Who uses Traction Control?

[Klax75]

For me it's not so much who is using TC. It's all the people using 3rd person!

I think third person in a simulation should be banned!!! If you want to see your rider, watch the reply!

[Napalm Nick]

All these years I would have agreed with you Klax, with as much passion.

But now I have mellowed and say 'meh' to it lol.

However "the Club" has Onboard View and DST-only Race suggestions planned where the real simmers will show through.  I mean no-one on the Best Laps server who got to the front using 3rd P really achieved anything did they? hahahahahaha 'meh'.

Surprised you haven't joined yet Klax, seems like your day is dawning.......

[Hawk]

When beta 7 is released with I hope the fixes for DST, then I'll give DST another serious try.
I was actually going pretty good with DST with Klax's help in learning how to ride it, but the current bug with the steering off the start put me off it. But I'll certainly give it another go when beta 7 is released so long as Piboso has fixed the steering issue.

Hawk

[Stout Johnson]

Stoner agrees with us Stout, so I think we're on the right train of thought..... Scrap electronics on all racing bikes and lets get back to real man and machine racing, and if that means that riders cannot handle the current 4 stroke bikes then lets get back to real race bikes(2 Strokes  ). Controversy all around, but that's all that needs to be said.

Like MaX said, 2strokes def more in need of TC than 4strokers - but I am sure you are aware of that.

Many here seem to have the perception that riding without TC is the way of "real men" and "natural" and everything else is for sissys. I would make a sure bet that every rider from the golden era of those 500cc 2stroke rockets would gladly have taken TC - if used with modern TC software of course. In fact it would have safed some lifes and kept some riders from being confined to a wheelchair.

I know that many riders (in fact the vast majority) disliked the early electronic helpers as much as that some just refused to use them. But that was mostly due to the crudeness of the early systems. They felt bad (boldly cutting combustion) and they made the lap times slower - the benefit was making crashes less likely. But the competitive riders would never accept slower lap times and the crudeness of those systems that felt like giving up the control over the bike.

interesting article here:
http://www.bennetts.co.uk/bikesocial/news-and-views/features/bikes/history-of-the-500cc-two-stroke-grand-prix-bike/#.VW91QJMTbIU

For many racing aficionados, Doohan's victories were the most dramatic of the whole two-stroke era. Good as his NSR Hondas were, the bikes were vicious, violent, tyre shredding animals which took not only a huge amount of riding skill to race but cojones the size of a fit Hereford bull. You either conquered these bikes or they broke your body. There was no middle ground!

And now for the big question. Speak to Kevin Schwantz, Mick Doohan or even Vale and they will tell you the same thing. Even with half the capacity of the current four-stroke MotoGP machines, if you ran a two-stroke today with the benefit of latest electronics and plenty of fuel capacity then this would be the machine to beat.


Imo, the bottom line is: it is a romantic feeling to consider riding a 200+hp/130kg monster (no matter if 2stroke or 4stroke, either way it is a monster) without any electronic helpers. There was a time where all was decided by cojones and talent because there were no electronic systems available (at least no competitive ones). But if we talk about the resemblence of modern motogp bikes in GPB, the importance of electronic helpers should be resembled. In general human reaction time is just not small enough to be able to compete with modern electronic sensors and computers.

It is a risk/reward calculation. Very good riders might (plus the prerequisite of good tyres) be able to be as fast or even faster without TC in terms of lap-times - but there would always be the Damocles sword of highsiding-into-the-stands dangling above their heads. Sooner or later even great riders would be thrown off their bikes and be looking up to riders being healthier and more constant with electronic helpers. And hand on heart - all cojones talk aside - irl health is a big issue and nobody would constantly risk his health just for the feeling of being able to "control it all" with no software in between the right hand and the rear wheel. Just my thoughts.

That should be resembled in GPB if we want a true sim. Therefore TC/AW simulation should be as close to real life as possible (I know it is hard to do as there is a whole industry developing software in that field for several decades). AND there should be some more realism when in comes to crash-penalty. Imo, a crude simulation of bike damage should be done in order to make sure there is no crash penalty except the mere time used to re-spawn one's bike - pretty arcadey the way it is handled atm. Imo, even a crude simulation of rider health would be cool for hardcore sim freaks, but not a must at all

Just my thoughts, Stout.

[Vini]

Well, in my opinion no TCS is way more fun in GP Bikes.


Anyway, I admit that most of the time I ride in third person view.

But I have also done some laps in first person and while it takes a bit of time to get the lines right, the feel for the front wheel (especially under hard accaleration) is much better than in third person view. Wobbles and (big) wheelies out of high speed corners can be much better controlled (IMO).

I think that with some practice, it is possible to achieve faster lap times with the 2014 RCV in first person view than in third person view.

[doubledragoncc]

In 36 plus years of riding in real life I never  saw my own ass............POINT

TC is a system that works today so why not implement it in a sim.

DD

[BOBR6 84]

Its not who gets on the throttle first that wins.. Its who gets on full throttle first!

TC needs many laps to set up so theres no doubt the riders are capable.. Go as fast as you can and then fine tune the TC to give you that bit extra..

On the exit of a corner, if you can set the TC to give you a perfect amount of traction and drive with 100% throttle and no need to feather it on... Who would say no to that? Lol

[-aGy-]

For me it's not so much who is using TC. It's all the people using 3rd person!

I think third person in a simulation should be banned!!! If you want to see your rider, watch the reply!

im with you on this

[HornetMaX]

I could quote the entire post by Stout (above), but that wouldn't be very useful so I don't. 100% agreeing on what you wrote.

MaX.

[BOBR6 84]

For me it's not so much who is using TC. It's all the people using 3rd person!

I think third person in a simulation should be banned!!! If you want to see your rider, watch the reply!

im with you on this

I can understand why.. but it depends on your idea of what simulation is.. some people want to ''feel'' like they are riding the bike.. with onboard view, handlebars even full motion rigs etc etc

for me personally.. simulation is what is happening on the screen infront of me, i like to see the bike doing realistic things.

[Hawk]

Don't get me wrong guys..... I'm all for having TC in GPB to reflect the bikes in real life. I'm all for real simulation. What I'm advocating for in real life is the scrapping of TC and electronics altogether.

Of course some riders will prefer anything that makes riding easier and therefore safer for them to ride(same as many online gamers will use a cheat to get a better result than they otherwise could get). But as Bob stated above, tuning your TC so you can have your throttle at 100% on corner exit and get the correct amount of traction for greatest speed on exit is just not right in my opinion. It smacks of the bad old days of F1 were the cars were truly handling the cars and not the driver(note I didn't say the cars were driving the car. ). Basically the drivers just steered and throttled the car, the car would handle everything else; those electronic aids were banned the very next season.

As far as safety in bike racing is concerned. Hey! It's a dangerous sport. They all know the risks involved, so anyone who doesn't want to get hurt had better not compete because for sure at some time your going to get badly injured or killed, simple as that. The odds are always stacked against you in motorsport as far as your own safety is concerned. Accidents will happen no matter how good you think you are.

But some seem to want to continually bring in technology(supposedly in part for the sake of safety(finger down my throat - bork!) that will take the real riding skills away from the rider to the computer, ie, TC and electronic aids. As Bob said about tuning TC's for corner exits: That is and should be a rider skill using his throttle control, not something given over to a computer. It's no wonder they can all go fast these days! LOL

But anyway. Instead of me banging on for ages about this subject. I'll just finish by saying that yes, I'm all for simulating what is happening in real life into GPB, be it TC or whatever. As for my opinion on respawn, I have already posted previously here.

I get the impression that younsters these days just blindly accept this computer aided tech as a natural progression of the sport? It's not a progression at all! It's a contamination of the very soul of what motorsport is all about! Why can't you youngsters see that?! 

Okay.... I'm just an old fart that would like to see racing as it should be: Pure man and machine......  Not man > computer > machine = artificial result.

Let's see a riders real skills, eh. 

Hawk.

[HornetMaX]

I get the impression that younsters these days just blindly accept this computer aided tech as a natural progression of the sport? It's not a progression at all! It's a contamination of the very soul of what motorsport is all about! Why can't you youngsters see that?! 

You answered yourself on the next line

Okay.... I'm just an old fart

On this:

But some seem to want to continually bring in technology(supposedly in part for the sake of safety(finger down my throat - bork!) that will take the real riding skills away from the rider to the computer, ie, TC and electronic aids.

Technology gets in because otherwise constructors would not be interested in MotoGP. That's something the old-farters do not seem to get

Out of curiosity, what's your stance on slipper clutches ?

MaX.

[Hawk]

I get the impression that younsters these days just blindly accept this computer aided tech as a natural progression of the sport? It's not a progression at all! It's a contamination of the very soul of what motorsport is all about! Why can't you youngsters see that?! 

You answered yourself on the next line

Okay.... I'm just an old fart

On this:

But some seem to want to continually bring in technology(supposedly in part for the sake of safety(finger down my throat - bork!) that will take the real riding skills away from the rider to the computer, ie, TC and electronic aids.

Technology gets in because otherwise constructors would not be interested in MotoGP. That's something the old-farters do not seem to get

Out of curiosity, what's your stance on slipper clutches ?

MaX.

Lol! I may be an old fart, but seems us old farts are the only ones who can see the damage electronic aids are doing to the soul of motor racing here.   

As for constructers not being interested in racing GP's if Electronic Aids weren't allowed..... I would call their bluff big time if that was the case(which I doubt). I cannot believe they are only in the sport to promote and develop aids. That doesn't make sense whatsoever. There is a lot more to being a part of motor racing and competing as a team than just that.

Slipper Clutches: If your trying to say that a slipper clutch is the same as an electronic aid, then your wrong. A slipper clutch for a 4 stroke bike is as necessary as the clutch is to change gears, or the spark plug is to ignite the petrol mixture(yes I know we have electronic ignitions knowadays. Lol.... Showing my age now. Hehe. But you get the idea.  ). Slipper clutches are there to smooth out what would otherwise be a very dangerous aspect of changing down gears on a 4 stroke bike, especially down-changing while entering a corner.
If I get what your trying to say, then why don't you say we should race with square wheels, because round ones aid in the smooth transition between road and bike. Lol.

But no. Slipper Clutches are not the same as an electronic aid - BIG DIFFERENCE and you know it. Lol 

Hawk.

[EdouardB]

A slipper clutch for a 4 stroke bike is as necessary as the clutch is to change gears, or the spark plug is to ignite the petrol mixture(yes I know we have electronic ignitions knowadays. Lol.... Showing my age now. Hehe. But you get the idea.  ). Slipper clutches are there to smooth out what would otherwise be a very dangerous aspect of changing down gears on a 4 stroke bike, especially down-changing while entering a corner.

What the hell are you talking about Hawk? (sorry ) My 2003 yamaha R6 doesn't have a slipper clutch (the 0W01 I rode 2 weeks ago neither) and I'm perfectly fine with downshifts (but I do blip the throttle to match the RPM).
I've tried a 2008 yamaha R6 prepared for national Supersport championship with an evolved slipper clutch and I would say it's (at least to some extent) a rider aid. It makes blipping the throttle much less important, and basically the mecanism is equivalent to the rider slightly pulling the clutch in when the engine braking is too much...

Of course on top of that it's also an improvement to performance for braking stability but still, it makes riders downshift in a very lazy way...

[HornetMaX]

Lol! I may be an old fart, but seems us old farts are the only ones who can see the damage electronic aids are doing to the soul of motor racing here.   

Which could be a signal you're screaming in the wrong direction.

As for constructers not being interested in racing GP's if Electronic Aids weren't allowed..... I would call their bluff big time if that was the case(which I doubt). I cannot believe they are only in the sport to promote and develop aids. That doesn't make sense whatsoever. There is a lot more to being a part of motor racing and competing as a team than just that.

Because you think the constructors join MotoGP for the sake of the beauty of racing, competition and measuring which rider is more ballsy ?
They are in the sport not to promote aids, they are in to promote sales (of their bikes). This involves making better bikes, which in turn involves technological progress.
And before you say that constructors are greedy bastards (which could be true), I note that your beloved riders (Stoner included) ride in the classes where the money is, no matter the rules.
If riders were as romantic as you, they would only compete in classes where every rider has the same bike. But that, well ... just doesn't happen.

The only romantic ones are the "old farts" ... not even all of them, because I'm an old fart too as you know

Slipper Clutches:

Luckly (for me) EdouardB replied to that

One more question for you and then I'll give you the diagnosis of the disease that is affecting you (I'm already pretty sure, but just to make the point very clear).

So: you're not against slipper clutches. Now, are you against electronic engine brake control ?

MaX.