Automobilista 2 V1.1.3.5 RELEASED!

Thanks for the continuous development work Reiza! Even if not everything is perfect, I trust this team to polish this title until it's a standard to follow. Every time somebody remarks me of a flaw, I acknowledge what they say, but then proceed to point them at the work done with AMS1, how many years did they spent on that aging gMotor2 engine, and the amazing result they got at the end of the line.

I took the Lotus 79 out for a spin, couldn't do more than 5 laps at Silverstone Historic 79. It drove and handled as I expected, which was great. But one potential flaw was topspeed: before braking into the final chicane, the engine hit the limiter travelling at 292 km/h. From speed records I have seen from the time, that is too high for the downforce in the setup and the track. I would expect for it to be at least 10 km/h slower, as the car didn't seem to lack downforce around the fast corners. On a setup with proper gearing and trimmed out for Monza, this beast could easily soar past 300, probably even 310. And on these years, it was actually rare that they broke the 300 barrier. Top speeds recorded in F1 stayed around the 290-295 mark for the whole 70s decade, for a number of reasons.

I don't know if the work on driveline frictions had an unexpected effect on this, or if bodywork drag is too low, or if sideskirts friction is not properly accounted for, or tyre rolling resistance is too low. But something must be off here.

 

It can get above 300kph, i've done it on the nurburgring straight, took all the wing downforce off and closed brake vents and extended gears to do it though

 

You hit 310 kph at Hockenheim '77 on the default setup. A recommended combo, btw, if only to experience the Ostkurve taken at 240 kph.

 

Thanks for the replies.

I once came across a speed trap report where it stated the max speed F1 recorded every year. It hovered around 285-295 from 1967 to 1982. It was quite surprising at first, as I expected for speeds to keep on rising as power steadily went up from the 400 HP achieved when F1 doubled the displacement in 1966. (this number is said to be reached around Monza 67). But then, several factors come into play:

* Wings appeared on cars in 1968, and development never stalled (hehe). So aero drag was a factor, and it kept on increasing, no matter the work for making cars more efficient: more grip on corners prevailed over more top end speed.
* Rolling resistance for tyres probably increased as they moved from grooved tyres to slick ones (This is a guess and I could be wrong)
* As carbon fiber was not a thing in the 70s, as downforce increased, so did the stress on the chassis. And they couldn't beef them up without adding mass to them. So weight figures started going up hand in hand with the increased G forces. And this rocketed up several kg at the ground effects era, as teams got in severe issues with structures twisting or even breaking by the extreme forces on the cars. That added mass reduced top speeds a bit more.
* Ground effects cars had sliding skirts to seal the air underneath and give the huge venturi tunnels better efficiency. Designs on them improved during the era, with better materials for increasing durability of them in the race and reducing resistance. But they must have added some kind of friction that impacted top speed figures.
* When carbon fiber started to be used by all top teams in 1983, weight went down. But that same year ground effect was banned by mandating flat floors. So drastic power increase by turbo engines, weight reduction and absence of sideskirts was countered by huge wings that were installed in place to try to claw back all downforce lost, which shoot up drag figures. Top speed started to consistently got past 300 km/h, but not by much, as aero efficiency got massively reduced. I've read once that the Williams FW07, in the late 1979 config that was the standard of the field, had a staggering Lift to Drag ratio of 8 to 1. I don't think even nowadays do F1 cars have such a rate of efficiency.

A little more data to add on this: the local argentine CORSA magazine, on its coverage of the 1979 Argentine Grand Prix that kicked off that season, had the numbers of speed offered by Ken Tyrrel's wife, who was tagging cars with a speedgun of some sort just before braking into Ascari Chicane, the fastest part of that course, and possibly one of the fastest, if not the fastest, of the whole schedule of that time. Top speed recorded was by Gilles Villeneuve on a Ferrari 312T3 (not a GE car, the 312T4 would debut two races later) at 291 km/h, followed by Jean Pierre Jarier on a Tyrrel 009, at 288 km/h. None of the two were front runners, that weekend was dominated by Jacques Laffite on the amazingly good looking Ligier JS11. The only car that came somewhat close to that car's pace on raceday, was a Lotus 79 driven by Carlos Reutemann, who was still no match for the French combo. None of those two cars featured at the top of the speed charts.

 

A few remarks:

1. Top speed is almost entirely dictated by aerodynamic drag and weight is irrelevant.
2. The Tyrrell 009 was a blatant copy of the Lotus 79.

 

Well, at least on general upper bodywork, yes. But do we know if the underbody tunnels were the same? And the design and materials of sliding skirts? The rake setup they used? The attack angle of wings? The gurney flap element used?

Let's suppose that everything is the same and we can use that 288 km/h figure as reference: it's clearly lower than what this car can achieve in AMS2.

 

As the cars for Retro Gen1 then for Retro Gen2 these may follow? Just hope so.
Brabham BT46

McLaren M26

 

I'd be amazed if there's no Brabham in the 'Brazilian Legends' pack!

 

I still boot up good old PC2 now and then. It's a bit hit-and-miss, I think, and it depends a lot on what you're into, and indeed your settings. Rather easy on the eyes for sure, but some cars are quirky to the point of being undriveable while others are awesome.

Personally I dig the F5, the vintage Group 6 and Group C stuff, and a good '66 Mustang vs Camaro skirmish is always fun (I use the Custom Grid Tool).

 

yeah i still do some Time trial stuff on it once a week. and thankfully last night i was able to find a old custom ffb tune that felt similar to what i’m used to now , so was able to enjoy it .

As mentioned the graphics and Ui are fantastic. my favourite car is the good old Mk1 Escort , it takes me back to my youth.
And the Indy cars are pretty awesome .
there’s some great tracks too , like sakitto and long beach to name just a couple,
plus quite amazing that my Home town track Ruapuna is there. it’s not always great but it’s still cool to experience it .

 

Others with track experience say the opposite. I think a lot goes into finding a proper setup for FFB hardware and that logically explains why many including people with track experience give different, at time opposite feedbacks.
That adds to the complexity for devs to decipher the feedbacks in forums when there are so many different variables and reasons for that. IMHO.

 

Fancy sharing that file?

 

Isn't there a way to get past that? I don't know how.
Maybe how much time it takes for a for example Porsche would go around a corner in real life?
To me, it looks like there is not enough grip, certainly if you compare it to other sims. But I also don't have the game.
How would we know what grip levels are correct? Does anyone have any idea how to find the grip levels in real life and measure them easily to translate them to the game? That could be very useful.

 

I think Niels Heusinkveld spent an entire one of his sexy excel videos on how this data is either, not available, or very incomplete. So I don't think actual data is on grip levels exists.

Also, cornering times are dependant on more than just grip, but also driver skill, track conditions and tire temps (which is very close to grip, but you get what I mean).

And finally, and don't mean this in an offensive way, but i'm not sure how reliable your feeling is if you haven't played the game yourself. We can have discussion on setup, FFB settings and physics all day, but if you base this all on how you've seen someone else drive the car in a video, the info wouldn't seem very useful to me.
Not saying the game or it's physics are perfect, but making claims on second-hand info just doesn't seem helpful to me.

Quick edit:
Found the video;

 

Oh yeah, no problem. that discussion we already had. I have my standpoint on it and others their. They have driven the sim and I don't, that is a valid criticism. It would always be very fluid though. Let's say I have the game and I say that I find there is too little grip. Then it would be against what am I measuring.
Let's say you say to the community this car sucks it has no grip. Then the question becomes, have you driven that car, etc... That's why I stated my question that way that it could count for every sim and not only for this one. Like, is there a way to have some objective data that gets rid of bias or individual wheels, etc...

 

Maybe you misunderstood, with the custom FFB file, at least on DD1 to me it "FEELS" awesome, very very close to the real feel and what you can even get via FFB. But Im talking about the actual behaviour (mechanical etc.) of the cars.

And like I said, some if not many cars seem really good, like newer formula and prototypes (all the P's pretty much), really fun to drive. But some just jump and float around like boats or lose the front grip so easily no matter your setup. There there is the LSD "issue".

And back to the original point of this whole topic, I actually dont think many people are critical about Reiza's content release schedule, but rather working on what they have. Now yes, the excuse the game being very young may be valid, a lot of people are here since AMS1 which was arguably one of the best in terms of physics ... soooo naturally, those people expect AMS2 to be "at least" as good right from the beginning as far as handling and physics go. Whether it is or isnt, I'll leave up to everyone's impressions

 

Yeah the subjective nature of these things is somewhat annoying.
But I think that's what it will always be, subjective. It is extremely difficult to get data from tires working hard, even for actual race teams, let alone some randos on a forum discussing a video game.
And I personally agree on the lack of bite, but I still have naive faith in Reiza that they're working on it.

 

Yeah, I agree. And yes I have faith in Reiza. I am curious how it will evolve and maybe one day I will buy it too. But I will not play it with a pad so I have to pay for a wheel too. Was even looking at it today (must not be tempted ).