Question Fixed controls vs. full platform movement

Well, I'm new to this but am planning on a 2DOF racing simulator based on the great tutorial "2DOF Motion Simulator with truck wiper motor playseat" by RacingMat, however, I'm not 100% decided.

Here's my question: before I stumbled onto this site, I was planning a build along the lines of commercial designs. One company, who also sells parts, uses a design for their ready-built simulators that moves only the seat. I asked them why they didn't use a design in which everything moves together since that seems to be more realistic. Their reply was that most of the motion was felt through the seat and no other movement was needed.

I see lots of seat-only sims and lots of full-cockpit sims here on the site and can see some advantages unique to each design - any thoughts?

as far a the legend says... it is true, the seat mover has some kind of reality-ness that the whole platform moves has not

i personally havent try a full platform moving... but, seat mover is easier to build and it is easy to your motors.

and the argument is that... if you try to feel the next time you drive your real car, you are actually moving inside your seat, while the wheel and pedals seams to be statics.

best regards


fer

I have a full motion, completely enclosed sim, and I've only had extremely limited time in a seat only movement sim. The general consensus matches what @ferslash said. Having your body move relative to your hands and feet seems to enhance the sensation. Something similar happens with my sim, which is the motion seems much more dramatic (although less realistic) if I remove the cover so I can actually see the sim motion compared to the static room.

If you are doing flight sim, where the movement is larger and slower than racing, I would make everything move - including the screen if possible.

I hate to admit it but I didn't even realize that there might be a real reason to just move the seat vs. moving seat and controls. I had just assumed that full frame would be better.

I had already ordered the strut to go full frame when @Avenga76 asked what I was building and why. I'm going to build as just a seat mover first to try it out when the strut gets here, but I'll probably go ahead as a full frame for flying. I've been running with just a single bass transducer and I figure anything will be a step up.

I can attach my stick to the moving frame and use a fixed shelf above the frame for a wheel, but the pedals are the issue. If I can figure a way to swap fixed driving pedals that mount to the lower frame with rudder pedals that mount to the moving frame, I might be able to swap back and forth.

It may or may not work out. Trying to salvage the way I went not knowing any better and even turn it to advantage. If I'm way off, luckily the strut isn't too expensive. It's the fittings that get you. Or I just leave it in one configuration.

Sorry, just rambling. Maybe it will be of use.

Thanks everyone for their input. Between the time of my original post and reading your comments, I came across another company that makes sims & sells parts and they strongly advocate the full motion route and for very good reasons (of course!). I intend to add traction loss in the future and it would seem that a pivot point at the front of the frame rather than under the seat would add to the sensation.

You Dont add a Pivot point under the Seat for Traction loss, That would be called YAW if you did and that is NOT a land based vehicle "force" per say, but rather a flight axis.

CXC has a very in depth explanation that makes actual sense. Most full motion Mfg's explanation's are plain marketing mumbo jumbo.

http://www.cxcsimulations.com/products/motion-pro/how-it-feels/

The same can be said for Mfg's of 2dof seat movers on a pivot too since they are incapable of producing proper heaving action. Both types have pros and cons.

Once again, thanks for the input and direction. I've decided to go with a "seat mover", mainly because I've decided to build mostly with plywood for my first attempt because it's cheaper than steel tubing and your posts have convinced me that, for my needs, the seat mover fits best.

i choose full frame.. because my sim have a diferent types of simulation. like trains, cars, trucks, ships, space, flight, and roller coasters. so, chair only dont have sufficient moves for me.

http://i347.photobucket.com/albums/p460/paulopsx2/20170619_180931_zpsipv3nt3g.jpg

massive thanks for points in this thread, I'm about to move from seat rocker to full for a number of reasons

I love the seat only ( although I also have rear traction loss + lower platform overall pitch ) but
pedals need to be with seat and controls in VR move around -easy to get use to it but I think I prefer every thing solid together

going to add a 4 point seat belt tensioning system (using an actuator) to try and make up for that body to steering wheel
loss once changed, although in the design I can do a frame so steering wheel static if I notice I miss it to much

the main motion part will be fairly lite weight so rapid movement by 2x SCN6 actualtors will be maintained, there will be a rear traction under this which is another SCN6
+ a 4th SCN6 handling the tension of the race 4 point seat belt harness

if I want a static steering wheel then this will be mounted to the bottom rear traction frame and square round the moving cockpit and clear it by hanging down from above ....but hoping to avoid this

full movement (whole body) will be great for flight sims (DCS) as can have more movement

For all who read this thread, this is also really informative:

https://www.xsimulator.net/community/threads/seattimes-6dof-dc-build.6106/page-34#post-134858

Motion Simulator Community - Error
The requested thread could not be found.