It took some practice, but it's very possible, and actually not as hard as i thought first. You have to be quick and know what you're doing, but after a few laps i started to get the hang of it. And it's a lot of fun!
I did this with the stock setup... not even changed the tire pressure.
I drifted for years in LFS. So you could say i basically knew how to control the car... however, when i watched the replay afterwards, it looked like a guy who tries drifting for the first time... spin outs, loss of control, kissing walls... there was quite some humor in it!
The more i drive in this sim, the more realistic it feels... it just keeps getting better and better.
Actually... the Physics are fine, the pricing is ok (not the best), the graphics are fine (even on my PC, where I have them turned down to very low), and the SIM is perfectly good.
Yes, because it's not free means it must be terrible...
You get what you pay for...
Physics are constantly updated (much like LFS). Racing physics are great. Crash physics need work, yes, but that's less important overall... damage to suspension is spot on...
And for the cars looking cheap... I don't follow you on that one.. Laser scanned accurate to the mm ... if nothing else they are probably the most closely modeled (visually) of any sim/game out...
I'm not quite understanding your ffb issues, Android. Did you say you were using the Wingman Software to turn off stuff you can't via the windows profiler for your wheel? I'm asking because I can't. I get the exact same settings when just using the windows profiler, I get using the wingman thingy. The only thing I used wingman for was for assigning buttons on my wheel. Besides that there was absolutely no difference in ffb feel with or without it. Just saying, cause if wingman gives you problems running it in the background, you might as well turn it off.
Also, I'm using the exact same settings for iRacing I ever used for LFS. Even the ingame ffb strength settings are around the same mark.
Edit: One more word about the screenshots: What really makes iRacing look nice are "more shadows". With it turned on, all the objects and cars cast a nice complex shadow that really adds to the immersion when driving. The problem is, when running a resolution of 1680*1050 or higher, you need at least a GTX260 to run them with several cars around. My HD4850 doesn't cut it. But than again, you don't notice it that much while racing. Just having shadows turned on at least gives moving shadows in your own cockpit, which is especially nice, and again, adds to the immersion in closed cockpit cars. Unfortunately, there aren't too many for road racing, yet.
Edit2: The video called iCrash does not have "more shadows" turned on, as you can see from the car shadow on the ground. The second one does have "more shadows", but is crap quality, obviously.
Linsen, as am I. I don't touch my wheel settings going from LFS to iRacing.
John5200: Sure the LFS physics are "good" and feel fine in most situations, the iRacing ones feel a bit better. In real life, car's don't snap oversteer as severely as they do in LFS, whereas iRacing it's more progressive. LFS's FFB also lacks some of the feel and strength compared to iRacing, iRacing's FFB seems to be more deliberate and provides a better sense of what the car is doing and what the track is like.
Not saying LFS is bad, but iRacing has a few areas where the physics are "more gooder"
It's funny how people perceive things differently. I'd say LFS has anything but excessive "snap" oversteer - MRT5 excepted, but that's expected. If anything it has always felt perhaps a bit too wishy-washy in that respect, too progressive, too easy to catch (in very general terms).
I found iracing FF to be good, but not notably better than LFS either.
That said, I liked iracing as a simulation, to drive, as much as LFS and because of the circuit surfaces in a way it was better. I think the only reason I never "fell in love with it" like some have, is the the whole structure and pricing.
Tbh looks no worse than LFS would if you did all of those edits. Besides, as far as simulators go, it's how they drive, and not how they look. That's why GPL was awesome.
People are posting tiny little screens and saying the sim looks like crap. I had evidence otherwise... end of story.
Again, I'm not trying to sell iRacing to anyone here, or even saying it looks better than LFS. I'm presenting facts and letting people make up their own mind. This is what the sim looks like on my machine, sans blur obviously. Take it or leave it.
And let it further be known, , that the blur is the only edit! People are talking about these screens like I spent eight hours each trying to make something awful look good. I ran the blur tool across the fricken things, flattened them, and saved them.
hehe yeah. iracing, any side to side contact is a 4x penalty... my safety rating is only 3.36... Trying to get up to 4.0 so i can race the mazda now...
when i make contact w/ people in ctra, it doesnt annoy me anywhere near as much as in iRacing.
And I wish I had a 3.xx in road, right now with this B license I am 2.48. I've been fine before, but with B license you literally have to do no incident races to just gain like .08, but if you get like a 4x during the race it drops .05. Can't wait for that A license.
Yeah seeing that 4x pop up just drives me nuts! Tiny little contact in T1, and all of a sudden it's much harder to get +SR race in.
Still, I like the safety rating. The systems themselves are hard to compare, but racing in general has been much cleaner for me than in CTRA. By a long shot. However, I'm only Bronze and National B in CTRA, so I only drive Race 1 and SS1. I imagine the races are much cleaner in SS2, Race 3, etc.? Anyway, I seem to be much faster right out of the box in iRacing, so I'm placed in races with the fastest guys, who so far have been incredibly clean. I've never been taken out by someone failing to brake for T1, no ridiculous passing attempts, etc... People hang back for 4 laps to figure out where they can get you, and then they get you.... It's refreshing actually.
That being said, you can't beat LFS when you just want to race around and not worry about your SR because if you lose .10 more you won't be able to race your favorite car...
Which reminds me, Gabkicks, the Mazda is an SR killer. When I got promoted to D I was still pinned at 4.99, and the Mazda took care of that right away...
I drove for like an hour around summit point...and I felt like I was doing pretty good crashing about every few laps.
The mazda is part of the reason why I just haven't raced that much...I can't get into it. I watch videos of what the other guys are doing and it looks like we're driving different cars.
I've never felt this way about a sim before, and its really frustrating.
Also, there is the problem that the car never feels like I'm going as fast as possible. I ran a 1:05.6 I think it was...not terrible, a few tenths slower than I normally am off pole. I feel like I'm hugely off pace and I don't even want to race.
Well..mostly its the fact that I spin for god knows what reason every few laps and I couldn't imagine stringing 30 in a row. I countersteer and it snaps the other way. I don't countersteer and it still snaps the other way. The car doesn't really have an oversteer threshold..it goes into a 4 wheel skid like it loses downforce or something and then I countersteer, front end regains grip, and I snap spin the other way.
I can't wait to try something like the DP or the corvette...get away from these twitchy snappy unforgiving (unfun) cars.
Usually when calibrating my wheel, when the sim asks for 90 degrees i turn it a little less, giving me a readout of 240. I've always had to be really careful making corrections in the mazda, snaps right off the track. Today, I turned the wheel a little more so my readout said 222, and out of nowhere the snap is gone. The wheel requires a little bit more input to get X turning radius at Y speed, but it actually feels somewhat controllable in opposite lock situations now.
This is all on a black Momo of course, so your results might be different, but man what a difference it made for me. Turning the wheel slightly more than 90 degrees in the calibration screen seems to make it much less sensitive in the center, allowing for little corrections that don't send you into space.
]
, that the blur is the only edit! People are talking about these screens like I spent eight hours each trying to make something awful look good. I ran the blur tool across the fricken things, flattened them, and saved them.
