I've searched for a simular but haven't found anything so

In cars such as the Impreza WRX/STI and the Evo, you have active differentials which I'm guessing (I'm not a techie :shy would 'actively' change the locking of the diff based on slip angle, throttle, steering angle, and blah blah.

Some even have on the fly (Impreza WR1 to name but one) had a dial where you could change the front/rear torque split.

I believe this would add realism and increase setup options for drivers, and make cars (namely the RB4) used more widely and more competitive. It would also in turn mean that if propper rally courses were to be released in later versions, it would be much more fun

That's all

And also for the Mini Cooper JCW, IIRC.

And honestly, I don't know if active diffs are very common IRL, so for now it's a +0. I still want to read something more about them, and find out if they are an interesting option to racing or not.

but it would make setup designing even more complicated, if you look at the diff setting page in Richard Burns Rally with its ~40 changeable values.

Quote from ACCAkut :

but it would make setup designing even more complicated, if you look at the diff setting page in Richard Burns Rally with its ~40 changeable values.

which is far too simple really
what id like is a window popping up to type some c++ in

Quote from ACCAkut :

but it would make setup designing even more complicated, if you look at the diff setting page in Richard Burns Rally with its ~40 changeable values.

That's exactly the point

Anyone can win with a locked diff (hey, I do it every day :razz but I think that one single setting with 'active diff' which automatically changes on the fly, with no settings would be nice. Maybe an RB4 only thing?

I'd rather have torsen differentials than full out active ones...

Just a thought, isn't the Torsen Differential a Clutch Pack with equivalent lock/coast and no preload?

Not quite, as torque biasing differentials can have small amounts of pre-load, such as (IIRC) Quaife diffs ant Torsen T2s. Also the way they react to torque is different - a clutch pack will begin to lock up as you apply torque through the diff, even if both wheels still have grip, where as a TBD only locks up when a torque imbalance happens. So TBDs offer less scrubbing, especially during tight cornering, while retaining high locking factors.

Active diffs have been banned in WRC and I don't think there are many cars from around twelve to fourteen years ago with active diffs. It would also be a rather cumbersome thing for RBR.

Quote from ACCAkut :

but it would make setup designing even more complicated, if you look at the diff setting page in Richard Burns Rally with its ~40 changeable values.

That is why i never touch sets in RBR and downlaod them

Becaus this setup stuf is way to cimplicated for me idont have enough car knowlage for that

You would of course have to program not only the behavior of the differential, but the behavior of the computer that takes in all the steering inputs, yaw rates, throttle application, where the engine is in the rpm range etc.

Even the BMW DSC (not ASC, that is comparatively simple) does an amazing amount of computation using all sorts of sensors to keep you on the road when you make an ambitious entry into a corner.

It is doable, but it is also quite boring in comparison... I think for most people, a new car with no traction control is more exciting than an RB4 that adjusts the break and throttle application along with the differential locking for you in order to allow the car to make the turn you're steering for...

similarly, I'd say the 599 is an amazing car, but not as much fun to race as a 430 with the TC off...

Quote from S14 DRIFT :

I've searched for a simular but haven't found anything so

In cars such as the Impreza WRX/STI and the Evo, you have active differentials which I'm guessing (I'm not a techie :shy would 'actively' change the locking of the diff based on slip angle, throttle, steering angle, and blah blah.

Some even have on the fly (Impreza WR1 to name but one) had a dial where you could change the front/rear torque split.

I believe this would add realism and increase setup options for drivers, and make cars (namely the RB4) used more widely and more competitive. It would also in turn mean that if propper rally courses were to be released in later versions, it would be much more fun

That's all

I don't know about Subaru and other cars, but BMW's "Active Differential" is just an open diff that uses the computer to apply the brakes on the slipping side combined with the more advanced features of the DSC system. It is really a poor man's LSD.

The BMW Sauber would have some driver controllable diff settings, but it isn't actively controlled by the computer (AFAIK).

Quote from Hallen :

BMW's "Active Differential" is just an open diff that uses the computer to apply the brakes on the slipping side

How is it an Active Differential if it is an open differential, as you say? I'm pretty sure that applying the brakes to the wheel that is spinning faster would cause understeer.

EDIT: But, if the car were to oversteer then braking the faster wheel would help correct that. That's what stability control is, pretty much. I don't think that it qualifies as an active differential though.

Quote from wheel4hummer :

How is it an Active Differential if it is an open differential, as you say? I'm pretty sure that applying the brakes to the wheel that is spinning faster would cause understeer.

EDIT: But, if the car were to oversteer then braking the faster wheel would help correct that. That's what stability control is, pretty much. I don't think that it qualifies as an active differential though.

Yeah, I was thinking of the wrong terminology. BMW mostly uses "Electric Differentials" which is an mechanical open diff with wheel brake control. It behaves like a diff would by slowing the spinning wheel and transferring the power to the non-spinning wheel.

This is an excerpt from a Wiki, but from what I have seen, it is pretty much correct.

Electronic limited slip differential system uses Anti-lock brake sensors and hardware to electronically monitor wheel speed. If one of the wheels on an axle is rotating faster, computer briefly applies brakes to it, slowing the spinning wheel down and causing the wheel on the opposite end of an open differential to start spinning and gain traction. This is an opposite to the anti-lock brake application, when a locked wheel is electronically released.

One advantage of this system over mechanical is that the vehicle steering and control is less affected. It also generates less stress on the drivetrain compared to a mechanical locking device, making it particularly suitable for the vehicles with independent suspension. It can also be tuned for specific applications off- and on road and a different speeds.

A disadvantage is that it is less predictable when going over an obstacle, as the system needs time to react. Also, the wheel with traction will only have half of the available torque applied to it.

I don't think an active differential (as in RBR and banned in the WRC) would be viable to code but maybe (and some people will want to come round my house with pitchforks for saying this) it should be considered for traction control and/or dynamic torque split? I would guess that a similar car of the age (Lancer Evo Two or Three) would be likely to have TC and changeable torque split would be at least possible.

To the best of my knowledge, the Lancer Evolutions did not have an adjustable center diff until the 7 models. None of the models from Evolution to Evo 9 have TCS, though I believe the Evolution X now does.

I`d would be nice to have an electronically controlled active center differential rather than the usless Viscous diff , the Evo wodnent be that qick if it hadent had one.

Quote from duke_toaster :

Active diffs have been banned in WRC and I don't think there are many cars from around twelve to fourteen years ago with active diffs. It would also be a rather cumbersome thing for RBR.

Active central differentials have not been banned.

Quote from Shotglass :

which is far too simple really
what id like is a window popping up to type some c++ in

Amateur. I think if you want to change the setup you should have to recode the entire game in assembler.

its assembly

Quote from ACCAkut :

but it would make setup designing even more complicated, if you look at the diff setting page in Richard Burns Rally with its ~40 changeable values.

Do you mean settings for power/coast/braking at 10, 20, 30, 40... km/h? yep, that makes over 40 values. Why Warhog didnt make it graphical? I dont know.

the M5 has one aswell,
+1

Seems very very very complicated to code to my mind...

The devs aren't car engineers, and I don't think calling Subaru for help on how to copy their active differential is an option.

So it's a -1 to me.

Quote from Ricou :

Seems very very very complicated to code to my mind...

The devs aren't car engineers, and I don't think calling Subaru for help on how to copy their active differential is an option.

So it's a -1 to me.

thats not the point, its more would you not like this implemented into the game?
I think it would be cool to have in the game, the more stuff in it the better

Quote from harjun :

thats not the point, its more would you not like this implemented into the game?
I think it would be cool to have in the game, the more stuff in it the better

You're right about the more stuff the better.

But to me it's just wishing for something that's totally unlikely to happen... is there a point about that ?