Simucube 1 vs simucube 2


SC1 was modular platform with some level of extensibility/upgradeability.
Looked good on paper, keep the case, PSU, replace board, move on to the next gen. Or replace encoder, or motor, anything goes.

SC2 is a completely closed system and doesn’t matter how good and bullet proof new HW design is, at some point it would need to be upgraded, what that path is going to look like.
Would we need to dump, sell for peanuts SC2 (board with motor) to get new and shiny SC3.


i didn’t know there was a limitation on questions. I won’t ask again so problem solved.


Why would it be different then any of our other sim racing hardware?


Because this is not the way it was

Nobody expects this from Fanatec, because Fanatec was never open platform, plus their products have very long shelf life.
With SC that was promised as future proof, modular platform, we see the whole direction abandoned even before product had a chance to fully mature, with “Sayonara, suckers!” hand wave.
Most people who is considering SC2 are existing GD customers, including Argon and IoniCube users who were wise enough, or poor and slow not to jump on SimuCube hype train in time.
I really feel sorry for recent acquisition SC1 users, they have full rights to get upset and certainly deserved either upgrade path or at lest some compensation that can make a difference, not $40 joke as was suggested above.
User base is the most valuable asset, you can’t retain them, you’ll lose the business.
Right now I just don’t see GD understand or care about that.
I am sure that SC2 is a better engineered product than a competitor, but more often than not it’s not the best product that takes the market.


I get that. I was one of the upset ones when this was announced because I just bought mine almost exactly a year ago. I think you missed the fact it did just fully mature into a wheel devs will support. That was the only real downside to a OSW. I agree with you though about the guys that just bought an OSW in the last couple months. I think that could have been handled differently with regards to the release. But im sure there are reasons for how it happened some of which have been explained. At least for me im over the initial disappointment because I had no intention of buying another wheel base soon but I know how good the OSW is and im sure the guys at GD wont disappoint with the new bases.

They didn’t abandon the OSW as they have said multiple times so its not like your base will work any different next week. It will still work.


I was thinking of just a new board that has to be installed as replacement for the SC1 components into the Simucube Coolermaster Case, Acrylic Box or Augury Case… Wouldn’t that be possible?


It would require a pcb redesign effort, and would add still another firmware variant that would slow development.

But it is nice to have ideas. It all comes down to the size of the market that would be willing to DIY this type of upgrade. From the amount of DIY sales for SC1, it would appear that the price should be much larger than you expect to become profitable.


Yes, it would be a nice move if there was a really attractive upgrade special for SC1 owners, especially considering Fanatec coming out with their DD system as well. I read quite a bit of this thread, but missed where the $40 was mentioned and who it was. However, $40 would be a joke indeed. I’ve got a Lenze/Simucube and I’m really happy with it, but seeing all this fancy new gear coming out makes me think if a change is an option. The thing is it’s just getting crazy expensive with these dd wheels nowadays…would be the second one after changing over from an Argon OSW.


Why would it require a PCB redesign?

It seems that if there was a wire harness made for the encoder to DB15 and harness for the motor power that would handle the hardware end of things?


Custom connector on the encoder and the power would be required… But yeah, interesting project, but all hands on deck for Simucube 2 production start and firmware development still.


Ok good to know on the connectors.

If you guys did decide to offer SC2 upgrade board for SC1 users maybe at that time you could announce end of life for SC1, and you would only have to concentrate on the newer SC2 software?

Yes I bet it is busy busy there! No sleep for a while! LOL


The expected price is not equal the price that i would pay for an upgrade option. But it should be a fair price. It wouldn’t be a problem (for me) to wait a few (2-3) years for this option. So in my opinion there is no need to hurry.


Hmm this conversation got interesting by way of what Joe Proposes… Im sure there would be many that would probably do a SC2 upgrade CAP to a MIGE…

That would unify your Firmware for those that upgrade but of course you would have to choose what level of the software was given and also have embedded profiles in the firmware for BOTH the Small and Large ice servos if you wanted to do only a single cap…

You of course do have to judge how this would affect sales of the SC2 normal as well as if you offer it as a stand alone product that would still essentially allow an End user to buy a Mige servo and purchase the endcap.

which would essentially make your product offering SC2 Sport, SC2 DIY Mige 20, SC2 Pro, SC2 DIY Mige 28, and SC2 Ultimate. Which would be sort of interesting in itself.

The problem I see with the CAP would be the integration of the PSU so it is possible that an SC2 upgrade board in the format of the SC1 might be a better option.

I am guessing that the Major Hardware difference as far as the main electronics and Firmware running is the Processor Speeds… and as you mention a Stepped upgrade path might be nice as well if the Faster IONI Processor can be used on current SC1 Boards and take advantage of MORE SC2 features.

But that may of course overload @Mika even more as there would be essentially three firmwares to keep up with in that you would have the SC1, SC1.5 (IONI Upgrade), and then SC2. so that may just be too much work.

I can say it would be Nice to have an upgrade Path to the SC2 additions but there are some issues with possible cannibalization of the SC2.

The one thing I do miss with the SC2 release is the ability to DIY Choose your servo and power supply as well as the elimination of a Lower cost wheel interface. But with the SC2 sort of eliminating Granity bringing out a DIY SC2 might be more difficult than it is worth…

So I am torn personally…


I personally think SC1 to SC2 upgrade only makes sense if the exact same controller board of SC2 is used.

Then all upcoming software programming could be concentrated on one control board. Except for a few minor bug fixes, the SC1 compatible software need no more attention.

If the upgrade was offered as board level, with a few cable harnesses, the actual SC2 metal endcap would not be needed and the original SDR 480-48 power supply’s could be used.

Of course this all hinges on is the SC2 hardware really that much better, and can it handle the needed requirements of the small and large Mige?


That is true… Looking at the board though that they are using in the SC2 as they of course have pictures it would probably NOT really be able to be done as a DIY unless they offered the board with a different Encoder plug attachment and of course some sort of Terminal or breakout for the DC Input as that is done via a plug on the opposite side.

In looking at the board I wonder what ingenious method they have used for the back Current Control as I do not see a braking resistor, unless there is one actually attached inside the housing…


Yes that is why I said it would need to have some wire harness/ cable adapters.

The conversion would need to be done by someone that af least has medium mechanical/ electrical skills.


Yea it would definitely be a bit more complex than that of the Current SC1 Building.


you forget. the reality of this “open” platform was that granite did all the work and you got it for free. heck, it even works better today than it did when you bought into it. free upgrades!

it’s all to easy to complain about a business making a new product.
so lets get to the nitty gritty. what was your contribution to OSW? what did you do to help?


Yeah, that’s what we all got it for, FREE. :partying_face:
BTW, OSW is Argon based design from Bernhard Berger.
Technically anything after that is not, not sure if Beano’s IONICube based Project Bruteforce still qualifies, but definitely not SC1.


As i have stated many, many times on several forums, Ioni, ionicube and Simucube is NOT OSW, not related and had ZERO input from Bernhard, others involved in the Bernhard RS-485-based osw.

Between myself and GD, we conceived and developed IONI, Ionicube, Simucube and now Simucube2.

Wrt the ‘free’, you got the Simucube1 FW at zero development cost to any of you. As explained before, it was supposed to have been developed by the community, but as was evident, if we had to wait for that, we would still have been stuck on an old, outdated and no development (for 3 years) MMoS FW.

Hence Mika being employed to develope the new FW at GD cost. Again, it was intended to be open-source, it would have been, had all the clever guys in the community step in and actually do something.

Just thought I’d clear that up, as many are not aware of the history of IONI and Simucube development, it is totally seperate and different from Bernhard’s OSW.