• "Mwoah" - Kimi Räikkönen
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Dear Guest. Follow RaceDepartment on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Twitch, Steam and YouTube.

Assetto Corsa with Evotek 027 F1 Simulator tested by Andrea Montermini

Discussion in 'Assetto Corsa' started by electriclife, May 6, 2017.

  1. electriclife

    electriclife

    Messages:
    3
    Ratings:
    +5
    Andrea Montermini testing the Evotek Formula1 simulator at SPA Francorchamps for one of his future races. Montermini just won the Pirelli World Challenge SpintX race at the Virginia International Raceway in the USA, in him Ferrari 488 GT3. Evotek 027 is, bar none, the best simulator on the market, created meticulously by ex Ferrari F1 Engineers, the same that created paddle shifting and active suspensions. Andrea Montermini raced in Formula one with several teams before moving to GT Racing.
     
    • Like Like x 5
  2. Andreas Knöpke

    Andreas Knöpke
    Let's drive side by side! Premium

    Messages:
    1,092
    Ratings:
    +358
    A guy in a simulator... not that impressive.
     
  3. electriclife

    electriclife

    Messages:
    3
    Ratings:
    +5
    Training for real racing. He just won a race...Maybe simulation really helps
     
  4. David Dominguez

    David Dominguez
    Premium

    Messages:
    2,568
    Ratings:
    +1,558
    Driving the F1 car with TC and ABS and barely keeping the car under control, not sure if that says much about "the best simulator on the market".
     
    • Like Like x 2
  5. electriclife

    electriclife

    Messages:
    3
    Ratings:
    +5
    David, you're merely referring to the software, which is fully customizable and can be turn on and off those functions through the many switches on the steering wheel. That's a choice of the pilot, not the simulator, nor the software (Assetto corsa in this case). Most likely the pilot needed those settings for a good reason. As far as the sim goes, still the most refined simulator out there, they're just way ahead of everything else of similar value. Anything comparable will need to have another zero in the price. Extended experience in F1, production cars like Ferrari (And many more) and top notch engineering can only lead to certain results, rather than assembling a bunch of hardware randomly and with little knowledge.
     
  6. Uff

    Uff

    Messages:
    187
    Ratings:
    +53
    Have you ever driven one of those sims? Because, honestly, I think you're just overrating them. They're nice, but considering the price they sell the whole package you can find much better simulators at a way lower price.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Frapp Lee

    Frapp Lee

    Messages:
    123
    Ratings:
    +22
    As far as better simulators go - rf2 smokes AC hands down. AC is better looking than rf2, But the driving is no where up to rf2 levels. I own both and both are good for different reasons. But, for simulating driving - rf2, hands... down...
     
    • Haha Haha x 4
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Albert McSaltens

    Albert McSaltens

    Messages:
    528
    Ratings:
    +513
    not only that but looks to me like the motion of the cokpit, is always late to what the software is doing, looks to me like very decieving. i would prefer that motion turn off
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  9. David Dominguez

    David Dominguez
    Premium

    Messages:
    2,568
    Ratings:
    +1,558
    That too, at least for what I see visually, it looks like the motion, instead of giving more feedback, makes driving way harder.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Frapp Lee

    Frapp Lee

    Messages:
    123
    Ratings:
    +22
    The fanboys laugh!
     
  11. JoelGL

    JoelGL

    Messages:
    1,120
    Ratings:
    +82
    At 3:30, why doesn't he turn DRS on? :)
     
  12. Frapp Lee

    Frapp Lee

    Messages:
    123
    Ratings:
    +22
    To the people that laugh at my assertion that rF2 is a better driving simulator... don't confuse immersion with simulation. Fact, rFactor Pro has been used by F1 teams and many other teams in many other series of racing. Is it possible that, just maybe, the developers utilized the data generated by many, many professional racing teams, from many different series since 2005 to make a"better sim"? Or, did they just say - "to Hell with it!". I don't mean to be a smart-ass, I ask this from a point of being enlightened - how widely is AC used by pro teams as opposed to rF2?

    https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/36h7df/what_simulators_do_the_f1_teams_use/

    This even states that rF2 shares a lot of code with rFactor Pro.

    http://community.bugbeargames.com/index.php?topic=8710.0

    Just a little reading to do before you laugh.
     
  13. Michael Hornbuckle

    Michael Hornbuckle

    Messages:
    2,661
    Ratings:
    +2,412
    :rolleyes:
     
  14. Uff

    Uff

    Messages:
    187
    Ratings:
    +53
    Don't be surprised if people laugh at your message. First, you claim that one sim is better than the other based purely on your taste, no real data. Then you bring to the discussion rF Pro, which definitely has little to share with the standard version: if you expect F1 team to use the same 40€ software we use... well, good luck. :rolleyes: The base code might be similar, but professional team then replaces it with their own model and usually real components too.

    Add to this that in orded to support your assertion you link a couple of random links found on the web, where there are zero FACTS about one sim being better than the other (the second one end with the magnificent message "To the earlier comment from rallysmo about everything being a MOD. Why not? Better than everything being an $8.00 - $15.00 DLC purchase". :speechless:).

    I'm sure ISI (or probably the team who developed the professional softwate) got a lot of useful data from teams that uses rF Pro and helped them in developing it, in the same way Kunos got proper feedback from Ferrari engineers while developing Ferrari Virtual Academy before, AC then. Or from Dallara, or from the F1 team they developed the simulator for in the past.

    Each sim has its point of strenght and weakness: I see people claiming that rF2 is the best sim ever, yet they run endurance races with modded cars with no ERS systems, let alone a proper simulation of how the real AIDs work on the car (while in AC you can also set different traction control for front and rear tyres, just as an example). Many rF2 supporters claim that the sim's tyre model is better than anything else, then you find out that there is no sign of graining and blistering simulation like instead AC has.
    In the same way, rF2 takes advantage of the fact of being an evolution of something that already existed (rF1), with additional feature like chassis flex that AC is missing (as far as I know).

    Now, going back to topic, I think that the delay in the motion system might be related to the video recording: when I tried the Evotek simulator I didn't notice any major delay. The movement wasn't very noticeable, but was working properly. I had a similar feeling while watching a video recorded with a D-Box system: the video always seemed to be "late" compared to the driving, even if during my test I didn't have this feeling.
     
  15. Frapp Lee

    Frapp Lee

    Messages:
    123
    Ratings:
    +22
    Maybe you should re-read what I said. "I own both and both are good for different reasons. But, for simulating driving - rf2, hands... down..." rF2 takes into account many more variables than AC, It does share code with rF Pro and I believe ISI may have actually learned a thing or two from having so many F1 teams and other series use rF Pro. Ferrari F1 team uses rF Pro And as far as your assertion of no graining or blistering...
     

    Attached Files:

    • Haha Haha x 2
  16. Frapp Lee

    Frapp Lee

    Messages:
    123
    Ratings:
    +22
    GRAB_023.JPG
     

    Attached Files:

  17. Uff

    Uff

    Messages:
    187
    Ratings:
    +53
    lol If you're not able to distinguish between a graphic effect and a physical one, calculated by the physic engine... Well, that tells enough about your knowledge.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. Frapp Lee

    Frapp Lee

    Messages:
    123
    Ratings:
    +22
    Wow! No need to be the north end of a southward headed dog! Honestly, how much time have you spent with rF2? If you had spent even an hour you wouldn't be acting like such an ass. Obviously your an AC fanboy, so I will withdraw from this thread. I stated that I had both, that I thought both were good for different reasons and you obviously feel the need to be abrasive. Your the man Uff, your the man. Limited set up options in garage(some that don't even work), limited set options for steering wheel and limited FFB set up options, auto clutch(you can't even stall a car when you loop it) and no pit lane speed limiter would obviously make AC the better sim. Fan boys unite! A.M.F.!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Uff

    Uff

    Messages:
    187
    Ratings:
    +53
    I've been owning almost every sim released in the past 17 years: does this make my opinion more trustworthy then yours? No, if I state something false. You posted a couple of screens that have nothing to do with graining nor blistering, they just show visual tyre degradation (exactly like netKar Pro did, for the record). No one is attacking you, if you can't accept someone to make you notice you're wrong... well, probably you should not post on a forum. :rolleyes:
    I always love how people react when they have no fact to bring into the discussion and can't simply admit they were wrong on a subject (tyre behavior on two different sims), so they move the discussion to a completely different argument that was never talked about. Ace. :D
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. henrisal

    henrisal

    Messages:
    11
    Ratings:
    +2
    Talking about fan boys you came to AC area/AC article spreading your own opinions how "rf2 smokes AC hands down". :laugh:
     
    • Agree Agree x 2