GT4 Dampers

Scaff · May 3, 2006

sucahyo
This is my interpretation of those quote:

red as road bump, blue as tire movement.
The spring rebound too slow, the tire is loosing traction, but I don't call this as jump.

This is what I mean by jump:

The spring rebound too quick, the tire is loosing traction and jump.

sucahyo
I see, my mistakes then, I am bolding word that confuse me. So you are saying that suspension move too slow. It makes sense to me now, it's complement to what I said before: "stiffer damper make suspension move slower"

Stiffer damper make the suspension move slower so that it can't move fast enough.:

Umm your diagrams don't match your descriptions? The second one in which the rebound is supposed to occur quicker apears to be taking the same amount of time to rebound, assuming the horizontal scale is distance and the assumed speed is the same.

It is however irrelivent, what I want to clarify is if you accept that a car with a stiff set-up can jump when it makes contact with a bump. From the second quote here I believe you are saying this and I just want to clarify this point.

sucahyo
About rebound, I think GT4 damper is not too stiff so it will still rebound.

I have not said that it would not rebound, but again its not strictly relivent to my example as if the force has caused a loss of contact with the road the rebound may well simply be returning the tyre to air.

sucahyo
It's not to where I want, it's to where the wheel direct to. I don't have accuracy needed, but I can still make the wheel turn.

OK so are you saying that in your hands the Integra Touring car will not understeer at all? I have to say I find that hard to believe, try the final corner at Grand Valley (full) at full throttle and 110mph+, that should do the trick.

sucahyo
if it's about swaybar attached to car body, it's my mistakes. if it's about benefit and weakness, I am rewording someone else's.

The benefits (while basic) are fine, it was the gross assumption regarding Anti-roll bar location that was wrong.

sucahyo
enough to make it invalid?

Given the testing I have done on Anti-roll bar settings its certainly going to colour the results, particularly with maximum settings. Given the roll or ARBs is to tie the two sides of the suspension together is has to have an effect.

To be honest to truly see the effects of the dampers it would be better if we could totally remove them from the tests. As we can't do this then I owuld actually suggest minimal settings to ensure them have the least effect possiable.

sucahyo
spring rebound before it make the car jump on big bump if the damper is too soft, more bound = more rebound = higher jump. on stiff damper less bound = less rebound = less jump. on ultra stiff damper the car will launch from the bump top.

No, not strictly true.
Softer dampers = quicker suspension = more time for the suspension to travel = slower unloading/loading of the contact patch = more visiable body movement but less chance of the car losing contact on a big bump (note I said less not none)

Stiff dampers = slower suspension = quicker unloading/loading of the conatct patch = less visiable body movement but more chance of the car losing contact on a big bump.

I have never said that one will always lose contact and one will always keep contact as it depends on so many factors, but the simple rule of thumb is that softer damper = less chance of tyres losing contact and stiffer damper = more chance.

sucahyo
10 years. more than 10 different car, most of them SUV. Road ranging from smooth, bumpy, uneven, rocky to muddy.

Fair enough, but to be fair (and its not being unkind) it is a limited number and range of cars.

sucahyo
Are you talking about Subaru 360 using 1.5/1.4 spring rate and maximum ride height do not have wallow?

That is exactly what I am saying, the level of body on suspension movement is small and certainly I would not describe it as wallow.

sucahyo
Ok, I'll do it. From what I already do, driving caterham in deep forest with max spring rate and max damper is not scary, driving Falken GT-R with stiff spring rate on nurburgring is not scary. Scary is when I have to struggle controlling the car sometime even on straight. I am not saying it's easy, it's easier. You don't have to be carefull with your damper anymore.

You are honestly saying that you have spent a little over 24 hours with GT4 and you find driving the Caterham and Falken GT-R at the 'ring easier that playing previous versions of GT?

Again I just find this statement stunning!

sucahyo
yes. Using driver aids make tuning harder, so I don't use it. It become my hated routine to zero driver aid on every new car.

Excellent

sucahyo
I am aware that it is less realistic, but I like it more. Higher level of surface detail mean developer has choice of using more triangle in 1 square meter road. Mean they have the option to make more bumpy road or more smooth road. Mean they have the option to make smaller bump. It shows clearly on rally stage. On tarmac stage bump is less. On deep forest there is places where the tire would vibrate, but that's it, passing those places on maximum spring with caterham is not scary.

So you like it more unrealistic?

I still think this is an issue with the controller you are using, have you tried GT4 with a DS2 or a decent wheel? It may well change your mind.

sucahyo
Ok, but I don't like it, less challenge, more boring.

?

sucahyo
BTW, I have Falken GT-R in nurbburgring video. do you have interest to find what suspension setting that can make GT4 falken GT-R behave/bounce like the real one does? If you do, can you post it?

From an interior only view its very difficult to say, I will give it a go, but it could take a while.

sucahyo
How about Subaru 360 using softest spring and d-high (in autumn ring)?

Again, no this is not 'wallow.

sucahyo
loosing contact can happen too if you use stiff spring and very soft damper.

As I have said above, I do not dispute this, just that (as I have said many times) it is less likely to occur.

sucahyo
That can happen too.
What I learn from RBR video:
stiffer damper = less bouncing. on "Gravel Dampers Max RBR.MPG" when the car hit the dirt, the car rear body lift up, after dropping down it do not bounce.
stiffer damper = less traction. the car tire do not seems to follow road countour.
softer damper = more bouncing.
softer damper = more traction. the car tire follow the road countour.

sucahyo
My GT4 test result:
higher value damper = more bouncing.

OK I have put together a few more RBR and GT4 videos

RBR Max Spring & Min Dampers - Tarmac

RBR Max Spring & Max Dampers - Tarmac

GT4 Max Spring & Min Dampers - Tarmac

GT4 Max Spring & Max Dampers - Tarmac

Now the RBR min dampers run clearly shows the car body wallowing or pogoing on the suspension, the movement is clear and easy to see, tyre contact loss with the surface is however minimal despite the huge amount of roll. Its also important to notice that this movement occurs even on the smooth sections and not just the bumps. When the tyres do lose contact the car continues to oscillate for a considerable time after the tyres return to the tarmac.

In the RBR max dampers run the car is visible stiff with almost no visible movement of the car body on the suspension. However tyre contact loss with the surface is far more frequent as the suspension is unable to react quickly enough. When a tyre returns to the surface after a loss of contact no visible oscillations can be seen.

Now with the GT4 runs it is clear to see the limits of the GT4 physics engine in comparison to the RBR engine, also both of the GT4 runs have far more in common with the RBR max dampers run than the RBR min dampers run.

In my opinion this does rule out GT4 damper being considered to have a truly 'soft' value. Also given the very similar nature of the two GT4 runs from a purely visual perspective, it comes back to point I have always maintained and that is that we have to look at a much big picture here and include all information.

In terms of feel, handling and noise, the higher damper value run in GT4 has feel, handling and noise characteristics that are a close match to the RBR max damper run.

I don't agree with you at all that higher damper values in GT4 display the correct visual characteristics as soft dampers, quite the opposite. Then we come to the other areas of feel, handling and noise, all of which you have clearly stated you either unable to effectively test or can't yourself tell the difference. Once again these areas clearly point towards higher GT4 values being stiffer.

The simple fact that you are only (by your own admission) able to offer an opinion on one area of testing makes it very difficult to accept your assersion that the values are reversed. Quite simply I do not believe that you have been able to test this enough (and that without the simple issue of the limited amount of time you have spent with GT4) to make these statements as fact.

sucahyo
For camber, many of my 300mph car (with softest spring rate) loose traction more on 1.5 camber compare to 0 camber. On my attempt to drift Falken GT-R, Mustang GT, RUF BTR2, RUF RGT, camber value 2 always have less traction than camber value 0 on softest spring and highest ride height. So I really don't see the point of using 2.0 camber on medium spring rate and low ride height aside from reducing cornering traction.

Right so just because it's your preference in GT4 then anyone who have a different setting in GT4 or the real world is wrong? Just a touch arrogant, do you not think that the F1 teams have a fair idea of what they are doing? I personally find that for my driving style a reasonable degree of negative camber can help massively and certainly does not reduce traction at all for me.

Regards

Scaff

sucahyo · May 3, 2006

Scaff
Umm your diagrams don't match your descriptions? The second one in which the rebound is supposed to occur quicker apears to be taking the same amount of time to rebound, assuming the horizontal scale is distance and the assumed speed is the same.

my mistake, I should mention that the second diagram have stiffer spring.
Here is more complete diagram, red as road bump, green as soft damper, blue as stiff damper.
soft spring

stiff spring

If you think this is wrong, please show your diagram, handwriting is ok.

Scaff
It is however irrelivent, what I want to clarify is if you accept that a car with a stiff set-up can jump when it makes contact with a bump. From the second quote here I believe you are saying this and I just want to clarify this point.

Ok, stiff setting can make the car jump. But if we call both reaction as jumping how can we differentiate the different effect of soft and stiff? (like in my second diagram)

Scaff
OK so are you saying that in your hands the Integra Touring car will not understeer at all? I have to say I find that hard to believe, try the final corner at Grand Valley (full) at full throttle and 110mph+, that should do the trick.

Ok, I'll try it again.

Scaff
The benefits (while basic) are fine, it was the gross assumption regarding Anti-roll bar location that was wrong.

Ok.

Scaff
To be honest to truly see the effects of the dampers it would be better if we could totally remove them from the tests. As we can't do this then I owuld actually suggest minimal settings to ensure them have the least effect possiable.

Ok.

Scaff
I have never said that one will always lose contact and one will always keep contact as it depends on so many factors, but the simple rule of thumb is that softer damper = less chance of tyres losing contact and stiffer damper = more chance.

Ok.

Scaff
Fair enough, but to be fair (and its not being unkind) it is a limited number and range of cars.

ok.

Scaff
That is exactly what I am saying, the level of body on suspension movement is small and certainly I would not describe it as wallow.

I will test it again.

Scaff
You are honestly saying that you have spent a little over 24 hours with GT4 and you find driving the Caterham and Falken GT-R at the 'ring easier that playing previous versions of GT?

No, I am saying that tuning would be easier, not easier driving. I don't have to worry about road ripple when tuning.

Scaff
So you like it more unrealistic?
I still think this is an issue with the controller you are using, have you tried GT4 with a DS2 or a decent wheel? It may well change your mind.

I don't think changing controller can make GT4 do this:
various car bouncy ride

BTW, what is your damper tuning suggesting for the car in this video?

Scaff
From an interior only view its very difficult to say, I will give it a go, but it could take a while.

ok, thanks.

Scaff
OK I have put together a few more RBR and GT4 videos

Thanks. Although I wish you use Subaru 360 for GT4 example, with still drivable spring and maximum ride height.

Scaff
Now with the GT4 runs it is clear to see the limits of the GT4 physics engine in comparison to the RBR engine, also both of the GT4 runs have far more in common with the RBR max dampers run than the RBR min dampers run.

It's clear to see damper differences in RBR, but it is hard to see it in GT4 video.

Scaff
In my opinion this does rule out GT4 damper being considered to have a truly 'soft' value. Also given the very similar nature of the two GT4 runs from a purely visual perspective, it comes back to point I have always maintained and that is that we have to look at a much big picture here and include all information.

I sure wish you will include hacked information too.

Scaff
Right so just because it's your preference in GT4 then anyone who have a different setting in GT4 or the real world is wrong? Just a touch arrogant, do you not think that the F1 teams have a fair idea of what they are doing? I personally find that for my driving style a reasonable degree of negative camber can help massively and certainly does not reduce traction at all for me.

I am not saying real life F1 is wrong, what I said before is for GT4. I am wondering why everyone use more than 2.0 camber for their rather siff spring and low ride height car.
For preference thing, on fake DS2 controller, I found that 2.0 camber have less traction in corner (by feel) compare to 0.0 camber on softest spring rate lowest ride height on 300mph cars in my signature and on drift falken GT-R, RUF BTR2, RUF RGT, caterham, Mustang GT.

The most noticable difference in front tire grip when using different camber is when cornering test track using race car. Everything else make closer to wheelie setting, by using 0.0 front camber I can keep the car stay on the corner inside line, by using 1.0 front camber I don't feel the difference, by using 2.0 the car can't stay on the inside line even when I am not lifting my finger from left turn button, it will try to go straight, by using 0.5 camber I get the maximum cornering.
Funny thing is, on skyline GT-R or Supra RZ, car that have no problem hugging inside line in test track, using 12.0 front camber will not make the front tire loose traction much, it can still turn on R5 tire.

sukerkin · May 3, 2006

!?

I've been following this through and haven't been adding anything to the mix as I think that Scaff is making the points quite well without any outside assistance.

However, I am astounded that this discussion is still going on, Sucahyo. Surely the body of evidence is more than sufficient to prove that, in GT4, a higher numeric value in the tuning interface signifies a stiffer (slower reacting, more directly transmitting) damper?

I think the core problem is that you don't have proper access to either the game or an appropriate controller and that really makes it impossible for you to formulate informed conjecture on the nature of the in-game physics.

Now if only PD would 'come-clean' and openly state how they fudged things that would make matters a whole lot simpler :lol:

. What I mean by 'fudged' is that altho' GT4 is the most 'real' feeling game on the console market, in some respects there are compromises and fiddle-factors in the physics engine (which I still half believe to be a 'beta' of the GT5 engine with certain variables disabled or set to fixed values).

Setting that aside, if the springs are selected within reason and the general car balance is sorted first, then the dampers behave exactly as I would expect them to, with a bit of adaptation for rather artificial drive-train inherent characteristics.

Scaff · May 4, 2006

sucahyo
my mistake, I should mention that the second diagram have stiffer spring.
Here is more complete diagram, red as road bump, green as soft damper, blue as stiff damper.
soft spring

stiff spring

If you think this is wrong, please show your diagram, handwriting is ok.

No the diagrams are not quite right, I don't have the time to actual draw anything at the moment, so I will try an describe.

In the first diagram the soft damper line is OK, but the hard line starts fine, however its still in rebound when the second bump is enountered which is goin to change how the tyre responds to the second bump. Over a series of bumps this problem can grow.

The second diagram is a little more complex as you appear to be confusing the movement of the car's body and the tyre reaction. As can be seen in the RBR video for stiff springs and soft damper the tyres will actual follow the road very well (unlike your diagram), what causes the problem is that the oscillations will build as further bumps are encountered. Its a slower process that builds to a loss of contact.

The stiff springs and stiff damper example is much closer as the effect of overdamping will almost always restrict the spring more. Again as can be seen in the RBR video it heavely restricts the movement of the suspension.

What always has to be taken into account here is that contact loss can also occur when the force of impact is greater that the suspension can manage, this is of course a variable factor (depending on the size of the bump and speed of impact) and is far more difficult to graph. Also you have to consider the weight of the car, centre of gravity, static weight distribution, etc.

sucahyo
Ok, stiff setting can make the car jump. But if we call both reaction as jumping how can we differentiate the different effect of soft and stiff? (like in my second diagram)

Soft and stiff what? Springs or dampers?

sucahyo
No, I am saying that tuning would be easier, not easier driving. I don't have to worry about road ripple when tuning.

Can't agree with that, but I can say that the use of a different controller can make a big difference here. For example the bumps of the Hunaudieres straight feel far more severe with the DFP wheel that with the DS2 controller.

As such I would have to disagree that tuning and driving is easier in GT4 that previous versions.

sucahyo
I don't think changing controller can make GT4 do this:
various car bouncy ride

BTW, what is your damper tuning suggesting for the car in this video?

I didn't say that a different controller could do that!

In regard to tuning settings for that video its not easy to tell from simply a fix chase cam. This is something I have mentioned before, you simple can't see enough. You need to be able to see both the actions of the wheels as well as the body.

sucahyo
Thanks. Although I wish you use Subaru 360 for GT4 example, with still drivable spring and maximum ride height.

I did not use the Subaru 360 simply on the ground that it would not be a fair comparison, I used the Subaru WRX Rally car (2003 to be exact) to ensure the same car was used and the comparison whould be like to like.

Comparing the reaction of a Subaru 360 in one game/sim to a WRC car in another is not going to give results that could be easily or accuratly compared.

sucahyo
It's clear to see damper differences in RBR, but it is hard to see it in GT4 video.

My exact point, this is why I have always maintained that visual only information is too limited to be used as the sole information source.

Do you however agree that the GT4 visuals have more in common with the stiffer damper video in RBR?

In my opinion they do, which again would point towards GT4 biasing dampers to the stiffer end of the scale, which would be logical for a racing game. After all a stiffer range of damper settings is far more relivent to real world track racing than soft damper ranges. I honest think this supports my belief that GT4 damper ranges run across a medium to firm range (with 1 being the 'softest' in this range and 10 being the firmest).

sucahyo
I sure wish you will include hacked information too.

Sorry but until someone (and it would have to be PD) can 100% confirm that the use of hacked values will not have any unknown effect I can't accept them.

sucahyo
I am not saying real life F1 is wrong, what I said before is for GT4. I am wondering why everyone use more than 2.0 camber for their rather siff spring and low ride height car.
For preference thing, on fake DS2 controller, I found that 2.0 camber have less traction in corner (by feel) compare to 0.0 camber on softest spring rate lowest ride height on 300mph cars in my signature and on drift falken GT-R, RUF BTR2, RUF RGT, caterham, Mustang GT.

The most noticable difference in front tire grip when using different camber is when cornering test track using race car. Everything else make closer to wheelie setting, by using 0.0 front camber I can keep the car stay on the corner inside line, by using 1.0 front camber I don't feel the difference, by using 2.0 the car can't stay on the inside line even when I am not lifting my finger from left turn button, it will try to go straight, by using 0.5 camber I get the maximum cornering.
Funny thing is, on skyline GT-R or Supra RZ, car that have no problem hugging inside line in test track, using 12.0 front camber will not make the front tire loose traction much, it can still turn on R5 tire.

Hold on are you saying that most of this is based on the level of grip you feel you get on a single high speed corner on one track in the game?

If so, thats a far from expansive and wide ranging set of tests!

Camber like anyother setting will always have an element of personal feel to it, it will also have different effects on different corners and in different parts of a corner.

However, what I have an objection to is your insistance that after spending around 24 hours with the game that you make a statement as fact that higher camber values reduce grip in stiffer cars. You state this as if it is an indisputable fact that is beyond question, when this is far from true.

Many, many people (myself included) find that increased camber values help with grip on a lot of car, track and driving style combos, just like in the real world. It does not change the point I made that as you upgrade the suspension in GT4 the settings get more and more race orientated, and this includes the damper settings.

Regards

Scaff

FastEddie12 · May 4, 2006

This is still going on????

Come on, Sucahyo, wake up and smell the coffee! I saw the clincher a month ago (see below).

Great work from you Scaff, but I think you'll have to show him the holes in your hands before he truly believes!

Scaff
OK this is quite nice and visual and may help

Here are a couple of pictures taken from the BTCC. I'm quite sure that given the nature of the cars and the ride height that they are quite clearly running that we would agree that the suspension setup is going to be on the stiff side.

We are seeing here what happens when stiff suspension settings encounter a curb on a track and the suspension can't react quickly enough to it. The force is transfered directly through the shock, which can't react quickly enough. This results in the corner, or in this case, side of the car lifting off the ground.

I then took out the Integra Type R Touring car in GT4, about the closest car to a BTCC car in the game. I then ran it over a curb with the dampers set to F3/3 & R3/3 and F10/10 & R10/10.

Damper F3/3 R3/3

Damper F10/10 R10/10

Now aside from the totally different feel of the cars, its quite clear to see that the car with the higher values damper settings is displaying the same characteristic on encountering a curb as the BTCC shots.

The car with the lower damper settings remains in conatct with the surface, while the higher damper setting causes the car to 'jump' on impact with the curb.

This, in my opinion, is yet more evidence that point to the higher damper values in GT4 being firmer settings.
Regards

Scaff

Scaff · May 4, 2006

FastEddie12
This is still going on????

Great work from you Scaff, but I think you'll have to show him the holes in your hands before he truly believes!

It is and being the stubborn SOB I am I just can let this one go.

Thanks for the feedback.

👍

Scaff

sucahyo · May 4, 2006

sukerkin, I really wish someone can ask this to Kazunori

.
FastEddie12, the more I play GT4, the more I see 10 damper is softest

.

Scaff
No the diagrams are not quite right, I don't have the time to actual draw anything at the moment, so I will try an describe.

Ok. How about this diagram, stiff spring with big bump.
red as road bump, black as zero suspension travel, yellow as bound travel, blue as rebound travel, green as wheel loose traction path.
sorted from softer damper to stiffer.

Scaff
Soft and stiff what? Springs or dampers?

damper.

Scaff
Can't agree with that, but I can say that the use of a different controller can make a big difference here. For example the bumps of the Hunaudieres straight feel far more severe with the DFP wheel that with the DS2 controller.

Ok.

Scaff
In regard to tuning settings for that video its not easy to tell from simply a fix chase cam. This is something I have mentioned before, you simple can't see enough. You need to be able to see both the actions of the wheels as well as the body.

Here is the normal replay video. both car using 8/8 spring rate and maximum ride height. I use 12/0 camber for elise because I use equal setting for other suspension setting. I hope this should be easier for you to suggest what damper tuning needed.
elise boouncing
BMW bouncing

Scaff
I did not use the Subaru 360 simply on the ground that it would not be a fair comparison, I used the Subaru WRX Rally car (2003 to be exact) to ensure the same car was used and the comparison whould be like to like.
Comparing the reaction of a Subaru 360 in one game/sim to a WRC car in another is not going to give results that could be easily or accuratly compared.

It's not fair, GT4 do not have damper tuning range as much as RBR. I think we should use car that can easily show how the damper react. We are comparing how damper simulated only. It don't have to be accurate.

Scaff
My exact point, this is why I have always maintained that visual only information is too limited to be used as the sole information source.
Do you however agree that the GT4 visuals have more in common with the stiffer damper video in RBR?

Hard to tell.
I try to guess which is which by playing your video without identifying it (finding max or min in these filename GT4@20Max@20Spring@20Max@20Damper@20-@20Tarmac.MPG), I failed. I can't tell the difference. Just like finding the damping difference in integra or Land Rover Storm, which I tested the same day I test integra thinking that heavier car make damping difference noticable, it doesn't.

It's lighter car that can make damping difference noticable.

Scaff
I honest think this supports my belief that GT4 damper ranges run across a medium to firm range (with 1 being the 'softest' in this range and 10 being the firmest).

Yes from your point of view (1 = softest) I also think that that is the range of the damper. From my point of view (1 = stiffest) the range of the damper is from soft to medium.

Scaff
Sorry but until someone (and it would have to be PD) can 100% confirm that the use of hacked values will not have any unknown effect I can't accept them.

Ok.

Scaff
Hold on are you saying that most of this is based on the level of grip you feel you get on a single high speed corner on one track in the game?

No, I try it on deep forest, nurburgring, and apricott hill too when trying to make drift setting.

Scaff
Camber like anyother setting will always have an element of personal feel to it, it will also have different effects on different corners and in different parts of a corner.

Do controller have effect on this too?

Scaff
Many, many people (myself included) find that increased camber values help with grip on a lot of car, track and driving style combos, just like in the real world.

Then, what is the maximum camber that you can use on some car before you start loosing traction. How about Falken GT-R on N1 tire, 12/12 spring rate, minimum ride height, do you think 2.0 front camber has more cornering grip compare to 0.0?

FastEddie12 · May 4, 2006

What I find funny is that you come out with your half-baked theories full of pseudo techno speak, pretending that you understand everything that Scaff says, yet when you set up your transmission you set it so it makes a nice noise :lol:

sucahyo
The way I setup my gear is by using tranny trick and make it around the most growling sound part of the rpm.

What's less funny is that they let you edit our precious guides, thus reducing their authority to near zero....

sucahyo · May 4, 2006

FastEddie12
What I find funny is that you come out with your half-baked theories full of pseudo techno speak, pretending that you understand everything that Scaff says, yet when you set up your transmission you set it so it makes a nice noise

I admit that it sound crazy, but on serious side, it shows that PD put attention to engine noise.

It can make my gear tuning faster.

FastEddie12
What's less funny is that they let you edit our precious guides, thus reducing their authority to near zero....

I edit it because no one do it in month. I am the one that put link to guide from Scaff, ///M-Spec, Greyout and Boundary Layer and Swift. So if anyone find inconsistency between those guide and tuning guide, they can find out soon.
If anyone find my writing in those tuning guide to be wrong, they can delete it.

FastEddie12 · May 4, 2006

Ok whatever. I think it would be wrong of me to turn this (very clean) argument into a slanging match, so I won't go any further down that road. Apologies for any offence caused, too.

But please listen to Scaff. Take in what he is saying. Maybe just imagine for a minute that (God forbid) you are wrong, and everything will fall into place. I've learned enough about car and bike suspension tuning over the (considerable) years to know 2 things: 1) it's a black art you can spend your entire life learning about; and 2) when you meet someone who has worked hard to learn it all (and who is open minded enough to keep on learning) you listen and learn, or you will simply prove that you are a fool who knows nothing.

Again, sorry about the cheap digs in the previous post.

Scaff · May 4, 2006

sukerkin
!?

I've been following this through and haven't been adding anything to the mix as I think that Scaff is making the points quite well without any outside assistance.

Ta 👍

sucahyo
sukerkin, I really wish someone can ask this to Kazunori .
FastEddie12, the more I play GT4, the more I see 10 damper is softest .

Ok. How about this diagram, stiff spring with big bump.
red as road bump, black as zero suspension travel, yellow as bound travel, blue as rebound travel, green as wheel loose traction path.
sorted from softer damper to stiffer.

Now I am begining to get seriously concerned about your understanding of damper behaviour.

I say this because you have the suspension going into rebound before the bumps mid point has been reached, how on earth do you explain that?

If we assume a car has well set-up suspension and it encounters a bump it is able to handle, the following will happen.

As the bump is encountered the suspension will go into bound, with the spring compressing.
As the 'top' of the bump is crossed the suspension will go into rebound and the spring will expand.
Upon return to the level surface the suspension will settle into a steady state.

From what you have drawn and described above you have taken a very flawed assumption and used it as a start point, this has obviously caused a huge problem.

How on earth do you even begin to try and explain the suspension going into rebound when compressing force is being applied to it?

As long as load is being applied to the suspension its going to be in bound, when that load is removed its going to be in rebound. In simple terms while the force of encountering the leading face of the bump is occuring its in bound, only once the leading edge (or the mid-point) is passed and the force reduces will it be in rebound.

I've just found the following and it should help to explain, the surprising thing is that you have used pictures from this site before so I would have thought you had read it.

The Suspension Bible
Compression damping.

This is the damping that a shock absorber provides as it's being compressed, ie. as you hit a bump in the road. It's the resistance of the unit to alter from its steady state to its compressed state. Imagine your riding along and you hit a bump. If there is too little compression damping, the wheel will not meet enough resistance as the suspension compresses. Not enough energy is dissipated by the time you reach the crest of the bump and because the wheel and other unsprung components have their own mass, the wheel will continue to move upwards. This unweights or unloads the tyre and in extreme cases, it can lose contact with the road. Either way, you briefly lose traction and control.
The opposite is true if compression damping is too heavy. As the wheel encounters the bump in the road, the resistance to moving is high and so at the crest of the bump, the remaining energy from the upward motion through the shock absorber is transferred into the frame of the bike or the chassis of the car, lifting it up.

Rebound damping.

Go on - have a guess at what this is. Well in case you're not following along, this is the damping that a shock absorber provides as it returns from its compressed state to its steady state, ie. after you've crested the bump in the road. Too light, and the feeling of control in your vehicle is minimised because the wheel will move very quickly. The feeling is the soft, plush ride you find in a lot of American cars. Or mushy as we like to call it. Too heavy, and the shock absorber can't return quickly enough. As the contour of the road drops away after the bump, the wheel has a hard time "catching up". This can result in reduced traction, and a downward shift in the height of the vehicle. If that happens, you can overload the tyre when the weight of the vehicle bottoms-out the suspension.

sucahyo
Here is the normal replay video. both car using 8/8 spring rate and maximum ride height. I use 12/0 camber for elise because I use equal setting for other suspension setting. I hope this should be easier for you to suggest what damper tuning needed.
elise boouncing
BMW bouncing

I'm still not sure what you are asking me to do here? Comment on the GT2 set-ups or try and recreate these in GT4? I don't actually see the value in either, so what exactly are you asking for and what relivence does it have?

sucahyo
It's not fair, GT4 do not have damper tuning range as much as RBR. I think we should use car that can easily show how the damper react. We are comparing how damper simulated only. It don't have to be accurate.

First how can you say that a test does not need to be acurate?

Secondly I converted the RBR spring rates and used them in GT4 and then set the highest and lowest damper values in each and compared the results, thats about as valid as it gets. The results clearly show that the damper range in GT4 is (as I have said before) limited, and it also indicates than the characteristcs of the reactions in GT4 have more in common with firm damper settings that soft ones.

Do not try and bring the Subaru 360 into this, its a totally different car that will react in a different manner due to differing weight, wheel base, cog, length, etc.

My test is valid and fair, just because the results do not support your assumption do not try to invalidate the results with a spurious and inacurate comparison and then say acuracy does not matter. Comparing a Subaru Impreza WRC car in RBR with a Subaru 360 in GT4 would not be a fair test.

sucahyo
Hard to tell.
I try to guess which is which by playing your video without identifying it (finding max or min in these filename GT4@20Max@20Spring@20Max@20Damper@20-@20Tarmac.MPG), I failed. I can't tell the difference. Just like finding the damping difference in integra or Land Rover Storm, which I tested the same day I test integra thinking that heavier car make damping difference noticable, it doesn't.

It's lighter car that can make damping difference noticable.

I would like a definative answer from you on this one, do both the GT4 vidoes have visual traits more in common with the RBR Soft video or RBR Stiff Video.

Do not try and change the question, just answer it please.

sucahyo
Yes from your point of view (1 = softest) I also think that that is the range of the damper. From my point of view (1 = stiffest) the range of the damper is from soft to medium.

Then answer the question above and then explain how you believe your view is supported, I've done this in detaul, with countless tests and videos and real-world references.

I feel it time for you to do the same.

sucahyo
No, I try it on deep forest, nurburgring, and apricott hill too when trying to make drift setting.

Do controller have effect on this too?

Then, what is the maximum camber that you can use on some car before you start loosing traction. How about Falken GT-R on N1 tire, 12/12 spring rate, minimum ride height, do you think 2.0 front camber has more cornering grip compare to 0.0?

With a wheel vs a DS2 you have much greater range of steering control, so feel and grip I find much easier to characterise and describe with a wheel. As far as using a non-Sony pad I would not have a clue as I have never used one, but if it is just digital as you describe, the it would not surprise me.

As far as what is the maximum camber I would use, well I have already said that it would depend on the car, drivetrain (which can change how I drive) and track.

As far as some degree of negative camber being better than zero, in all the testing I did for the tuning manuals then that has been the case, I do not see why the Falken GT-R would be any different. Certain my own runs with the car have included a degree of neg camber (I'm also slightly confused as to why you are running a race car on N1's).

Edited to add I took the time to run the Falken at the 'ring and found that personally camber settings of F3 and R1 worked well for me, certainly them offered far more grip than F0 R0.

Falken GT-R - Click

This is however not even remotely important to this thread and is simply another of your 'distractions', the simple fact is that as you fit more race orientated suspension systems in GT4, the default settings move to more race orientated values. That these defaults match real world trends you can not deny, and my point is that damper values do the same, implying that higher damper values are firmer.

Even if we remove camber from this (and I do not see why we should - the real world and the majority of GT4 tuners do not agree with you that lower is always better in a stiff car) the fact remains that spring rate, ride height and anti-roll bars all do follow this pattern.

You are saying that dampers are a deliberate exception and PD set-up GT4 to use softer damper values with stiffer springs, sorry but that is rubbish.

Additionally maybe you can explain why every other suspension tuning scale runs from left to right as an increaseing value (toe being the exception as it has both a negative and positive scale). Yet you suggest that only dampers buck this trend. Why would that be done?

Regards

Scaff

Dave_George · May 4, 2006

sucahyo
Damper test report:
Integra on Grand Valley
failed, I can't get consistent turn, so measuring how far the car jump is difficult. I test it using soft spring rate and stiff spring rate, the different between d-low and d-high is hard to notice. Measuring other feeling also hard too.
Caterham on autumn ring.
Lowest spring rate (5.0/3.8), max ride height, 7/7 stabilizer, stage 3 weight mods.
d-high jump more, bounce more, handle worse than d-low
Subaru 360 on autumn ring
Lowest spring rate (1.4/1.5), max ride height, 7/7 stabilizer, stage 3 weight mods
d-high wallow more, handle worse than d-low
Highest spring rate, max ride height, 7/7 stabilizer, stage 3 weight mods
d-high jump more, bounce more, handle worse than d-low
Subaru 360 on cathedral rock II
Lowest spring rate, max ride height, 7/7 stabilizer, stage 3 weight mods
d-high wallow more, handle worse than d-low
Highest spring rate, max ride height, 7/7 stabilizer, stage 3 weight mods
d-high bounce more, handle worse than d-low
All test done in about 2 lap, with alternating d-low and d-high test 3 times.
In Caterham and Subaru 360, the different between d-low and d-high is more noticable than on integra or Land Rover Storm. In Caterham and Subaru 360 d-high show consistent behaviour of more bouncing or jump compare to d-low. The handling is worse because it would need longer time for the car to be steady.
The effect of damper for car body is shown more clearly on Subaru 360, maybe because higher ride height and very soft spring.

If more bouncing can be assumed as softer damper, d-high is softer.

Hi,

Well I finally got around to having a go at your tests, I have driven all three cars (Integra, Caterham and Subaru) at the respective courses mentioned by yourself and Scaff and the following are my results, a few pictures and my conclusions.

Honda Integra Touring car

With softest springs, highest ride height and everything else set to minimum i started first with Dampers at 1/1. The Honda felt quite stiff as I would expect a race model in GT4 to feel, it did track well though and handled the kerbs very well as picture 1 illustrates. The car stayed quite neutral throughout but with a bias to understeer when pushed hard (As Scaff says in the final corner particularly)

With dampers adjusted to 10/10 (Bound/rebound) the immediate thing i noticed was more wheelspin in each gear, more vibration coming through the DS2 controller (Genuine Sony but not a DFP I know :indiff:

) and a general tendancy to get wheels in the air when encountering kerbs. The car suffered even more understeer and I had to back off in several places that had been previously much easier to attack. The DS2 is vibrating much more on kerbs too.

This points towards higher damper settings = stiffer car.

Damper 1/1 - Rides kerbs quite well....

Damper 10/10 - Causes car to lift...

Caterham Fireblade

I used sports suspension on the Blade, with ride at maximum and camber at 0 and tuned to the full 220+bhp. With the 1st lap on dampers at 1/1 again the Caterham proves to be fun if handled correctly. The car wheelspins in anything upto 5th gear if your not carefull too, a few laps in though and I find a nice balance, turns in nicely and rides kerbs quite well, a full on launch at a kerb will of course result in going airborne but you would expect that with such a light car. Setting the dampers to 10/10 proves not so good....Massive wheelspin now suggesting the rear cant grip as well and lay down that power, watching the replay there are two points on the main straight at deep forest, just over each crest where the front wheel covers appear to vibrate such is the stiffness of the suspension. The car suffers from worse understeer everywhere and encountering a kerb throws me offline severely. The whole balance has shifted from a car that was barely soft enough before to one that feels virtually undriveable due to the stiffness. The feedback coming through the DS2 upon hittings kerbs tells me that the car is stiffer, much more vibration than with 1/1 setting.

I initially felt after 1/1 dampers that the Caterham still needed a softer damper (Standard ones perhaps) due to the extremely light weight. Upping the damping to 10/10 made matters much worse and certainly suggests that 10/10 = much stiffer set up.

This points towards higher damping settings = stiffer car (Much stiffer)

The photos are from the 2nd to last corner taken as quick as possibly to use the kerb, the first one shows that with 1/1 (Which was still a bit rough) its driveable and I can stay online. The 2nd with 10/10 shows that the car leaves the ground and is more or less out of control, such is the force that has been transmitted up through the suspension and forced the car into the air.

DAMPER 1/1 - Able to hold line...

DAMPER 10/10 - Kerbs virtually un-useable....

Subaru 360

Set to full engine tune and again with sports suspension (High ride height and 0 camber) I start out again with 1/1. Having never driven this car I didnt know what to expect, with gear ratios that get at least some speed out of it, the 360 feels quite slidy and has noticeable body roll, like the Caterham hitting a kerb will still make the car go airborne for a moment, but stick to sensisble lines and the Subaru will handle ok. Turning the dampers upto 10/10 and yet again I have a car that understeers more, vibrates the DS2 more on kerb contact and generally becomes a handfull, launching into the air due to once again, stiff dampers transferring impact force through to the car body and causing the car to go skywards.

This points towards higher damping settings = stiffer car.

The picture below is with dampers set to 10/10, if I manage to upload the replay of this lap you will see that I didnt even come into contact with the kerb on this corner, such is the stiffness of the damping, the car is lifting an inside wheel. Generally obsevations of the replay is that with 10/10 damping, when cornering, the forces can be seen to make the car body go one way and then back again, the stiff damping overcoming the low weight quite easily to flick the little car over one way and then back again. I am loathed to term this as "bouncing", unsure what is actually happening though..Im sure its the damper taking up the load after body roll and forcing it back the other way, the same is then repeated on the other side of the car. This all happens quickly though, pointing to a stiff damper....again.

Damper 10/10 - Chassis stiff and causing inside wheels to lift up....

Apologies but I ran out of time to test the 360 on the Cathedral rocks circuit.

Sucahyo
If more bouncing can be assumed as softer damper, d-high is softer.

More bouncing cannot be assumed as softer damper. The 360 appeared to "Bouce" in a corner from left to right sometimes, this however was due to the stiffer dampers in my opinion.

I conclude with no doubt in my mind that setting 1 = a softer damper and that setting 10 = a stiffer damper.

I hope it was ok to use sports suspension on the Caterham and 360, my theory was that it removes another variable in the spring rates? If this is not to anyones satisfaction then I will be happy to re-run the tests.

Apologies if this is not the most in depth reply but I am extremely busy right now and trying to fit everything in!

Sucahyo, the tests that you yourself have presented to us have been run now several times. Countless sources of information have been offered to you and still everyones conclusion is that higher values = stiffer settings in GT4 damping. If I had the money to get on a plane tomorrow and drag the proof out of Kazanori himself I would, would that be enough to convince you though?

I ask you once again to go back to your original question and look at the mountain of evidence put forward to you for the argument that in GT4 higher values do = stiffer dampers. It simply is true, and I cannot see how you can think otherwise. 2 or 3 corners (Let alone laps!) in any car with a DS2 or wheel and you should be able to see this.

I have to now conclude that either

A) You have a different copy of GT4 to the rest of us...

B) There is a massive mis-understanding going on here

C) You are doing this on purpose as you cannot admit you may have been wrong.

Whatever the reason I think this one needs putting to bed.

Finally I have to add that you are giving the "Guides editor" badge a much less respected status in my opinion. Thats not good.

regards

David

Scaff · May 4, 2006

Dave_George
I have to now conclude that either

A) You have a different copy of GT4 to the rest of us...

B) There is a massive mis-understanding going on here

C) You are doing this on purpose as you cannot admit you may have been wrong.

Whatever the reason I think this one needs putting to bed.

regards

David

Dave

Thanks for taking the time to do this and the pictures do help a great deal, particularly the Caterham shots that clearly show the range of movement on the lower damper values.

I would agree with your three conclusions and while I hope that the case is not C, it does concern me that this may be the case.

However given the gross flaw in sucahyo's understand on dampers when encountering a bump, then B is also a strong contender.

Regards

Scaff

sucahyo · May 5, 2006

FastEddie12, Ok.
I agree that 10 is stiffest few time, but after I test it myself, I found it's the otherway around.

Scaff
I say this because you have the suspension going into rebound before the bumps mid point has been reached, how on earth do you explain that?

Like I said, it's a big bump. Big enough so that the suspension will rebound before it reach the top. should I call it ramp?
IMO, suspension will rebound before it reach the top because:
- the bump is big enough
- the suspension reach it's maximum travel
- the spring is stiff enough so the car weight can not force it to compress further, and it will feeds most of it back in the opposite direction, rebound.

I refer to last point for my diagram.
Is there something wrong with this?

BTW, I don't count the reduced spring power caused by stiffer damper in my diagram, so the second and third jumping angle should be lower.

Scaff
How on earth do you even begin to try and explain the suspension going into rebound when compressing force is being applied to it?

The spring is strong enough to resist and fight back. Damper will reduce the compression force being applied, but damper will also reduce the fight back force.

If you think this is impossible, please explain how the stiff spring soft damper car behave while driving through ramp.

Scaff
I'm still not sure what you are asking me to do here? Comment on the GT2 set-ups or try and recreate these in GT4? I don't actually see the value in either, so what exactly are you asking for and what relivence does it have?

This is to test your understanding about how to tune the car in GT2. You don't need to recreate this in GT4. I want you to suggest what damper value change needed to make the car handles better. I don't mention damper value so you can judge better.
Your answer will determine if your understanding for GT2 game tuning is same with my understanding. Also to determine wether you give correct answer or not. The goal is to reduce the bouncing or making the car handle better.
Everyone can suggest too.

Please answer, I will be very sad if you choose not to answer it. I hope you answer it before you double check it yourself on GT2.
Lotus Motorsport Elise
BMW i740

Scaff
The results clearly show that the damper range in GT4 is (as I have said before) limited, and it also indicates than the characteristcs of the reactions in GT4 have more in common with firm damper settings that soft ones.

We want to find out which value is softest, not to proof that GT4 damper is limited. Indication is hard to see.

Scaff
Do not try and bring the Subaru 360 into this, its a totally different car that will react in a different manner due to differing weight, wheel base, cog, length, etc.

Are you saying that in GT4 Subaru 360 have different damper behaviour than Subaru WRC?

Scaff
Comparing a Subaru Impreza WRC car in RBR with a Subaru 360 in GT4 would not be a fair test.

We need to find damper behaviour similarity here, not car handling.

Scaff
I would like a definative answer from you on this one, do both the GT4 vidoes have visual traits more in common with the RBR Soft video or RBR Stiff Video.

Inconclusive.
GT4 video looks the same. If you send me file with random name, I don't think I'll be able to guess which is which.
That is why I refer to Subaru 360 which has very high ride height and low weight.

Scaff
Then answer the question above and then explain how you believe your view is supported, I've done this in detaul, with countless tests and videos and real-world references.
I feel it time for you to do the same.

Already done that when we discuss car bounce can also be caused by softer damper.

Scaff
With a wheel vs a DS2 you have much greater range of steering control, so feel and grip I find much easier to characterise and describe with a wheel. As far as using a non-Sony pad I would not have a clue as I have never used one, but if it is just digital as you describe, the it would not surprise me.

ok.

Scaff
As far as some degree of negative camber being better than zero, in all the testing I did for the tuning manuals then that has been the case, I do not see why the Falken GT-R would be any different. Certain my own runs with the car have included a degree of neg camber (I'm also slightly confused as to why you are running a race car on N1's).

Edited to add I took the time to run the Falken at the 'ring and found that personally camber settings of F3 and R1 worked well for me, certainly them offered far more grip than F0 R0.

Different result then, maybe because I use fake controller. I use N1 tyre because I want to create drift setting for DSJ vol 12. For me, using 0.0/7.0 camber has the same feeling as 1.0/8.0 camber. where 1.0/7.0 would give me more understeer.

Scaff
Falken GT-R - Click

Sorry, my connection too slow, I can't watch online, please use file hosting for the next video. maybe http://www.turboupload.com/.

Scaff
You are saying that dampers are a deliberate exception and PD set-up GT4 to use softer damper values with stiffer springs, sorry but that is rubbish.

Be more open mind please, this is a game, use testing as proof.

Scaff
Additionally maybe you can explain why every other suspension tuning scale runs from left to right as an increaseing value (toe being the exception as it has both a negative and positive scale). Yet you suggest that only dampers buck this trend. Why would that be done?

I don't know. I can only guess.

Dave_George
Well I finally got around to having a go at your tests, I have driven all three cars (Integra, Caterham and Subaru) at the respective courses mentioned by yourself and Scaff and the following are my results, a few pictures and my conclusions.

Thank you very much

.

Your test result is about the same as mine although with much more greater detail 👍, but the conclusion is different.

IMO, more jump and vibration can be caused by softer damper. Stiffer damper will prevent jumping and vibrating better.

But I still not sure which make the car jump higher, softer or stiffer damper. This is what I think:
- stiffer damper will jump higher if the car jump far before top of the bump.
- softer damper will jump higher if the car jump close to top of the bump.

Dave_George
I hope it was ok to use sports suspension on the Caterham and 360, my theory was that it removes another variable in the spring rates? If this is not to anyones satisfaction then I will be happy to re-run the tests.

IMO, I think using sport suspension in car will actually make higher spring rate compare to the minimum of FC suspension. So it make all the effect more pronounce. Still, I don't think it will change how the damper behave.

Dave_George
Generally obsevations of the replay is that with 10/10 damping, when cornering, the forces can be seen to make the car body go one way and then back again, the stiff damping overcoming the low weight quite easily to flick the little car over one way and then back again. I am loathed to term this as "bouncing", unsure what is actually happening though..Im sure its the damper taking up the load after body roll and forcing it back the other way, the same is then repeated on the other side of the car.

If this do not happen in 1/1 damper, I would assume that by using 10/10 damper the car will have more lateral movement cycle. more cycle = softer damper.

Skip Barber:
"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."

I interpret "control" as reducing cycle caused by spring. If using 10/10 damper make the car go left and right more when cornering, it is less control, which is equal to softer damper.

Dave_George
I ask you once again to go back to your original question and look at the mountain of evidence put forward to you for the argument that in GT4 higher values do = stiffer dampers. It simply is true, and I cannot see how you can think otherwise.

The result of my test is about the same as yours, but we have different opinion of what causing it.

I reach an agreement that damper 10 is stiff at post 184, but after I find how caterham behave (post 188), I changed my main.
It maybe mountain of test result data, but as we have different understanding of what causing it, it can result in different conclusion.

Dave_George · May 5, 2006

sucahyo
Thank you very much .

Your test result is about the same as mine although with much more greater detail 👍, but the conclusion is different

So yet again everyone else is wrong as normal? I dont see how you can conclude any other outcome??

sucahyo
IMO, more jump and vibration can be caused by softer damper. Stiffer damper will prevent jumping and vibrating better.
But I still not sure which make the car jump higher, softer or stiffer damper

Why would a softer damper transmit more force through to the car to make it leave the ground or "Jump" as you term it? A softer damper would be able to react MORE and transmit less of the force to through to the car body. Stiffer damping will transmit more force to the car and would feel stiffer for the passengers inside, the same principle applies with GT4 based on the feedback I got from your own tests that I ran!

sucahyo
IMO, I think using sport suspension in car will actually make higher spring rate compare to the minimum of FC suspension. So it make all the effect more pronounce. Still, I don't think it will change how the damper behave.

I disagree, I think sports suspension might even retain the original springs because there is no adjustment at all, semi-race stiffens the springs and race stiffens them furthur still. Sports suspension I believe represents the aftermarket "uprated" dampers and adjustable ride hieght kits that can be bought in real life.

sucahyo
The result of my test is about the same as yours, but we have different opinion of what causing it

Your not wrong there....

sucahyo
I reach an agreement that damper 10 is stiff at post 184, but after I find how caterham behave (post 188), I changed my main.
It maybe mountain of test result data, but as we have different understanding of what causing it, it can result in different conclusion.

The Caterham demonstrates perhaps the most convincingly that 10 = stiffest.
Can you imagine if a Formula 1 team simply stated that even though they had a massive amount of data pointing to one thing, they were still going to ignore it because they didnt understand what caused it? We must trust the data and also the vast amount of knowledge on here.

Sorry but you are wrong on this one Sucahyo.

David

sucahyo · May 5, 2006

Dave_George
Why would a softer damper transmit more force through to the car to make it leave the ground or "Jump" as you term it? A softer damper would be able to react MORE and transmit less of the force to through to the car body. Stiffer damping will transmit more force to the car and would feel stiffer for the passengers inside, the same principle applies with GT4 based on the feedback I got from your own tests that I ran!

Softer damper will let the spring stored more energy, and less restrain the spring when it release the energy.

Assuming the spring travel do not exceeded. Using softer damper, on bound stage the spring will stored more energy, less energy will be delivered to car body. After car kinetic power reach zero because resisted by spring, the energy will stored in the spring. softer damper will allow more energy stored in spring. If bump is small, the kinetic power will never reach zero and less energy will be stored in the spring.
On rebound stage, the spring will release the energy by moving the opposite direction. Softer damper will allow more energy to be release, pushing the wheel further from the car. If the energy is big enough it can make the car leave the ground.

when subaru 360 turning to the right, it will roll to the left, spring will fight back, make it go back to the right. stiffer damper will prevent this from happening. If 1/1 damper has less left-right roll, then 1/1 is stiffer.

Dave_George
I disagree, I think sports suspension might even retain the original springs because there is no adjustment at all, semi-race stiffens the springs and race stiffens them furthur still. Sports suspension I believe represents the aftermarket "uprated" dampers and adjustable ride hieght kits that can be bought in real life.

I have that conclusion when I hack GT4. IIRC, sport suspension have higher spring rate than normal. FC suspension can have higher spring rate than normal which from what I know have value around 2.0.

Dave_George
Can you imagine if a Formula 1 team simply stated that even though they had a massive amount of data pointing to one thing, they were still going to ignore it because they didnt understand what caused it? We must trust the data and also the vast amount of knowledge on here.

I don't say I ignore it, I say I translate it differently. I trust the data, but I am using different interpreter.

Mt. Lynx · May 5, 2006

sucahyo
Are you saying that in GT4 Subaru 360 have different damper behaviour than Subaru WRC?

Is this comment for real?? Of course it does! It is an entirely different car! On the whole, dampers will have the same principal for any car, but depending on car, they will work slightly different, caused by weight, CG, chassis stiffness, tyres, type of spring etc.

sucahyo
IMO, more jump and vibration can be caused by softer damper. Stiffer damper will prevent jumping and vibrating better.

No, it wont. Especially not in this case, where all other factors has been minimized, dampers being the only thing changed. If jumping and vibrations occur in this case, it is because the dampers are too hard. In your opinion, if they were soft, they would have to be so soft that they bottom out all the time. And then the jumping and vibrating has very little to do with the dampers.

sucahyo
Skip Barber:
"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."

I interpret "control" as reducing cycle caused by spring. If using 10/10 damper make the car go left and right more when cornering, it is less control, which is equal to softer damper.

You really have to account for more factors. Softer dampers does not create less control. Too soft will, but you must account for more factors.
The word "control" is - IMO - just reffererance to dampers, not what they do.

Scaff · May 5, 2006

sucahyo
Like I said, it's a big bump. Big enough so that the suspension will rebound before it reach the top. should I call it ramp?
IMO, suspension will rebound before it reach the top because:
- the bump is big enough
- the suspension reach it's maximum travel
- the spring is stiff enough so the car weight can not force it to compress further, and it will feeds most of it back in the opposite direction, rebound.

I refer to last point for my diagram.
Is there something wrong with this?

BTW, I don't count the reduced spring power caused by stiffer damper in my diagram, so the second and third jumping angle should be lower.

The spring is strong enough to resist and fight back. Damper will reduce the compression force being applied, but damper will also reduce the fight back force.

Keep digging, this is starting to get fun.

Did you actually read the piece I posted or just start a reply without giving it any thought at all.

Once again I can provide a number of quotes that same (in slightly different words) the same thing. What you are suggesting is that enough force can be stored in the spring under load that even while this load is still being applied it will be released. All in less time than it takes to cross the bump.

To address you three claims:
the bump is big enough
The size of the bump alone does not determine the force involved, I have covered this before. It is dependant on the size of the bump and the speed at which is encountered.

the suspension reach it's maximum travel
Again we have covered this before, if the suspension reaches its maximum travel and excess force will be trasfered to the cars structure, this is more likely to result in an immediate loss of contact with the surface - not rebound - that would follow the loss of contact. For rebound to occur in the situation the road surface would have to give way before the car did.

the spring is stiff enough so the car weight can not force it to compress further, and it will feeds most of it back in the opposite direction, rebound.
When a bump is encountered the cars body weight is not the primary source of compression. Suspension compression and expansion when enountering bumps principally comes from the unspung mass of the car (its load transfer from cornering and accelerative forces that involve the sprung weight).

As a stiffly sprung car enounters a bump at speed it will apply force to the unsprung components (tyre, wheel, brakes and suspension components below the spring & damper) and try to move them upward.

If the damper does not allow the suspension to move quickly then the force will be transfered to the unsprung portion of the car, however it is very, very unlikely that the force generated by moving (or trying to move) the unsprung mass of the car would result in sufficent force being generated to immediatly launch the car into the air. Instead the car will simply continue on a balistic path one the crest of the bump is reached (oh wait that was covered in the Physics of Racing piece - again did you not bother to read it or maybe you simply thought it was irrelivent).

To put it very, very bluntly you have a very flawed understanding of what is occuring here.

You first started learning about dampers (and from that I would assume suspension as a whole) less that six months ago, and even at that time you stated you did not care how real suspension systems work.

Yet now you are the 'expert'. I have some news for you, I have trained in the automotive field for over a decade and I would not claim to be an expert or state that I know everything in a particular field.

sucahyo
If you think this is impossible, please explain how the stiff spring soft damper car behave while driving through ramp.

I did in the post concerning this (obviously you did not bother to read it), I provided a quote to confirm the point and I have now explained it again.

sucahyo
This is to test your understanding about how to tune the car in GT2. You don't need to recreate this in GT4. I want you to suggest what damper value change needed to make the car handles better. I don't mention damper value so you can judge better.
Your answer will determine if your understanding for GT2 game tuning is same with my understanding. Also to determine wether you give correct answer or not. The goal is to reduce the bouncing or making the car handle better.
Everyone can suggest too.

Please answer, I will be very sad if you choose not to answer it. I hope you answer it before you double check it yourself on GT2.
Lotus Motorsport Elise
BMW i740

I have stated more times than I care to mention that I do not and will not tune from visual only information.

What is the value of this, other that providing yet another of your pointless distractions from the subject. You should already know that my opinion of GT2 tuning does not agree with your own, I have clearly stated that a number of times.

sucahyo
We want to find out which value is softest, not to proof that GT4 damper is limited. Indication is hard to see.

Are you saying that in GT4 Subaru 360 have different damper behaviour than Subaru WRC?

Right first would you agree that the suspension movement shown in RBR is highly realistic, yes or no?

If the answer is yes and we then compare the same car in GT4 we will be able to first establish a rough range of damper values that GT4 uses. This is critical to me in that you have clearly stated a number of times that GT4 values run in teh range of soft to medium, you have also stated that GT4 damper values can not be set too hard.

The direct comparison between RBR and GT4 with the same car seems to indicate that you are wrong in your statement. GT4 damper values quite clearly opperate in a range that occupies the firmer end of damping.

How would a different car effect this, well as a change in weight, ride height, wheelbase, track width and cog will all effect the amount of load transfer that occurs, combined with the fact that the same spring rate is not comapriable on cars of differing weights, then quite a bloody lot actually.

Again if you can't see this then I would question your understanding of the basics.

sucahyo
We need to find damper behaviour similarity here, not car handling.

I did not state anything different.

sucahyo
Inconclusive.
GT4 video looks the same. If you send me file with random name, I don't think I'll be able to guess which is which.
That is why I refer to Subaru 360 which has very high ride height and low weight.

And the reason this claim is irrelivent I have covered above.

sucahyo
Already done that when we discuss car bounce can also be caused by softer damper.

Um no we did not, in every case you misunderstood the information that you used to try and back up your point.

I'm sorry but in almost every case in this thread when you have tried to 'call me out' (and on one occation suggested my job was at risk because I was so wrong) you have singularly failed to prove you point.

sucahyo
Different result then, maybe because I use fake controller. I use N1 tyre because I want to create drift setting for DSJ vol 12. For me, using 0.0/7.0 camber has the same feeling as 1.0/8.0 camber. where 1.0/7.0 would give me more understeer.

And the focus here should be on two things, the first being the amount of time you used the word me, camber tuning is personal (as are many things in fine tuning), yet you have stated your personal preference as fact that all should use.

Secondly, you are using stupidly high values to illustrate the point, also you can't just look at camber values in isolation. How was the rest of the suspension set?

sucahyo
Sorry, my connection too slow, I can't watch online, please use file hosting for the next video. maybe http://www.turboupload.com/.

No problem, I'm so used to broadband that I do make the assumption that everyone has it.

sucahyo
Be more open mind please, this is a game, use testing as proof.

sucahyo
I don't know. I can only guess.

Please look at the two posts you have made above and see if you can tell me the problem I may have with them.

You can't in one sentance tell me to only use proof and then say its fine fo r you to guess.

Additionally I did not say it proved anything, I said that in my opinion to suggest that PD would do anything so strange would be rubbish.

Both of the points I made in this area could be dismissed in isolation, however when the whole wealth of information is gathered together it does all point in one direction. Just because you do not like that direction does not make it automatically wrong.

sucahyo
Your test result is about the same as mine although with much more greater detail 👍, but the conclusion is different.

An you refuse to accept that as you are the only person who holds this view that the falw may be with your reasoning and understanding?

sucahyo
IMO, more jump and vibration can be caused by softer damper. Stiffer damper will prevent jumping and vibrating better.

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!

How many damn links and quote and how much proof, in how many forms do you have to be shown before you will accept this.

What realy winds me up is that you use the Skip Barber quotes with so much ease, yet have quite clearly either not read or understood them. The Skip Barber quote regarding bumps clearly contradicts what your are saying above, yet you say you agree with the quote and then ignore it.

The only person who is reaching the wrong conclusion here is you.

sucahyo
But I still not sure which make the car jump higher, softer or stiffer damper. This is what I think:
- stiffer damper will jump higher if the car jump far before top of the bump.
- softer damper will jump higher if the car jump close to top of the bump.

Please, please will you stop with your 'pop' theories on suspension behaviour and work with what you have been shown. Cars do not start jumping around like fleas when they first encounter a bump, how many damn times can one person continue to ignore the basics of what is being shown to them.

Are you willfully ignoring what is being shown to you?

Go back to Skip Barber or the The Suspension Bible or the RBR videos, in every case the actions are clearly described. On contact with a bump Softer damper = quicker suspension movement = less contact loss with the track surface.

Additionally it is quite clearly described in the Suspension Bible and the Physics of Racing piece that contact loss will occur once the car crosses the top of the bump.

sucahyo
Skip Barber:
"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."

I interpret "control" as reducing cycle caused by spring. If using 10/10 damper make the car go left and right more when cornering, it is less control, which is equal to softer damper.

What in the name of all that is holy are you talking about now. I would strongly suggest that you stick to one area of suspension behaviour at a time. I mean I'm fine if you want to start talking about handling characteristics of damper settings, but you should be aware that what you have said above in (not the control as reducing the spring cycle) regard to grip in a corner.

What you are trying to say above is not very clear, but less control over a cars ability to maintain a direction change is not a characteristic of soft dampers (that would be a reluctance to turn in if set too soft).

sucahyo
I reach an agreement that damper 10 is stiff at post 184, but after I find how caterham behave (post 188), I changed my main.
It maybe mountain of test result data, but as we have different understanding of what causing it, it can result in different conclusion.

Your understanding of what is happening has had to be constantly challenged and has constantly been proven wrong.

The only person who is (in my opinion) misinterpriting the information here is you, a classic example of this is the fact that stiffer dampers will result in a greater loss of contact over a bump. Yet the test that demonstrates this you conveniently are unable to carry out.

In closing I have to say that while I am an extremely patient man, and have no problem at all in sharing what I do know about this field, I am growing increasingly frustrated with an almost willful reluctance to accept anything that your theories don't match.

You need to be aware of the basics before you can start examining the detail, and yet you refuse to do this. In short I am growing increasing the frustrated with you stuborn refusal to every accept that you may be wrong, I do not want to loack this thread, but I am growing tired of fighting an uphill battle just to get across the basics.

So here is how it will go, I am more than willing to continue discussing this if you will agree, here and now, that you will start to accept that you still have one hell of a lot to learn, and then actually start to take it in board. One of the main problems here is that of attitude (and if you were a delegate on one of my training courses with this attitude I can state that you would have been removed) you state theory as if it were fact and then refuse to accept it when your theory is shown to be wrong. Do you not think that it would be far more benificial to propose a thought as theory as that way it can be re-evaluated and changed when shown to be wrong.

Regards

Scaff

sucahyo · May 5, 2006

I am certain that your answer about damper needed for GT2 would be wrong
you are clever not to answer that question 👍

you refuse even if I beg you

more reply tomorrow.

Scaff · May 5, 2006

sucahyo
I am certain that your answer about damper needed for GT2 would be wrong
you are clever not to answer that question 👍

you refuse even if I beg you

more reply tomorrow.

What are you trying to suggest with this comment.

I have to say that this falls into my point on attitude.

I have been nothing but honest and open (and very patient) in my posts, every table, graph and video has been clearly labeled to avoid misunderstanding.

If you are saying that your 'test' set for myself and other members was deliberatly 'fixed' in any way then you are going to very quickly run into me as a moderator, rather than as a contibutor to this thread.

You should be aware of this extract from the AUP

AUP
You will not post any material that is knowingly false, misleading, or inaccurate.

Be aware that this is a very serious point I am raising here and the tone will change very quickly if I ever suspect that an attempt was made to break the AUP on this (or any other way).

Scaff

FastEddie12 · May 5, 2006

sucahyo
Using softer damper, on bound stage the spring will stored more energy, less energy will be delivered to car body.

This is absolutely correct.
Think about this. It means that the car body will move LESS, because less energy is being delivered to it.
A Rolls Royce gives a soft ride because it has soft springs and dampers (for its weight). If you corner hard in a Rolls Royce it leans and lollops about like a ship at sea. It is very unlikely to leave the ground when encountering a kerb, BECAUSE THE SPRINGS ABSORB THAT ENERGY, and they do NOT transmit the energy to the body. If they do not transmit force to the body, the body cannot be lifted off the ground.

This is the fundamental mistake you have been making from the beginning.

sucahyo
Be more open mind please, this is a game, use testing as proof.

The cheek!!! Scaff is the one person who always backs up what he says!!! I can't believe YOU said that!

sucahyo
- the suspension reach it's maximum travel

So presumably it's hit the bump stops.

sucahyo
- the spring is stiff enough so the car weight can not force it to compress further,

So presumably it hasn't hit the bump stops.
You're showing your tenuous grasp of what is actually happening here.

sucahyo
Damper will reduce the compression force being applied,

The damper does not "reduce force": it applies a friction force of its own to slow the spring. This is physics and again shows your ignorance of what is going on. Furthermore nothing in the suspension can reduce the force being applied from outside, the force is the force. The various components will react against it to produce an equal and opposite force.

sucahyo
IMO, more jump and vibration can be caused by softer damper. Stiffer damper will prevent jumping and vibrating better.

This is the purest garbage. We have already shown that soft suspension absorbs bumps and vibrations. That is how Rolls Royces are so comfortable. Vibration and the bounciness are caused by suspension and dampers THAT ARE EXCEPTIONALLY STIFF. How can you not grasp this?

OK, take the forefinger of your left hand and grasp it with all the fingers of your right hand. It may look rude, but that is effectively what a damper is. If you grasp the finger tightly, that is a stiff damper. Very little movement. If you get someone to jog your right hand, your left arm moves, right? Thus all the force is transmitted. It has nothing to do with the spring bottoming out, it's just a very stiff damper.

Now barely grasp the finger at all. If someone jogs your right hand, not only do you make an obscene gesture, but also your left hand doesn't move. Soft damping. Now go back and read this entire thread again AND STOP WASTING SCAFF'S TIME.

sucahyo
I am certain that your answer about damper needed for GT2 would be wrong
you are clever not to answer that question

Cheeky little sod. You'd better take that back.

sucahyo · May 6, 2006

Team666
Is this comment for real?? Of course it does! It is an entirely different car! On the whole, dampers will have the same principal for any car, but depending on car, they will work slightly different, caused by weight, CG, chassis stiffness, tyres, type of spring etc.

No, damper in Subaru 360 will not work the opposite way of Subaru WRC.

Team666
No, it wont. Especially not in this case, where all other factors has been minimized, dampers being the only thing changed. If jumping and vibrations occur in this case, it is because the dampers are too hard. In your opinion, if they were soft, they would have to be so soft that they bottom out all the time. And then the jumping and vibrating has very little to do with the dampers.

Spring prevent car bottoming out more than damper.
Without spring there will be no vibration. There is vibration because damper do not slow the spring movement much.

Team666
You really have to account for more factors. Softer dampers does not create less control. Too soft will, but you must account for more factors.
The word "control" is - IMO - just reffererance to dampers, not what they do.

The different between two setting is just damper, so I think it is
ok to blame just the damper for any differences occured.

Scaff
the bump is big enough
The size of the bump alone does not determine the force involved, I have covered this before. It is dependant on the size of the bump and the
speed at which is encountered.

Ok, miss that, maybe car weight too.

Scaff
the suspension reach it's maximum travel
Again we have covered this before, if the suspension reaches its maximum travel and excess force will be trasfered to the cars structure, this is more
likely to result in an immediate loss of contact with the surface - not rebound - that would follow the loss of contact. For rebound to occur in the situation the road surface would have to give way before the car did.

Spring rebound will do the jump. The jump power will depend on what energy
that spring stored, reduced by damping power.

Scaff
the spring is stiff enough so the car weight can not force it to compress further, and it will feeds most of it back in the opposite
direction, rebound.
When a bump is encountered the cars body weight is not the primary source of compression. Suspension compression and expansion when enountering bumps principally comes from the unspung mass of the car (its load transfer from cornering and accelerative forces that involve the sprung weight).

Car body weight have linier relation to load transfer.

Scaff
As a stiffly sprung car enounters a bump at speed it will apply force to the unsprung components (tyre, wheel, brakes and suspension
components below the spring & damper) and try to move them upward.

spring as remarkable depository of energy will store this force.

Scaff
If the damper does not allow the suspension to move quickly then the force will be transfered to the unsprung portion of the car, however it is very, very unlikely that the force generated by moving (or trying to move) the unsprung mass of the car would result in sufficent force being
generated to immediatly launch the car into the air. Instead the car will simply continue on a balistic path one the crest of the bump is reached (oh
wait that was covered in the Physics of Racing piece - again did you not bother to read it or maybe you simply thought it was irrelivent).

Are you saying it will never rebound before top of the bump?

My understanding for what you are saying:

Assume that the bump has 1 feet uphill, spring is stiff.
spring compressed mainly caused by unsprung mass (wheel, tires, brakes, suspension)
when meeting bump the force will be applied to those, if the suspension reach a turn back point at 1 inch, it will continue at that point until it
reach the bump top.
the jumping force is detemined by how much force being generated to move unsprung mass.
damper bound affect how fast it happen, and how much force transfered to the unsprung mass
damper rebound do not have any effect for how the car react in this stage.

My opinion:

spring compressed mainly because car refuse to change direction (to go up), the weight will affect how much force will be generated.
spring will force the car to go up by its springing power and store the force it receive while compressing, car weight will resist this until the car move the same speed as bump vertical.
when reaching a turn back point, the car do not push the spring anymore, it already go up at the same rate as bump vertical.
after turn back point, the car get push up further by spring, the car weight will resist the force until spring force is zero
depend on how fast the car go up, the weight will make the car continue moving up faster than bump vertical speed until gravity reduce it speed.
if the force is high the tyre will loose contact with the bump.
damper bound will reduce force stored to spring when compressing
damper rebound will reduce the force generated by spring when expanding

Scaff
I have some news for you, I have trained in the automotive field for over a decade and I would not claim to be an expert or state that I
know everything in a particular field.

Why you refuse to tune from visual only information? considering your experience?

Scaff
I have stated more times than I care to mention that I do not and will not tune from visual only information.
What is the value of this, other that providing yet another of your pointless distractions from the subject. You should already know that my opinion of
GT2 tuning does not agree with your own, I have clearly stated that a number of times.

You force me to conclude from your picture and replay but you refuse to conclude anything from my replay. You force to judge wether the RBR video show soft or stiff behaviour but when it's your turn to judge you say you won't. It's not fair.

If you don't want to suggest what damper tuning needed, I change the question.

Is the video show soft damper behaviour or stiff damper behaviour? I am sure you have no problem answering this.

reminder:

Scaff
sucahyo

I started to doubt your feel when you say damper behavour in GT2 & GT4 is the same as damper behaviour in GT1.

Click to expand...

You can doubt all you like, I'm the one who sat down and did a full back to back comparison of the entire GT series as far as damping when.

All of which was done on the PS2, with a DS2. You have admitted that a lot of the testing you were doing with GT2 was done on a PC emulator using the
keyboard.

I'm sorry but its your ability to read feel that I would place in doubt here, I would also seriously question your ability to compare it to real world
feel encountered in a car on a track.

So now you are stating that GT2 and GT4 have different damper behaviour?
Me? after testing caterham myself I believe GT2 and GT4 have the same damper behaviour, only GT1 is normal like RBR.

You are saying that dampers are a deliberate exception and PD set-up GT4 to use softer damper values with stiffer springs, sorry but that is
rubbish.

Additionally maybe you can explain why every other suspension tuning scale runs from left to right as an increaseing value (toe being the exception as it
has both a negative and positive scale). Yet you suggest that only dampers buck this trend. Why would that be done?

FYI, in GT2 damper use 1 as left value too.

Scaff
Right first would you agree that the suspension movement shown in RBR is highly realistic, yes or no?

Yes.

Scaff
The direct comparison between RBR and GT4 with the same car seems to indicate that you are wrong in your statement. GT4 damper values quite clearly opperate in a range that occupies the firmer end of damping.

Quite clearly? I can't notice it.
You seem to have a very good observation for this. Why state that you have bad observation when it comes to tuning car from visual?

Scaff
How would a different car effect this, well as a change in weight, ride height, wheelbase, track width and cog will all effect the amount of load transfer that occurs, combined with the fact that the same spring rate is not comapriable on cars of differing weights, then quite a bloody lot
actually.

big enough to make damper work the opposite way?

Scaff
I'm sorry but in almost every case in this thread when you have tried to 'call me out' (and on one occation suggested my job was at risk
because I was so wrong) you have singularly failed to prove you point.

I see.

Scaff
Secondly, you are using stupidly high values to illustrate the point, also you can't just look at camber values in isolation. How was the
rest of the suspension set?

Abnormal too, see the link. I like it better if you try it first before commenting.

Scaff
No problem, I'm so used to broadband that I do make the assumption that everyone has it.

Thanks

.

Scaff
Both of the points I made in this area could be dismissed in isolation, however when the whole wealth of information is gathered together it does all point in one direction. Just because you do not like that direction does not make it automatically wrong.

Your answer for what damper tuning needed for GT2 video can change that. So it is very important for me that you answer this question. You claim that you have a very good observation for car behaviour, where I am a stupid car newbie, why won't you answer it?

Scaff
Go back to Skip Barber or the The Suspension Bible or the RBR videos, in every case the actions are clearly described. On contact with a
bump Softer damper = quicker suspension movement = less contact loss with the track surface.

I blame it on GT for having such stiff spring rate
that Skip barber or RBR don't cover.

Scaff
Additionally it is quite clearly described in the Suspension Bible and the Physics of Racing piece that contact loss will occur once the car
crosses the top of the bump.

that is not the only possibilities.

Scaff
What you are trying to say above is not very clear, but less control over a cars ability to maintain a direction change is not a
characteristic of soft dampers (that would be a reluctance to turn in if set too soft).

Less damper control over spring reaction to push back the
car to the opposite direction.

Scaff
What are you trying to suggest with this comment.

You are deliberately avoid to answer the question at any cost.

Scaff
If you are saying that your 'test' set for myself and other members was deliberatly 'fixed' in any way then you are going to very quickly
run into me as a moderator, rather than as a contibutor to this thread.

This test can be duplicated easily by anyone who have GT2 disc. Attempting to create this would be easy as I already show the important suspension setting, 8/8 spring rate and maximum ride height for this car. And, this is not using hacked value. I even use car that are easy to get, by buying it in appropriate dealer.
But, I use PAL version for the video, for NTSC 1.2 version you need to use 20/20 spring rate for BMW 740i to make it behave like 8/8 spring PAL, Lotus Motorsport Elise too.
Just ask if you need proof.

The video was created with non hacked GT2, the test was not fixed in any way. But I still believe you will answer it wrong or it force you to drop some
of your previous statement.

Now, would you answer the question or would you ignore it?

FastEddie12
If they do not transmit force to the body, the body cannot be lifted off the ground

Read my explanation for Scaff.

FastEddie12
Scaff is the one person who always backs up what he says!!! I can't believe YOU said that!

He can make mistakes too. As I am certain that damper tuning is reversed in GT2, even when damper left value is 1 in GT2.

FastEddie12
If you grasp the finger tightly, that is a stiff damper. Very little movement.

Yes, it's like that. On bumpy road it means the car will follow the road countour with many top of the bump launch. Means, no vibration.

FastEddie12
You'd better take that back.

I accuse Scaff deliberately avoiding to answer the question. I will delete those post after Scaff answer it.
BTW, you can try to answer too.

Mt. Lynx · May 6, 2006

sucahyo
No, damper in Subaru 360 will not work the opposite way of Subaru WRC.

I did not say that, did I? I said that any damper on any car will work by the same principle, but by outer factors not in the same way on all cars. A damper is always a damper, but you cannot compare damping on a Subaru 360 to a modern Subaru WRX rallycar.

sucahyo
Spring prevent car bottoming out more than damper.
Without spring there will be no vibration. There is vibration because damper do not slow the spring movement much.

This is called underdamping. Hard springs will need a harder set of dampers than soft springs.
What you seem to forget is the fact that the dampers should cooperate with the spring. Under- or overdamping works against the springmovement in a too high degree, and creates various disturbances (vibrations, jumping, wallowing etc.) in the car.

sucahyo
Spring rebound will do the jump. The jump power will depend on what energy
that spring stored, reduced by damping power.

If that happens, then you are seriously underdamped. This of course depends on how large the bump/ramp is.

sucahyo
Are you saying it will never rebound before top of the bump?

If you referr to the ramp described earlier, the answer is no. A more normal bump will generate a "yes, usually".

sucahyo
Why you refuse to tune from visual only information? considering your experience?

I think the answer is; why? They do not do it even in the real world, where visual information actually is correct (why do think F1 uses testdrivers?), as is not always the case with a virtual world.

sucahyo
Yes, it's like that. On bumpy road it means the car will follow the road countour with many top of the bump launch. Means, no vibration.

You better back this up! The jumping caused by hard settings, will also cause vibrations over more even surfaces. Especially if there is downforce involved.

Scaff · May 6, 2006

sucahyo
No, damper in Subaru 360 will not work the opposite way of Subaru WRC.

No one said it would act the opposite, please read what has been said again.

In fact the only person to use the word opposite was you, just now.

Stop trying to put words in peoples mouths.

sucahyo
Spring prevent car bottoming out more than damper.
Without spring there will be no vibration. There is vibration because damper do not slow the spring movement much.

No always true. Springs and damper act together, you can have very stiff springs and soft dampers, as long as sufficent force is applied to the spring it will still bottom out.

You also appear to have a very different understanding of the meaning of the word vibration to me, as its one of the principal characteristics of overdamping.

sucahyo
Ok, miss that, maybe car weight too.

A fairly fundimental point to miss do you not think.

sucahyo
Spring rebound will do the jump. The jump power will depend on what energy
that spring stored, reduced by damping power.

Car body weight have linier relation to load transfer.

spring as remarkable depository of energy will store this force.

Are you saying it will never rebound before top of the bump?

A number of points.

First spring rebound will not do the jump, nor will teh jump power depend on the energy stored by the spring, however I would agree that damper will have an effect on the energy that is store by the spring (but not a major factor).

The cars sprung weight certainly does have an effect on load transfer, its just a great pity that load transfer does not have a significant effect on teh suspesnion system when you encounter a bump.

Am I saying that the suspension will not rebound before the top of a bump. As long as the load is not removed (and this is not load from the car, but load from the change in track surface - the bump) by say stopping the car, then yes I am saying that the suspension will not rebound before the top of the bump.

Not only am I saying it, but so does the Suspension Bible and Skip BArber (among many others).

Skip Barber
When some force acts on the suspension system to compress the spring, it also compresses the shock. When the shock compresses, it's called "going into bump". If the load is removed from the suspension, the spring gets longer and the shock extends - a state known as "going into rebound".

Quite clearly here you are mixing up the differences between shock reaction to surface changes (mainly a factor of unsprung weight) and load changes (mainly a factor of sprung weight).

sucahyo
My understanding for what you are saying:

Assume that the bump has 1 feet uphill, spring is stiff.

spring compressed mainly caused by unsprung mass (wheel, tires, brakes, suspension)

when meeting bump the force will be applied to those, if the suspension reach a turn back point at 1 inch, it will continue at that point until it
reach the bump top.

the jumping force is detemined by how much force being generated to move unsprung mass.

damper bound affect how fast it happen, and how much force transfered to the unsprung mass

damper rebound do not have any effect for how the car react in this stage.

My opinion:

spring compressed mainly because car refuse to change direction (to go up), the weight will affect how much force will be generated.

spring will force the car to go up by its springing power and store the force it receive while compressing, car weight will resist this until the car move the same speed as bump vertical.

when reaching a turn back point, the car do not push the spring anymore, it already go up at the same rate as bump vertical.

after turn back point, the car get push up further by spring, the car weight will resist the force until spring force is zero

depend on how fast the car go up, the weight will make the car continue moving up faster than bump vertical speed until gravity reduce it speed.

if the force is high the tyre will loose contact with the bump.

damper bound will reduce force stored to spring when compressing

damper rebound will reduce the force generated by spring when expanding

For a situation in which the force is resulting from a change in the track surface (rumble strip/bump/curb) then mine is right and yours is wrong.

Sorry but it is as simple as that.

If you disagree, then stop giving me your theory, do what I have done and actually provide some real world evidence (as I have done).

sucahyo
Why you refuse to tune from visual only information? considering your experience?

The reason I am not stupid enough to state catagorically that a car should be tuned in manner x, y and z from just visual information is based on my experience.

The sad fact here is that I have said more times than I care to remember that I will not tune just using visual information alone.

sucahyo
You force me to conclude from your picture and replay but you refuse to conclude anything from my replay. You force to judge wether the RBR video show soft or stiff behaviour but when it's your turn to judge you say you won't. It's not fair.

If you don't want to suggest what damper tuning needed, I change the question.

Is the video show soft damper behaviour or stiff damper behaviour? I am sure you have no problem answering this.

First off I did not force you to conclude anything, I asked which of the two RBR vidoes better matched the GT4 video, from a visual standpoint only.

I also provided the settings that were used in the creation of these, the entire process was open and up front. I did not ask you to tunethe cars, suggest tuning settings or say which was set hard or soft. ALL OF THIS INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED BY ME (and yes I am rasining my voice).

By comparison, you provided (originally) a video that showed GT2 cars from a chase cam view only, with no settings information and asked my to say what they showed in terms of suspesnion set-up.

Now thats a bloody big difference, and as I have previously said on many occasions that I do not tune by visuals only (which was not what I asked you to do) and thecahse cam does not even let you see the wheels clearly.. Even the second set of vids is not a lot of help, GT2 is not the last word in visual perfection.

In my opinion your 'test' was a purile and simplistic attemps to mislead and score points. To be blunt, I am not stupid enough to fall for it (and you said as much). Its a type of behaviour that is not generally tolerated here at GTP - be very careful.

However here is what I will do, I have two nights away with work (Sunday and Monday) so I will drag out my PS1 and take it and GT & GT2 along with me. A full write up on damper behaviour on both will follow.

sucahyo
reminder:
So now you are stating that GT2 and GT4 have different damper behaviour?
Me? after testing caterham myself I believe GT2 and GT4 have the same damper behaviour, only GT1 is normal like RBR.

Show me the exact quote in which I said that.

I said no such damn thing, but once again you are attempting to put words in people mouths.

sucahyo
You seem to have a very good observation for this. Why state that you have bad observation when it comes to tuning car from visual?

At it again, its starting to be your new habit (and one I am not happy with at all), I did not say any such thing.

I have always maintained that visual information alone does not give you enough info to tune a car.

If you misquote me again I am going to take this to the mods forum to discuss, because the number of times it has happened now has lead me to believe this has gone beyond a language issue and is more a deliberate act. You are on very thin ice in this area.

Quote people correctly from now on, I have already shown you the AUP section relating to misleading information, take note of it.

sucahyo
big enough to make damper work the opposite way?

Your words not anyone elses, read the above.

sucahyo
Abnormal too, see the link. I like it better if you try it first before commenting.

I did try it, you should know by now that if I do not have the time to try something I state as much, You are the individual that writes in a manner than implies you have carried out tests and then has to back track when it is discovered they did not do the test.

BTW as far as the drift settings for the Falken GT-R go, I would agree with the majority of posters in the drift forum, they may well work fine for you. But after a number of laps, in my opinion they let the car go because they provide little grip, but they do not give the car a great deal of control at all.

sucahyo
I blame it on GT for having such stiff spring rate
that Skip barber or RBR don't cover.

You have done this before, how the hell do you know what Skip Barber covers on springs?

You do not have a copy of the book, yet this is not the first time you have tried to claim you know what it covers.

Additionally how do you know what the spring rate range os in RBR? Have you managed to pick up a copy?

Or are you now blatently posting information that you must know to be potentially misleading?

For your information you are wrong on both points.

sucahyo
that is not the only possibilities.

Less damper control over spring reaction to push back the
car to the opposite direction.

Mixing up suspension reaction to surface changes vs. load transfer again.

sucahyo
You are deliberately avoid to answer the question at any cost.

This test can be duplicated easily by anyone who have GT2 disc. Attempting to create this would be easy as I already show the important suspension setting, 8/8 spring rate and maximum ride height for this car. And, this is not using hacked value. I even use car that are easy to get, by buying it in appropriate dealer.
But, I use PAL version for the video, for NTSC 1.2 version you need to use 20/20 spring rate for BMW 740i to make it behave like 8/8 spring PAL, Lotus Motorsport Elise too.
Just ask if you need proof.

The video was created with non hacked GT2, the test was not fixed in any way. But I still believe you will answer it wrong or it force you to drop some
of your previous statement.

Now, would you answer the question or would you ignore it?

And this is the first time you actual provide any information on the set-up.

Still by now you would have read my answer above.

sucahyo
He can make mistakes too. As I am certain that damper tuning is reversed in GT2, even when damper left value is 1 in GT2.

Yes the difference is, as anyone who has read a good number of my threads will know, that if I am wrong I am more than happy to admit it.

sucahyo
Yes, it's like that. On bumpy road it means the car will follow the road countour with many top of the bump launch. Means, no vibration.

Once again you are ignoring every piece of information that has shown this to be incorrect (unless you have a very strange idea of what vibration is).

Would you agree that the rumble feel that driving over a rumble strip creates is vibration? I think most people would, so on that basis.

The following two quotes are from an Ohlin's damper tuning manual

Ohlin's
If the vehicle is hard and bumpy, especially over a series of bumps, then the rebound damping should be reduced

Ohlin's
If the vehicle feels harsh and has hard resilience, e.g. over changes in road paving, then the compression deamping must be reduced

Now do not start the whole 'it doesn't have the word vibration in it' rubbish again. The situations described here are clearly ones that involve vibration (harse over changes in paving for example) and the recomendation to reduce it? Soften the dampers.

sucahyo
I accuse Scaff deliberately avoiding to answer the question. I will delete those post after Scaff answer it.

An invalid and flawed test is no test at all, I have stated this above.

You can delete what you want form your own posts, it will not change the fact that any of you bizzare and strange claims will still be in other peoples posts to see, and these you can't touch.

Regards

Scaff

FastEddie12 · May 6, 2006

[/anger off][/sarcasm off]

SUCAHYO
Without spring there will be no vibration. There is vibration because damper do not slow the spring movement much.

Sucahyo, I have just noticed something that is causing a major misunderstanding: you have mistranslated the word "vibration".

Vibration is at a higher pitch/speed than the oscillation you get in a suspension spring. The vibration Scaff and the rest of us are talking about is like a buzz from a hifi speaker; the "vibration" you are talking about is the oscillation of the spring.

With super hard dampers, there is lots of vibration, but the spring does not oscillate (much), as the dampers damp out the oscillations of the spring quickly, but transmit the vibration.

With soft dampers, the spring absorbs the vibrations, but the dampers fail to damp the oscillations of the spring.

Please don't think I am being rude about your command of English: I have worked in a foreign language myself and know how well you have been coping with it. Unfortunately this has proved to be a fundamental misunderstanding.

I hope this clears things up.

Dave_George · May 6, 2006

FastEddie12
I hope this clears things up.

And hope we do indeed...

Kent · May 7, 2006

Ok guys, here's the deal.

First off, read this and notice that I am not taking anyone's side. 👍

This thread has been going around in circles between a few key players all with different "game styles" (if you will).

Most of this has been point and counter-point (true).
All of this has been theory and fact (very true).

Simply throwing together a mix of your own theories based on previous GT games, generalized physics, and limited testing without imperical data to back up claims has now become a problem.

Where at first we were trying to discuss and solve a problem or hypothesis, now we are simply fighting for our own ideas to be the right ones regardless of evidence provided or logic used.

That can not and will not work in this situation.
Not only does the unrest of this thread contribute to greater problems in the GTP community, it also contributes to the spread of a deadly virus known as "the bad tuning advice bug."

So before this epidemic grows to pandemic proportions and ruins the minds and races of all those who traffic the gtp I will take action.

My action to take...
Thread Closed.

Good luck to all of you in the pursuit of a perfect ride. :cheers:

Scaff · Nov 17, 2006

OK Given the number of discussions on GT4 damper that have started to take place in various threads around the Tuning and Settings sub-forum I am going to take a risk and re-open this thread.

My main reason for this is that its easier than people having to re-write posts or link to a thread that is locked.

However I open it again on a couple of provisos

Any test discussed must have been carried out by the member who posts it and full settings must be included
Opinion as fact will not be tolerated, sources must be provided
The AUP will be enforced to the letter

I will be keeping a close eye on things and should it head in the 'old' direction again then action will be taken, the first of which will be the permanent locking of the thread. I will also be re-naming the thread as it has gone beyond the original title subject.

Enjoy

Scaff

sucahyo · Nov 18, 2006

Ok.

For starting point I suggest we examine how damper influence handling during load transfer. Since recently I see many post complain / asking about lift off throttle oversteer or understeer. Damper is not the only solution to this but I think we should find out how much it can solve the problem.

Scaff · Nov 18, 2006

Sucahyo did you not actually read my post on re-opening this thread?

Because it was quite clear...

Scaff
However I open it again on a couple of provisos

Any test discussed must have been carried out by the member who posts it and full settings must be included

Opinion as fact will not be tolerated, sources must be provided

The AUP will be enforced to the letter

And what is the first thing you do, post up incomplete settings, and setting that I know are, to say the, least unusual by most peoples standards. You are also aware that I have passed comment on these very settings (all but one of them), yet you made the choice not to even bother providing a link to the thread in question.

So in the sake of anyoen wishing to reply to your post here are the links

Suchayo's Original Post

Scaff's Reply

The entire thread (settings relating to the above from post 23 onwards)

And for the sake of brevity here are Suchayo's settings as applied to the cars in question.

Sucahyo
In my last 3 entry on tuning competition, I basically tune only two suspension setting, stabilizer and damper. I tune stabilizer first and then damper, only if I still have enough time that I tune other. I start with initial setting that I consider as soft suspension:

Spring rate: minimum front / minimum rear
Ride Height: maximum front / maximum rear
Damper bound: maximum front / maximum rear
Damper rebound: maximum front / maximum rear
Camber: zero front / zero rear
Toe: zero front / zero rear
Stabilizer: minimum front / minimum rear

1. Ford GT '05
This car feel super oversteer on mid corner so:

Decision 1A. increase front stabilizer, to 7/1, still not enough though

After this tuning I drive around a bit, then I detected that the car will go wide if I push throttle in the middle of cornering so:

Decision 1B. reduce rear damper, both to 10/1, seems ok

2. Paganini Zonda C12S
This car feel badly understeer on mid corner so:

Decision 2A. increase rear stabilizer, to 1/7, a bit excessive

I detected that the car will go wide if I push throttle in the middle of cornering so:

Decision 2B. reduce rear damper, both to 10/7, seems ok

3. Hyundai Tiburon
This car feel understeer on mid corner so:

Decision 3A. increase rear stabilizer, to 1/7, a bit excessive on low speed

I detected that the car will go in too much if I push throttle in the middle of cornering so:

Decision 3B. reduce front damper, both to 7/10, seems enough

and my reply

Scaff
sucahyo

About the value of other suspension, I do limited suspension compare then. GT4 first:

In my last 3 entry on tuning competition, I basically tune only two suspension setting, stabilizer and damper. I tune stabilizer first and then damper, only if I still have enough time that I tune other. I start with initial setting that I consider as soft suspension:

Spring rate: minimum front / minimum rear
Ride Height: maximum front / maximum rear
Damper bound: maximum front / maximum rear
Damper rebound: maximum front / maximum rear
Camber: zero front / zero rear
Toe: zero front / zero rear
Stabilizer: minimum front / minimum rear

Click to expand...

A number of questions pop into my head here, the first and most important being why are we now talking about dampers and stabilisers? This was a discussion about extreme spring rate settings?

The second question is how does raising ride height and reducing camber 'soften' suspension?

sucahyo

I don't think my decision is wrong. If you think it is wrong, please explain after you TRY yourself. Remember that I limit my self on tuning only stabilizer and damper. So please replicate my setting and try to tune the car the same way I tune it, by only changing stabilizer and damper. Use stock car with FC suspension.

Click to expand...

I've highlighted the above section in bold because its very important and I think key to a number of points, you state that you start with your 'soft' settings and then claim that in the set-up you have only tuned using damper and stabilisers. Well quite clearly thats not true, you have changed every suspension setting bar toe, so you are not just looking at dampers and stabilisers. Its not possible to say you are just tuning these areas and ignore everything else, they are all working together.

However I pressed on and gave you tests a run, I ran the cars at the Grand Valley Speedway as it contains a good range of corners and has a smooth track surface.

sucahyo

1. Ford GT '05
This car feel super oversteer on mid corner so:

Decision 1A. increase front stabilizer, to 7/1, still not enough though

After this tuning I drive around a bit, then I detected that the car will go wide if I push throttle in the middle of cornering so:

Decision 1B. reduce rear damper, both to 10/1, seems ok

Click to expand...

Basic set-up
Well the changes from default have increased load transfer in a huge way, with a resulting balance of mild oversteer on the throttle out of constant radius corners, its far from 'super'.

Change 1A
Stabiliser f7/r1
An immediate increase on understeer in the 's' section of the track between the two hairpins and out of the last sweeper.

Change 1B
Damper f10/r1 (both)
A massive increase in push out of the final sweeper, with exit speed negatively effected. The speed through to 's' section was also reduced and required far more care.

sucahyo

2. Paganini Zonda C12S
This car feel badly understeer on mid corner so:

Decision 2A. increase rear stabilizer, to 1/7, a bit excessive

I detected that the car will go wide if I push throttle in the middle of cornering so:

Decision 2B. reduce rear damper, both to 10/7, seems ok

Click to expand...

Basic Set-up
The Zonda in this tune had easy to initiate power-ion oversteer out of slow (2nd gear) corners, but with a slight push out of the final sweeper and through the 's' section, mainly due to the load transfer to the rear of the car when getting back on the throttle.

Change 2A
Stabilisers f1/r7
This resulted in excessive power-on oversteer out of the slower corners, while helping to reduce the push out of sweepers. Care still needed to be taken due to the level of load being transferred.

Change 2B
Dampers f10/r7 (both)
Reduction in the level of power-on oversteer out of slower corners, but an increase in the level of push out of sweepers as teh front felt slower to react to the load transfer than the back.

sucahyo

3. Hyundai Tiburon
This car feel understeer on mid corner so:

Decision 3A. increase rear stabilizer, to 1/7, a bit excessive on low speed

I detected that the car will go in too much if I push throttle in the middle of cornering so:

Decision 3B. reduce front damper, both to 7/10, seems enough

Click to expand...

Basic Setup
This car, with its higher ride height options and greater curb weight, shows the folly of these 'soft' defaults most clearly. Load is moving around the car whenever you accelerate, brake or turn, even small changes in the cars attitude throw the load around, resulting in a very unstable car. Heavy push out of slow corners and i sweeping corners, particularly the 's' section.

Change 3A
Stabilisers f1/r7
Lift off oversteer can now be initiated in the car under braking and off the throttle. Back step-out allows the car to be lead by the nose, but in keeping with its FWD layout it will still push wide out of the sweepers.

Change 3B
Dampers f7/r10 (both)
Better front end grip in both slower corners and particularly through the 's'-section.

I have to say that your descriptions of what the problem was are still not clear, and I have to question the wisdom of both your 'basic' set-up and the desire to jump from one end of the scale to the other. A number of times you have ignored values that could have been of use. On the Zonda you say that Stab 1/7 is excessive, yet you don't then reduce it, you just move to the dampers. Why, if the stabiliser setting was too high, did you not reduce it?

Now that quite a bit to miss out, particularly as my reply was hardly short or lacking in detail!

This is a last chance situation here, I knew it was a risk opening this thread back up again, but I will not hesitate to lock the damn thing again of this continues. As it stands you are risking just that, and what is more amazing is you did it with your first new post.

Regards

Scaff

GT4 Dampers

Scaff

sucahyo

sukerkin

Scaff

FastEddie12

Scaff

sucahyo

FastEddie12

sucahyo

FastEddie12

Scaff

Dave_George

Scaff

sucahyo

Dave_George

sucahyo

Mt. Lynx

GT racing!

Scaff

sucahyo

Scaff

FastEddie12

sucahyo

Mt. Lynx

GT racing!

Scaff

FastEddie12

Dave_George

Kent

Retired

Scaff

sucahyo

Scaff

Similar threads

Latest Posts