rec.autos.simulators

by **Byron Forbe** » Fri, 24 Apr 1998 04:00:00

> % > I would think that the linear setting will apply to the brakes and
> % > accelerater if on an axis.

> % It hasn't in past Papy sims, so I would imagine that it wouldn't in
> % GPL either...

> Well, since they are doing a much better job now with the braking and
> acceleration physics, I think it's time that they look into a linear
> adjustment for these all too important inputs. Braking and acceleration
> control are just as important (and sometimes more important) than
> steering.

Two things on this. As with the steering I find the brakes and Acc
fine. I suppose being able to adjust linearity of brakes is ok but I
would think the Acc should be the same for everyone as in a real car ie
a certain amount of depression = a certain amount of throttle opening.
The brakes off course are a very different story.

by **Jim Sokolof** » Fri, 24 Apr 1998 04:00:00

> Two things on this. As with the steering I find the brakes and Acc
> fine. I suppose being able to adjust linearity of brakes is ok but I
> would think the Acc should be the same for everyone as in a real car ie
> a certain amount of depression = a certain amount of throttle opening.
> The brakes off course are a very different story.

Speaking as a mechanical engineer, I assure you that it's quite easy
to devise a mechanical throttle linkage that has any degree of
linearity desired. (In fact, of the major analog controls to a
racecar, throttle is the easiest to adjust the linearity of to suit
the driver.)

Inserting a cam into the linkage to vary the relationship between
pedal and butterfly is quite easy; drive-by-wire obviously makes it
*that* much easier.

As to whether that *needs* to be user-adjustable, I can't say other
than I'm happy with what's present. But, it could be adjusted to suit
the driver, even in 1967.

---Jim

by **Byron Forbe** » Sat, 25 Apr 1998 04:00:00

> > Two things on this. As with the steering I find the brakes and Acc
> > fine. I suppose being able to adjust linearity of brakes is ok but I
> > would think the Acc should be the same for everyone as in a real car ie
> > a certain amount of depression = a certain amount of throttle opening.
> > The brakes off course are a very different story.

> Speaking as a mechanical engineer, I assure you that it's quite easy
> to devise a mechanical throttle linkage that has any degree of
> linearity desired. (In fact, of the major analog controls to a
> racecar, throttle is the easiest to adjust the linearity of to suit
> the driver.)

> Inserting a cam into the linkage to vary the relationship between
> pedal and butterfly is quite easy; drive-by-wire obviously makes it
> *that* much easier.

> As to whether that *needs* to be user-adjustable, I can't say other
> than I'm happy with what's present. But, it could be adjusted to suit
> the driver, even in 1967.

Good point. I never thought of that. I guess this highlights the
difference between a fully fledged Mech Eng and one who dropped out of
same course 2 years in :)
My setup gives me the impression that power comes in big time over
the last 1/4 of acc pedal travel which I would imagine is a good
representation of the peaky engines of the time. No probs here.

by **Jonny Hodgso** » Sat, 25 Apr 1998 04:00:00

> > Two things on this. As with the steering I find the brakes and Acc
> > fine. I suppose being able to adjust linearity of brakes is ok but I
> > would think the Acc should be the same for everyone as in a real car ie
> > a certain amount of depression = a certain amount of throttle opening.
> > The brakes off course are a very different story.

> Speaking as a mechanical engineer, I assure you that it's quite easy
> to devise a mechanical throttle linkage that has any degree of
> linearity desired. (In fact, of the major analog controls to a
> racecar, throttle is the easiest to adjust the linearity of to suit
> the driver.)

> Inserting a cam into the linkage to vary the relationship between
> pedal and butterfly is quite easy; drive-by-wire obviously makes it
> *that* much easier.

> As to whether that *needs* to be user-adjustable, I can't say other
> than I'm happy with what's present. But, it could be adjusted to suit
> the driver, even in 1967.

It *is* adjusted on F1s these days to suit each driver's preference, as a
matter of course. I've also noticed the difference driving my 'new'
(secondhand) road car (a C-reg Cavalier) which has a very aggressive
throttle curve - my previous transport has had a much softer response. I
seriously considered re-engineering the linkage, but I'm getting used to
it and I don't think I can be bothered!

rec.autos.simulators

GPL inputs need low sensitivity zones like GP2

GPL inputs need low sensitivity zones like GP2

GPL inputs need low sensitivity zones like GP2

GPL inputs need low sensitivity zones like GP2

GPL inputs need low sensitivity zones like GP2