Hello, I just came across a wiki page that drew my attention:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_resistance
"Rolling resistance greatly increases with applied torque. At high torques, which apply a tangential force to the road of about half the weight of the vehicle, the rolling resistance may triple (a 200% increase).[39] This is in part due to a slip of about 5%. The rolling resistance increase with applied torque is not linear, but increases at a faster rate as the torque becomes higher."

I'm just wondering if I have to take care of this on top of regular rolling resistance calculations?!

That is your decision.

Let's see how far we can get with this :-) (me again ...)

Rolling resistance increases in curves due to partial slip as well, from centripetal force and depending on the width of the tyre (there is only one line along the curve radius where it is slip-free) and the pressure, which causes wear on the tyres if too high and too low (usually on my car *rolleyes*).

Keep in mind that in a curve the inner wheels roll along a different radius and speed than the outer, and the suspension plays a role as well: driven axles usually have a differential that distribute the force between the two wheels, non driven ones roll free.

Along the drive train, there are more gears (more differntials between driven axles, shifting gear/converter, general transformation between engine and drive train, clutch, brakes and bearing) that affect (rolling) and mechanical resistance as well, some only very little (a well maintained clutch), some significantly (converter).

I believe, electric cars are simpler :-)

Green_Baron said:
Rolling resistance increases in curves due to partial slip as well, from centripetal force and depending on the width of the tyre (there is only one line along the curve radius where it is slip-free) and the pressure, which causes wear on the tyres if too high and too low (usually on my car *rolleyes*).

That's clear, and this effect "somehow" comes out of the tire formula as slip angle increases. I'm not into cornering now :)

The original question could have been this:
Do I have to scale up rolling resistance when I step on the throttle (or brake)? I never saw anything about this, not even a setting related to this in other sims.
The resistance formula I use only considers, pressure/tire load/speed (and some material properties)
There is no input torque in this yet.

I don't feel cornered, no worries.

Idk, the following maybe too far fetched, when you brake the suspension will partly convert the deceleration force into normal force on the front axle, which may increase the contact area, which may increase the braking force, or the push the limit between static and dynamic friction, silent energy conversion and audible entertainment and finally cold deformation :-)

Green_Baron said:
Idk, the following maybe too far fetched, when you brake the suspension will partly convert the deceleration force into normal force on the front axle, which may increase the contact area, which may increase the braking force

Sure, I even count with anti-pitch-suspension-geometry, when the weight on braking goes through the suspension links instead of the spring, so it doesn't compress, I spared no expenses :)

My concern here with torque based resistance is whether I have to explicitly deal with it or not.

Just like weight transfer. There are some literature about how to calculate how much load goes to here and there, but at the end it's just confusing, because if you do the simulation properly you don't have anything to do with weight transfer at all.

As a conclusion:
I finally added this to my sim, and it didn't become worse, somehow easier to control when "burning tire".
Time will tell...

it's something like:

f = abs(torque_in / wheel_radius)
factor = Clamp(f / (vehicle_mass * G * 0.5), 0.0, 1.0)

torque_resistance *= Lerp(1.0, 3.0, pow(factor, 2.0))

@bmarci strange enough, the relationship between applied torque and rolling resistance never appears in literature. It is only mentioned in that wikipedia article. I tried to track down the mentioned source (Roberts) but I couldn't find it. It would be interesting to know where the author got it from.

It is actually the other way around. Rolling resistance, which is mostly due to rubber deformation and the consequent hysteresis, generates a rolling resistance torque. The rolling resistance coefficient mostly depends on speed (namely its square) and inflation pressure, so I am not sure your implementation makes a lot of sense physically even though it produces a more derivable/controllable vehicle.