VPForce Vs. FFBeast Comparison?

[Mikestriken]

Does anyone know where I can find a comparison for these 2 Force Feedback Flight sticks? I am in the market to buy one, but I'd like to make an informed decision.

EDIT: I have a similar post of this question on reddit, in my OP I note the major takeaways I've found from different users.

Edited May 11, 2024 by Mikestriken

[propeler]

You will not find it right now. As Rhino produced already good number, FFBeast is just on it's starting line and not so many users have those devices .

Edited May 10, 2024 by propeler

[shwed]

"At a maximum of 9 Nm of Torque the Rhino can provide about 3+kg of pull with typical stick setups. Compared to most springs & cams -controllers, this is about the maximum they can do with the heaviest springs, but they really only give you that much resistance at the very edges of avia-style cams, whereas the Rhino can be more linear. In practice, the Rhino is probably the strongest controller you have used, even if it’s not exactly in a class of its own."

FFBeast force: pedals: 30kg - 66lbs,  joystick: up to 25kg -55lbs     ~50-60+Nm

that's all the comparison

[propeler]

  On 5/10/2024 at 10:07 AM, shwed said:

FFBeast force: pedals: 30kg - 66lbs,  joystick: up to 25kg -55lbs     ~50-60+Nm

 

Expand  

Not all I produce a little bit more conservative 35Nm  joysticks.

[Hiob]

The question is, do you really need all this force, or in other words, do you really want to pull 25+ kg at your desk cockpit?

It‘s all about feedback and immersion. I don’t think you really need all that much to have a good experience. 

Motion platforms can only „simulate“ <1 G instead of up to 9G and still are considered sim-pilot‘s heaven (for some).

I think, well tuned profiles and smooth operation is much more important than brute force.

I can’t tell from personal experience with FFB flight yet, but I expect the Rhino to be sufficiently powerful. 

[shwed]

FFBeast is a professional-level simulator, the high power of which allows you to simulate various nuances of aircraft control. There are many real helicopter and airplane pilots among FFBeast users, and everyone notes the plausible efforts and operation of the devices. For example, Rhino users complain about the poor control of the Mosquito, they need to adjust the response curves of the axes, their trimming breaks, but on FF Beast everything is perfectly controlled, the axis settings are linear.
The Rhino has too little power.

Edited May 10, 2024 by shwed

[Hiob]

Ok, just (semi) finished my Rhino build (Thanks a lot to @Winger for his brilliant kit and patience with my stupid questions)….

I haven’t used it in DCS yet, but played around with it in the control software. Tested all the effects (spring, hold, inertia, friction etc….).

My conclusion so far, depending on the length of your extension - it has more than enough power. When I set spring force to max and try without an extension, I can barely move it against the motors.

I don’t have a comparison - but I know for sure that I probably won’t use the Rhino on max gain.

I would love to also test the Beast, but unfortunately that is not a viable option. The Rhino is expensive enough.

 

[Aapje]

  On 5/10/2024 at 11:22 AM, Hiob said:

Motion platforms can only „simulate“ <1 G instead of up to 9G and still are considered sim-pilot‘s heaven (for some).

Expand  

Motion platforms don't simulate G, so that's not really a proper comparison. In general, it is a true apples to oranges comparison that makes little sense.

  Quote

I would love to also test the Beast, but unfortunately that is not a viable option. The Rhino is expensive enough.

Expand  

The price difference seems just 100 euros, which is not really that significant compared to the price of the thing.

I like the metal construction a lot better and if it is way more powerful, then it's hard to fault the price.

[Aapje]

Hoggit has a discussion about this right now and apparently the software of the Rhino is a lot better: 

 

[Hiob]

  On 5/10/2024 at 9:14 PM, Aapje said:

Motion platforms don't simulate G, so that's not really a proper comparison. In general, it is a true apples to oranges comparison that makes little sense.

The price difference seems just 100 euros, which is not really that significant compared to the price of the thing.

I like the metal construction a lot better and if it is way more powerful, then it's hard to fault the price.

Expand  

Of course the do. That‘s what they are for. Why do you think they tilt backwards when accelerating and forward when braking?

I know that the price is roughly comparable. Point was, I won’t buy a second one just to compare.

But regardless. After playing around with it for a couple of hours - there is definitely no need for more power for my taste. I‘m around 30% gain currently (without extension) and that is plenty powerful. When I add my extension and grip, I will probably increase the gain - but not threefold.

[Shrimp]

With a stronger FFB base (50 Nm Brunner CLS-P) it is possible to make software stops (shorter stick travel). Even an F-16 with very short stick travel is possible.
Some (most?) aircraft have a shorter nose down stick travel (push) than pull that can be configured properly with a stronger base.

Because of being so strong these software stops are like mechanical stops, for any practical measure.

 

In this view, I think FFBeast may become the best for price/force/quality as it is quite strong (35 Nm) and not prohibitively expensive as the CLS-P. And, if software evolves…

 

CLS-E (now Mk II) is weak and was only good when there was nothing else.

Rhino is very good if we don’t want software stops or stronger stick forces, especially with extensions. And has great software.

 

CLS-P is almost perfect hardware wise, but has a ridiculous price tag. In terms of software, Brunner should enhance the DCS plugin to make a proper displaced neutral trim functionality and have the possibility of programming rudder shaker (C-101, F-4) in addition to the stick shaker for the FFB rudder (maybe this last one is possible and I haven’t figured it out yet). The FFB behavior is better in CLS2Sim mode (more progressive, discrete and nuanced)  as opposed to DirectInput mode (more zeros and ones, sometimes the effects being way stronger than the natural stick forces - way unrealistic) if not for the trim mess.

 

 

[Aapje]

  On 5/10/2024 at 9:47 PM, Hiob said:

Of course the do. That‘s what they are for. Why do you think they tilt backwards when accelerating and forward when braking?

Expand  

That doesn't mimic sustained G-forces and many people with VR set their motion rig up to make fairly small movements, giving more of a suggestion to the human body than truly trying to mimic G-forces.

This is very different to a FFB stick where you do want to mimic sustained forces.

[Mikestriken]

  On 5/10/2024 at 9:32 PM, Aapje said:

Hoggit has a discussion about this right now and apparently the software of the Rhino is a lot better: 

 

Expand  

Yup, my post. Nice to see more FFBeast users in here to get a better all around opinion. I will update both post's OP with the TL;DRs from both communities.

[Hiob]

  On 5/10/2024 at 11:21 PM, Aapje said:

That doesn't mimic sustained G-forces and many people with VR set their motion rig up to make fairly small movements, giving more of a suggestion to the human body than truly trying to mimic G-forces.

This is very different to a FFB stick where you do want to mimic sustained forces.

Expand  

ok, I think you have a wrong idea how motion platforms work in simulators. Or at least we‘re talking past each other. But we shouldn’t de-rail the thread here - if you want to continue the discussion, maybe pm me. Cheers!

[some1]

A stronger FFB base can give you more "dynamic range" to work with, and also will perform better when mounted on the floor and with a long stick extension. Which I guess is the only way to use FFBeast anyway, looking at its size and force output.

On the other hand, very large forces aren't that practical for flight sims, unless you go for immersion at the cost usability. I have a Rhino without stick extension, which due to Rhino size is equivalent to a typical spring joystick with ~8 cm extension. And I normally use ~70% gain for most of the flying, especially dogfighting. At 100% I don't fly better, I just get fatigued faster  To me that ~3kg pull at the stick is a comfortable compromise for armchair flying.

I also have FSSB R3 Ultra and I don't use full forces on that base either. And FSSB R3 at 100% is only half of what real F-16 stick requires from the pilot. But in the game we're not concerned so much about airframe limitations, pilot induced oscillations, passenger comfort, we don't fight g-forces and we are not thrown around the cockpit when performing manoeuvres, so other than immersion, there is not much need to have very heavy sticks.

Contrary to what other guy says about Mosquito, that plane in DCS doesn't require stronger base, it just needs small inputs to fly well.  One fundamental thing about FFB in general is that it doesn't work with input curves. So you cannot use curves in the software to fix twitchy FM, which some guys over at Mossie forum tried to and learned the hard way. Mosquito also has an issue with trim due to ED hardcoded effects, but this is the same with every FFB device.

I haven't followed FFBeast development so I don't know how good is the software provided with the base. But be aware that FFB support in DCS varies between modules, and joystick software is needed to make up that deficit. In Razbam modules FFB is bugged or not existent, even the trim. ED approach in their modules is to simulate only forces that are transmitted through the control column in real life, so if you want additional haptic effects like airframe shake due to g's, buffeting, VRS, runway bumps, gun firing etc. all that needs to be provided by the joystick software. Some other modules like Deka's JF-17 or Heatblur's F-14 have such effects already built in to some extent. There are other useful things that can be done in the software, like balancing a heavy grip and extension, or rescaling axes to shift the neutral point back to centre if the module doesn't do that (A-10, F-14)

If you plan to play other games, then FFB support varies there too, Il-2 is pretty good out of the box, MSFS and Xplane don't support FFB at all, and everything has to be provided by external software that reads telemetry data from the sim.

 

 

[Aapje]

Apparently, the Rhino code is freely available under the GPL, so FFBeast could adapt it to their needs:

https://github.com/walmis/VPforce-TelemFFB/blob/wip/aircrafts_msfs_xp.py

[VirusAM]

  On 5/11/2024 at 9:48 AM, some1 said:

if you want additional haptic effects like or rescaling axes to shift the neutral point back to centre if the module doesn't do that (A-10, F-14)

Hi, can you elaborate more on that?
I fly the F14 in my squadron, and the F14 center point with the rhino is tilted a bit forward.
How do I shift it back to the center?
Thanks

About razbam modules, the f15e supports ffb just well.
In the past the harrier didn't support trim offset, but now it should do

[propeler]

  On 5/11/2024 at 10:28 AM, Aapje said:

Apparently, the Rhino code is freely available under the GPL, so FFBeast could adapt it to their needs:

Expand  

Why do you think i need to adapt something of it? I have msfs support

  On 5/10/2024 at 9:32 PM, Aapje said:

Hoggit has a discussion about this right now and apparently the software of the Rhino is a lot better: 

Expand  

Have you used FFBeast software? At least opened it?

[propeler]

  On 5/11/2024 at 9:48 AM, some1 said:

haven't followed FFBeast development so I don't know how good is the software provided with the base.

Expand  

You can download it and check. Ui works without device. 

[propeler]

In any case. The only option to get FFBeast base quickly if you decide it now - building it DIY. Waitlist is already big enough and lead time will be huge.... but everything needed for DIY is available on the market.

Edited May 11, 2024 by propeler

[some1]

  On 5/11/2024 at 4:57 PM, VirusAM said:

Hi, can you elaborate more on that?
I fly the F14 in my squadron, and the F14 center point with the rhino is tilted a bit forward.
How do I shift it back to the center?

Expand  

Below is the setting I use with A-10. The real F-14 has 4 inch forward/5.5 inch aft stick travel, so my guess would something like 75% max forward position instead of 35% for the A-10.

When rescaling an axis you may also need to reduce that axis gain.

  On 5/11/2024 at 4:57 PM, VirusAM said:

About razbam modules, the f15e supports ffb just well.
In the past the harrier didn't support trim offset, but now it should do

Expand  

FFB trim is badly implemented in both F-15E and Harrier, it works on top of non-FFB trim that is still active. At least that's how it was last time I checked. Q-Feel is not simulated. And FFB doesn't work at all in the Mig-19.

Edited May 11, 2024 by some1

[Aapje]

  On 5/11/2024 at 5:57 PM, propeler said:

Why do you think i need to adapt something of it? I have msfs support

Expand  

The users with experience are saying that the software for that device is better when it comes to cogging and ease of use. 

[propeler]

Ahhh..  userS. Ok then Continue to believe in what you want to beleave

[HILOK]

  On 5/11/2024 at 9:48 AM, some1 said:

One fundamental thing about FFB in general is that it doesn't work with input curves. So you cannot use curves in the software to fix twitchy FM, which some guys over at Mossie forum tried to and learned the hard way. Mosquito also has an issue with trim due to ED hardcoded effects, but this is the same with every FFB device.

Expand  

that's interesting. could you please elaborate on this? do you mean curve settings in dcs have no effect on ffb sticks? are there any workarounds? thanks  

[propeler]

  On 5/12/2024 at 7:19 AM, HILOK said:

that's interesting. could you please elaborate on this? do you mean curve settings in dcs have no effect on ffb sticks? are there any workarounds?

Expand  

You do not need curves with ffb. Just set all linear and that's all. Even more. You should set all linear to have correct ffb with correct trim 

Edited May 12, 2024 by propeler