What Is the Point of Safety Cars in Sim Racing?

Safety_Car_in_Sim_Racing_1024.jpg
In the real world of motorsport, Safety Cars are essential to neutralise the racing. Marshals are out on track to retrieve debris or stationary cars, after all. But since that is not the case in the virtual world, are Safety Cars needed in sim racing?

Last week, many of the top F1 Esports drivers were competing in Round 12 of PSGL's top PC tier. During the pitstop window, some of the drivers had pitted before one of them crashed, which brought out a safety car.

This resulted in the drivers who had not pitted gaining a load of free positions. Ferrari driver and reigning PSGL champion Bari Broumand finished third behind his main rival Jarno Opmeer, and tweeted his frustrations after the race.


That got us thinking. Why even have the safety car enabled at all?

Breaking Immersion​

Sim racing is, of course, attempting to replicate real racing. As a result, the argument can be made that removing the need of a safety car would break the immersion. Of course, with many people in sim racing who want to get as close to the real thing as possible, it is an essential part.

But unlike pitstops, tyre wear, fuel usage, and even weather to a certain degree, it is very imbalanced as to how it affects people’s races. It’s a necessary evil though in the real world, and assuming the rules are applied correctly, can be chalked up to “that’s just part of racing”.


However, in that aforementioned PSGL race, when the driver crashed out, their car just instantly despawned. So the only purpose the safety car serves is to neutralise the race to protect the non-existent marshalls.

It just feels completely unnecessary as it tends to randomly benefit some and ruin the races of others.

Where It Works​

This is not to say there are no situations that do not warrant a safety car in sim racing. A slow moving car trying to return to the pits under its own power, or a stationary car or big pile up with no quick de-spawning are examples in online races. But what about single player?

If you play an F1 game career mode and you have mechanical failures enabled, drivers can stop or be slow on the racing line. Having parts fail on a racing game can be annoying, since it is unavoidable in the real world. But it is seemingly a randomised function in sim racing.


So whilst many people like the immersion, it is safe to say the vast majority of sim racers are there to enjoy some competition. If any competitive environment can bypass a feature that is not unavoidable for the sake of fairness, it should do that.

Plus with someone’s internet connection essentially acting as a potential equivalent for mechanical failures in sim racing, who should also have to worry about an engine randomly blowing up?

Conclusion​

As unpopular an opinion this might be, sim racing does not need to fully replicate everything in real racing. Unless iRacing and the F1 games can add marshalls that behave like actual humans to remove each individual piece of debris over a period of laps, it can be removed altogether.

Of course, there is the added element of bunching the field back up to go back racing. But then why not just throw a competition caution? They do it in a lot of American-based motorsports. State a designated period of time for when a caution will come out, so the drivers can time any pitstops they have.


Of course, that runs the risk of creating artificial racing and not letting the race run naturally. Overall, it’s a slippery slope with no definitive correct answer. It all comes down to whether one wants to part with some immersion for the sake of fairness.

But in high level competitive championships with prize money on the line for example, safety cars just don’t serve any purpose other than to shake up the natural order like a Mario Kart race.

Do you think safety cars are needed in sim racing? Are there any surprises to you? Let us know on Twitter @OverTake_gg or in the comments below!
  • Angry
Reactions: Andy_J
About author
Luca [OT]
Biggest sim racing esports fan in the world.

Comments

I like the safety car in league racing, simply because it acts as a wildcard.

On some tracks you will strategise around the posibility of a SC.

I remember one race I was expecting it to come out early and went with soft tyres so I could change to hard and take them to the end (where I race, 2 different compounds must be used), leveraging the few extra laps at low speed with the SC. In the end, people behaved, and no SC came out, I was stuck in a strategy that wasn't optimal.

The opposite can happen too where opportunities arise. Sometimes it is unfair to you, sometimes it gives you an edge.

This is why I love having SC in league racing, I love the wildcard it can be, and I'd argue it is part of racing.

However I'm against so called "Sportsmanship Safety Car" or "Competition Caution", who's sole purpose is to bunch up the field, and are nothing but a gimmic that punishes people having a good race.
 
Last edited:
I think most of us would agree it'd be a good feature to be able to switch fcy, safety cars, red flags etc. on and off, that way everyone would get the game they want. I guess sensible choice is what most players want, i.e. not the choice between different types of virtual racing gloves but the choice to construct the racing environment you and your peers would love to play in, let each group/individual decide for themselves, but developers should try to give us a choice.
 
This seems to be the week of RD hot takes. RD should be all in for hardcore realism, but it is starting to feel like catering to casual gaming simracing. RD as of late seems to want simracing dumbed down so the market can grow.

How many times all of us have been in a server and we have seen that after a crash of after the first laps people at the back of the pecking order start exiting the server because they no longer have hopes to fight for anything meaningful?, because I have seen this happen hundreds of times.

If we had safety cars some of those people would kept on the server in the hope of a safety car that could put them back in contention. Safety cars are a key part of real life racing and for some reason developers have massively failed us in representing it properly or at all in simracing.

I find that it is a very big fail to simracing to allow competitors during any session to park the car on the side of the track and go intermediately teleported to the pits ready to go back to the track when it isn't a race session.

Come on!, that totally breaks immersion and it is frustrating to other people trying to have fun, it should have an animation of the marshals recovering the car from the track, and a safety car or red flag deployed for it.

If you want to go back to the pits you should be forced to either physically go back to the pits the realistic way or park the car out of the track near to a marshall post and then have the car recovered by the marshals.

But there is the catch in having the car recovered by the marshals: the marshals need time to physically recover your car put your car in a crane and to the crane to a truck that goes back to the pits, making you loose at least 20 or 25 minutes of the session for it.

I find it fair to the other competitors that had to endure yellow or red flags due of someone being lazy in non wanting to go back to the pits in a realistic way. If this happens in a race or in a qualifying session it should be like in real life: instantly the session is over to you as the car can't be recovered.

Developers also have failed us massively in not creating a damage model capable of truly put a car out of a race due to mechanic failures due to crashes and off track excursions, not mechanic friendly failures like a missing gear, or a radiator opening badly picked in the setup options being too small for the temperature conditions overheating the engine and forcing the driver to either lower the revs or risking an engine blow up.

I find it pathetic that it took so long for a top simracing title as big as ACC to have functional pit animations when GP4 in 2002 had marshals animations recovering cars beached on the gravel or crashed cars.

GP4 even had animations for the car mechanics recovering the car from the pitlane putting the car in the pit box and jacking up the car to put it over supports while other mechanic put a tv screen over the car cockpit as in a real F1 qualifying session.

We have went backwards in some ways in simracing, we should even have animated crowd and varying amounts of crowd changing between sessions and tracks, we lack immersion and atmosphere.

Developers went crazy behind physics, laser scanned tracks, modding and graphics, but they forgot immersion in the process. It would do them and us good to revisit how games of old outdid in some aspects modern titles like F1 challenge and GTR let you pick your radiator and brake air intake openings at your own peril.

How much more immersive GP4 was in terms of atmosphere, animations, weather predictions and track drying. We also had Viper Racing that had soft body damage in 1998!, Richard Burns Rally had a realistic ruthless car damage model, but we don't have it in simracing because it could hurt the feelings of someone to have to be pull out of the race for a small contact that damaged the radiator.

RD and simracing should strive to improve realism, not dumbing down simracing to make it more popular and thus commercially profitable. End of the rant.
Indeed, damage modelling is a crucial aspect of simracing which has been forgotten by developpers for years. If it was done properly, that discussion would not exist, because racers would see visually the result of a crash, with debris everywhere to avoid because it would be dangerous to hit them. It is not impossible to do that in modern games, Codemasters has been doing it for many years, and even for independant developpers : Wreckfest did it years ago and BeamNG is brillant (imo the future of simracing).

Simracing developpers have been focusing on tires modelling and graphics for years, dropping crucial features of the sport. While the improvements in the graphics are obvious, those in the physics area are less impressive at the end as the level of complexity has made physics refinement difficult and then brought a major issue : time consuming development.

Developpers should stop trying to sell new groundbraking physics and tire models. They've been doing that for years and they've just been making half games. I don't think simracers expect better physics, but better everything else, absolutely. We won't get better sims if we start to ask for even less than what we have in the current titles.
 
Commenting as a mostly offline sim racer, I welcome anything that adds a bit of randomness/unfairness to the proceedings. My biggest gripe with modern sim racing titles is how boring they are as single player experiences...and it doesn't need to be this way. I want to see more mechanical failures, spins, crashes, mistakes (sometimes leading to safety cars)...anything to add chaos that means every race isn't a lights-to-flag victory for the AI driver that qualifies fastest.

I feel like these sims are so focused on the online experience and everything being 100% fair that they've become too clinical and not particularly good at representing the unpredictability and chaos of a race day. I have to go back to games from the 90s for that e.g. Geoff Crammond's Grand Prix.
 
Last edited:
I think most of us would agree it'd be a good feature to be able to switch fcy, safety cars, red flags etc. on and off, that way everyone would get the game they want

rFactor2 has 4 options for flags and 4 options for track limits.

What I don't see the point of is having one version of a sim can go from full arcade to full pro which is what rFactor2 does trying to please everyone.

Instead all sims should have 2 versions, PRO and AMA.
So you know where you stand, buy Pro version is real life there are no on and off switches.
UI 500% less complicated. No settings to change.
If you want a auto clutch or you don't have pedals then buy the AMA version.

Think about it, majority of crazy drivers won't waste their hard earned on PRO to stuff around on open servers. :sneaky:
 
Premium
I like the safety car in league racing, simply because it acts as a wildcard.

On some tracks you will strategise around the posibility of a SC.

I remember one race I was expecting it to come out early and went with soft tyres so I could change to hard and take them to the end (where I race, 2 different compounds must be used), leveraging the few extra laps at low speed with the SC. In the end, people behaved, and no SC came out, I was stuck in a strategy that wasn't optimal.

The opposite can happen too where opportunities arise. Sometimes it is unfair to you, sometimes it gives you an edge.

This is why I love having SC in league racing, I love the wildcard it can be, and I'd argue it is part of racing.

However I'm against so called "Sportsmanship Safety Car" or "Competition Caution", who's sole purpose is to bunch up the field, and are nothing but a gimmic that punishes people having a good race.
The fact is, if you or you chosen car... and indeed your team (if all realism is implemented) are too slow, then the safety car might be the only hope of a better result, some say "any one you walk away from is a win"... it depends how you pla enjoy your racing.
 
Developpers should stop trying to sell new groundbraking physics and tire models. They've been doing that for years and they've just been making half games. I don't think simracers expect better physics, but better everything else, absolutely. We won't get better sims if we start to ask for even less than what we have in the current titles.
I wholeheartedly agree with your complete post, but the part in bold puts in words something what I have been having on the back of my mind for almost a decade, maybe more. Even ACC that has laser focus feels incomplete or crude in some aspects that at first glance seem irrelevant, ACC is now what it should have been in early access.

Original AC as brilliant as it was, always felt half made: the IA, the lack of matchmaking, the offline experience feels very rudimentary and crude, almost place holder. It is almost as if the game design phase went all in in physics, moddability, graphics engine and and coder porn that would blow fellow coders minds, but none of us is going to notice.

It feels as if the dev team was totally disregarding the user experience small details and non core game features because of the absolute lack of manpower and the over-reliance on Stefano.

And I speculate that Stefano was somehow the firefighter of the company at that time, always putting down fires from other coders and coding mostly what no other coder in the company could in a fast amount of time and what he felt challenging, rewarding and interesting to him as a coder.

The bad side or relying on a genius is that he is also human and can't do the entire game by himself, so in order to release the game in time the rest of the features had to be very rudimentary or disregarded. He fixed the absolute abysmal IA in ACC in his spare time after he left kunos in I don't remember if it was only 2 or 3 weeks, that is proof that he was working his ass in more core features not having the time to put work in other small features all that time until he left kunos.

I know that Stefano did most of the coding of AC, so I'm sure that he was in charge of all the core features that blew my mind with that game. Come on!, he must have been behind the in game moddable apps, the guy is a genius, one of the best simracing developers ever. But then the small features that don't need a genius feel hollow and crude.

Geoff Crammond did quite the opposite in the grand prix games: he took small side features, atmosphere, music and user experience up-to eleven while he disregarded the physics engine and the game controller configuration was a nightmare. My wet dream would be those two geniuses working together without budget limitations and with an army of developers backing them up. And then you have iracing that went up-to eleven with everything, but the price we had to pay for ti was to much, software as a service is a price I'm totally opposed on principal.

I have only talked about kunos because that developer team is the one I know the best, but I believe that any other simracing developer team must have the similar challenges as them.

I believe that the problem with this half made games in simracing is that as the complexity of development grew the size of the niche didn't, so the size of the developers crew kept frozen and with limited development time and limited manpower they have been forced to focus on the core features that make the main game experience work. I don't blame them, I'm sure that they think that it sucks as much as me, they simply can't do more.

But it sucks anyways, every game should start from the base of the previous game and add more new features instead of what from our point of view feels like reinventing the wheel with every new game. But I believe that this is the kind of things that are quite easy to say and incredibly hard to make reality. Manpower is limited.
 
Premium
This seems to be the week of RD hot takes. RD should be all in for hardcore realism, but it is starting to feel like catering to casual gaming simracing. RD as of late seems to want simracing dumbed down so the market can grow.

How many times all of us have been in a server and we have seen that after a crash of after the first laps people at the back of the pecking order start exiting the server because they no longer have hopes to fight for anything meaningful?, because I have seen this happen hundreds of times.

If we had safety cars some of those people would kept on the server in the hope of a safety car that could put them back in contention. Safety cars are a key part of real life racing and for some reason developers have massively failed us in representing it properly or at all in simracing.

I find that it is a very big fail to simracing to allow competitors during any session to park the car on the side of the track and go intermediately teleported to the pits ready to go back to the track when it isn't a race session.

Come on!, that totally breaks immersion and it is frustrating to other people trying to have fun, it should have an animation of the marshals recovering the car from the track, and a safety car or red flag deployed for it.

If you want to go back to the pits you should be forced to either physically go back to the pits the realistic way or park the car out of the track near to a marshall post and then have the car recovered by the marshals.

But there is the catch in having the car recovered by the marshals: the marshals need time to physically recover your car put your car in a crane and to the crane to a truck that goes back to the pits, making you loose at least 20 or 25 minutes of the session for it.

I find it fair to the other competitors that had to endure yellow or red flags due of someone being lazy in non wanting to go back to the pits in a realistic way. If this happens in a race or in a qualifying session it should be like in real life: instantly the session is over to you as the car can't be recovered.

Developers also have failed us massively in not creating a damage model capable of truly put a car out of a race due to mechanic failures due to crashes and off track excursions, not mechanic friendly failures like a missing gear, or a radiator opening badly picked in the setup options being too small for the temperature conditions overheating the engine and forcing the driver to either lower the revs or risking an engine blow up.

I find it pathetic that it took so long for a top simracing title as big as ACC to have functional pit animations when GP4 in 2002 had marshals animations recovering cars beached on the gravel or crashed cars.

GP4 even had animations for the car mechanics recovering the car from the pitlane putting the car in the pit box and jacking up the car to put it over supports while other mechanic put a tv screen over the car cockpit as in a real F1 qualifying session.

We have went backwards in some ways in simracing, we should even have animated crowd and varying amounts of crowd changing between sessions and tracks, we lack immersion and atmosphere.

Developers went crazy behind physics, laser scanned tracks, modding and graphics, but they forgot immersion in the process. It would do them and us good to revisit how games of old outdid in some aspects modern titles like F1 challenge and GTR let you pick your radiator and brake air intake openings at your own peril.

How much more immersive GP4 was in terms of atmosphere, animations, weather predictions and track drying. We also had Viper Racing that had soft body damage in 1998!, Richard Burns Rally had a realistic ruthless car damage model, but we don't have it in simracing because it could hurt the feelings of someone to have to be pull out of the race for a small contact that damaged the radiator.

RD and simracing should strive to improve realism, not dumbing down simracing to make it more popular and thus commercially profitable. End of the rant.
And that should have been the news article.

I wholeheartedly agree, I think its time that the entire physics debate gets shelved as they all do a pretty damn good job of it, and that devs work on bringing us a more fully featured racing experience.
 
Safety cars are an important part of real world racing (road and oval) and thus should be in sim racing games. End of story. Many of the most upvoted comments express things I agree with!

One thing I don't want, though: a slapdash, badly implemented, or buggy safety car system. For example – issues like not reliably throwing a yellow when needed or not having an option to freeze the field instantly. I wonder if this also might explain some people's frustration: if you've only experienced safety cars that are buggy, unreliable, or missing features, you won't have a high opinion of them!

There are also ways to make safety cars feel less 'artificial' in a virtual environment: for instance, disable instant 'despawn' (that is, 'return to garage') and have realistic, nasty gravel traps that can bog down cars, leaving them stranded.
 
Last edited:
Because the "marshall" was just a two-frame sprite attached to the car as it slowly ascended towards the skies lifted by an invisible hand.
Imagine if technology never improved: we would be stuck with 3dfx Voodoo graphic cards and Pentium PCs.
NOBODY after Geoff Crammond took that road of creating a realistic environment in racing sims. Now, in 2023, we have UE5.x and RTX graphic cards, which means a quantum leap in software and hardware technology. If we want a racing simulation to be realistic, then someone has to resume what Geoff Crammond did back in the day, and take it to the next level. At least I would love to see someone trying to do it. Geoff dared to do it, it doesn't matter if that was a sprite, he did it and the result was cool back then.
 
Last edited:
I wholeheartedly agree with your complete post, but the part in bold puts in words something what I have been having on the back of my mind for almost a decade, maybe more. Even ACC that has laser focus feels incomplete or crude in some aspects that at first glance seem irrelevant, ACC is now what it should have been in early access.

Original AC as brilliant as it was, always felt half made: the IA, the lack of matchmaking, the offline experience feels very rudimentary and crude, almost place holder. It is almost as if the game design phase went all in in physics, moddability, graphics engine and and coder porn that would blow fellow coders minds, but none of us is going to notice.

It feels as if the dev team was totally disregarding the user experience small details and non core game features because of the absolute lack of manpower and the over-reliance on Stefano.

And I speculate that Stefano was somehow the firefighter of the company at that time, always putting down fires from other coders and coding mostly what no other coder in the company could in a fast amount of time and what he felt challenging, rewarding and interesting to him as a coder.

The bad side or relying on a genius is that he is also human and can't do the entire game by himself, so in order to release the game in time the rest of the features had to be very rudimentary or disregarded. He fixed the absolute abysmal IA in ACC in his spare time after he left kunos in I don't remember if it was only 2 or 3 weeks, that is proof that he was working his ass in more core features not having the time to put work in other small features all that time until he left kunos.

I know that Stefano did most of the coding of AC, so I'm sure that he was in charge of all the core features that blew my mind with that game. Come on!, he must have been behind the in game moddable apps, the guy is a genius, one of the best simracing developers ever. But then the small features that don't need a genius feel hollow and crude.

Geoff Crammond did quite the opposite in the grand prix games: he took small side features, atmosphere, music and user experience up-to eleven while he disregarded the physics engine and the game controller configuration was a nightmare. My wet dream would be those two geniuses working together without budget limitations and with an army of developers backing them up. And then you have iracing that went up-to eleven with everything, but the price we had to pay for ti was to much, software as a service is a price I'm totally opposed on principal.

I have only talked about kunos because that developer team is the one I know the best, but I believe that any other simracing developer team must have the similar challenges as them.

I believe that the problem with this half made games in simracing is that as the complexity of development grew the size of the niche didn't, so the size of the developers crew kept frozen and with limited development time and limited manpower they have been forced to focus on the core features that make the main game experience work. I don't blame them, I'm sure that they think that it sucks as much as me, they simply can't do more.

But it sucks anyways, every game should start from the base of the previous game and add more new features instead of what from our point of view feels like reinventing the wheel with every new game. But I believe that this is the kind of things that are quite easy to say and incredibly hard to make reality. Manpower is limited.
I thknk these small companies has just been skipping the market survey part for many years, making games mainly to flatter their ego, not for the customers. So they've been trying to reinvent the wheel each time. By chance the offer is so small that these games meet customers. As simracers, we don't have many choices, we have tobaccept these half games.

As you stated, some strong and talented individuals are involved in these different projects but may have too much of a presence, being misused or having too much decision power. These "genius" are generally hard people to work with and usually forget strategy considerations, which can explain why we've been bored by these half games for years.

Iracing is a good example of a successful strategy, not focusing on modernizing aspects the other sims are all trying to modernize. I think the infamous MSG, which has made the mistake of underestimating the difficulty of simracing development, has been doing a good job with S397, now leading to a potential great title, Le Mans Ultimate. These strategies do not rely on geniuses abilities, each one his own.

It is hard to understand why simracing is still a narrow vision business ; publishers seem blind, although AC sold more than 25 millions copies. With such a potential, these titles should not rely on genius individuals who tend to be victims of obsession instead of understanding what simracers need.

Geoff Grammond was a genius as he has created a need and answered it, and he was also backed by the most famous sim company of that time Microprose : development, communcation, strategy, everything was there. Different times, a genius backed by a solid company. This has been lacking in the simracing genre for years, except for Dirt Rally games, which may be now being often criticized, were praised by all the community.

AC is also a good example of an opportunistic strategy success linked with a "genius". Simracers were expecting a new rfactor and AC delivered a downgrade clone with amazing graphics. It was a time simracers were expecting a new step in that department. And we agreed on that game proposal. The right proposal on the right time, absolutely obsolete few years later. It was a specific case with chance, it won't happen again.

There's a lesson to learn from all of these experiences. The most crucial one is to be able to say "no"
 
Premium
if you really want to simulate real GT3, you need to have safety car, intended that they are unable to do more than 3 laps in a row without a crash.

That said , i would be curieuse to see how it would work. Just think of rolling start of ACC with real contact enabled !!
 
Imagine if technology never improved: we would be stuck with 3dfx Voodoo graphic cards and Pentium PCs.
NOBODY after Geoff Crammond took that road of creating a realistic environment in racing sims. Now, in 2023, we have UE5.x and RTX graphic cards, which means a quantum leap in software and hardware technology. If we want a racing simulation to be realistic, then someone has to resume what Geoff Crammond did back in the day, and take it to the next level. At least I would love to see someone trying to do it. Geoff dared to do it, it doesn't matter if that was a sprite, he did it and the result was cool back then.
You could argue (and some people do) that the increase in graphical fidelity has actually made racing games worse over time. Devs have to spend resources on 3D modelling, motion capturing driver and track marshall models, high-resolution textures, rain animation and FX, and a bunch of other stuff that doesn't fundamentally make for a better game or a better simulation of motor racing.

Geoff Crammond could do it alone in his shed because back then a single person could write a physics engine and a graphics engine and do a whole bunch of other stuff that these days would require a dev team of dozens of people. It's quite clear most racing sim devs are severely constrained by the lack of resources and can't realistically do all these things that we would all love to see in our games.
 
Last edited:
Was it Ken Levine who said of game design "if reality ever gets in the way of fun, then choose fun every time"?
I know many are purist sim-racers but for me this is a leisure activity where I want to always come away having smiled, enjoyed and challenged myself. I am not doing a sport as a pro, I am doing it ala the fat guy playing novice level football before going the pub with his teammates on a Sunday afternoon.

So I'd vote for fun. Not Mario Kart, not Forza, but simulate the good stuff - we dont have to simulate the fart in the cockpit. Pick and choose.
 
.. but there is no effort to correlate breakdowns to driving style - you can over-rev the engine at every shift yet have a suspension failure, or vice versa, bounce over the curbs every turn but have an ignition failure..
Assetto Corsa has gearbox damage that increases with every missed gear shift and engine damage that increases every time you over-rev the engine, plus suspension damage where the car "pulls" to one side if you damage the suspension. I think these are actually rather decent, maybe they'd need more polishing, but what is really missing is a proper 3d model damage and debris.
 
OverTake
Premium
Assetto Corsa has gearbox damage that increases with every missed gear shift and engine damage that increases every time you over-rev the engine, plus suspension damage where the car "pulls" to one side if you damage the suspension. I think these are actually rather decent, maybe they'd need more polishing, but what is really missing is a proper 3d model damage and debris.
Adding to this, AMS2 has a fairly interesting damage model not too many seem to know about. If you don't keep an eye on your engine temps, you might provoke an oil leak, leading to an engine failure sooner or later.

Similarly, if you damage your suspension and keep putting stress on the part, it could break later on. Had this happen in a CART race at Fontana: Someone tapped my right rear suspension in the first few laps, but apart from the steering being a bit out of whack, the car was still fine. Until the right rear just let go in the middle of turn 3 a lap from the end. As I was spinning towards the wall with my tire flying who knows where, I remember thinking "okay, I'm not even mad, this is pretty cool."

And then there's the time I managed to hook it into second instead of fourth under braking for the first turn at Interlagos in our F1 1991 league about eight laps in. Great start to the season, sitting on the sidelines with a Benetton engulfed in smoke :D
 

Latest News

Article information

Author
Luca Munro
Article read time
3 min read
Views
6,828
Comments
85
Last update

How often do you meet up (IRL) with your simracing friends?

  • Weekly

    Votes: 4 6.7%
  • Monthly

    Votes: 2 3.3%
  • Yearly

    Votes: 5 8.3%
  • Weekly at lan events

    Votes: 1 1.7%
  • Monthly at lan events

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yearly at lan events

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Never have

    Votes: 48 80.0%
Back
Top