From the manual
Yea the specific output is just a ratio of the actual output from the wheel to the output that the telemetry gives.
With Slew… No, that is something you sort of have to feel out. The thing to look for is if the wheel feels as if it is causing you to saw at it…
Most of the time that I notice this is on a return to center moment after a minor oversteer. Normally in a real car you should be able to control a slight oversteer with minor adjustments to the wheel. However a wheel that is too fast will snap back toward center at a rate that you as the driver cannot keep up with… This causes you to saw at the wheel a bit to regain control and find center where in reality you should be able to use just throttle control and slight inputs to bring the car back in line…
Some people like this quick snap back as it makes them feel the car is being reactive (and some cars depending on settings in the suspension or track surface can be(i.e older style nascar cars on an oval where they are setup biased and you se the car get loose and they ca hold onto it JUST until the put too much correction and it shoots to the wall) Problem is with an overly active return this shoot to the wall no longer has to do with the car but the return uncontrolled overcorrection of the wheel.
So it is something that does have to be played with and becasue I don’t have an ultimate I cannot really say what would be a good setting… However I would say that you will probably be around the same number as the Slew is a torque application over time.
F1 cars are, compared to F3, much more easier to steer when we talk about the force needed. Some of actual F1 drivers said that steering in F3 was very demanding, due to the lack of power steering.
It’s the acceleration of the motor. Lowering slew rate makes the steering more rubbery/realistic.
Turn it down to 1 and hit some curbs. You’ll notice what it does then.
The difference between 3.25 and unlimited is not so obvious, but once you go below 2 you’ll feel the difference.
I drive with slew rate 2.2. It’s a good compromise between detailed info, but a realistic/less robotic feeling.
1 Like
We have TBW, Slew Rate limit, all these params limit physical potential of the servo.
You’ve paid extra for more reactive motor but run it on a fewer cylinders.
More “rubber” and wheel weight can be accomplished via Damper/Friction/Inertia, also Recon if you want smoother signal. It’s a more conventional, traditional way without resorting to “exotic” params very few understand and killing your servo potential in the process.
Overcomplicating things seems to be a trend among simracers.
1 Like
no, lower value is less reactive. But outright 0 means that the filter is turned off.
2 Likes
Really, I thought it was changed to be the actual limit applied on the top of existing rate. Seems like it’s still absolute value of a Slew Rate. Thanks for correcting, may be a good idea make it look more meaningful in UI.
Yeah, we actually discussed it when implementing the slider for the effect. Either way it would be confusing in some way - if the slider was “inverted” compared to how it is now, the value on the slider would decrease when moving it to the right. Then again, we prefer technical explanation of an effect instead of just arbitary number. However in this case the technicality is what makes it confusing.
Same goes for the torque bandwidth limit filter if that was implemented as a slider…
2 Likes
Slew Rate is the best “Effect” of the Simucube2! It is so POWERFULL. I use it simelar like a “Bass - Compressor” and you should do that too. You tune your FFB-Signal to its finest! Keep an eye Flat-Spots at the last half lap. Also the Crash at the End.
Slew Rate in dark blue…
0.1Nm/Ms
0.65Nm/Ms
2.5Nm/Ms
9.5Nm/Ms
If I read it right (probably not), it shows by how much at lower slew rate reaction of the motor deviates from, lags behind signal.
Cool graphs, btw, wish TD had some monitoring tool.
How do you capture all this data, including slew rate?
2 Likes
So all four screenshots show the same 3 graphs with different “Slew Rate’s” (0.1 /0.65 /2.5 & 9.5Nm/Ms).
On the first graph:
“SC2 Base Torque Curve[Nm]” shows the basic FFB-Torque…like curves for example and a bit of oversteering if it doesn’t require too much slew rate.
“SC2 Torque Curve[Nm]” shows simply the FFB signal output by (in this case) Rfactor2. So the “car multiplier”(aka PreAmp) has an influence on the curve, but also the settings in the .json files.
“Curb Marker” tells me if I’m currently driving on curbs. The reason is that I get a hind where the frequencies come from that bother me. In “La Source” you can see it quite well. (Doesn’t look like a big deaL, but it’s super practical =) Especially because the games aren’t 5-star orchestras. Hope no one will be mad at me, but anyone who has ever worked with Cubase or Wavelab knows that the CPU places limits on signal generation and SimRacing is signal generation.
The second graph just shows different slew rates.
“SC2 Slew Rate adj. [Nm/ms]” shows me the slew that I would like to visualize. In other words, I recreated the “True Drive- Slew Rate -Effect” in Motec. As above (0.1/0.65…). I used to call it Adjusted (adj.).
Here you can then adjust everything. Maximum torque & slew rate of your base and of course your true drive settings. It’s interactive so the Sport, Pro and Ultimate can use it.
“SC2 Slew Rate [Nm/ms]” is the slew rate the game wants, but limited by the maximum slew rate of the wheelbase. I always put the slew rates on top of each other… so you can see where the signal is being compressed. Is then the blue curve before the red curve.
“SC2 Base SR Curve[Nm/ms]” shows me the slew rate of the “SC2 Base Torque Curve [Nm]”. Namely, if you give your Simucube2 less slew rate than it needs for cornering and oversteer, you’ve definitely gone too far.
With the third graph I do the calculation back into a torque. So the red slew rate curve, which is only limited by the maximum slew rate of the SimuCube, and the blue slew rate curve, which is changed by our True Drive setting. Unfortunately, this is then distorted (NOT IN THE GAME, ONLY IN MOTEC), but you can tell by the thick curves in the flat spots. So based on the ratios and the peak to peak values. For example, with the 0.65Nm/ms slew rate I reduce the torque of the crash from ~54Nm to ~10Nm… i.e. reduced by 44Nm. So you can let children play with it with a clear conscience. 
1 Like
Slew rate and static force reduction are extremely helpful imo. Slew rate limitation can make the difference when one has a huge crash at high speed. Static force reduction gives the opportunity to use more torque in general, while certain situations (fe Silverstones high speed combo Copse/Maggotts/Becketts) still can be driven at a full length race without getting too tired. Both don’t filter anything out of the amount of FFB information. Damping is adding latency, something friction does not, although you will loose fidelity/speed at the shaft with it.
Both are problem solver rather than anything else. You can use ULLM to compensate the latency you created with damping and friction.
These diagrams are interesting. To have something similar in TD is totally unnecessary. If one is interested in engineering there is sure (as we can see) plenty of 3d party software.
As a driver you don’t need to interfere with the job of engineers. Even you are good at it: no-one wants you to do such things. Be fast, win the race and let them do what is necessary for you to win.
If some already have a problem to understand what a limitation of a defined maximal value is, then TD sure doesn’t need integrated mechanical physics or telemetry implementation. This would only need a real time connection, which is exactly what brought up resistance
2 Likes
You definitely know more about this than I do but doesn’t lowering the slew rate make the FFB feel sort of “floaty”? That’s the best way I can describe it
Yep I see it that way too. Keep True Drive as slim as possible. It really does offer endless settings to play with.
However, you can also gain additional information with the slew rate and that’s how I use the thing. Compress the curbs and turn the torque up. Imagine totally over the top curbs superimposed on the actual FFB signal. So that you no longer feel the oversteer, but now you do thanks to the lowered slew rate. I’ve had a number of situations there… but I don’t have any right now. Recently cleaned up Motec… needed the space. 
It depends how far. That’s why I built it myself to finally get control over it.
To put it this way. I made a really nice, clear and powerfully defined FFB. I let the thing run at 32Nm and have no problems with it. It’s just great!
1 Like
Very interesting comparison with Cubase! Compressing signals, how fast a curve of a signal has to rise…
In AC there is a possibility to compress lower/finer FFB signals. The result is a very detailed FFB also at low torque and while driving relatively slow. My favourite cars are open wheelers (RSS and GP). They use power steering. New cars like the the RSS 2022S or the Grand Prix 2022 coming with special physics packages. You can turn steer assist into range compression and this is very clear to see on a FFB graph. If you compare both of them, the one with range compression is much more detailed, and the feeling while driving is showing the same result.
Slew rate limitation is something I was familiar with very soon. I drive rally, and the handbrake input was just to much in too short time. The perfect solution: slew rate limitation. That is also the case when you drive with almost 200km/h through Finlands woods and you run out of talent… and this within max 10 meters: it took a blink of an eye, from 200 to be mash on a huge tree. Again, slew rate limitation is your best friend then!
@CLAYREGAZZONI
The effect is also so powerful, but I didn’t think of it right away. I had a serious accident once… a Ki pushed me away and that was it. I was allowed to take a week off from sim racing. I have an old Trace Elliot amp here and it totally reminded me of the True Drive software and when it started again, a lot of the settings just had different names. I then tried to set the Simucube2 like an old Trace Elliot GP12 smx and lo and behold it worked. It was Luck…
Something to wink at. 
The audible difference between with slew rate (compressed) and without slew rate limit (not compressed).
Like I said before, no criticism of the game makers. It’s sad but It is what it is and we have to going to live with it atleast for a while. It’s not their fault either, they have to live with the hardware we have, too. I don’t think my PC do perform very well there either.
1 Like
Add chorus, add 1250 layers, compute the best to her singing (much easier than waiting on her to meet with the beat 
).
Those games I like most are either pretty old (I wonder how a present version of AC would be like), still much to much focused on the controller customers, or a bit arcade like F1 titles.
My PC is…I don’t really know:
I7/10700
Aorus Z490AC Elite
G.Skill Trident Z.R 32/4000
Be quiet 1000 power supply
3070ti Aorus Master
Ssung 970 Evo plus nvme
250+1TB
Samsung Odyssey G9 49 curved
I think is pretty ok. Never had performance problems at 5120x1440 at 120 Hertz
I see it this way:
Someone hits me in the face. He hits with 100 kg force (let’s assume there are 100kg from the very first moment and this amount doesn’t change till it is landing in my face) and with the speed of 60 miles.
The same slap, the same speed BUT (because I told him so) with 20 kg.
Everything stays the same, only the torque per time is limited
1 Like
The charm of the classics does not decrease. I can recommend RFactor2 to you. The scope is not nearly as extensive, but definitely sufficient. But the FFB is unique in the industry. They could make more vintage cars available. But they are said to have revised the physics as well. However, I cannot confirm.
At least I have a vintage machine at my feet.
AMD 2600
x470 board
32GB Ram
1070GTX GPU
Well, most of the time I’m out and about in Motec anyway. Doing experiments with it is great fun.
1 Like