I feel the C7 Corvette handles nothing like the actual car!

Default tire pressures are set to factory specs (for street tires), but the tires in the default setup are semi's. Lower the pressure a couple psi for the streets, and a handful of psi for the semi's.

And that is pretty much all I know concerning setups.

 

It just takes a certain sort of man to pull off...

 

Typically the sort with grey hair and a paunch.

(I kid, actually a big Corvette fan here.)

 

Sport Auto recently managed to publish their Supertest on this car. They gave it lots of credit for good handling. I drove it quite a bit in AC and I found that Sport Auto and AC are well aligned. Comparing Christian Gebhardt's impressions with AC is something I like to do very much in AC.

As for plain numbers, I think it's fair to say that there's no issue to be found there.

I also agree that power oversteer is the way to get this car really, really sideways. And that's simply a driver mistake, nothing you could blame a car or simulator for.

 

The Corvette in AC is a fun car to drive. Certainly a lot more fun than the Mustang (which feels a bit strange to me; no hard data to back this up, so it's another case of good old "personal opinion")

 

Corvette is definitely a more serious sports car. Mustang is a 4-seater, softer, a great highway cruiser, easier to get in/out of etc. Still a blast to drive, but not a difficult car to live with. More like a BMW 2-door. But a stock Mustang GT can't keep up with a Corvette on the track.

 

I think there is often some interpretation required when someone says, "This car X doesn't feel like my real X". The question is, "Does it perform like your real X car?" Take a look at the videos Aristotelis made in the series Assetto Corsa vs. Real Life Driving on YouTube. The AC performance is remarkably similar to the Real World, which speaks volumes about the physics engine & car data & tweaking/testing Stefano & Aris put into making AC cars. Is every car 100% perfect? Of course not. Yet, the resulting performance is hard to dismiss.

 

You can have a car with the same lap time, same top speed, same acceleration, and same cornering speed as its real counterpart that behaves nothing like the real thing (or like a car at all). Matching performance is the easy part; the "feel" and behavior outside of the typical operating range is what makes or breaks a good driving simulator.

 

If that's the case then screw data, just build an entire sim based on 'muh feels' and youtube vids and then sit back and become massively rich.

 

Isn't that what SMS did with McLaren 720S?
Genuinely curios what exactly they tweaked to move from nothing like the real car to 'as close as it gets'

 

You're completely misinterpreting the point...

A car can have correct speeds/times but be made from completely fictional data, while another car can be made exclusively with real life data and have the same performance. Both go the same speeds, but one feels (and is) quite a lot more realistic than the other.

Kunos (and any sim developer) have some holes in their data, whether it be parts of the car, tire force measurements that can't be made with reasonable accuracy in real life, or the aerodynamic coefficients of drag or downforce, these things leave room for adjustability if the car performs correctly but doesn't feel right.

So like I said, just because a car can go the same speeds as real life doesn't mean it's accurate (or inaccurate for that matter - the point is that you can't take much from speeds and laptimes alone).

I think it's reasonable to have an open mind in these types of discussions, some points may be more valid than they appear at first glance (and lead to improvements within the sim) - though of course it's usually more likely that they're fallacies.

 

Yes. You are 100% correct. My comments didn't fully reflect the point I was trying to make. I'm assuming that the sim company IS putting in as much accurate data as possible. You're right. You can make up your own wild & crazy car that ends up with the almost identical performance numbers. What I'm saying is, if you put as much real data into the AC physics engine that Lamborghini is willing to release or gather from other sources - you'll probably end up with damn near identical performance numbers (if you're dealing with a quality simulator) but you don't feel being pinned back into your seat on launch. You don't feel your head snap back on each violent shift change from the Aventador SV. You don't feel the shimmies and shakes, the bumps, the G forces. But, if verified real world data is being put into the simulator and you're producing darn near identical MoTeC telemetry as the real car - I say "Bravo! That sim is doing something right!"

 

Right and I agree with you to an extent. But my point (or one of them anyway ) is that real data will only get you so far with the performance and feel of a car (even tire grip in sims is typically based on experimentation within the sim rather than actual data). To continue with your example, though Lamborghini's data will get you a car that's close, there will still be some blanks you'll have to fill in yourself.

These blanks are usually tire related, don't necessarily show up in telemetry (and if they do are very hard to notice), and don't have real life data to fall back on. That's why it's taken 3(?) years to notice the tire "issue" I mentioned earlier (which only really shows up in steering telemetry traces or "feel" - as we still don't actually have data it's not even necessarily correct to call it a definitive issue, it just certainly seems like it's one based on subjective analysis). So to that end it's worth having some "feel" input for the devs (read: Aris) as they will be making some educated guesses based on their knowledge in any case, and some real life observations -provided they are detailed and thought through- may help that process.

 

I see what you are saying. Thanks for explaining it a second time. I appreciate that.