rec.autos.simulators

Well, I would tend to agree with Gerry.  Imagine that the steering arc
was reduced to, say 30 degrees in each direction.  Then it would take
superhuman reflexes to put the car precisely where you want to be on
the track because you would almost always turn the wheel a bit too
far.  One would always be oversteering and over-correcting.  So, it
makes sense that a larger steering arc gives more control not less.
The ideal solution would be a large steering arc and a very high
quality potentiometer, thus giving an accurate reading with a greater
margin for error and far more ease in hitting the "point" in question.
The issue is not solely how many points of resolution there are
(clearly more is better because of added precision) the point is
whether you can physically turn the wheel to get as close as possible
to the place on the track you want your car to be.

"Gerry Aitken"  wrote

You'd be turning the steering wheel but the car would stay were it's going
until it hits the next spot. You'd have less  precision.

I said I've tested several wheels and the ones with better resolution always
produced better lap times. There may be a few people that are just such bad
drivers that it won't make any difference, but for everyone else it will.
Capon.  :)

--
Slot

Tweaks & Reviews
www.slottweak.com

You assume you are right by making that statement, which I don't think
you are.

Gerry

Well, maybe you'll never be convinced of this. PDPI was when they came out
with their port as was Act Labs when they sold it in combination with their
RS wheel. TSW, BRD and ECCI are and that's the primary reason they use
higher quality pots. I feel that I'm in good company with the belief.
However, you are as entitled to your opinion as they are to theirs.

--
Slot

Tweaks & Reviews
www.slottweak.com

Sorry not to get back to you sooner, but lately the weekends mean not much
time online.

Any way back to your question. What I was getting at is a larger range in
between the same number of pints. Using your example above the 180 degree
sweep had 1" between points, and the 270 degree sweep wheel had 1.5" between
points. I would think that it would be easier to repeatedly hit that 1.5"
window than the 1" window.

MadDWAWG

Looking forward to the article, but maybe include a few definitions for
the terms that you use. ;-)

BTW a 24 bit DAC  is probably overkill, 12 bit would probably be good
enough if it's not noisy.  For a 270 sweep, 12 bit gives less than
0.066 per point, about 0.01 inch of movement per point for a 9.75 inch
diameter wheel.

Ken

You're right, it's easier to hit........but it's not what you want to do.
Keeping with the example, as you turn your steering wheel, the wheels on
your car turn. They pick up the beginning of each point and stay pointed in
that direction until you hit the next point. Then they turn again. You turn
your steering wheel smoothly, but your car wheels actually turn in steps
(small jumps). They jump from the beginning of one point to the beginning of
the next.
So, let's say you're at the beginning of one of these points and turning
right. Your wheels won't turn again until you hit the next point, 1 1/2" to
your right. What happens if  your target (the apex of a corner or something)
is only 3/4" away, or at a point on the screen somewhere before the wheels
actually turn again? If your points were 1" apart, you'd be closer to
hitting the target you want.
As you're driving down your virtual road, there is an infinite number of
points you could want to steer at, but your wheel only lets you target a few
of them (whether the wheel has 180 or 270 sweep). The more points your
wheel gives you, the easier it will be to go exactly where you want. Both
sweeps give you the same number of points, but 180 keeps them closer
together so more of them will be in the range where you 'usually steer (how
often do you have the steering wheel all the way to the left or right?).
Because the wheel limits the number of points you can aim at, generally
you'll miss the exact apex (or whatever target you're steering at) by a
little bit, or you have to make some little zig-zags (small, almost
unnoticeable corrections) to get to the exact point. Of course, since we act
ually have about 128 points, not 15 as in my example, it's not as bad as my
example makes it seem. There could be reasons why someone might prefer a
270 sweep, but they have more to do with ergonomics than
mechanical/electrical steering precision.
In LFS demo, you can see the wheel sweep and points in the controller setup
page. You can also see how smooth it is when you select 'mouse' to steer
with.

--
Slot

Tweaks & Reviews
www.slottweak.com

It's the "range where you 'usually steer" part that is confusing the
issue.  If everyone used the same amount of sweep then saying that a
270 sweep is less precise than a wheel with 180 sweep would be
correct, however it depends on the amount of  sweep the user actually
uses as to whether or not the wheel is precise or not.

But now a quick question for you Slot:  Does increasing the wheel size
make the wheel less precise?  Say for example you have a 10" wheel with
128 points over a sweep of 180 (and the user uses all of this sweep).
Now the 10" is replaced with 13" wheel and everything stays the same
(180 sweep used by the driver, 128 points).  Obviously with the larger
wheel the user has to move their hands more to get the same input (ie
less sensitive) but the "window" for each point are now bigger and
easier to hit (ie better repeatability).  But has the precision changed?

Ken

I disagree with this part 100%.  The first thing you want to do is be
consistent. After you are repeatable then you can adjust your setups for the
weak areas. If your not consistent you'll never know if you just got lucky
or if your setup change did any good.

'usually steer'  if that is not something a lawyer would love to get his
hands on. :)  However this catch phase does help explain your argument. If
you had a 180 degree wheel with say 180 points that's one point per degree.
Now if you "usually" only use 90 degrees you would then be using 90 of these
points. With that same 90 degrees of usage on a 270 degree wheel (1.5
degrees per point) would have you only using 60 points. In this case I would
agree that a smaller overall angle would provide you with a smoother motion.

right?).

About 4 times a lap or each corner. They don't call it Slideways for
nothing. :)

I would suggest that 'usually steer' is as well a ergonomic issue. If not an
ergonomic issue than an environmental one relating back to what type of
wheel a person first learned on. If you began with a 270 degree wheel your
'usually steer' angle would be greater than someone that was brought up with
a 180 degree wheel. If you were to take your theory to the extreme then a
wheel with only 1 degree of travel would be better yet. Of course you would
need a wheel about 3 foot in diameter so that you could actually tell the
difference between each of those 180 points.  It could even get down to
something as basic as what precise means to each person. To some people it
could mean small movements of wheel providing meaningful changes in game, or
it could have more of a total meaning of being able to hit a given vehicle
steering angle REGARDLESS how much you have to move the game controller. My
guess is you are of the first definition while myself and others are of the
second. Who is right and who is wrong all depends on your point of view.
Hey doesn't GPL have an editor for that? :)

MadDAWG

OK, we're together so far. I can see the light at the end of the tunnel ;-)
And you're agreeing with this because everyone using this 'same' sweep would
have more points of resolution compacted within the sweep and therefore has
a better chance of one of these points lining up with the target he's
steering at, right?

If everyone is using the same sweep and it's X or if everyone is using the
same sweep and it's (X+5), it wouldn't make any difference. As long as
they're using the same sweep, the principle is the same. So, if one group
uses X and another group uses (X+5), the principle is also still the same.

Electrically, no. It still has the same number of points of resolution
within a given amount of rotation. The tangent limits haven't changed.

[side notes...]
I think what's happening is that it wasn't a good idea to break this whole
subject into parts, or at least I should have started with another part
first, but, that's not the way the topic got started. It would have gone
smoother to cover the ergonomics first (covering expected input vs. result
relationships), going to options and limitations in different game
controller setups and then the restricted limits of points of resolution.
You guys are making points about wheel size having a factor, and this is
true. MadDAWG's example of 1 of travel and a 3 foot wheel, while extreme,
is absolutely valid. But, I would like to keep it separate from compressing
points of resolution and keep the wheel size the same for the moment. Then,
discuss the effects of wheel size later.  Again, it would probably have been
better to start with wheel size, but ......
The point about controller setups has also been made. They are valid. Most
games only have a linear to non-linear setting, so you can only slow down
the steering ratio. Wheel lock helps to increase the ratio, but
unfortunately also increases the wheel lock. Then some games, like NFS:PU,
let you set the controls to the opposite extreme as non-linear, which for
lack of a better word, I've called hyper-linear. In NFS:PU, you can have
your wheel or pedals set at each end, so they come on slow (non-linear) go
to a gradual climb (linear), and then come on fast (hyper-linear).
Basically, you can be at full acceleration at 3/4 throttle movement. This
kind of control is ideal, but most games don't have this setting and most of
us only have one steering wheel. We're usually left only with the option of
slowing down the steering ratio. This is one reason why the physical
steering wheel sweep is relevant. For steering, the in-game hyper-linear
setting isn't as linear as a mechanical setting, but it certainly helps. I
stress linear settings for the wheel because we are driving with certain
input/output rules. The rule says if I turn the wheel so much, my car will
turn so much, always. Nice and easy to understand while driving. In a
non-linear setting, the rule says if I turn the wheel so much from here to
there, the car will turn so much, but if I turn the wheel further, the rule
changes and the car will turn even faster. It makes it harder to judge where
you'll end up.
Now, about not everyone have the same 'usual' driving sweep.  I think the
track determines what the sweep will be, mostly. But, if you are driving
1:34.5s in LFS and I'm driving 1:35s, and we looked at each others replays,
the amount that the wheels turn would be remarkably similar. The braking
points would be a bit different and you'd be hitting the apex in the corners
a little better, but both of our steering sweeps would be very similar.
For MadDAWG's point about either sweep being good depending on what you're
used to, I'd have to say technique is important. You might be faster now
with one or the other, but if you learned the other you might be even
better. In GPL the cars drive much easier if the weight is forward while
braking. But, if you can learn to drive with the weight closer to 50%,
you'll be faster. You certainly won't be comfortable with it at first,
though. You have to learn to drive this way.

Anyway, if possible, I'd like to keep this narrowed to the current subject.

MadDAWG, what 180 wheel were you using before the MOMO?  I started out
racing with a CH exl500 (analog) with 180 sweep. After a year and a half, I
got an Andretti (digital) wheel with 270. My lap times improved over 1 sec
on some MTM2 tracks. (the andretti wheel has excellent resolution btw) I
thought it was the increased sweep that did it. Then I got the original
Ferrari wheel (180)  and my lap times were just as good. Then a LWFF
(180,+-) and my lap times weren't as good again. Then the Force RS (270) and
my lap times were about the same as with the LWFF.  I started driving with
all  3 wheels and the issue of comfort never became an issue as far as 180
or 270 degrees goes. Then, when changing the wheel characteristics in
NFS:PU, I noticed that I could match my Ferrari lap times with the Force RS.
Later, I physically limited the RS's sweep and could match the Ferrari lap
times on all tracks. What happened here is that the Andretti had much better
resolution than the exl500. Also, the Force RS and Ferrari had very good
resolution, but the LWFF (as much as I loved the smooth operation of the
wheel) didn't have quite as good resolution.
So, I'm wondering what you were driving before. The MOMO is really up there
for resolution, so it's possible that you're better and more consistent laps
are simply due to the fact that you're driving with a better wheel.

--
Slot

Tweaks & Reviews
www.slottweak.com

I actually started out with the good old T2. Which I think was around 240
degrees. Then I went to the LWFF which after being use to the larger sweep
of the T2 I was always hitting the stops on the LWFF. With the LWFF I was
always afraid of turning the wheel too much and breaking the ass end loose
and backing it into the wall. After going to the MOMO that problem go
better. After thinking about this I'm thinking that the ideal setup would be
a smaller sweep with a larger wheel. I know I hate these little as wheels
they put on game controllers. For me I'm thinking at least 13" diameter
probably bigger. Maybe then my elbows wouldn't be jabbing me in the sides
all the time.

MadDAWG

This is actually what I was trying to get you to think about, X may vary
within a group.  For you (and me btw) the ideal sweep is around 180 but
for others it may be larger or smaller, as the other posts would
suggest.  Whether or not the wheel is "precise" will depend on the user
and  the ergonomics of their setup.  In your opinion, based on your
experience, the ideal sweep is 180, but you may want to consider that
this may not be ideal for everyone.

Again, it's down to definitions and opinions.  You distinguish between
wheel precision and electrical precision, to me they are the same thing.
Also you like a wheel that changes input with small movement, but this
may not be ideal for everyone. So while better resolution will help
everyone, a larger wheel or a wheel with a larger sweep may not be a bad
thing for some people.  In the end we're in agrreement on the mechanics
and the math behind the subject, but some of it comes down to opinion.
 The Williams F1 team once said that one of the design limits they had
to contend with was that Senna liked a large steering wheel so they had
to design the tub to make sure there was enough room for it.  Just an
example of how opinions/preferences can vary. :-)

Maybe in the article, discuss the theory first (ie how all the various
parameters influence each other) and then say what works best for you
and why you think so. That way others have the infomation to figure out
how to tweak things to suit their situation.  But that's just my
opinion, it's your article, right it anyway you want. :-)

Ken

Right on. I have enjoyed this thread abunch even if it has made my brain
hurt a few times. :)

MadDAWG

I wish they would have continued the series.  What we could have today would
be awesome!

-Larry

"Larry"  wrote

Larry, are you referring to MTM2? (sorry, it was a long post and I'm not
sure which part you are talking about).  Did you race in 1998 and 99? Man,
that was some of the best online racing ever. Had to know your short cuts
;-)  LFS demo kind of reminds me of the same type of online action.
What team were you on?

--
Slot

Tweaks & Reviews
www.slottweak.com