Adrenaline Tune Reviews ~ Honda HSV - Part 1

  • Thread starter Adrenaline
  • 137 comments
  • 39,187 views
All tunes tested with the same tires, tranny and aero settings.
Car: Lotus Elise 111R '04
Track: Deep Forest Raceway

RKM Motorsports - 1:08.579
Deutsche Rennsport - 1:07.991
Vengence Tuning - 1:07.952
Team Lotus Tuning - 1:07.853
Precision Motorsports - 1:07.849 (V2)
Precision Motorsports - 1:07.504 (V1)
*Anonymous - 1:07.326

Well I was referring to this in particular, I mean you either did, or did not, use all the same aero settings for this comparison?

Lap time comparisons are based on the standards I feel best suited to be the fastest possible and that will be used online.

In contradiction to the argument you are trying to make, if you test it with the aero intended by the tuner then it should reveal best lap time potential?
 
Consistent Aero is something I consider track specific for my tunes.
This is half-true.

Yes, aero setting can be seen as track specific :
- maxed out, the car oversteer or understeer (depending of the range of the aero setting) at average speed / turning degree the car is to run around that track.
- if aero was set balanced, the car may have "too much" control over the track you're testing, but if the setup is written like that, there's a reason.

I don't understand : if you change the aero for that track on a setup, you must change RH too AND SR AND the whole LSD (+/- 8 clicks for each setting). Then camber. Dampers. The whole setup.

Aero have a lot more dependancies than you think, it's pretty fundamental.
 
Well I was referring to this in particular, I mean you either did, or did not, use all the same aero settings for this comparison?
Like I said, they all used the same aero, because it's my own personal test, for people who follow my thread. Therefor I decide what produces the best lap times, and try to put all tunes on equal ground. It won't always be fair, but neither will the reverse logic of using 'as written' when they've all been tuned on separate tracks.


In contradiction to the argument you are trying to make, if you test it with the aero intended by the tuner then it should reveal best lap time potential?

I've proved this many times. I don't make adjustments, run a slower lap and then say "yeah, that's way better!" Every adjustment I post publicly as a test, is an INcrease, not a DEcrease. I do this in an effort to quantify what changes helped the car in my hands, for the tuner to take into account. So no, 'as written' doesn't always produce the best lap time potential. Like I said, maxing aero saw a 2.7 second lap time difference in the fastest tune tested. 1:09.9xx with 'as written' aero, 1:07.326 with maxed aero.


- if aero was set balanced, the car may have "too much" control over the track you're testing, but if the setup is written like that, there's a reason.

Aero have a lot more dependancies than you think, it's pretty fundamental.

This is only true, if you pretend that 'balanced' is a universal concept. Which it isn't. I'm guessing every tuner designs their cars/tunes to be 'balanced' but balanced to them, doesn't mean a single thing to me. Different driving, different styles, different tracks, different people. Balanced is a relative term that can not be assumed consistent between drivers.

While I'm sure the physics are fundamental to you, that's what makes you a tuner. What's fundamental to me, is results, that's what makes me a driver. By results I'm directly referring to lap times. I understand that it's probably unrealistic to change a single setting on the car, and not need to adjust something else, but I also understand that changing that 1 thing, resulted in a better lap time. Lap times are what I compared here in my thread. Not the cause and effect of changing settings, not a test of GT5 physics, nor a realistic outcome, just what tune produces the fastest lap under the specifications that I know I'll be using online. Period.
 
(...) that's what makes you a tuner. (...) that's what makes me a driver.
You just don't understand.

Any setting you change isn't a value. Or, for people that begin to understand tuning, a "value that have dependancies".

It's a valued balance that have dependancies. So...

(...) that's what makes you a tuner. (...) that's what makes me a driver.

My point exactly.

If the original tune is ****, test it like that. It will have **** result, too bad for the noob tuner.

Or, if you change aero, change the LSD, at least.
And if you change the LSD, change the etc.

Here we go : hey with LSD set @15/50/30 you'll have better times so do it... Then SR/RH, it's also unfair : some people set it low some don't and it's track dependant.

Camber : go on too. It is also very track dependant... And toe... And brakes... And dampers... Everything is track dependant.

You see what I mean ? It's tuner's choices you change, and your result doesn't belong to them by the time you change their tunes. They had too see before something was wrong.
 
Last edited:
Even say you felt the need to readjust aero to be lighter on a track without touching the other settings, you still need to attempt to maintain ratio as that will have the least obvious repercussions. As noted by blueshift, camber is a good example is a setting that directly rated and severely affected by a shift in aerodynamic and needs to be completely reworked, that's why I do it last. Else, if I wanted to provide multiple aero specs with my tunes, then I'd need to at least pair them with matching camber settings, and a minor ride ht. adjustment to counter the effective spring rate change.

For example, adjusting the aero will have adverse effects as noted, but if you still insist on it, then maintain the ratio for least impact.

Sample Car A
Aero @ 15/40 (.375) - stock aero
Aero @ 12/32 (.375) - minimum aero
Aero @ 18/48 (.375) - maximum aero
 
You just don't understand.

Any setting you change isn't a value. Or, for people that begin to understand tuning, a "value that have dependancies".

It's a valued balance that have dependancies. So...



My point exactly.

If the original tune is ****, test it like that. It will have **** result, too bad for the noob tuner.

Or, if you change aero, change the LSD, at least.
And if you change the LSD, change the etc.

Here we go : hey with LSD set @15/50/30 you'll have better times so do it... Then RH, it's also unfair : some people set it low some don't.

Oh and camber. Go on too. It is also very track dependant...

You see what I mean ? It's tuner's choices you change, and your result doesn't belong to them by the time you change their tunes. They had too see before something was wrong.

Okay, I think I'm catching you between edits, as the text changed 3 times so far.

Regardless I want to focus on these 2 aspects:

"If the original tune is ****, test it like that."
I repeat... I DID. When I 'review' the tunes I review them as they were designed, back in their respective threads. This thread here, is designed to help sort through all tunes available and I do my best to offer what I feel will produce the fastest lap time for myself, and therefor, also for the people who have found my results to mirror their own.

So, the tests and comparisons I do on the side are for my own benefit. I make adjustments, I change things, I experiment, I do whatever it takes, to reach an outcome that I feel capable of producing the fastest lap time. That's what I designed this thread for. To sort through the BS, find the best outcome, regardless of how it was obtained, and display it for the public who share my driving style. That's it.

"too bad for the noob tuner" In their review, yes. Too bad for them. I'm pretty blunt about what I didn't like, what I thought was wrong and how I think they can fix it. I didn't create this thread, to repeat myself. Or to copy/paste the same reviews over and over. This thread was designed for the following, found in the first paragraph on my original post: "I wanted to know where each excels and lacks, with side by side comparisons of the other tunes available, what tracks and times, what adjustments were made to fit your style etc etc." This is what I'm trying to provide. If you only want to know what I thought of Tune X, then read the review that I've linked. If you wanted to know what I did to Tune X, to make it better than Tune Y, then read my thread with comparisons, adjustments and lap times. You're trying to force me to write this thread without allowing me to make any changes to the tunes. That's the opposite of what this thread is for. So I'm sorry, it's not going to happen.

Another thought on the 'noob tuner' aspect...
If 1 tuner creates the best suspension set ups on the entire site, but they lack any and all understanding of LSD, resulting in their tunes being masked purely by LSD, then I don't feel it's fair to completely write them off as failures. This is a game, that's been out for roughly 5 months. No one has all the answers, and I don't expect any tune or tuner to have an end all be all tune.

Avid is a perfect example here. I've had a fair amount of success with Avid tunes, but time and time again, I've had to completely disregard their LSD settings, because they simply don't suit my style. Does this make Avid a 'noob tuner' to you? Maybe it does, but it sure as hell doesn't in my eyes. There's too many variables in this game and to restrict anyone to play within boundaries of 'as written' to prevent any progress or adaptation to themselves is completely ridiculous and utterly pointless. If a simple LSD change to the slowest tune, magically changes it to the fastest tune, you can bet your @$$ that I'll be using it.
I am loyal to Lap Times.

For example, adjusting the aero will have adverse effects as noted, but if you still insist on it, then maintain the ratio for least impact.

'Ratio' only applies, if you felt the tune was 'balanced' to begin with.
 
So are you a reviewer or a re-tuner? You seem to claim to be the first then position yourself at the latter to claim some of the credit for making it work. Maybe I'm just put off with your attitude.
 
I am loyal to Lap Times.
Tuners too... They just can't post decent times lol.

But about aero, if you change it, I still agree with budious, you need to find the ratio it was used because it impact a lot lot lot lot lot lot (...) more than you think SR and LSD. And even if you follow the ratio, you'll have to much accel after that, at least 4 clicks too much if you increased aero each 15°.

My ratio formula is "front / (rear - front) must stay the same before and after editing", but it's not really 100% perfect, esp for low front values (0° front...). I'd say 80% ok.

@budious : he just said he was testing both tunes, so this is still honest... But... Ah.

Adrenaline, it's the same problem when you tested Zondas. Have me told the HP was 750, I could have put a better LSD and get maybe another second more from that... You see what I mean ? By the moment you change the initial conditions (any track/only deep forest), you can't compare the tunes. You should choose 3 tracks : one with smooth curves like cape ring or hsr, one with crak corners like london, and one with bumps like deep forest : you only compare bumpy road setups like that.
 
Last edited:
So are you a reviewer or a re-tuner? You seem to claim to be the first then position yourself at the latter to claim some of the credit for making it work. Maybe I'm just put off with your attitude.

You act as if I'm limited to one or the other.
It's quite simple really, I'm a normal guy, looking for the tune that will give me the best ability to win online. I test and review the tunes. That's part one. Then I take the tunes I felt had the best potential, and try a few experiments and see if any of them show more promise than the others.

Then I usually take the top 2 tunes, into an online lobby and fidget with them, until I find the one that produces not only the fastest lap times, but the ability to maintain that pace over 10 laps. I prefer online lobbies that force you to take into account tire wear, as I feel it adds a lot more variables to winning.

I'm not sure why it's so hard to understand, that my main goal is to find the fastest tune possible. Regardless of how I got to it, what I had to do to it, or how many others I had to test to find it. Reviewing, adjusting, comparing, tuning, testing... These are all just steps in the process to reach my end goal. No more, no less. I don't see a need to complicate it more than that. I want to win.

I have not taken credit for anyones work. Every single platform, adjustment, garage, tuner etc is documented in every single post, with links, explanations and disclaimers. I'm a firm believer that anytime you try someone else's tune, there's always some way to make it go faster, if slightly customized to your needs. Unless you drive the exact same way as the person who tuned it, it's safe to assume there's ground to be made.

Adrenaline, it's the same problem when you tested Zondas. Have me told the HP was 750, I could have put a better LSD and get maybe another second more from that... You see what I mean ?
I do, but it's not like I get to publicly announce "I'm testing this car" and all garages are going to custom build it for my specific needs. I'd never expect you guys to do that for me, it's crazy. I take all tunes already available, and do my best to put them on level ground. It's not always going to be fair, I understand that, and I'm sorry it has to be that way, but it's a lot more fair then testing 2 cars with a 200hp difference, don't you think?
 
I understand that, and I'm sorry it has to be that way, but it's a lot more fair then testing 2 cars with a 200hp difference, don't you think?

I would no sooner compare an apple to an orange than to say both are fruit. Room for moderate HP and max HP tunes and everything in between, they don't have to be matched.
 
I do, but it's not like I get to publicly announce "I'm testing this car" and all garages are going to custom build it for my specific needs. I'd never expect you guys to do that for me, it's crazy. I take all tunes already available, and do my best to put them on level ground. It's not always going to be fair, I understand that, and I'm sorry it has to be that way, but it's a lot more fair then testing 2 cars with a 200hp difference, don't you think?
I think that online, you only test deep forest :D

This is not an easy problem. I see both your point and budious'.
 

Mine is maxed out on both power and weight reduction and sits on Racing Softs. So as long as you're willing for the tune to be tested under conditions that you didn't design it for... then by all means, I'll revisit all 4 of them on a single track and update the results. I've been wanting to give this beast another chance now that I've had a lot more driving experience.

Edit - I just went and ran the car stock to get a feel for it... It's not my experience, this car is just horrible. It acts as if it has a solid axle in the front. It's by far the easiest car to flip that I've driven in GT5. I didn't even get to the start finish line of my first lap of Trial Mountain before it rolled over. If you hit a bump, the entire car feels like it leaves the ground. Any change in elevation and the car goes airborne, in the air, it seems to float as if gravity doesn't apply to this car. I honestly feel like there's something wrong in the coding of this car.
 
Last edited:

Stock(w/max downforce): Ran 15 laps to get back in the groove, as I haven't even played GT5 in over 2 weeks now. Stock the car feels great. It has some strong but controllable throttle oversteer, that allows you to get to the gas earlier and let the LSD steer you out of the corner. Too much too soon and you'll spin though. Because of that, the best lap times came from early braking, a quick coast to let the car settle and then back to the gas really early, about the center of the apex. I had the stock tune run faster than 3 of the tunes, including NTwo, Motor City, and budious, but not by a very large margin, and I definitely would say the stock set up, is driver style specific, unless willing to adjust to the tune.
Best Lap: 1:16.960

E - Motor City Hami: This tune used the stock springs, so I expected a feel rather similar but I was mistaken. I found this to be the least consistent of the tunes for me, with a .5 difference between my fastest and 3rd fastest lap times. It had less 'turn in' than the stock settings on corner entry, and exit was consistent with this as well, as I again felt a tendency to understeer on exit. Although under acceleration this tune had much better forward bite that the stock set up, which was made it much more controllable and safer on acceleration. I did find that this tune also had a breaking point, where when I tried to push it too hard it would understeer as stated and then frequently snapped loose and sent me sideways. This happened a number of times. This was on both exit as well as entry, where when driving into the corner hard, the setup gave the car a RR type feel, as if it were very @$$ heavy and the rear end kind of felt like it was 'swinging' the car into corners. Again, I found myself being majorly penalized for pushing the car beyond it's limits, very unforgiving. I think this could partially be from the very low rear downforce used.
Best Lap: 1:17.626

D - Rotary Junkie: The transmission annoys me when driving this car. I mean, it works, but it just sounds like it's going slow, because it's geared very highly. I must admit though, this odd gearing set up, seemed to 'pull' harder than any other tune down the straights, not to mention this gearing allows you to slam the gas down at any point without any concern to losing traction. It does seem to lack some rotation through the center of turns, but overall was consistently quick lap after lap. This transmission setting can really help some of the heavy foot drivers with traction issues. Didn't provide the fastest lap, but did provide the fastest 3 lap average.
Best Lap: 1:16.675

F - Niigma: This tune wasn't as maneuverable as RJ's which really hindered the cars ability to keep up through the tighter sections. I felt some high speed understeer through sector 1, but even so, this tune kept pace with RJ's all the way through sectors 1 & 2, but lost time in sector 3 every time, which is what ultimately ended up being the determining factor in lap averages. Personally I felt the issue was in your LSD Initial settings being so high. Lowering it down to the 10-15 range would (by my theory) open up the diff, allowing the car to get through the tighter turns better, especially the Esses of the track. I think the 40 initial was just too locked (again, by my theory) and didn't allow the car to rotate through the turns. I will be testing this tune again with my custom LSD later on to verify this, but haven't yet.
Best Lap: 1:16.897

C - NTwo: This was a rather 'neutral' tune, which translates to understeer for me. I've always preferred my cars on the loose side. If I had to guess, I'd say this was a DS3 tune and would probably work well for DS3 users, as it's less likely to bite you for mistakes from imprecision. The understeer seemed constant through the track, regardless of high/low speeds, banking, tight, sweeping or ess curves.
Best Lap: 1:17.380

G - budious: This tune was pretty much a mirror image of NTwo's on the track, but with more understeer overall, which I think might have been due to excess front camber, resulting in all 3 laps times, being "roughly-exactly" 1 tenth slower that NTwo's. .3/.5/.7 and .4/.6/.8 respectively.
Best Lap: 1:17.427

B - NM Racing: This was a very neutral set up by my standards. This tune was easily the best through the 2nd sector, enough so, that it managed to put down the best lap time overall, despite losing time through every 3rd sector compared to RJ's sector times. Unfortunately this car has 1 little glitch that I ran into, which was that it's very unstable anytime you get 1 tire in the grass. On trial mountain there are numerous places where the grass is the fastest way around, which is what I feel cost NM Racing the gold trophy for me. On other tracks I can see NM Racing coming out on top, but oddly enough, this tune has been suffering in the hands of many other drivers, I'm not sure why.
Best Lap: 1:16.581

Personally I'll be taking tunes B, D & F (NM Racing, Rotary Junkie & Niigma) to a few tracks, where I'll install my personal LSD and the same Transmission gearing on all 3, to find out which suspension truly fits me best. Taking those 2 variables out of the equation should give me the insight to decide which single tune I'll apply universally to the car.
 
Last edited:
I think you nailed it with me and NTwo favoring DS3 usage because understeer seems to be a common complaint to my tunes but I like mine that way I guess. You could probably drop the LSD from 32/28/16 to 32/28/12 if you want to retest, I use the latter more often on tight city circuit tracks. Over use of front camber with high LSD braking sensitivity are two factors to be tweaked.

Edit: Nevermind, would help if I remembered the LSDs I did use on my own tune, lol. I think the two I mention were newer combos though, anyways, didn't test at Trial Mountain so I make no promises for it on anything. :)

You could try 24/21/12 also; Camber 4.0/1.6, 3.0/1.2, 2.0/0.8, etc. No one setup suites every track. Also, the com > ext tends to slide around a little more on flat corner tracks than light cambered ones, so 8e/8c or 9e/9c might work better. I just don't care to test it all for each and everyone to find out, that's the inherit problem for tuning.
 
Last edited:
Raybrig NSX - 525hp
Stock + Oil Change + Stage 2 Turbo
Racing Soft Tires
Default tranny used in every test to avoid gearing advantages.
All other settings were 'as written' by the tuners.
15 laps for every tune
Test Track - Tsukuba
Offline Practice mode
Grip Reduction - Real

I was rather disappointed that this car got the short end of the stick in my Tuner Challenge Championship for a few reasons. The largest of all, is that I'm a big fan of GT500-700 Racing online. More often than not, these classes usually focus around JGTC, of which I've always been a fan of the Supra's. While I've had much success in my Supra, it became abundantly clear that the GTR's and NSX's were the more common cars amongst people who ran in this class.

I had experimented with the NSX's with some success, but nothing that matched my Supra's speed or feel. Honestly, I don't think there's a car I feel more comfortable in, than the JGTC Supra's. While my Supra worked well for the majority of tracks in the game, I found the NSX's to excel at the flatter, non banked tracks. Not to mention the Japanese rooms I joined (Assuming I actually got to race, before getting kicked for being American) were almost exclusively using NSX's. I figured there had to be something to it and even if not, I'd like to have an NSX on hand for tracks like... Rome, Suzuka, Cote De Azure, and others of the same nature.

I had 2 tunes submitted for the canceled competition, and knew of 2 other tunes from reputible tuners. I'd like to thank Motor City Hamilton and budious of Motor City Tunes and Deep Forest Tunery respectively for their hard work. I also opted to use RKM's as well as LDP's tunes that had been completed before hand and test them all side by side.

The track I chose for this test is Tsukuba. This is a short, flat, tight and very technical track that should be excellent for finding out which tune would work best for me on these types of tracks. Another reason for this track, is the fact that I'm unfamiliar with it. Taking this as a learning experience combined with it's shorter nature allows me to learn the track and successfully compare 5 tunes giving each tune a fair amount of laps, without expending too much time.

3.5: Stock
To get warmed up I used the *stock set up and ran 16 laps. Before blindly jumping in, I used a custom LSD of my own as well as maxed out the downforce of the car, to give it a fair chance and strong baseline for comparison.

Once on track the stock tune felt rather solid. It had a slight tendency to oversteer on hard corner entry, both on and off the brakes. The NSX's always seem to be tail happy so I was expecting this, and my LSD settings could be adjusted to help tame that as well. Although I must admit, the oversteer never got to an uncontrollable state, I didn't go completely sideways, but the back end did step out, enough to break traction and lose time. I quickly noticed that this is a track where corner exit is the key, because every exit, leads you into the next entry. Screwing up one, throws off the next and has a domino effect. Another key note, was that forward bite would be an issue, with such low speeds in the centers and trying to get back to the throttle as quick as possible, I found throttle modulation to be the key to quick laps. On the other side of the corners, brake modulation was equally important. Too much brake and you blow through the apex and lose valuable time. Final key to this track, I assume will be conservative LSD settings, that allow you to put 1 wheel on the grass, as you often will if you're pushing it like you should, without completely spinning out, like some cars do.
3 Best Laps
51.214
51.303
51.319

4th: Deep Forest Tunery
Spec wise, there's not a whole lot of difference between budious' set up and default. An adjustment to shocks, sways and camber, with zero toe. Ran 15 laps, and got much of the same feel, although the car seems to 'skip' across the track. What almost appears as if the car is bouncing on the springs as if it had no shocks at all. I also experienced a minor amount of understeer on exit, and a harder time getting the power down on exit. Getting to the gas too early showed outside tire spin and the car would quickly snap sideways losing all forward momentum. I could watch the ghost pull away at ever corner exit as it was able to consistently get more traction out of the turns. This made me weary of putting the throttle down and made it hard to be consistent. I'd either get to the throttle too soon and lose traction, or wait too long and lose time.
3 Best Laps
51.363
51.635
51.652

2nd: Motor City Tunes
For the 3rd test in a row, I haven't had to most the spring rate slider more than 2 clicks... If it's not broke, don't fix it I guess? Luckily the other settings paid off for Hami here. The LSD is more suited to my driving style and allowed me to get back to the gas far more reliably, consistently and confidently. The front toe also seemed to help the car rotate through the centers, or possibly the camber. Either way, it was an improvement to the stock tune's maneuverability and the lap times back it up. I think the only thing that may have helped is if the car could have been more neutral all around and possibly a tiny bit of throttle oversteer could have been used to help the car turn through the tighter turns of this track. Although when online and considering tire wear, this might be safer to leave it as is. The final big sweeping turn of the track made me curious if I could drop the rear aero a bit and maybe help it turn easier through that section, but I've yet to test it. If I were to continue playing with this car, I'd try dropping the front sway bar by 1, raising rear ride height by 3, and upping the LSD Accel value by 2. Then after that comparison, I'd toy with rear downforce at 60 to see if it helped the overall balance of the car, if still needed.
3 Best Laps
50.826
50.842
51.142

3rd: RKM Motorsports
Before even applying this tune, I'm afraid of the LSD settings. Accel of 55 should prove to be quite the challenge. One thing I always enjoy about RKM, is they refuse to 'adjust' a stock tune, they always change it completely. Some others are afraid to deviate too far from stock and it may hinder their overall ability by containing themselves in such conservative ways. Although, if RKM has over reached, I'll be eating these words in 15 short laps, lol. The trend I see with RKM is stiff springs, soft bar. Coming from the circle track world, there was always 2 sides of suspension theory... well there's a ton more than that, but roll with me... Big bar, soft spring or small bar big spring. RKM has opted to use the latter of the two and in past tests, it's seem to fit my style. I also know that RJ and I are somewhat close on lap times, so it probably also helps to know we're both pushing the car to roughly the same limits. I must admit, RJ's times seem to be consistently quicker than mine, but if I ever make the swap to MT that may change :P

Anywho... The LSD settings seemed to help the car make it through the larger sweeping turns, but proved to be difficult on the tighter turns, although was much more manageable than I expected. The RKM tune consistently carried a higher speed down the straight measured at the line, but it didn't seem to matter with a straight this short as the ghost seemed to catch right back up, but braking later, due to a lower straight speed. Overall the suspension felt fine. It seemed to have a tendency to break loose far more often than the MCH tune, for which I blame the LSD.
3 Best Laps
50.948
50.981
51.009

1st: Lion's Den Performance
The first tune to use a stiffer rear spring, softer front. But, like the RKM tune, shares the oddly high LSD Accel. I had a lot of difficulty with this tune. It shared the traits that the RKM tune had, being better on the sweeping corners, but hard to control in the tighter, lower speed corners. Further complicating the scenario, this tune made the bumps more noticeable and really upset the car overall. Now... Having said all of my complaints, this car did run 2 of the fastest laps of all tunes, but I really felt I had to work for them. But if it was easy, anyone would do it, right? This was a setup that seems to reward people who brake hard, use a minimal amount of coasting, and who have throttle precision. The precision isn't needed for control persay, but it comes in handy for those who like to keep steady RPM's through the turn. Doing this, combined with the 60 Accel setting, gives the LSD the ability to turn the car for you somehow. As long as I kept the throttle at ~10-15% through the turns, rather than coasting, it seemed to handle extremely well and followed the curves in a much tighter fashion. Though, this creates a consistency issue, as I had a hard time repeating this process. My fastest laps didn't come until lap 12 & 13. Rather late compared to all of the other tunes.
3 Best Laps:
50.613
50.753
51.280

For me personally, I'd probably stick to the Motor City Tune, try those adjustments I mentioned and go from there. I feel consistency wise, I'm far more likely to run a better 10 lap average with the Motor City tune despite Lion's Den putting up a faster single lap. I'd also try to alter the LDP LSD and see if maybe I could tame the car down a bit as well. Again, the online world could turn the results completely upside down.
 
I like how mine, that I consider a twitchy bastard on my Takata NSX, got the closest lap average. As for my being faster than you? No. :lol: Not once we step out of my comfort zone (road cars on S3s).
 
Thanks Adrenaline. Good reviews. Take my NSX tune to some of the larger Japanese tracks like Fugi, Suzuka and Tokyo. I think you'll be happy. The tune for the cancelled challenge was meant to play the middle - be great on the average track and competitive on shorter ones.

Thanks for testing.

I also like that you mention changes that you would make to match your driving style and controller use. I think that's what people need to learn to do.
 
Are you testing online in a lounge, open lobby or offline? It might be here in the thread and I looked through quite a few posts and only found something from someone saying you tested online only at Deep Forest....just curious as I'd like to give some of these tunes a test comparison.
 
So you put a stage 2 turbo on and did not install chassis reinforcement? My tune wasn't really intended for Tsukuba to begin with and add a turbo and remove the chassis reinforcement spec, I'd imagine it only gets sloppier.

LSD was sensitive as is and only for the 508HP (if I recall) I tested it with. Chassis Reinforcement has a pretty big effect on tune balance, so I can't say mine works without it because I installed it first, but I know there is some typical adjustments I have to make from other cars where I have tested. I did hit mid-50's with it with Chassis Reinforcement installed and no turbo and stock transmission on Tsukuba myself, though that was best lap only; low 51's were manageable easily without turbo.

Also, I notice you mention understeer with my tunes often. I think this is because I go to great lengths to eliminate fatal oversteer. The idea being you can press a pad full left or right and hit the tightest turn radius the car can handle without breaking loose. While I have not tried wheels much, I am thinking perhaps you should adjust the dead zone or increase the steering sensitivity under driving options then have no fear cranking that wheel as hard as you can.
 
Last edited:
1: Johnny, I can't say for sure where they've all been tested. I'd say about 90% were done offline, before I started getting into the online world.
2: "All other settings were tested 'as written' unless stated otherwise"
That includes chassis stiffening.
3: I understand the need for DS3 tunes to be more on the stable side, but I don't think changing my steering sensitivity is going to change the balance of the car. It may make it easier to drive, but the understeer will still be there.
 
2: "All other settings were tested 'as written' unless stated otherwise"
That includes chassis stiffening.
3: I understand the need for DS3 tunes to be more on the stable side, but I don't think changing my steering sensitivity is going to change the balance of the car. It may make it easier to drive, but the understeer will still be there.

Well you didn't put Chassis Reinforcement in the topic but you did put Mid RPM Turbo. If you're having problems with LSD slip than re-run mine at a handicap without the Turbo and compare the times because that is how I tuned it. MCT's tune probably isn't as noticeable because a more open LSD is more friendly to power upgrades where a more aggressive LSD tune requires some re-tuning after bumping up HP. Turbo 2 is really an overkill for Tsukuba anyways, the extra power is not needed there when I can ran the same lap times you have with stock (broke-in) HP on stock transmission.

Edit: Your times are probably right on, I looked back at my notes and my best ones were about the same you posted with a different set of dampers and anti-roll bars. I think the ones I ending up spec'd were for harder cornering tracks so they are probably slower than my preferred setup at Tsukuba. Mostly the LSD is the hang up in the test though with the Mid Turbo installed because I did not account for that. Anyways, overall results not an issue.
 
Last edited:
RUF Yellow Bird
Top Gear Test Track
Well... I wanted to have some fun today, and I figured this would be where I would find it.
Fun with borderline agression.

Test Track: Top Gear Test Track

*All cars were tested with the same default custom 6 speed transmission & gearing, on Race Softs, with Max HP. Tunes can be found here: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=198751
Most of which are of current discussion in this thread here: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=200971


Stock - A learning curve it was...
My first lap was a 1:44, followed by a 1:24, then a 1:12. I ran 7 more laps for a total of 10.

In stock form the YellowBird can't be defined by common racing terms. You've either driven it, or you haven't, 'nuff said. 700hp in a car that doesn't hook up with half that is bad news. The back end is a caged lion and your steering input is directly related to how open the door is. Even the slightest tug on the wheel, the door goes flying open and you'll quickly be mauled with both teeth and claws. This car requires a steady hand and a matching foot.

In fact, I'd venture to say that this car would be faster, If you could limit the throttle input to about 80%. Full throttle will only get you in trouble and should be reserved for straight lines only. As you as you even think about turning the wheel, you had better start letting up on the gas. This is where we run into problem #572. Deacceleration allows the weight of the rear to complete unload and transfer to the front, which seemingly break the minimal amount of traction you may have previously had. This throws the car sideways and the yellowbird sure as hell doesn't like to be caught. There appears to be no controlling the slide, or catching your mistake. If you're sideways, it's already too late. Even making the exchange between the 2 straight aways at the end of the track, you can not maintain full throttle as the rear will come around on you. In stock form, this is a car that demands precision, patience, control and discipline; It will settle for nothing less.
Best Lap: 1:08.008

Rotary Junkie
Next up, will be RJ's 'I guessed' tune, because I <3 him long time.
Another 10 laps at TGTT and not a whole lot changed with this tune.
The car still possesses every demon mentioned in the first one, but RJ has toned it down about 3 notches. I assume we'll never fully tame this car to the point that you won't recognize it, so I can't consider this a downside. Every issue still existed, but you can get to the throttle sooner, it's slightly more forgiving, I even found myself catching 3 different 'drifts' that I wouldn't have been able to catch previously. Most importantly this tune allows you to get to the throttle sooner on exit with a bit more confidence. The rake used is noticeable and greatly appreciated. You can see the front end lifting up as the weight slowly transfers on acceleration. I'd even say it might benefit from stiffer shocks in the back, to further slow down the rate at which weight is shifted to the back of the car. Two downsides did show up in this tune though. One of which, is that on corner exit, when the car has complete traction front and back, it had a tendency to understeer. This was most dominantly experienced in the twin straight transition, where the car would push wide and I even tagged the invisible wall a few times, heading to the last 2 90's. The second issue, was that outside wheel spin was more evident on early exit, under acceleration. I can only assume this is because RJ didn't get to drive this car, so there is no LSD fine tuning. I'd probably install my custom LSD and re-test this set up to see how much I could improve. Overall, this tune doesn't alter the car's tendencies, it just tames them down to a less deadly point.
Best Lap: 1:07.435

Next up, is the thread starter, No_OBst33R
This tune drastically changes the way the car drives and took me longer to get assituated in. If you can find a way to exploit the flaws of this tune, you can pull off some quick laps, and this tune, so far, has been the most forgiving. I think it has LSD and rake issues, using 1 to counter act the other. In doing so, you can force through the car's understeer tendency with on throttle oversteer. But watch out for the breaking point, as it will snap loose if done incorrectly, and you'll eat a lot of wall if done too soon. I'm not a fan of ballast, but this car is far easier to drive than the others. Having said that... If you're looking for an easy car to drive, you wouldn't be considering the Yellowbird in the first place, therefore I consider this car/tune combo an oxymoron. If I were to tweak this car to suit my needs, I'd remove some rake, lower the LSD Accel setting, and lower the ballast as much as I could, without sacrificing the 'control'. You can definately see this car getting raped down the straight aways due to the extra weight. On tracks that aren't as momentum based as TGTT this car would greatly suffer, because it simply can't accelerate as quickly. So tracks like Laguna or Grand Valley, where many tight turns are connect to short straights, I would avoid this tune.
Best lap: 1:07.375

dr_slump
This tune was a reality check. After adapting to noobster's tune, this one was out of control. Once I remebered I was in the Yellow Bird, which the car quickly made a point of, I slowly started gettign quicker and quicker. This tune feels a lot like the stock set up, including the caged lion reference. The one thing that did stand out was the crazy high LSD Accel setting, AGAIN. I don't know what people are thinkign combining these LSD settings with an already tail happy car. Maybe it's because it's tuned to their transmissions? The rake still allows you to get to the throttle sooner than the stock set up, and the lap times are much better than stock as well, but this car is far from the creaters claim of 'a lot easier to drive'.
Best Lap: 1:07.008

Praiano63 (2)
Finally a conservative LSD setting, but for some reason it ends up on the stiffest tune, with reversed spring rates and no rake... Oyy vey. This tune makes corner entry very edgy, but has a solid rotation through the center, both thanks to the low LSD DeAccel setting. On acceleration, the car lacks traction, which I blame the lack of rake. Luckily the LSD is on the lower side, meaning it isn't undriveable. The downside of the lower LSD settings, is that on the wide sweeping turns, the car doesn't turn quite as well, which on this track, bites you in the straight exchange, but wasn't a deal breaker. Overall the tune seems to lack grip on both ends. It just doesn't seem to have enough traction throughout the track, but despite this, i was still able to run quick laps, but it's a thin line to walk.
Best Lap: 1:07.116

Blueshift, an early tune of his, that he openly admitted needed more work. Blueshift succesfully tamed the Zonda R, so I had high hopes for this car in his hands. But... a castrated LSD with reverse rake made me very weary when applying the settings. Once on the track, you see the effects of the LSD quickly as you just BURN the inside tire off the rim. The car is just as tail happy as ever and requires throttle precision to make it work, although when the rear tires do break loose, it's easier to control inside tire spin, than outside tire, to a certain point.
Best Lap: 1:07.481

Part 2
Okay, after a personal reset, I've put another 10-15 laps on the top 2 tunes, to give a more focused and accurate result. These are still 'as written' with no personal adjustments yet, but still the default tranny.

praiano63(2) : 1:06.476
dr_slump : 1:06.179

After the above 'as written' testing, I started toying around with both, to see which one I could adapt to my style most effectively. It did turn out that dr_slumps was still the quickest for me, as I managed to shave 2 more tenths resulting in my current personal best of 1:05.662.

My first adjustments were to take out a little of ride height and rake, to help the car feel a bit more stable. Then I lowered the LSD Accel setting, to reduce outside wheel spin, but left enough of it, to use on acceleration oversteer, to carry the car through the wide sweepers at this track.
Ride Height: -31 / -18
LSD: 8/19/5
Brake Bal: 10 / 3
These 3 small adjustments, allowed me to finally break the 5's and I feel these adjustments have made the tune far more consistent & reliable, as well as a lot less likely to cause you any major mistakes. I can run lap after lap with no major issues, resulting in lap times that are all .6 or .7's. I still make an error or 2 here and there, but now it just costs me some forward momentum, rather than creating a catastrophic wreck that all of the other tunes resulted in, when they hit the boiling point.
 
Last edited:
Lexus LFA
Road Course - Indy

Due to 2 separate personal requests, I've finally got around to testing out this LFA. I've had a bad history with this car, but I believe some of it stems from my extensive racing of Race Cars, where I get spoiled with downforce. Over the last week I've been spending a large amount of time with the RUF Yellow Bird, so if there was ever a time, that this LFA was going to be enjoyable, it's directly after, lol.

For this test I wanted to stick to a smooth, flat and open track. This car doesn't like bump or jumps, so I'm avoiding them at all costs. Two of the tuners posted lap times at Road Course - Indy, and I have some friends online who love this course. I'm not really a fan personally, so I figured I'd put some seat time into it, and try to learn the course better, so that I can be more competitive online, where I'm bound to end up there if either of them hosts the room.

8th Default
So, as usual we'll start of with the car in stock form. I ran 5 laps of warm up to get familiar with the track, and then 10 laps of testing. Overall the car didn't feel nearly as horrible as I remember. It still lacks the agility of most cars of this caliber and just seems to lack overall grip. One friendly thing about the car, is that it's rather low torque output makes it much easier to control compared to other cars in the HP range. The default transmission wasn't quite cutting it here, as you bump the rev limiter down the back stretch, but I just left it. This car is very balanced in stock form. Someone who wants just a stable, easy to drive cruiser, keep the stock settings, add some camber, zero out the rear toe, lower it to -10 / -8 and you should be good to go. Maybe soften up the front spring 10%. If you want more oversteer, up the rear sway 1 notch. LSD 15/25/10.
Of the 10 laps ran, the 3 best were as follows:
1:28.422
1:28.335
1:28.077

7th Moose Knuckle Tuning
The first tune to be tested, will be the first requester. Sanmusa from Moose Knuckle Tuning. While installing all of the settings, the first thing I noticed is that... Not much is changing; numerically. Of the 20 settings available, MKT left all but 9 of them at the original value. More than half of this car, is at it's stock setting. I guess... if it's not broke, don't fix it? But results are all that matters, so lets move on.
Similar settings, similar lap times. I'm not sure if it's the camber or front toe, but it seemed to help the car rotate through the center, just slightly better than the default set up. Unfortunately it also added some understeer on corner exit, so the gains were lost. It seems that this one made it through the very tight ess turn better that default, but struggled on higher speed sweeping turns, like the last one leading into the straight. This could have been caused by the higher initial on the LSD, which also helped stabilize the car on hard acceleration out of tight turns as well.
Best 3 laps:
1:27.915
1:27.800
1:27.727

3rd Red Valley Racing
Via PM, this was the second garage to request a review of the LFA. Therefore they're second in the line up. A rather new Garage to the forums, eager to be competing with the veterans of the forum. Right away I could feel a difference with this tune. The car is much easier to turn, rotates pretty well, in fact, it has a bit too much. It definitely has oversteer tuned into it. When diving into corners, you'll notice the back end of the car 'hang out'. Don't get it confused as the car isn't quite 'sliding' yet, but it's on the edge. This makes you a bit more conservative on entry, and I didn't realize how much harder I was driving MKT's tune in, until I was in this tune against the previous ghost. This is a good feel, for sweeping turns, where it allows you to keep a higher speed, without worry, which is verified by the large jump in Sector 1 times. But once you get to the tighter turns of Sector 2 & 3 you start losing time, to the car that can be much more aggressive without worry to a spin. When on the throttle, the RVR tune has a tendency to burn up the outside rear tire. This only really seemed to be an issue when exiting corners in 2nd gear. In my experience, this could be in part due to two things. An LSD issue, or in this case, what I feel to be a ride height issue. Running the car with a lower rear ride height than front, is a quick trick to force oversteer into the car. Do it in reverse (rake) and you gain forward bite, but force understeer into the equation. If I were to fine tune this car to my liking, I would level out the ride heights and re-test, to check for overall balance, as well as outside tire spin. If the tire spin is still there, I'd lower the LSD Accel setting, and possibly turn the initial up a few clicks.
Best 3:
1:27.303
1:27.299
1:27.294

9th High Quality Performance
Funny that RVR and HQP got tested one after the other. As above I mention the effects of using ride height to achieve certain goals. RVR used a lower rear ride height to induce oversteer and here HQT did the exact opposite. With quite a bit of rake in this tune, the understeer on a car that's already as stable as the LFA, is what I would consider crippling from the center out. The plus side of this choice is that you have tons of traction on corner exit. You can safely go full throttle at pretty much any gear other than 1st without fear of any traction issues. If you are the type of driver that brakes early, sets up quickly, and then accelerates off hard from an early apex out, this tune will probably suit your style. Unfortunately for me, I drive the exact opposite. I drive hard and deep into the corners, coast through the apex and then accelerate out as soon as I see the car set. This tune simply doesn't fit my style, at least not on a flat track like Indy Road course. Perhaps results would differ on a track with intermediate levels of banking. Another thing I noticed, not that it seemed to cause any handling issues, is that when on part throttle, through a turn, the car seems to 'wobble' from corner to corner. It looks like it's on hydraulics almost, as the outside front kind of bounces up and down, as the opposite corner opposes it. I'm not actually sure what causes this, but I have seen it with a few other tunes I've reviewed in the past and I can't remember what the tuner said it was from, or how to fix it. It's almost as if the weight of the car is oscillating on the springs. Maybe just too stiff of a front spring, as it is the stiffest spring of all the tunes I've driven? I'd start by evening out the ride height and re-testing, before I got into shocks and springs.
Best 3:
1:28.651
1:28.609
1:28.020

5th Deep Forest Tunery
budious never actually finished this tune and to be honest, it's rather noticeable. This was the... not hardest, but... took the most work, to get around the track. I felt like I was babysitting. I had to be overly focused, up on the wheel at all times and just had to try too hard. It ran some very quick laps, but in all honesty, I'd take a slightly slower tune, just for the peace of mind. Lose your concentration on this one and you'll pay for it. It has a very loose feel around the entire track, it looks like it really just wants to slide around. It's rather difficult to get the gas peddle down, it lacks forward bite and rear traction. Although I do think that 'soft' is the way to go with the springs on this car, but I think this was a bit too soft. Lack of camber and toe, no LSD or tranny gears due to the incompleteness, but I wanted to include it anyways. I'd encourage budious to come back to this tune, as he has a solid platform going, it just needs to have some rough edges smoothed out and completed.
Best 3:
1:27.831
1:27.719
1:27.536

4th niigma
There's not a whole lot to say about this tune. It was pretty balanced overall. Sometimes, but rarely I'd get a bit sideways on entry(could be the brake balance?), but my main issue was that it was a bit tight on exit. I was actually beating the ghost when I crossed sector 3, but I couldn't keep the car low enough on the long sweep to the straight and ended up trailing at the line. This could easily be fixed with a shock adjustment, or maybe even some front toe, even upping the camber could be good. This is probably the tune I would say I can recommended to most, despite not coming away with the best lap, it's the one that I expect to work best universally for the masses.
Best 3:
1:27.919
1:27.789
1:27.365

2nd RKM Motorsports
I saved this one for last, because I assumed it was going to be the worst. This one is designed around Sport Softs, less power and has had consistent reviews from people trying to use Race Softs, with zero success, including myself. Okay... what the hell just happened. Unless RKM ninja-updated their LFA tune, I'm not sure what's going on. It just ran the fastest lap, and then immediately after, beat that one too. I absolutely hated this tune the first time I tried it. Although, even though RKM had the fastest lap, I have the most complaints about this tune. First, it;s unstable on corner entry. Probably in part to the LSD DeAccel being so low. It lacks forward bite and acceleration traction out of corners, and when traction is lost, it burns up the outside rear and only the outside rear, the inside never seems to lock up and help out. It had a slight understeer in the medium to high speed corner exits, but did well in the esses. I think the gearing is the strongest part of this tune. I'd be interested to use RKM gearing on the RVR tune to see what happens.
Best 3:
1:27.146
1:27.049
1:27.035 (I WAS GUNNA RUN A 26!!! But I rubbed the wall coming to the line!)

6th GT_God
Well, after the RKM surprise, I decided not to skip this one as planned, just because they aren't active anymore. Also the Laguna Lap time posted with the tune, made me quite curious, because I don't remember my FTO Super Touring Car even running that fast there. One thing to note, i ignored the listed transmission, because the default redlines set at 205, so 180 is ridiculous. These settings are all pretty damn extreme, so I have no clue what to expect from these next 10 laps. Well... it feels pretty normal. The only thing that stands out, is it doesn't like to rotate under braking or coasting, but under throttle, it seems to do okay. This would be another tune for people who brake early, but get back to the throttle really early, but lightly, using the throttle to help steer the car out of the corner. So not quite the same as the HQP tune, same style, different approach I'd say. With an LSD upgrade this could be a solid contended.
Best 3:
1:27.979
1:27.884
1:27.672

1st praiano63
A late entry arrives, last to the show, but not last on the track. I used the 'suzuka' version, as I felt it best related to Indy Road Course. As soon as I crossed the start finish line, this car started pulling on the ghost(1.27.0xx) which is a good sign for the gear set up. Through the bends the car feels pretty solid and stuck right with the RKM ghost. This tune doesn't quite roll through the center as tightly, but it didn't seem to have any noticeable effect. What was noticeable is that on corner exit, the car has a slight amount of understeer. I would classify is as very 'stable' for most, just not as free as I prefer for most cases. When trying to compensate this understeer with throttle, I noticed the outside wheel tends to burn up which can catch you off guard from time to time, but once you get use to it and ready for it, it was no longer an issue. I wasn't able to hold the car quite as low as I like through the medium to high speed sweeping turns of the track. I'd say the weak point of the tune overall, was the hairpins, as that's where I struggled most, both with tight turns, as well as safely acceleration out of the turns from a lower speed/gear. You might want to adjust the 2nd gear ratio, to help increase traction for low speed corners. I can safely say that this is probably the tune I would recommended everyone to use. The only issue of real concern is the outside wheel spin. The corner exit understeer is nice for overall control and would only be experienced by drivers pushing the car to the absolute limits.
Best 3:
1:26.964
1:26.909
1:26.721

Conclusion...
I think praiano's tune will be the most user friendly overall, stable and quick. RVR's is great for people who like a free car. RKM's is fast, but has it's issues that would prevent me from using it for a longer race, with tire wear. RKM and RVR with some minor changes could give praiano a run for his money. DFT is quick, but more effort than it's worth when you have better options. For different driving styles, GT God and HQP could provide the feel you're looking for. Unfortunately MKT's is the only one I would recommended to avoid, not because it's bad, but because it really doesn't offer anything. To be blunt, it looks like it was just half-***ed. Anyone who plans to do serious online competition with this car, would be recommend to take the top 3 tunes and test them on 2 other tracks of your choice. I may do this at a later date, for only the top 3, as I have no desire to run 9 tunes, 10 laps each on 2 more tracks :crazy:


Part 2:

Took the Top 3 tunes out for a cruise at a new track. I wanted something, smooth, flat and semi open, but something that will differ from Indy. I decided on Tsukuba because it fits the bill and is a much smaller track which can help magnify any issues the tune may have. After running 10 laps each, I can easily say that praiano's tune is by far going to be your best bet for a wider range of tracks. My best lap was 51.600, dead on the money.
A hint of understeer, with the tendency to snap loose, the outside wheel spin is much more prevalent on these tighter turns where you do a lot more accelerating on exits, but overall the car has much more grip, is far smoother, stays tighter through the turns and is very controllable. Whereas RKM and RVR showed to have issues beyond what was seen as the larger track. My closest lap was still 3 tenths off of praiano's tune and was extremely less consistent.
 
Last edited:
Great review and for a new tuner that result isnt bad.. but ill look into the tune and update it today or tomorrow
I refuse to add rigidity improvement as that makes the the too understeery!
Oversteer was the aim of the tune.. but maybe i went a bit overboard
Haha :)
 
New Tune:
No Aids (Of Course)
Same Tune Except These Settings

LSD:
Initial Torque - 20
Acceleration - 29
Braking - 19

Ride Height:
-20/-20

No understeer but less oversteer.. Try it!
 
Hey Adrenline, any chance you'll do a Honda NSX Type R 02' tune review? If you can it'd be greatly appreciated. It'll be even better if you could use this car for next month's Tuner Challenge Championship on the Nurburgring with racing soft tires! :D
 
What about F40, everybody want to drive fast with it, but till now no more than medium to medium+ tunes....
I'm working on it for monthes....
it'll be good to do something for all the Ferrari fans, including myself. I see great possibilities in F40 , more than the Enzo that let me mad:crazy:

Hey ,test my cobra please ,it's good at Trial mountain...1'25'5 ,you will see, the last jump after the straight,you fall on the brake for the close left..... Full gas, it's very funny, and better ,the car stay very safe in this conditions.👍
 
Back