Simucube 3 on the horizon?

[StrayTexel]

If that’s true then they could have some problems in the next 1-3 years. The competition is catching up (or even exceeding them?) on FFB performance, and out-innovating them on QoL features. Simucube doesn’t seem to be the kind of company that would let that happen for too long.

I also find it hard to believe that SC3 hasn’t already been in development for years now. SC2 turns 5 this year. These types of products have long lead times that have already been defined on a roadmap that was written up even further back then that.

In the end we’re all just placing bets here :). Until SC3 is announced we’ll have no actual idea, but the speculation is fun. Will be interesting to see who winds up being right.

[drivendriver]

FWIW, I can’t see SC ever competing with Fanatec, Simagic and Moza in the 10-15Nm segment. Margins are probably much lower in that segment than at the high end, and the Chinese brands probably have much lower manufacturing costs. Also, if ActivePedal is any indication, SC is aiming for the top end or even pro-sumer market. I doubt very much that there will ever be an offering below the Sport. I just hope I’ll be able to afford the entry-level SC3.

Also, we’ve reached a point where the DD wheelbase technology is quite mature. It’s unlikely that there will be a big jump in hardware anytime soon. There’s only so much torque people can use. So I agree that software (including APIs and telemetry) will probably be the differentiator going forward.

Meanwhile, Mika is probably ROFL reading these speculative posts.

[Andrew_WOT]

@drivendriver

Also, we’ve reached a point where the DD wheelbase technology is quite mature.

As an ex owner of Argon based OSW, I’d say it was already mature enough then and there wasn’t huge jump in QoL when moving to SC2 except may be Recon filter, MMOs already had all other things.
And I am sure SC1 owners do not feel any urge to upgrade to SC2 either as functionally they are pretty much piers.
And we are still waiting for some new killer features coming to SC2 to start truly differentiating two.
It’s useless debate as everyone will try to convince himself of one thing or another, if you are looking for an excuse to not buy SC2, you can always find hundreds of them.
As an SC2 owner, I personally do not care, if SC3 substantially better to dump SC2, I’ll do it on a whim, but I really doubt that this will be the case, as I would probably still keep SC1 if I had one.

[drivendriver]

By “mature”, I meant that no manufacturer has a significant technological advantage anymore. Now that Fanatec has seen the errors of its ways and pretty much dropped the DD1/DD2 design, most manufacturers (except maybe Logitech and TM) are converging on a SC-like design.

[drivendriver]

To go back to the question of which wheelbase to buy now, I actually think the decision process is quite simple.

Can you wait? If so, then wait until you can’t wait anymore.

You can’t wait? Then there are 2 questions:

1. Do you trust the reviewers that rate the Asetek Invicta higher than SC2 Pro?

2. Asetek is a relatively new player with gen 1 products. SC2 has been around for over 4 years and is proven to be bullet-proof. How much do you value that?

If the answer to 1 is yes and the answer to 2 is “I’m willing to bet on Asetek”, then buy the Invicta and don’t look back.

By the way, by bullet-proof I really mean shock-proof. While transferring my SC2 to my aluminum rig, I dropped it from about 2ft on a hard surface, without any consequence at all.

[Andrew_WOT]

See if this help with purchase decision process.

Simucube vs Asetek feedback

Hi guys i thought you might like to know my first week experience using both wheelbases as i now have the Asetek invicta to compare to my simucube 2 pro. Firstly lets get the obvious out the way because this post is not to bash on one or the other, the simucube 2 is now a few years old and the Asetek comes with some ‘‘features’’ that just was not likely considered when designing the Simucube 2 such as a built in USB-C hub for connecting various peripherals, this comes with the natural advantage…

[StrayTexel]

Thanks for this. It’s another confirmation that the Invicta is noticeably faster somehow, and in a good way. I think it’s fair to say by now that all of those reviewers weren’t making this up.

[Purple_Red]

@StrayTexel

And I’m not looking for something stronger than SC2… but faster yes.

I don’t care if the next SC is faster, as long as you can still adjust the speed! But I would like the money to go to other development areas.

Let’s change the value from Nm/ms to Nm/s!!!
Sc2 U - 9500 Nm/s
Sc2 P - 8000 Nm/s
Sc2 S - 4800 Nm/s

What slew rate is high enough? And for what situations do we need a higher slew rate?

We are already in the area that is dangerous for adults, broken bones are very likely for children and there is no solid evidence that such an ultra-fast slew rate is beneficial for the FFB-signal,
but to remain fair there are only simple emotional statements that an ultra-high Slew-Rate is better. Both on YouTube and in forums!!!

“Comparison of steering angle spectra, according to [14]
The rally driver is Petter Solberg at the Argentina Rally as part of the 2002 World Championship”
Source: Rennwagentechnik Band4 (red-rallydriver / green-normaldriver)

Let’s simulate an oversteering signal at an utopian 5Hz and at an utopian 32Nm. Most signals of this type are at 1Hz or much lower and at much lower torque!
To make it easier to calculate, the waveform is triangle and not sine. So the true slew rate is probably !!a little!! higher.
What else there is to know is that the oversteering FFB signal is countered by a control input signal from the driver of the same frequency. This means nothing else that we are starting to countersteer when oversteering begins and we are stopping countersteer when the car no longer oversteers. This is the reason for picture of the spectral analysis of Mister Solberg’s steering behavior.
So…
1/5Hz = 0,2s
We need just one half wave…
0,2s/2 = 0,1s
And we need only the time from zero torque to full torque…
0,1s/2 = 0,05s or 50ms
So our oversteering signal at a utopian 5Hz and also at a utopian 32Nm needs a slew rate of…
32Nm/50ms = 0,64Nm/ms

utopian values!so…
Let’s do another calculation @ a realistic freq.
However, we stick with the triangle signal and the torque. We stay at that upopian torque to make the slew rate artificially higher.
At the exit of a sharp right curve(for example “La Source” @Spa) we accelerate quickly, our LSD-Diff locks immediately and our rear oversteers, our tires leave two nice black stripes on the asphalt. !!!We have to countersteer to the left for one single second!!!
So…
What freq we are talking about?
1s*2 = 2s
1/2s = 0,5Hz
The oversteering signal is at 0,5Hz!

what slew rate do we need?
2s/4 = 0,5s or 500ms
32Nm/500ms = 0,064Nm/ms

Here the slew rate for the SC2 Pro…
25Nm/500ms = 0,05Nm/ms
And here the slew rate for the SC2 Sport
17Nm/500ms = 0,034Nm/ms

An example of mine in rF2… For those who don’t know. rF2 is known for its very active FFB, but this is one of more charming ones!!!
A Scatter-Plot in Motec. The blue cross always shows the maximum slew rate (1.5 or 0.65 Nm/ms), the red cross shows what slew rate would look like without any restrictions. This means that every point above the True Drive Slew Rate gets a second point exactly at the True Drive Slew Rate Limit. In addition, some points are colored green; green points mean that these “sample points” are curps.
X-Axis shows the torque in Nm
Y-Axis shows the slew rate in Nm/ms

True Drive Slew Rate is reduced down to 1,5Nm/ms… Mika’s recommendation

Witch is a good value for an ultimate! Only some spikes were killed! The slew rate of 1,5Nm/ms is less than 0,18s activated(Histogram) of overall 16s of curps.(1,125% time of the curps feel smoother)

I go much lower, down to 0,65Nm/ms @ 32Nm but not deeper!! Just to get more “compressed” kerps.
1,7s activated slew rate of overall 16s of curps. (10,625% time of the curps feel smoother)

I use this calculation (Torque/100*X)–>X=2or3or4or5 Mika seems to use 4,7…@ 4,7 I get 1,5Nm/ms @ full power for an ultimate. But that is speculation. I don’t know how he get this value!

Someone said that he tested 1,5Nm/ms with a Pro…I think @ 25Nm in ACC and the curps are no longer existent!!!

0,06s activated slew rate of overall 16s of curps. (0,375% time of the curps feel smoother)
You should ask the ACC developers for an FFB Channel in Motec, they already got Motec support. You just need a the FFB output channel. That makes it so easy to setup your FFB ingame and in the True Drive software!

I really can’t understand some of the statements, claims or reviews made here, some of them really don’t make any sense.

Lastly, one more thing. For those who think the Asetek is faster because of the different ratio of torque and slew rate is another than GD’s SC2. You have to hit the wall at 200mph or 320kph, then use an oscilloscope and a wired wheelbase to tell the difference between a GD and an Asetek Why?Because we are talking about 0,5ms or 0,0005s!!!

Have a Nice Day!

[CLAYREGAZZONI]

good one bro…let me know what the outcome is.

[CLAYREGAZZONI]

I don’t get it, it’s a bit too too technical for me (let me add another “too”, just to make sure you understand my level of non understanding).
What I think I might understood is:

@Mika ain’t so wrong when he says that everything above 1.5Nm/ms slew rate isn’t helpful nor realistic for simracing?? (I should have known that he doesn’t make such a statement without proof, sorry for the way I reacted @Mika)

Diff settings on the fly are as important as I thought and felt they are. I use it with every car possible, and I can’t tell you how much I love to get rid of the bullshit mid corner oversteering when the transition from braking/rolling to on throttle is happening. Entry oversteering was a problem aswell, but not as difficult as mid corner.

[Purple_Red]

@CLAYREGAZZONI

@Mika ain’t so wrong when he says that everything above 1.5Nm/ms slew rate isn’t helpful nor realistic for simracing?? (I should have known that he doesn’t make such a statement without proof, sorry for the way I reacted @Mika)

No, he didn’t just make that up. This value must at least be based on some consideration. A consideration that can be checked “relatively” easy with Motec, but can also be refined for yourself with its help!

Here’s another car, one that, despite the weaker in-game FFB setup, requires significantly more slew rate for the curps. You can see that the blue dots on the X-axis for the torque do not go nearly as far to the right into stronger torque(like the other car from the post before). The “string of pearls” of green points on the Y-axis at 1.5Nm/ms is significantly denser or more connected.
Those cars make you love your decision of lowering the slew rate!
Here again for 32Nm and 1.5Nm/ms. Classic Open-Wheeler… I think Brabham BT44

I have often thought that light vehicles benefit significantly more from a lower slew rate. Graphics like this got me thinking this way.

[CLAYREGAZZONI]

@Purple_Red

Let’s change the value from Nm/ms to Nm/s!!!
Sc2 U - 9500 Nm/s
Sc2 P - 8000 Nm/s
Sc2 S - 4800 Nm/s

I went through your post again. You calculate it correct, but to me it looks similar to:

The car accelerates in 2 seconds to 100 km/h. So in a minute it accelerates to 3’000km/h. This is only correct if the car can accelerate to 3’000 km/h, and acceleration is linear. It isn’t: for 0 to 100 a F1 car has 2.5 seconds, from 100 to 200 under 2 seconds. But it never exceeds maybe 400 or 450 km/h.
So my understanding is that a Simucube 2 can reach, depending on the model, maximum torque in 3 to 4 milliseconds, but in a minute it’s still the same. Wrong??

[CLAYREGAZZONI]

@Purple_Red

I have often thought that light vehicles benefit significantly more from a lower slew rate. Graphics like this got me thinking this way.

It’s really something I have to try out asap. Lowering slew rate can maybe impact overall torque I can use, I can maybe decrease static force reduction. Makes me really consider quite some stuff. And it seconds what @Mika wrote.

[StrayTexel]

I love looking at raw data like this (I’m an electrical engineer) and value it highly. However, what ultimately matters here is that almost all (but not all to be clear) reviewers of the Invicta report that it feels noticeably better than their SC2 Pro daily driver. I don’t think it’s clear yet how or what is making this difference. Just that the leading theory is a difference in slew rate. And it’s just another bullet point on the list of justifications for a hypothetical SC3.

[Purple_Red]

But I think extrapolating the value to one second instead from one millisecond makes it clear what kind of “power” is at work. The SC2’s can reach full torque atleast at 3,5ms, what tatally fine!!!

ahh… it is more like km/h and km/s… 330km/h is same like 0,091666km/s
in other words 9500Nm/s is same like 9,5Nm/ms, but that GD is using Nm/ms is much more logic!!!

[Purple_Red]

Maybe a hidden capacitor on the board that smooths the signal a little bit?

Or maybe a hidden Peak&Notch Filter that is suspiciously missing from the Asetek software?!?!?

But the story with the slew rate convinces me to 0.0%!!!

electrical engineer - cool job! I repaired guitars and bass amps when I was young. I still think tube amplifiers fascinating today and why they sound like that.

[Panschoin]

I understand people concerns on getting an SC2 at this stage but all this discussion here is just pointless.

1. Asking GD if they are working on SC3 - do you guys really expect an answer on this? Regardless if they do work on it or they dont, nobody is going to say, isnt it obvious why?
2. Comparing Asetek and SC2 especially on Slew Rate, and that Asetek is better because it has supposedly a tiny bit higher slew rate?? And that GD needs to bring an SC3 which will have a higher Slew Rate to be the better base? Come on, really? I can guarantee you that if you limit slew rate by 20% in TD in an SC2 pro, there is no way you can perceive any difference. So even if Asetek feels better (havent tried it so cannot say), there is no way this is due to the Slew Rate. You like the new qr system of Asetek then by all means go and get one, for sure this is a great wheel overall.

Another point that i would personally consider though, GD helped Asetek on the software. But GD is currently working on its TD software which as far as we understand is going to bring serious improvements to SC2. Will Asetek software be updated down the line and how?
You can wait for another 1-5 years waiting for an SC3 to be released (and hoping that it would be the better product), or just go and get an SC2 or an Asetek now and enjoy sim racing.

[StrayTexel]

1. I don’t think anyone realistically expects GD to answer questions regarding SC3 before they announce it.

2. All we know is that multiple people who have used both claim the Invicta is noticeably better. No one knows for sure why. Just that there’s a difference, and it’s a positive one. It is what it is.

It’s normal to want post-purchase confirmation after buying and owning something as expensive as this. Almost all humans are wired that way. But to think it’s impossible to improve on, especially after 5 years since its release, is a little silly. Let’s get real guys.

[Purple_Red]

But keep in min that I tested that stuff only in rF2.

[Nrde]

Most likely it’s possible to improve SC2 and Ultimate. But it’s telling that for example boosted media gave gloving review of Asetek base, saying it feels even better than his Ultimate. But still today he’s using the old SC Ultimate. I suppose it would have been tempting to sell the Ultimate and buy a better base half the price?

So I guess the babble above means that a replacement wheel needs to be a lot better for people to upgrade or change to, Granite may think they still have unused potential in the HW not needing to rush for new platform for example.

For me personally I would give more value to not FFB specific features, but stuff like USB hub and analog wireless axes instead of FFB tweaks that you can’t even notice in blind test situation.