Test-Driving Dallara’s Professional-Grade Simulator – Video

Sean Evans of DRIVE was lucky enough to be allowed to try out Dallara’s professional-grade simulator, being the first journalist to do so.

Located in Indianapolis, Dallara’s top of the line simulator is used for race car setup development and driver training, being able to replicate real-life cars & forces as well as a wide variety of tracks.

A full day of operation of this multi-million dollar machine costs roughly $12,000, luckily Sean Evan’s wasn’t billed for his time in the simulator which he spent racing at Indianapolis and at Moncao, with a less than expected ending!

GTOmegaRacing.com

  • ImageArtSigns .

    The overall machine looks phenomenal…understand how they could dial in some great FFB on the possible Direct Drive wheel and add some butt kickers so to speak…but not sure how they could dial in some G-Force.

    • Happ Download

      They simulate the G forces by tilting the simulator. The occupant can’t see outside it so they don’t notice the tilt, but it feels like G forces. Though I wonder how it could come close to real level G forces that a formula car, or even a GT car, can produce these days.

      • Alex Ardoin

        They can simulate abrupt G loads, but they cannot properly give you the feeling of sustained G loads higher than around 1G. But otherwise those high tech simulators actually do a great job. Some manufacturers develop a new car inside a sim even as it’s still undergoing design work.

  • Jimmy

    Movement of the shadows under the front wing at about 3.35 doesn’t look right. Everything else looks great though!

  • Chris Partridge

    And they’re using Assetto Corsa software 🙂

    • Hash

      Without checking Im guessing you are absolutely full of it, I dont know ONE commercial setup for driverengineer purposes running AC, and for good reasons.

      • Chris Partridge

        I think you’ll find that I do know. And it IS running AC I can assure you.

      • Hash

        You got one source? and if this is the case thats absolutely BS, AC has so many setup quirks and certain “work arounds” that would render it useless for setups especially open wheelers etc it just wouldn’t work other than a showroom floor at Porsche, have you even seen the lack of data AC Tele puts out? teh tyre data adn heating doenmst even work very well among so many stuff it would be a abslute joke charging that kind of money to “play” AC, vanilla too? is that the indy track AC comes with?

        Bets are RFpro, or even modified RF1 .

      • Chris Partridge

        Marco Massarutto in an on-the-record interview.

      • Hash

        Well dont doubt you as you seem certain, but got a link, we talking about a sim Ferrari itself dropped, there is so many reasons why AC would be a very poor choice in this setup, unless this is in actual fact a expensive attraction.

      • Hash

        They are using the graphics engine of AC only, and I think you know that Chris.

      • David Dominguez
      • David Dominguez
      • RapidRefund

        Sorry I stand corrected 5x’s

      • melanieuk1

        Don’t argue with Hash, he think’s they are all running this rinky dinky rFactor, with the same physics he is running in his bed room, dare any professional organisation use Assetto Corsa PRO

      • Hash

        They arent,they are using AC GFX engine, got anything to relevant to add,

      • melanieuk1

        ” got anything to relevant to add,”

        Not with you, otherwise I’ll be going round in a endless circle, after all you’re always right……Not.

    • GamerMuscle

      But Assetto Corsa is Simcade , everyone knows that cars over the limit are practically impossible to control and get into slides that require a driver to focus on always driving under the limit !

      • Hash

        Sarcasm aside why would a commercial setup run a sim with so many limitations, like wack setups, and inaccurate Tyre heating among so much more, as a consumer product sim, AC works fine but if it is AC I doubt engineers would have zero benefit from it without even mentioning “driving”

      • pez2k

        A commercial setup like this will rarely be running a standard version of the software, to the best of my knowledge. rF Pro for example is designed to let developers drop in their own physics components instead of sharing them with rF1 or rF2 themselves. I suspect any licensing deal with Kunos would include similar room for modification of the physics engine.

        The key reason for this isn’t just that a standard sim game isn’t sufficient in some way, it’s more that they’re single-purpose sims rather than general-purpose so Dallara’s simulator never has to do things like treaded street tyres or all-wheel-drive. Additionally, Dallara will have a ton of telemetry data and design information on their own cars so that they can refine the simulation to more accurately reproduce the performance of those specific designs. A third party like Kunos is very unlikely to be given that level of detail for a commercial videogame.

      • Hash

        Agreed, they are using the GFX engine of AC, but thats it.

      • pez2k

        I suspect ‘gfx engine and more’ suggests that many other things like input handling will still be mostly Kunos code, it’s more that the core of the vehicle dynamics will be custom for Dallara’s application. It makes a lot more sense that way than for Dallara to scratch-build the full simulation software and only use the renderer – if they were doing that nothing would stop them from using a freely available and more widely supported engine like UE4.

      • ModernTimes2

        ” rF Pro for example is designed to let developers drop in their own physics components instead of sharing them with rF1 or rF2 themselves.”

        Correct. Same for AC, as Mr. Massarutto says. The disciplines of developing a 3D graphics/UI/IO engine and a professional grade physics simulation are very different. It makes perfect sense for a pro sim integrator to draw upon the highly developed 3D engine from a game, then let the (non gaming) physics boffins handle the physics part. The professional physics simulations are heavy stuff, often running on racks of computers dedicated to crunching the maths. Thus they get the best of both worlds; slick realistic gfx and deep physics (that no game is even close to touching).

      • GamerMuscle

        You can find limitations with all the simulators, it will be down to how specific cars are implemented and then what the end user / client wants to get from the simulator.

        You would have to ask a given team why they picked x sim for whatever they are doing , there will be loads of reasons to professionally use one sim over another.

        With private pro simulators you will likely find much more custom development so “RF pro” “AC” or whatever base platform they use might not mean much at the end of the day if they have changed many core aspects of have a very specifically implemented car.

      • Hash

        Its AC graphics only, like I said it seemed absurd otherwise, yes all sims have limits, but AC limits quadruple its issues in this application, like I say be damn near useless for setup accuracy.

      • GamerMuscle

        Well you don’t know if its graphics only.

        “AC limits quadruple its issues in this application”

        Not sure what you are basing that on as I say you can spot “issues” with plenty of cars in all the leading consumer simulators I’m sure even top “pro” sims have “issues” as well, it will just be a case of if those “isses” stop it from being of use as a tool for a given use case.

        “like I say be damn near useless for setup accuracy.”

        That might depend on the car and other aspects, do you work for a team that uses simulators to develop car setups for real world use ?

        Do you know whats specifically needed for it to be of use at the real track given the real track on the day will likely have quite different conditions ?

      • Hash

        No, it doesn’t depend on cars etc, it depends on the engine adn what itscabalbe off and accurate DATA OUPTPUT, you are either being dishonest or you knowledge on your fave sim a lot less than you think, for crying out loud it densest even have a break simulation, I could right a “paper” on its short comings in that department, but of course ill be painted as a nut,but i have a feeling ill be wasting my time, the Motec tele data would be enough to show you, Chris even claimed vanilla AC, which according to his own source is utter rubbish.

        This isnt about “your sim is better than mine” this is about calling BS statements.

        I find it slightly ironic anytime ISI are shown to be behind commercial software a horde of well known AC fans claim its so “highly modified” that it aint ISI software, but peddle this myth as god holy truth.

      • GamerMuscle

        I own and play all the simulators so all my sims are better than yours, AC has really nice FFB for me and I like how the cars handle around the limit and over the limit.

        I didn’t say AC was perfect or they were not using there own physics I was just pointing out that teams may or may not use X Y sim for different reasons and may or may not Moddify aspects of a given sim for different reasons.

        I’m sure lots of people could write a paper on each simulators short comings, could be quite interesting and would document and better help race team better decide which platform to use for there tasks.

        Simulators are so complex and there application so varied there are going to be loads of reasons to use different sims be it vanilla, partly custom or fully custom.

      • Hash

        You are missing the point, this isnt a sim argument, simply correcting what amounts to lies, its impossible Chris didnt know what the setup was ,as his own source said as much, but he choose to peddle a lie, to justify his fave sim, then ppl like yourself jumped the gun and assumed he was right about this absurd suggestion, and went on to defend it, without even checking source, nice.

      • GamerMuscle

        In my op I was pointing out how it could not be AC because AC is SimCade , everyone knows AC is SimCade and is of no simulation value.

      • quf

        “I could right a “paper” on its short comings in that department”

        I bet you couldn’t. You always talk and talk but do nothing than talk some more of what you’re gonna do. Typical..

      • Hash

        Cavalry’s here, Yeah nice input QUF, nothing about Chris attempted Lies in the name of AC fandom? we ignoring that now?

      • quf

        What attempted lies? He just said Assetto Corsa software. He didn’t mention graphics, physics, sounds, content in particular, he just said the software. It can have many interpretations about the usage as he was vague, but you jumped on him that he was lying… lying about what in particular? See you can’t tell, because he was vague by just saying “Assetto Corsa software”.
        When Marco posted this on facebook, about two weeks ago, he replied in a comment with “3D assets, customized gfx engine and more”.
        Now we know.. can we move on?

      • Hash

        He later said vanilla AC, and then didn’t post source after I asked, it was obvious what picture he was trying to paint, adn Ive pissed of AC fan brigade becasue I pulled him up on it.

        Now Im going to be reading pages of QUFs vague all over the place defense of this, Kunos or AC fans could murder babies and QUF could write a paper on how it was justified.

        Edit: whats the bet QUF talks about how horrible person Iam talking about murdering babies….

      • Hash

        Your honest mate deleted his “vanilla” comment, that also deleted a couple of mine, was this your advice to him QUF?

      • quf

        idk of that, when I entered this article a lot of comments were already there. So idk what got deleted in the meantime.

      • Chris Partridge

        Hash – I have never heard of you but you’re not coming across as particularly impressive. Why not accept someone else might actually be correct?

      • Hash

        Correct? how about your dishonesty, tell me again about vanilla AC is being used, when your very own source says otherwise, its a GFX only from AC, AC doesn’t even bloody model brakes to any real degree for crying out loud.

        See David Dominguez below.

      • David Dominguez

        Indeed, you should accept that someone else than you might be correct.

        https://i.gyazo.com/a54f0637a5b8a22c52f9429dd5aa7c7e.png

      • RapidRefund

        3x’s posting this?

      • David Dominguez

        What is practically impossible to control for you doesn’t mean that it is for others.

      • GamerMuscle

        Well that’s the problem I can only drive simcade titles.

      • Hash

        David Dominguez posted the evidence I seen saying from Marcos own mouth its 3d assets and GFX,this was a lot of misinformation from AC fans on here.

      • GamerMuscle

        Misinformation !

      • Hash

        I almost choose to not use that word, should of just said liars are you just having a laugh now GM, or are you trying to paint a picture as my point has well and truly been proven.

      • GamerMuscle

        I don’t think you should have used it , I think Misinformation is up there with Simcade at the moment.

        As a representative of the Assetto corsa fanboy association I think its fantastic Dellara are using AC in some or another it clearly proves AC can have some simulation value. Mind you its obviously impossible that they would use any of kunos’s physics code. I mean they may or may not have, but we all know they did not because the tire model and other aspects of AC are SimCade due to it being to easy to drive.

      • Hash

        No not due to it being easy to drive,its due to its engine, and how the core engine works,motec data shows it, AC own apps show it, its files tell the story,its not dynamic, or at least not how you think, the variables are tiny in AC,it is a list of work arounds to produce a alright “feeling” sim for consumers, as soon as you want real data or even realistic results from setup changes it falls over hard………the reason its easy to drive is due to those factors,not other way around like you suggest.

      • quf

        But that’s what other companies use rf1 or rfpro for, their graphics engine because of low latency graphics streaming. Then make their own physics simulation and who can’t afford will use whatever they find good to suit their needs and then at least create their own car and tyre physics with their data. But the main purpose is outsourced graphics (and sometimes laserscanned tracks) for their own physics and cars. These specialized companies or even manufacturers/racing teams have their own software, and even before any of the relatively modern sim racing games were released. When they don’t have their own, there are several professional physics software on the market unrelated to games.

      • Hash

        And? where were you before when people were lying about it?what this entire thread was about.

        Person A: this uses AC….even Vanilla AC
        Me: I call bull, AC psychics would be no where near cabple, I didnt say others Games were did i QUF

        Person B: How do you know hes worng, AC da best

        Me: check source, turns out GFX and model assets used and thats it.

        Person A: He disappears

        Person C: oh no real commercial project uses any off the shelve product.

        Me: Not exactly true but agree with sentiment, doesn’t change the fact I was right calling BS and pointing out lies.

      • quf

        To not repeat myself, see this post http://www.virtualr.net/trying-dallaras-professional-grade-simulator-video#comment-3046020876 about the “lying thing”.

      • David Dominguez

        Not with rF1. Many racing teams simply use rF1 with their own data, like any other mod. rF Pro is a whole different thing.

      • David Dominguez
      • GamerMuscle

        That diagram just shows me hitting the apex, I don’t see the issue.

      • Richard Hessels

        I suspect that making a car in AC with all the proper parameters for the chassis and the tires is a whole different drive than the AC we drive on.

      • GamerMuscle

        I agree

        With the pro sims VS home sims I think the biggest difference will be in 1) usable data out 2) specific alignment with reality for certain applications.

        The general end drive nature in-terms of fundamental approach to driving the car will likely be very similar , IE how the car handles in general when pushed and what the driver does to push and respond to the car and then what the car does in general in response to the driver.

        In the end home users are not really going to get any utility from a car spitting out data or a lap time being say 0.300 closer to a specific real world lap time.

        Then of course for a home user having lots of content cars, UI , mod tools and stability and quality across a large bulk of content is more important.

        Pro sims tend to be more of a specialized tool for very defined use cases where as home simulators are more of a Swiss army knife / multi tool in some ways.

      • JoshuGhong

        There is no AC physics portion in this simulator.
        https://i.gyazo.com/a54f0637a5b8a22c52f9429dd5aa7c7e.png

    • Mark

      No, they’re not. However, they are using iRacing’s version of the Indianapolis track according to iRacing Staff Jack in the iRacing forum.

  • Oliver

    I’ll take four.

  • GamerMuscle

    I like how if you look at the VR post title image, its as if the guy is listing to a joke then in the video thumbnail its as if he just got it.

  • William Mazeo

    Came to read comments… fanboys melt down, as aways. We should cut the internet of some people, for real.

    On the video, I remember seeing a ICS driver posting a video of their practice in this way back in 2012, software does not seem like changed at all. Their Indianapolis virtual track is more detailed than any sim out there, it has a lot of stuff outside the track if I remember right

  • MC

    Scroll down for the most pointless argument. AC’s based on software developed for a simulator, that might actually be the link in this situation. Every racing team uses their own physics, I even knew a club racer who (years ago) created his own for rFactor.

    • JoshuGhong

      This is different. This simulator isn’t even powered by AC physics portion.

      • MC

        You do realise how long what we call Asseto Corsa has existed for right?

      • JoshuGhong

        Kunos physics is not on the same level as Dymola or even rFactor.

      • MC

        You seem to be missing my point. What Dallara and other simulators use predates the Assetto Corsa we play.

  • Helldriver

    Most of the F1 and Nascar teams are using rF pro for their simulators. Ferrari switched two years ago: http://www.autocarpro.in/news-international/ferrari-f1-team-switches-driving-simulator-software-rfpro-6554

    Early 2012 ISI released rFactor 2, an evolution of the original version. It contained a lot of code that had been developed as part of rFactor Pro,
    a version of the simulation that is sold to professional racing and
    formula one teams, backported into the new “consumer” version
    http://www.planetmarrs.net/rfactor-full-steam-ahead/

    AC is a nice game but far from a real simulator like rF2.

    • quf

      rfpro is a better solution than rfactor, rfactor2, assetto corsa, iracing. So don’t just use the fact that these professional teams use rfpro only to attack AC, because they didn’t choose a gaming product (such as rf1, rf2, ac, etc.), they chose a specific industrial product that offers them a particular set of features not found in any sim racing game:
      “simulation software must reproduce the track surface in minute detail and respond to dynamic inputs faster than the driver can detect. TerrainServer from rFpro is the first simulation package to fully satisfy both these requirements, and was selected after an exhaustive evaluation process.”

Back to top