Physics discussion thread

In developing a race setup for the GT Classics Porsche 911 RSR, it was noted that the Suspension travel is very limited beyond ride height, front and rear, but more-so on the rear. This limitation caused a fair few headaches, especially on rougher circuits under braking.

Is this by design? if not, would someone at Reiza be kind enough to log and have a look at it when available?

More detail in the following video, time stamp: 00:14:33 The oddity about the car

Admin: Feel free to move to a more appropriate thread if you feel the need. I struggled to find one.

All the best
Andy

 

I think the whole 'slippery' or 'slidey' definition has changed over the past few updates. Prior to 1.6, you could definitely abuse slip angle through the corner, which felt 'drifty' and 'slippery'. Nowadays, at least for me, the 'slippery' or 'slidey' feel is the way the tires feel themselves on the surface, mostly unrelated to carrying slip angle.

You cannot abuse slip angle anymore, I do agree with you there. At least not even remotely close to what you could do in v1.5 (and if you can, i am not skilled enough to do it, nor have i seen it done on the leaderboards).

I still 100% stand by AMS2 feeling slippery/slidey, though. To me, it feels like the tires have a very small contact patch with the road, or are very over inflated. Some people say it feels like driving on ice, or that you have rallycross tires on while driving on tarmac, or just driving on gravel in general. I don't think any of these wrong, just different interpretations of the same thing.

I just cannot feel the cars 'sitting down' and really grabbing the road surface, everything feels like and like it just glides on top of the track instead of really gripping into anything. This is probably my number 1 complaint with AMS2 physics now, which is amazing because the progress made from pre-1.5 to now is incredible, they have fixed SO MANY things to improve the feel and handling of the cars.

I also wish the cars felt heavier, but thats probably just a personal preference thing. Some cars are good at this (the super V8, the new Diablo SF, the 2024 Stock Car, etc), but GT3 cars are heavy and a lot of them feel paper-light and very twitchy and overly-manueverable.

The super V8 is pretty good at feeling the weight and grip on the road, so i would imagine the GT3's can be improved in this area as well (but who knows).

 

Are you sure it's not your ffb being set up way too light (or a ffb file) so it feels like you lose grip too fast? I can feel every bump on the road, every rut on a curb and there is big weigth to moving them around corners compared to how much grip Formula or LMDhs have

 

I wish it was!

I've got like 250 hours in the game going back years. I have tried all the FFB custom files (danielkart, rackforce, default, default+, etc etc), and tried just about every combination of FFB setting for my wheel out there.

I do feel the cracks and the bumps and curbs and all that, yes, but that's not what i meant. Again, some cars feel good, some don't in this aspect. Unfortunately, the GT3's (which i have put the most effort into feeling good) don't.

People have been leaving this comment going back to AMS2's inception -- telling people to change the tire volume, adjust camera settings, try custom FFB settings, etc etc, because it 'fixes the problem'.

Members on this forum were absolutely adamant that the problem was on the players side and not with AMS2 itself, and that the GT3's felt 'amazing' to them. And now, with this last update, Reiza confirmed that the previous GT3's were wrong with their weight distribution, inertia, differentials, etc. Are those same people still so confident in the old GT3 physics, now that they have been confirmed wrong by Reiza?

I love AMS2 and i love these forums, but i am just not the person to overlook obvious issues and glaze their favorite sim like a lot of others. I dream of the day AMS2 can feel as good as the majority of other sims, and they are getting better every update, but just not there yet.

If people stopped discussing issues like this, we would still be on pre-1.5 physics.

Edit: I'd like to add that I am sure Reiza does NOT need my input on this. They created AMS 1, they know exactly what good tire physics and grip feel like.

 

The Gt3’s are much better after this last update, they are now a more forgiving version of how they are in LMU.
I can jump between the two sims, and it doesnt require much of an adjustment.
LMU does feel more connected to the road so to speak and is less forgiving, but now for me at least they are in the same ball park, so i really do enjoy them in both sims now and AMS 2 is improving constantly, so im positive it will all continue to get better and better.

 

If you want more feeling of weight and connection of the tires to the road, you will need to use some custom ffb file of the type that allows for accenting the suspension feeling of weight transfer.
I use rFuctor2, and a friend uses Daniel’s, and they both have a function for adding a user selected amount of suspension feeling.
There may be other files that can do that, but I have not tried them.

 

It has no relevance to the RSR 1974, because this is the Physics Discussion thread, not a RSR 1974 thread.

I appreciate that, but it doesn't fix the issue.

 

FFB is so subjective past a certain point, I think AMS 2 now has one of the best FFB implementations of any sim, gives you everything you need, for what the cars doing.

 

The car I used was the Porsche gt3s gen 2 on default settings . Don't get me wrong , I use this simulator more than any other one. I find it very enjoyable. Also- the ' slidyness, floating , hovercraft' feeling people talk about is not there when you change to a bonnet/ dashboard view using control kkk free camera edit option. It's a strange thing to observe. I honestly believe the movement of the camera when using the in car views (regardless of world movement etc ) is the source of this 'feeling' . I know this has been discussed before but I think users should give it a try on a hybrid bonnet / outside gt view . It actually makes even pcars 2 enjoyable...

 

Honestly the difference between 1.6.7 and 1.6.8 regarding GT3s is imho quite small, more in the nuances of the car. It's more refinement of the pyhsics of these cars than some huge faults they corrected (and to my understanding bringing the physics of the different cars in line with each other). I stand by it that if you still encounter since 1.6.7 it's really not the game, I really want to see clips showcasing how you can still slide in those cars since I just don't get it

So please record some clips showing the issue.

As mentioned in another topic I tested multiple FFB files with 1.6.8 and came to the conclusion that - for me at least - the custom ffb feel totally off now, having resistance in the steering while you already lost grip and those issues. I'm back to standard FFB and it's amazing, coming from using Danielkarts FFB for many months (his file reduced the last little bit of sliding I had in Pre 1.6.6 or something like that)

 

I literally said this in the 2nd paragraph: "You cannot abuse slip angle anymore, I do agree with you there. At least not even remotely close to what you could do in v1.5 (and if you can, i am not skilled enough to do it, nor have i seen it done on the leaderboards)." I am not sure what you are looking for a clip of.

The fact that there is so much nonsense around this issue just shows that there is a problem. You say the changes from 1.6.7 to 1.6.8 are quite small, while people in this thread are saying they are game changing, 'rediscovering AMS2', 'so much better', 'feels like a different car', etc etc.

3 posts above yours, someone recommends a custom FFB file. You are saying custom FFB files are now broken. Someone just recommended using bonnet cam to solve the 'slidey' problem? If the physics were correct out of the box, none of this would be necessary.

And i do believe that FFB is subjective, but you don't see this type of stuff anywhere but AMS2 and 90% of it is nonsense. AMS2 is the outlier in terms of physics/car feel when it comes to comparisons with other modern simulators. And when 5/6 sims feel mostly similar, and 1/6 feels very different, which is more logical to believe to be more accurate?

Every review I've seen from an actual real life racing driver doesn't praise AMS2 for it's physics, sorry. People are positive on this forum, but if you look around elsewhere, that is not the general consensus on AMS2's physics.

Anyway, i'm going to check out of this thread because I don't see this being productive any longer. Be happy that you can enjoy the current physics/ffb so much, I really wish i could.

 

It’s in everyone’s best interest that improvements keep coming for physics ect, it’s getting closer, but still has plenty to go.
FFB talk is a thing with every sim, but it’s just way more prevalent here because of custom FFB profiles, where everyone has, this is the profile that’s feels best for me because xyz.

And yea 100% agree the fact that you can have five different people tell you five different things that make the cars feel better, is all the evidence you need, that certain things need improvement.
Not to mention Reiza are constantly improving the physics, tyres ect that are bringing improvements for the better.

 

I think you maybe attributing far too much of your assumptions based of what other people say .

with only 250 hrs in years … that’s just not inline with having spent meaningful time . and certainly isnt going to give you a baseline to judge how much or little something changes from one update to the next or even if there’s something inherently wrong in the first place .

you will only be expecting it to feel like something it’s not . it does feel different from many other titles and that’s a positive for people who want more dynamic handling and character, the feel is more communicative, but the car behaviour and physics are not actually that different.

the last change was only a small but very welcome difference in character of some cars , but some do get excited and over exaggerate .

It has not changed anything that would break a custom ffb unless that file was already flawed or require a complete change in your default settings if you had already had them in a good spot .

Someone can give you the best Piano in the world , but if you don’t know how to tune it you will never make the music the same as expect and it will take time to learn how to tune it .

 

I'm currently using MoTeC with AMS2, thanks to GeekyDeaks' Sim-to-MoTeC log converter. Most cars in AMS2 follow a consistent pattern when it comes to Suspension Position and Ride Height telemetry data. However, the Porsche 911 RSR 1974 appears to deviate from this norm.
I suspect there's a bug affecting the suspension telemetry for this particular car. While the car's behavior on track doesn't seem to be impacted, the telemetry data could lead to misleading analysis or setups based solely on feel rather than accurate data.
For reference, the default setup specifies a ride height of 70 mm at the front and 95 mm at the rear. When observing the static Suspension Position while the car is stationary in the garage, the values are 67.2 mm (front) and 94.6 mm (rear)—which aligns closely with the expected static ride height pattern seen in other cars.
However, the Static Ride Height graph reports values of 156.2 mm (front) and 200.0 mm (rear). Notably, the ride height never exceeds 200 mm during telemetry logging —it only compresses from that point. This discrepancy suggests the telemetry may be scaled or offset incorrectly.
I reported the issue on the official forum long time ago, but I believe my explanation may have been hindered by a language barrier (as I'm Brazilian). Unfortunately, the response indicated that fixing this was considered a very low priority.

[Reviewed and enhanced by Copilot]

 

I removed the section about what does it have to do with the RSR, because I wasn't fully aware at the time that this was the physics thread, and thought it was about the RSR. Sorry about that.

But the MoTeC doesn't show the same character for other cars that are similar in build. In fact I don't think I ever saw anything like it anywhere else.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachme...b4aa8e3a30eb75f9dfed304f07beef2641178bd946c6&

 

So, @newtonpg may be on to something, then, about a telemetry error? The car drives so well, it is difficult to believe it is so far off kilter.

 

It is perplexing, but I keep coming back to the question of why only this car?
This same car in two other games does not exhibit the anomaly, and no other car in AMS2 that I have seen has this anomaly.
And additionally, none of the other readings are shown as odd, only when the pitching and squatting occurs.
If the telemetry was offset or not calibrated, or if there was something questionable about the MoTeC data, then all the data would exhibit some odd behaviors throughout the whole range of data displays.
I can’t really prove anything, but I also can’t explain it either, except that I only see it on this car.

 

Unfortunately, that's not my opinion. Ams2 doesn't always improve; sometimes it even gets worse due to physics updates or FFB changes. There are many things in Ams2 that simply don't work correctly. There's plenty of evidence from people who understand it. But it's ignored or immediately vehemently defended because it's their preferred simulation. However, I still like Ams2 a lot, but there are simulations with fewer anomalies or classes (GT3) that clearly work better. That's why I personally select and only take what I like, and get the rest from other simulations.

The car seems to constantly be running at the end of its suspension travel. Or in other words: It's constantly traveling on the bump stop of the spring.

 

Or has packers, which aren't visible / adjustable on AMS2 setup, but it doesn't mean they couldn't be part of the simulation.

 

I'm only referring to the video I saw. To judge it, I would have to drive the car and feel it, only then can I definitively judge.