sucahyo
About feel, I use smythee test as suggested because I can feel the difference, but don't know which is which.
About Castrol Tom supra, I think we have different goal. My goal is to use hardest spring, highest damper, lowest stabilizer, lowest height tuning that I still can drive, I am not looking for the best handling. I am not sure if setting can be transferable, because I don't know how spring affect acceleration in GT4 (harder=faster in GT2). Can you show me your setting for deep forest? I will try it to see if its transferable.
If you can feel a difference, but yo do not know which is which then I have to ask what is the point. If you are unable to identify the end results then you will never be able to reach a conclusion that the majority of people will agree with.
Just what is wrong with simply driving the car and working on its feel and how the car visually reacts with the road to determine what a damper value relates to?
If you are not looking to tune a car for handling, what are you looking for? You say you "My goal is to use hardest spring, highest damper, lowest stabilizer, lowest height tuning that I still can drive". Why? What is the reason?
In regard to spring rates effect on acceleration, I believe we have already covered this a few pages back.
sucahyo
About one part of the suspension system, I agree that we should balance the car first.
About sweet spot, I will try it later. Maybe 4/6 4/6 vs 6/4 6/4.
About damper being too stiff, I don't believe we can get too stiff damper in GT2,3&4. This is my opinion for damper in GT1 & GT2 (I curently believe GT4=GT2).
Don't disagree with you with regard to balancing the car first, but once again you are puting up settings without relating them to a car. I do not believe that you can just pluck settings options out of the air and expect them to work, only through testing and gradual changes to settings will you get a balanced set-up.
As for it not being possiable to get too stiff dampers in GT2, GT3 and GT4. I could not agree with you less. In the Griffith tests dampers set to 10 in all versions of the series were too stiff. Set the Caterham Fireblade to a damper setting of 10 in GT4 and the car is virtually undrivable, that would meet my definition of being too stiff.
I do need to just ask a question regarding which versions of GT you have tested, you refer a lot to the entire series, but if I have read you're posts correctly you have tested GT and GT2, is that correct. Also you run GT & GT2 on a PC using an emulator, what do you use as a controller? Do you have GT3 and/or GT4, because you are making a lot of assumptions about how the settings work in these two?
sucahyo
About low spring rate, I use it because this is usually what non suspension modified car have. I will test default racing modified value later. Notice that you are using racing modified default. Can't I use stock car spring rate for my test? I don't see any reason not to.
About 5/5 damper in GT1, just in case you miss it.
About visual wheel, its because I can't count the bouncing like in GT1.
Again I would like to clear something up here. Can you answer the following for me (sorry about all the questions).
- Are you fitting racing suspension or just changing the values using a 'hacking' device?
- If you are fitting racing suspension, why are you changing the spring rates back to the 'standard' values?
The reason I ask is because the fitting of uprated suspension does have an effect on the cars overall stiffness (this has been tested across the GT series many times), and again could result in flawed results.
I did answer the GT1 5/5 damper setting point, you may have missed it.
Scaff
I'm not sure why it is important to try running GT with a damper value of 5/5? Its not like a 'magic' damper will solve all you're problems for all cars on a single track. A value of 5/5 could feel soft or firm depending on the car its used on and the track its run on.
I did run the tests with more damper values that these written up above, and the Griffith (in GT) was stiffer and firmer on a 5/5 setting that on the default 4/4 settings. My preference for this car and track would actually be around 3/3.
On the visual wheel bit, you need to look at much more than just what the wheel is doing, start looking at the car as a whole and how it feels to drive.
sucahyo
About spring rate do not control how quickly the wheel move, I don't agree, if I use smythee theory, spring rate stiffness is directly corelated to oscilation frequency, which I believe the same as speed. IMO, spring rate control the speed (V) = how quickly, damper control the acceleration (a) = how far. Harder spring rate have faster wheel speed, stiffer damper have higher decceleration.
Spring rate is like ball, damper is like brake. Harder ball is faster, more brake reduce the stopping distance.
Well I have to say this one is causing you a major issue, but I'm sorry you are wrong.
Spring rates do corelate to oscilation frequency, and if a car was fitted only with spring and no dampers then you would be correct. The spring rate would then control both how far and how quickly the roll occured, the spring would also continue to oscilate until all the energy had been disapated.
Thats excatly why you fit dampers, to control the springs oscilation so the car does not carry on bouncing for a long period of time.
I'm going to refer to Skip Barber's book Going Faster which covers the subject well (if you are unaware of who Skip Barber is I strongly suggest you google him before considering saying he is wrong)
Going Faster
Shock absorbers or more correctly Dampers, have the primary function of helping to control the energy stored up by the springs. A spring is a remarkable depository of energy. When the spring is compressed by a bump or a change in load on the spring, it stores the energy of the initial motion and feeds most of it back in the opposite direction. Without control, the spring would go through a number of cycles of compression and extending in response to its first deflection, losing a little energy with each cycle.
................
Ultimately, the shock setting doesn't determine how much load gets to the tyre or how much the suspension moves moves in response to the load. It alters the speed with which the load gets to the contact patch and the speed with which the suspension moves in response to the loads fed into it.
Even you're analogy of brakes is not 100% correct:
sucahyo
more brake reduce the stopping distance
Actually the limit on stopping distance is principally determined by tyre compound not brake force. If you're brakes are capable of overcoming the slip percentage of you're tyres (and all modern systems will be) then the limiting factor on stopping are you're tyres not you're brakes.
sucahyo
About the guide, agree.
About skipping, it can happen when the damper is too hard AND too soft.
No its does not, skipping is a characteristic of suspension travel that is not able to maintain contact with the road surface. I.E. suspension that can't react quickly enough to surface changes, a characteristic of hard damper settings, not soft damper settings.
I have worked in the motor industry for most of my adult life, and have been training in the industry for the last decade, I have never come across a softly damped car that has 'skipped' across a broken surface, but I have come across plenty of stiffly damped cars that will skip over broken surfaces (my own Celica will on very poor surfaces).
sucahyo
About theory, how if we test it backward? we test it first blindly (don't care which is which) and then see what real life fact is, and make conclution.
I am not assuming anything when I do the test, I judge the correctness comment later. I test it first using 10/1 10/1, note the car handling, then using 1/10 1/10, note the car handling, open the reference, judge.
About hacked value, I guess you still won't believe me even when I can (maybe impossible) show you 255 damper in GT4. For now, seeing that 255 damper in GT1 is stiff, 255 damper in GT2 is soft, I believe GT1 and GT2 damper is switched.
About higher spring rate stiffer damper, seeing duck's test for damper (see my previous test) I believe 1 is softest in GT4.
How can we test this blindly? And without reference to the real world?
You are insistant that a car will skip on hard or soft damper settings, which would lead me to believe that any blind test results would be worthless as you have no correct frame of reference to work with.
I've already said (many, many times) that I believe that hacked values are firstly totaly unrequired to determine damper settings and secondly that the results they provide could well be flawed as the physics engine does not allow you to flip or roll cars in any version of GT. Simply put, the code is going to step in and put a stop to how the car should react.
On the higher spring rate, higher damper, then yes I would use this as a guide. Its not however a rule, damper settings are very personal to the driver, car and track. As has been said they should always be matched to the spring rate (as they work together) but no magic rule exists to say with X spring rate you must always use Y damper rate.
sucahyo
1002kg silvia Q (spring rate stock 1.8/1.8, racing default 3.2/3.2) with 20/20 spring rate has spring frequency 120, with 2/2 spring rate has spring frequency 80. Spring frequency test done using softest damper and softest stabilizer in 15 seconds time.
So, using 2/2 spring rate is the same as normal road car. And if I follow the quote I should be running with 20/20 spring rate and super soft tire.
Do you honestly believe that the code in GT and GT2 (which was written to run on the PS) is actually analyising and using the actual real world spring rate frequency?
As I have said above (and many times before) no rule exists for matching spring rates and damper settings. In the real world its even more difficult as dampers are set by 'click' values (+ and - from a zero point) the levelof damping ofered by one click on a damper from one company will almost certainly be different to one clickon a damper from another company.
In closing you did not reply to this point from my last post:
Scaff
Think about it this way, which is more likely:
A - PD for some unknown reason switched the value range for damper settings only in GT2, then put it back for GT3 and GT4. And you are the first (and to my knowledge only) person to have spotted this.
or
B - The use of extreme (and sometimes hacked) values, along with a limited and at times confused understanding of how dampers work has thrown you test values out. Making it seem that the value range for dampers is reversed.
Now please do not take the above as me being rude, it is not intended in that way at all, I don't think that you could argue that you're understanding of how dampers functioned was limited at the start of this thread. You even admited as much yourself. Also I would be surprised if you would say that using extreme and sometimes hacked values did not run the risk of throwing the results out.
Regards
Scaff