[DiRT 4] Constructive feedback on the subject of car-feel and physics: The Ultimate Thread

[Madhun1967 51]

LMAO thats a good one . I hope its either 1 or 2! 

[Fjacobsen 58]

I´m not sure, but the RWD Opel Manta and Kadett feels more tail happy after the 1.05 Patch, not like in DR, but thats also known to be a tad too tail happy.
I also noticed that the onscreen stage notes now included a grey box with distances, which I have not noticed before.

So maybe this patch included more than just support for higher no. of CPU cores.

But maybe it´s just placebo...

[fab1701 0]

hawku0 said:

fab1701 said:

hawku0 said:

[...]

I have posted telemetry outputs from the Dirt 4 where the data shows that cars on Dirt 4 stop faster on gravel than a Le Mans Prototype cars on tarmac.

It is the time you to provide the data which shows that the Dirt 4's physics are correct and stop arguing the feelings of how the real life car handles.

[...]

Yeah, don't get me wrong, not trying to diminish your point, but I don't see that the braking is that far off from RL tbh. After all, we have absolutely no data about what is actually realistic in these conditions, like you say is necessary. What we really need is a set of real data that supports this. The videos posted with telemetry are fine, nothing wrong about them, but the issue is, that those drivers never brake at full capacity or to a full stop, because you don't do it when you're racing. Also, they're driving very smoothly to be fast and therefore the g-forces shown in the telemetry might not be the maximum ones that can occur.
The best data we have so far, derives from the videos I posted a while ago, where I calculated a maximum deceleration of 1g from. And keep in mind that these were bakkies with ABS and a modified Iveco truck, which is still far off from the capabilities of a lightweight rally car.

Here is a video from the Team O'Neil rally school about braking, that describes many things to keep in mind about different braking techniques in general and on loose surfaces (It's quite long though, but the important part about gravel comes straight ahead at 5:00 to at least 11:00):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V49TxR4-K90
 
At 10:20 he makes a guess about braking distances on gravel. Granted, this again is not the data we are looking for, because he himself says that this isn't necessarily correct, but the funny thing is, that 80mph to 0mph in 100m would lead to a deceleration of around 1.32g. I think the median g-forces in Dirt 4 under braking on gravel are about 1.4+ g atm like the telemetry shows? Not a huge difference imo, even considering that I'm not quite sure if he means road cars in general or actually high performing rally vehicles in the video.

I don't know how you calculated the 1.32 g's, but the more correct number would be around 0.65 g's, if the stopping distance from 80 mph to 0 is 100 meters and the deacceleration is constant.
Stopping distance from 60 mph to 0 is between 20 and 25 meters in Dirt 4.

If anybody still thinks that cars should stop faster on gravel than on asphalt, then you should read this:
https://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/NRD/Multimedia/PDFs/VRTC/ca/capubs/NHTSAabsT4FinalRpt.pdf
Of course the cars on that test aren't rally cars, but difference of grip still shouldn't be reversed.

Yes, overlooked a factor (mph should be banned, metric is so much better and doesn't lead to this...). It's 0.65g indeed. But as he said, this isn't necessarily correct and depends on the surface (still, then tends to support your argument ;)). Also, what about the bakkies with ABS that got to 1g? Checked these calculations too by the way, nothing wrong there.

EDIT: What we need to be sure, is data from actual rally cars on different surfaces, all of which can be defined as gravel.

[Narzugon 0]

Slowish said:

There are a few ways this can go as I see it:

• CM can refine the default setups - perhaps satisfying some Sim players
  
• CM can diagnose and solve some deeper underlying issues related to physics / assists / data, etc. - perhaps resulting in something more realistic between DR and the current D4 handling , something I suspect many of us would enjoy 
  

I can understand CM giving a vague statement to the Car Setup/Game Physics debate and it taking some time to look into. I'm sure it's a very slippery slope to navigate. But we're approaching 2 months after release and today's update hasn't addressed some of the simpler issues such as pace note calls and AI times. I don't understand how a CPU update was more urgent.

Along the same lines and back on topic, with this debate being such a big thing on the interwebs, I really expected quicker action in the form of information at least.

If they think everything is good with tunings and physics they could provide information to help the masses tune and or drive these cars the way they were intended.

If they agree that there is a problem, at this point (nearly 2 months after release) information on at least a game plan going forward would be helpful.

From a consumer's view, post launch reviews paints a negative picture which means a dent in future sales. Communication is key in my opinion. Then again, I'm just a consumer and don't know all the variables.

[SamRWD 2]

Probably CPU upgrade was much easier and straightforward to do.

[versedi 39]

SamRWD said:

Probably CPU upgrade was much easier and straightforward to do.

[ot] Or maybe, devs who are responsible for this part of the game were not on vacation/got back from it?

I myself took a break to see what future will bring. PUBG's taking most of my time lately anyway. 

[/ot]


Get a bit of patience. Please. Stay constructive.

[Gordouxk 0]

fab1701 said:

hawku0 said:

fab1701 said:

hawku0 said:

[...]

I have posted telemetry outputs from the Dirt 4 where the data shows that cars on Dirt 4 stop faster on gravel than a Le Mans Prototype cars on tarmac.

It is the time you to provide the data which shows that the Dirt 4's physics are correct and stop arguing the feelings of how the real life car handles.

[...]

Yeah, don't get me wrong, not trying to diminish your point, but I don't see that the braking is that far off from RL tbh. After all, we have absolutely no data about what is actually realistic in these conditions, like you say is necessary. What we really need is a set of real data that supports this. The videos posted with telemetry are fine, nothing wrong about them, but the issue is, that those drivers never brake at full capacity or to a full stop, because you don't do it when you're racing. Also, they're driving very smoothly to be fast and therefore the g-forces shown in the telemetry might not be the maximum ones that can occur.
The best data we have so far, derives from the videos I posted a while ago, where I calculated a maximum deceleration of 1g from. And keep in mind that these were bakkies with ABS and a modified Iveco truck, which is still far off from the capabilities of a lightweight rally car.

Here is a video from the Team O'Neil rally school about braking, that describes many things to keep in mind about different braking techniques in general and on loose surfaces (It's quite long though, but the important part about gravel comes straight ahead at 5:00 to at least 11:00):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V49TxR4-K90
 
At 10:20 he makes a guess about braking distances on gravel. Granted, this again is not the data we are looking for, because he himself says that this isn't necessarily correct, but the funny thing is, that 80mph to 0mph in 100m would lead to a deceleration of around 1.32g. I think the median g-forces in Dirt 4 under braking on gravel are about 1.4+ g atm like the telemetry shows? Not a huge difference imo, even considering that I'm not quite sure if he means road cars in general or actually high performing rally vehicles in the video.

I don't know how you calculated the 1.32 g's, but the more correct number would be around 0.65 g's, if the stopping distance from 80 mph to 0 is 100 meters and the deacceleration is constant.
Stopping distance from 60 mph to 0 is between 20 and 25 meters in Dirt 4.

If anybody still thinks that cars should stop faster on gravel than on asphalt, then you should read this:
https://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/NRD/Multimedia/PDFs/VRTC/ca/capubs/NHTSAabsT4FinalRpt.pdf
Of course the cars on that test aren't rally cars, but difference of grip still shouldn't be reversed.

Yes, overlooked a factor (mph should be banned, metric is so much better and doesn't lead to this...). It's 0.65g indeed. But as he said, this isn't necessarily correct and depends on the surface (still, then tends to support your argument ;)). Also, what about the bakkies with ABS that got to 1g? Checked these calculations too by the way, nothing wrong there.

EDIT: What we need to be sure, is data from actual rally cars on different surfaces, all of which can be defined as gravel.

I don't think it's impossible for rally cars to pull 1.4 g under braking even on gravel given that a road corvette on Hoosier  tyres can pull up to 1.8g under braking. Gravel is also very well known for its speed retardation properties which is why it's used at racetracks and in truck beds on highways. Some hard surfaces made up of clay and with gravel pressed into it actually act similar to a very soft hot Tarmac so they can decelerate a car very fact indeed. But ultimately unless we have some hard data it's all just intuition and educated guessing.

One thing is certain, reducing the grip isn't going to make this a better sim, because in heavy rain in Dirt4 there is significantly less grip and all it does is just makes the cars slip and slide more and that's about it. Also I don't believe there is a massive issue with a lack of on- throttle oversteer or the way and amount the cars oversteer and slide. It is in fact very reminiscent of real life and I believe that the only way to make it easier to slide is to put some hidden aid into the game like a tyre model with an unrealistically progressive loss of grip and to turn off or minimise the effects that the surface topography and the gravel  has on the cars. I mean, in real life on the kinds bumpy multi-cambered, multi surface stages that Dirt 4 features, pulling off consistent slides and on throttle oversteer is a very tricky business indeed. Very, very tricky. So to go to codemasters and to now say that you want to slide easier is an unrealistic request. A sim of this complexity is not a bunch of isolated parameters that you can just manipulate how you wish. It's a very large collection of parameters that must work harmoniously together and as a whole and changing one parameter can throw everything else out of whack.

[SkiddyMcCrash 311]

Gordouxk said:

I didn't know that multi account was a banable offence. I think I have one more account on here which I used a few years ago but I can't remember the password and I closed the email to which it was linked. So I set up another one, otherwise how do I post anything here.

Did you really? What was that accounts name?

[hawku0 0]

fab1701 said:

hawku0 said:

fab1701 said:

hawku0 said:

[...]

I have posted telemetry outputs from the Dirt 4 where the data shows that cars on Dirt 4 stop faster on gravel than a Le Mans Prototype cars on tarmac.

It is the time you to provide the data which shows that the Dirt 4's physics are correct and stop arguing the feelings of how the real life car handles.

[...]

Yeah, don't get me wrong, not trying to diminish your point, but I don't see that the braking is that far off from RL tbh. After all, we have absolutely no data about what is actually realistic in these conditions, like you say is necessary. What we really need is a set of real data that supports this. The videos posted with telemetry are fine, nothing wrong about them, but the issue is, that those drivers never brake at full capacity or to a full stop, because you don't do it when you're racing. Also, they're driving very smoothly to be fast and therefore the g-forces shown in the telemetry might not be the maximum ones that can occur.
The best data we have so far, derives from the videos I posted a while ago, where I calculated a maximum deceleration of 1g from. And keep in mind that these were bakkies with ABS and a modified Iveco truck, which is still far off from the capabilities of a lightweight rally car.

Here is a video from the Team O'Neil rally school about braking, that describes many things to keep in mind about different braking techniques in general and on loose surfaces (It's quite long though, but the important part about gravel comes straight ahead at 5:00 to at least 11:00):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V49TxR4-K90
 
At 10:20 he makes a guess about braking distances on gravel. Granted, this again is not the data we are looking for, because he himself says that this isn't necessarily correct, but the funny thing is, that 80mph to 0mph in 100m would lead to a deceleration of around 1.32g. I think the median g-forces in Dirt 4 under braking on gravel are about 1.4+ g atm like the telemetry shows? Not a huge difference imo, even considering that I'm not quite sure if he means road cars in general or actually high performing rally vehicles in the video.

I don't know how you calculated the 1.32 g's, but the more correct number would be around 0.65 g's, if the stopping distance from 80 mph to 0 is 100 meters and the deacceleration is constant.
Stopping distance from 60 mph to 0 is between 20 and 25 meters in Dirt 4.

If anybody still thinks that cars should stop faster on gravel than on asphalt, then you should read this:
https://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/NRD/Multimedia/PDFs/VRTC/ca/capubs/NHTSAabsT4FinalRpt.pdf
Of course the cars on that test aren't rally cars, but difference of grip still shouldn't be reversed.

Yes, overlooked a factor (mph should be banned, metric is so much better and doesn't lead to this...). It's 0.65g indeed. But as he said, this isn't necessarily correct and depends on the surface (still, then tends to support your argument ;)). Also, what about the bakkies with ABS that got to 1g? Checked these calculations too by the way, nothing wrong there.

EDIT: What we need to be sure, is data from actual rally cars on different surfaces, all of which can be defined as gravel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXupJu-Uu4A

Yes, the stopping rate for the GWM Steed 6 would be 0.98 g's, if the speedometer indicates 100% accurate speed and the driver started braking when the speedometer is at 80 km/h. 

Most cars do have about 10% speedometer error because it is illegal to speedometer to indicate lower speed than the actual speed and to allow installation of larger wheels. Maximum allowed speedometer error is 110% + 4 kmh, which would mean about 70 km/h actual speed when the speedometer indicates 80 km/h.
If the actual speed was 70 km/h, the deceleration rate would be 0.75 g's. Half way of those speeds at 75 km/h, the stopping rate would be 0.86 g's, which would translates to 100 km/h to 0 in 3.28 seconds and 45.7 meters.

It looked like the ABS was off in the GWM test or the ABS did somehow allow the wheels to lock up.
I wouldn't call that test very accurate, but it's better than nothing.

[fab1701 0]

hawku0 said:

fab1701 said:

hawku0 said:

fab1701 said:

hawku0 said:

[...]

I have posted telemetry outputs from the Dirt 4 where the data shows that cars on Dirt 4 stop faster on gravel than a Le Mans Prototype cars on tarmac.

It is the time you to provide the data which shows that the Dirt 4's physics are correct and stop arguing the feelings of how the real life car handles.

[...]

Yeah, don't get me wrong, not trying to diminish your point, but I don't see that the braking is that far off from RL tbh. After all, we have absolutely no data about what is actually realistic in these conditions, like you say is necessary. What we really need is a set of real data that supports this. The videos posted with telemetry are fine, nothing wrong about them, but the issue is, that those drivers never brake at full capacity or to a full stop, because you don't do it when you're racing. Also, they're driving very smoothly to be fast and therefore the g-forces shown in the telemetry might not be the maximum ones that can occur.
The best data we have so far, derives from the videos I posted a while ago, where I calculated a maximum deceleration of 1g from. And keep in mind that these were bakkies with ABS and a modified Iveco truck, which is still far off from the capabilities of a lightweight rally car.

Here is a video from the Team O'Neil rally school about braking, that describes many things to keep in mind about different braking techniques in general and on loose surfaces (It's quite long though, but the important part about gravel comes straight ahead at 5:00 to at least 11:00):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V49TxR4-K90
 
At 10:20 he makes a guess about braking distances on gravel. Granted, this again is not the data we are looking for, because he himself says that this isn't necessarily correct, but the funny thing is, that 80mph to 0mph in 100m would lead to a deceleration of around 1.32g. I think the median g-forces in Dirt 4 under braking on gravel are about 1.4+ g atm like the telemetry shows? Not a huge difference imo, even considering that I'm not quite sure if he means road cars in general or actually high performing rally vehicles in the video.

I don't know how you calculated the 1.32 g's, but the more correct number would be around 0.65 g's, if the stopping distance from 80 mph to 0 is 100 meters and the deacceleration is constant.
Stopping distance from 60 mph to 0 is between 20 and 25 meters in Dirt 4.

If anybody still thinks that cars should stop faster on gravel than on asphalt, then you should read this:
https://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/NRD/Multimedia/PDFs/VRTC/ca/capubs/NHTSAabsT4FinalRpt.pdf
Of course the cars on that test aren't rally cars, but difference of grip still shouldn't be reversed.

Yes, overlooked a factor (mph should be banned, metric is so much better and doesn't lead to this...). It's 0.65g indeed. But as he said, this isn't necessarily correct and depends on the surface (still, then tends to support your argument ;)). Also, what about the bakkies with ABS that got to 1g? Checked these calculations too by the way, nothing wrong there.

EDIT: What we need to be sure, is data from actual rally cars on different surfaces, all of which can be defined as gravel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXupJu-Uu4A

Yes, the stopping rate for the GWM Steed 6 would be 0.98 g's, if the speedometer indicates 100% accurate speed and the driver started braking when the speedometer is at 80 km/h. 

Most cars do have about 10% speedometer error because it is illegal to speedometer to indicate lower speed than the actual speed and to allow installation of larger wheels. Maximum allowed speedometer error is 110% + 4 kmh, which would mean about 70 km/h actual speed when the speedometer indicates 80 km/h.
If the actual speed was 70 km/h, the deceleration rate would be 0.75 g's. Half way of those speeds at 75 km/h, the stopping rate would be 0.86 g's, which would translates to 100 km/h to 0 in 3.28 seconds and 45.7 meters.

It looked like the ABS was off in the GWM test or the ABS did somehow allow the wheels to lock up.
I wouldn't call that test very accurate, but it's better than nothing.

Yes I can agree with that. I still think that a rally car could perform better though considering the massive differences to these bakkies featured, question is how much is really possible and even more important, what is possible on the exact surfaces featured in Dirt4? Until there is any real data, that is reliable and fits to both, the cars as well as the conditions, I think we have no real choice but to accept how it is now. Yes, it might be on the grippy side, but we don't know the data on which it is based. I don't think that they just made a guess on this. This doesn't mean that there is no error involved though.

I will continue searching to find anything that is usable, but maybe it is just enough to point out that there might be something weird going on with the braking, that seems to be worth taking a look at from our perspective. At least considering that the wheels do not lock up properly. About the braking distances itself... I wouldn't bet on this without any data. Looking at normal everyday road cars with all season tires or something sure, then I'm definitely on your side. But talking about rally cars... I just don't know.

[SamRWD 2]

I posted at least one onboard with a car we have in a game, from a rally we have in game, and in conditions we have in a game. It was low resolution, but you could clearly see when speed drops below 100 km/h (speedometer read drops into two digits) when Colin brakes into tight right hand corner. He doesn't even brake to full stop and it still takes him much more time and distance. 

[Madhun1967 51]

AGREED ,and the fact i always , in Dirt also ,had to turn down brake force to almost nothing to make stopping distances feel semi-real.
I mean cars are stopping on a dime ,very unrealistic in both titles,IMHO.

[SamRWD 2]

DR was really much worse. D4 is a huge improvement, but it is still nowhere real cars performance. 

[Madhun1967 51]

I would love to see a published recording of Meekes consultation about physics during development.Can we have that i wonder?
Would love to see his input,if not all, at least the modern cars.Just to see what his ideas and input got taken into consideration.Also i do not buy into him not being able to elaborate on classic cars handling,once tried in game.He can drive ANYTHING ,maybe not as well as the moderns,but could have said a few things im sure.
ps: he definitely could have sorted the  FWDs:) if you guys know what i mean 

[dgeesi0 305]

well they said they didnt focus on older cars which if you think about what he drives then you would get that.thing is the cars in the game are mainly older iconic cars people love.which handle oddly to be polite.thing is was petter and kris just marketing ?

while i feel for people like christina and the skeleton crew who are manning the ship while people on vacation what a time to take the vacations ! been a big mistake if honest. brand new, big game with not stellar reviews and nothing much can be done about it or said about it cause people are on holiday.thats poor planning.hopefully it doesnt happen again.people obviously deserved a holiday and its holiday season but right at launch.not a great idea.

its not just this title slip ups effects.you have other big titles soon and future titles and people remember when they come to open their wallets.cant have mistakes like are being made.regardless of how nice great a team codies are.your my fav game devs in the industry but Dirt 4 has slipped up.

im hoping you can put in the effort needed to bring it to where most of us want it without the business people interfering saying thats profits we cant do this or that.

im actually pissed at myself because i was invited to goto codies to try dirt 4 early on but couldnt due to family stuff and maybe feedback could of helped avoid some of the issues about now.

[Madhun1967 51]

all im saying is he knows how to drive .To get to his level ,you have to have an a more than better understanding of ANY driving physics at work in a race car.He may not be an expert on RWD,but guarantee you he could drive them.
That said,i long for the Big Lee(sp ?)  days when communication was great during EA of Dirt.Was amazing to have daily feedback about stuff being talked about.I do realize this isnt EA,but no Roadbooks and all is a bit saddening.With F1 release around the corner,we may not get much for awhile ,if this past month plus is any indication.We must really be a small minority,although complaints about D4 are all over the web.
Again to be as busy,as not to chime in with any comments,is not customer friendly IMHO.It can be politically correct,and doesnt have to promise us anything .Would be so nice to hear that this title will live on .........

[bogani 756]

I think Petter was more involved than Kris, who seems to have had limited time. I think the person they got most feedback from was actually Petters son, Oliver.

It also comes down to what they expekt from the game itself. In Kris' eyes it might have been close enough to what he would have expekted from a game? Who knows.

In the end, the RX feels brilliant and I really couldn't ask much more from it handling wise. Rally is another story. In some areas it's a big improvement, in others it's taken a step back. This is pretty much exactly the impression we got from Oliver in the interview WRX did on FB. He said RX feels "perfect" but rally was quite not there yet.

[fab1701 0]

SamRWD said:

I posted at least one onboard with a car we have in a game, from a rally we have in game, and in conditions we have in a game. It was low resolution, but you could clearly see when speed drops below 100 km/h (speedometer read drops into two digits) when Colin brakes into tight right hand corner. He doesn't even brake to full stop and it still takes him much more time and distance. 

In other words, we can't read the speed value, have no information about the brake input, can't measure the distance exactly, don't know about the actual brake input and the only data about the surface comes from the visual interpretation from an onboard camera with low resolution. This is no data, sorry.

Besides, finding an example, where the grip is really low, doesn't imply that this is always so. On the other hand, finding a reliable an fitting example where the grip is exactly like it is in Dirt4 atm could show, that it is at least not unrealistic. That said, I haven't seen one yet.

From my point of view, the upper bar lays somewhere between 0.75 and 0.98 g deceleration with a regular bakkie and ABS (supposedly). Now how much can this improve with an actual rally car, that is lighter and has better suspension, better tires, better brakes and better aerodynamics...? Also what is possible with a different surface and/or one that actually fits one of those in Dirt4?

Rally footage could still help though. It just has to deliver valuable information such as, exact information about speed, g-forces, brake input and so on. Also, it is necessary that the wheels definitely get locked up, because that is the condition where the tires might find the most grip and it is the way how you stop on Dirt4-gravel the best.

The point I'm trying to make here, is that we can't pinpoint the one realistic value. Especially not by finding videos that aren't really informative at all, but look slippier than what is show in Dirt4. IMO we have to define a spectrum of what is actually possible and what isn't before we can say that the grip is too high under braking. I think we all agree that gravel can be really slippy and might even be so most of the time, but that doesn't imply that Dirt4s gravel model is unrealistic at all. It's on the grippy side for sure, question is, is it inside that spectrum or not.

[Madhun1967 51]

Arent there some heli cam footages with speed showing ,where we could intelligently "guess' deccelaration on a straight  from lets say 80-90 mph to a corner with maybe 30-40 mph?

[Slowish 0]

Madhun1967 said:

Arent there some heli cam footages with speed showing ,where we could intelligently "guess' deccelaration on a straight  from lets say 80-90 mph to a corner with maybe 30-40 mph?

Side by side video comparisons are often made for racing-sim's so it should be useful for Rally as well but, it may have to be done using short sections of stages rather than complete runs. We've seen several for AC with Aristotelis driving both the real cars and the virtual cars in the same way / same track and it is quite convincing - as well as being very entertaining, IMO. They also use slow motion replay as a way to hone in on various handling behaviors.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1m4pwjfHV8

The bigger issue is probably related to actual loose-material properties being inconsistent and that will likely always present points of contention among viewers so Tarmac may be the best place to start due to it's nature with more consistent and reproducible conditions.

[Madhun1967 51]

thats awesome ,never seen it ! thanks very much 

[SamRWD 2]

So every footage from real life is always from some specific low grip surface. Do we have any evidence you can brake that fast in Wales? Because if we do we can also say it is not typical Wales surface. 

[KevM 44]

DirtFish would suggest the surface grip value may be the problem.  Cars are great on the concrete/tar, but display exactly the same weird behaviour on the gravel section as they do on the stages.  

Its certainly not a car physics problem or they'd feel weird on the sealed surfaces too, but drive around DirtFish and you can literally feel the characteristics differ as the surface does.

On sealed, you can perform the perfect power-slide in a RWD.  But unless you really go extreme with the setup, the car just digs in at the rear and ploughs the nose forward with understeer at full throttle.

Dirtfish is handy because it has both to try with the same car/same chassis, & it's weird because it happens but shouldn't?

[Porkhammer 78]

I really miss this, both in DR and D4 - cars struggling to get the power down off the startline.

Oh and the oversteer is nice to behold as well, even though the dude is hardly pushing it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztuTBhgX1hg

[bogani 756]

Porkhammer said:

I really miss this, both in DR and D4 - cars struggling to get the power down off the startline.

Oh and the oversteer is nice to behold as well, even though the dude is hardly pushing it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztuTBhgX1hg

Indeed. The most enjoyable one to get off the line like this is the Fiat 131 in Dirt Rally. In D4 you can hsrdly get any wheelspin with it :(

The Stratos seems to be a tricky car IRL. The engine placement truly gives great traction in the rear - up to a certain point. DR was much closer to behave like this imo.