Does anybody still like the F-Extreme?

if you drive back to back with the formula reiza it's a different beast almost tame compared to the extreme. Also the tyre noise is so loud on the extreme I wonder if there could be tweaks to it.

 

So I dunno about you guys but I feel like something has changed with this week's update.

Feels a lot less stiff and the inside fronts seem to want to lock up a lot less from cornering. Feels closer to the SCE version.

Do we figure changes to default set up or changes to physics? I haven't done any substantive empirical analysis so maybe I'm all placebo about this. I only noticed when I went to check out the new wheel display.

 

-

 

maybe reiza implemented kunos's placebo v1.1 update lol

 

-

 

I'm not sure Niels did this car ... these new V6T cars run very high rake compared to previous generation, i'm like 90% sure they do so to run softer springs at the rear and improve traction. But this F.extrem rake is quite similar to previous generations ones.

I really don't find it hard to drive, if you get in the new F1s mood, you really need to find a good balance between front and rear stiffness (springs and arb) to avoid front tyres taking off in corners.

 

Nope. You would ruin the rake and lose downforce with soft rear.

 

I was talking about real life cars not the f.extrem, some teams run really high rakes approaching 120mm difference between front and rear, and i see no reason doing so other than running soft springsrenault 2015 wheelbase is wrong a typo probably)

 

-

 

I never liked it because the nature of the ISI physics engine's holes come out more and more the more "hardcore" a car is. Driving a high powered and/or real stiff and fast racecar in real-life or in Live For Speed or Netkar Pro, or to a certain extent Assetto Corsa, is a different story though.

 

Stiffer springs at the back doesn't support any "modern principles", I don't know where are you getting this from.

 

Well, it's not my responsibility to educated you. I only say this: with "stiffer springs at the back" I meant with back heavy cars, which need stiffer springs there to get suspension frequency set correctly (10-20 lower than the front frequency). Sorry if my English fails here.

 

Spinelli you now saying that ac or the aforementioned has the best physics/most realistic in sim racing atm? Bold statement

 

Yes, but where do you got that F1 cars run stiffer springs at the back? Even iRacing's McLaren 2015 F1 has way way stiffer front springs than rear springs (both corner springs and heaves). And in many other real life open wheeler categories, stiffer springs are used at the front, compared to the rear.

 

Read about racecars and suspension frequencies. Limitations and errors of simulation software is not my problem.

 

What makes you think that there are errors or limitations with the simulators?

 

In fact, modern setups work well in many of them, so they're not that bad.

 

I don't know mate, you are the one saying they are bad, then later saying they are good I would just like to have some evidence that states that F1 cars run stiffer rear springs.

 

Re F1s, or any other racecars with 3rd springs or other solutions to control pitch (squat?) it is possible, I guess, to run very soft rear compared to more conventional suspensions (when looking for optimal corner exit speeds). I'll give you that. Setting ARBs accordingly should not be forgotten of course.