We also did investigate the available QR options when we designed Simucube 2. Q1R was one of the worst ones due to looks and sensitivity to tolerance between unit to unit, requiring adjustment, so it was discarded quite early on. Stacking several sheet parts on top of each other will cause tolerance stack-up. This is not to say that the QR that we eventually developed, is totally immune to all tolerance issues, but its much better in that regard. Also if we wanted to source the Q1R from its manufacturer back then, the supply just wasnât estimated to be up to it (but I donât know if we ever asked or not). And we didnât want to copy it either, thats not the right thing to do.
There is no standard USB protocol - every manufacturer then has to have their own custom software that has a custom way to configure e.g. clutch paddles calibration and bite point on the wheel.
This port is not a fair comparison. We never intended to make it any sort of an industry standard. The reason we put the Accessory Port on the device at all was that we wanted to make those few hardware manufacturers (and DIY people) that were already making devices for Simucube 1 and also sold Simucube 1 happy without leaving them without a solution when the market was estimated very quickly to switch to Simucube 2. Which was a good right to do, the market did switch very quickly.
You do realize the reasons why we wanted to go proprietary on this, right? The reasons have been described many times previously on this forum, but I can repeat them here if you forgot them:
Windows BT was quite a lot more unstable back then. Windows 7 had still market share. But the BT on Windows 11 is much better now - but is it good enough?
No hot plugging support
All kinds of issues with random BT dongles and their buggy drivers, which would have meant a support nightmare for us. Has this improved enough now? Have you actually done the tests with hundreths of different hardware combinations to support the claim?
With our solution, the whole code path through to the packet that contains button data that gets sent to the PC, is known to us. (adding: Without any 3rd party device drivers, that is the important part!) And we can have custom packets going the other way as well to configure functions on the wheel, which is not possible with BT standard game controller device as far as I know.
While none of the protocols are completely error prone, including SC proprietary solution, the BT issues you have listed are blown out of proportion. Itâs widely adopted industry standard everyone is using these days for all sort of peripherals and wireless audio.
Yep, you are right. There have been countless times when Teams meetings have been ruined by BT headset issues.
Is the Simucube Link Hub so bad compared to a USB BT dongle that you would need on your PC? What is the difference exactly? With the Link Hub you can also position it in better place with regards to the rig/PC which you canât if your PC has some type of integrated BT.
I have so many Bluetooth problems with Windows 11, and had them with Windows 10 too.
While my soundbar from Sonos, which is in the living room, does get recognised/listed (always) my soundbar from Panasonic wonât show up to 90 percent. This, with a wheel, an absolute nightmareâŚ
All PCs, laptops, and phones these days come with integrated BT. No dongles.
Anyway, whatâs done is done, no reason to cry over spilled milk.
Was just naively hoping that GD learned the lesson.
this is simply only true for laptops and phones. Iâve never owned a motherboard with a BT on it, and likely will not unless at some point I start to buy prebuilt PCs.
how much does the simucube link cost? i asked before if you would ever do a dongle for SC wirless wheels in case i ever needed to change wheelbase, i guess this is the option for that going forward
The missing features of SC QR is no power and no data. So the actual only missing feature is no power for wheels with screens as everything else can be handled wireless with a battery (well lights are not going to last for everâŚ).
I welcome the possible improvements if and when they eventually come, but my initial purchase of SC base was affected very little by its QR. If I was not satisfied with it, I could replace it with another relatively easily but I have no reason to do so.
I have nothing but bad experience with BT btw. Even with the built in ones. Only BT that works without hiccups are my ruuvi tags that communicate almost perfectly with a Pi3.
Communication with a PC and Android phone to transfer files for example is just hopeless, streaming music to headphones of speakers cuts down regularly etc.
I know the SC wireless module is like BT, but it still works better than any other BT device I have connected to my computer.
If MB comes with integrated wireless, BT is also included. I am big fan of Asus ROG MBs for my builds, and they all had it included. They come with antennas connectors on the back, you can also connect external antenna to reposition if needed for better reception.
I have also recently added PCI-E wireless/bt card to one of my older PCs to upgrade to wi-fi 5/6, same concept, either antennas bolted to the back or external one.
File transfer and audio require higher bandwidth, and BT is not really meant for that sort of things.
BT Audio why improving on Windows is still not as good as on Android when you can get hi-res protocols like LDAC. Reception stability is highly depends on TWS / BT DAC and codec you are using.
I for instance had nothing but great experience with Technics EAH-AZ80 TWS and FiiO BTR7 with Optimized for Audio Quality 909/990kbps LDAC, you need to flip to that higher quality/bandwidth in Developers settings or use app like BT Codec Changer. Technics is jaw dropping stable even at longer distances from the phone.
I transfer bigger files through cloud services anyway, but sometimes a quick small file should be easy to move between devices. But itâs a luxury if succeeds with my desktop windows machine and phones.
The point being, SC wireless has been hassle free, but other similar type of connections have not (on my desktop).
You are not comparing apples to apples.
SC wireless is the same low bandwidth HID BT profile as BT mouse or keyboard (unlike file transfer or audio), which are almost bullet proof (with the few exceptions as always).
And while I didnât have any issues and happy with SC wireless in general, unlike some users that reported one issue or the other, which always will be the case no matter what solution is in place, experience on standard BT stack could probably be the same, after all SC wireless is still running on the same BT network protocol, with the advantage of not being locked to SC wheelbase. They could even have shipped wheelbase with USB/BT dongle for users who did not have solid BT in their systems for instance, giving the option use integrated or provided dongle BT.
But I understand that this has not been a top priority for GD when designing proprietary BT profile locking users to wheelbase.
Itâs in rear view mirror anyway, whatâs done is done.
At least it sounds like we might be able to use our SC wheels with other systems via Link Hub, hopefully it wonât cost arm and leg when released. Wondering if itâs possible to achieve the same with the SW driver instead of hardware piece, probably not.
but everyone is free to use whatever connection for the wheel.
SC users can change whatever QR and BT or usb cable to connect their wheels to their computers. Unlike for example Fanatek customers.
So yeah, they lock compatible wireless wheels to their base if thereâs only SC wireless module in them, but no one is forcing the customers to buy those locked in wheels in the first place.
QR yes, with 3rd party adapter, wireless communication, not at that time. Cube Controls started adding standard BT to their USB wheels just a year or so ago.
So that would leave only wired USB as an option. Imagine if GD pushed for standard BT at that time and we saw a wider adoption of that as a universal wireless wheel standard.
Now seems like our SC1/SC2 wireless wheels will not be forward compatible even with SC3.
Through the dongle, yes, not directly though as GD is switching to another proprietary protocol. Hopefully that dongle will allow usage with other wheelbases as well.
Same thing as what Racewerk is doing with their SC Accessory Port pedals, by selling USB dongle.
Itâs an ugly solution to the problem that could have been avoided in the first place. Slapping myself for not going USB route even with wired inconvenience, now I have 3 wireless wheels to utilize somehow when switching to different brand.
Cube controls switched to the generic BT solution with proprietary additions because they wanted to include LED lights on their wheels with proprietary software solution.
As far as I am concerned there is no actual need for a SC3 in the near future. A powered + data SC QR like the one by Dan Suzuki would probably please 90% of the people that moan about the current QR.
All the top of the line steering wheels with a screen right now are USB (Bavarian Simtec Omega, GSI Hyper P1, Cube Controls CSX3 etc). A usb cable does not bother me but I see how it could annoy some people and a powered data QR would please them while not needing to upgrade the base or wheels.
ÎÎÎ at this point in time it is the software (sim games) that seems to be the bottleneck for better FFB which is the only thing that would make me pay for a new base.
I mean iracing is still on 60Hz ffs.
