Project RUF Blackbird Grip Tune Settings Released

  • Thread starter No_OBsT33R
  • 254 comments
  • 38,231 views
Yeah, Trial is one of my favorites, and probably my strongest track personally.
1:23.6xx is all I could muster up in the YB. There's a whole lot of ups and downs, dips and bumps all over this track that I thought would be the best proving ground for taming the Yellow Bird, so that's why RJ and I decided to use it as the final test.

Gave RJ as much feedback as I could, but like I mentioned on the previous page, as well as EivlEvo mentioned, it's good to get feedback from people who haven't gotten too comfortable with the car, like I have lately. I think my seat time in the car, may be causing me to be far more comfortable than most people hoping in for the first time trying these tunes.

Oh and RJ, the sways at 2/1 vs 4/1 I re-tested at a different track, and like we talked about, 2/1 was noticeably better at GVS. Just in case it comes up in the next PM.

I'm thinking about posting that entire PM, so that people might try some of the adjustments themselves and compare to my notes. I saved it, because of how much I think I can learn from it, when I go back to read it, as data for future tuning adjustments. If people are interested at all? There were about 20 different things we tried before I chose, what I felt to be the best rough draft we've had to date.
 
Adrenaline
I'm thinking about posting that entire PM, so that people might try some of the adjustments themselves and compare to my notes. I saved it, because of how much I think I can learn from it, when I go back to read it, as data for future tuning adjustments. If people are interested at all? There were about 20 different things we tried before I chose, what I felt to be the best rough draft we've had to date.
Click to expand...

Yeah, why not? It would be very interesting.

Ok, I tested your setup (sways 2/1).
Test Track was, of course, Grand Valley Speedway.
Ehhhmmm Adrenaline tell me the truth, did you ever a 1:48.XXX or even a low 1:49.XXX with this tune?
Because I couldn't. My lap times were just high 1:49. The car has not a main problem, it's just overall less grip (slow corners, fast corners, brake, exit...). I think it's caused through the high ride height.
The good is that it's very easy to drive, not as easy as No_OBsT33Rs, but faster.
Lap times increased, madness decreased.

Adrenaline told me once that GVS isn't a good track for his tune. Well, no problem, I tested it on Deep Forest too.
And the tune worked a lot better on this bumpy DF thing. No bottom out, very stable and it doesn't bounce around like a crazy horse.
The last corner was a little problematic, it was just too slippy.
Lap times were high and low 1:12.XXX (had you really done a 1:11.6XX with this setup?)
I tried also my setup on this track. It was the first time on DF and I was almost as fast as with yours.

Your tune is fantastic on bumpy tracks, but it looses a bit on flat circuits.
The driving behavior is very neutral with a little tendency to understeer at corner mid (especially in fast curves) and has just a bit oversteer at the corner exit (hey, it's a YB!).
 
Last edited:
1 thing i noticed with Noobsters tune is that it dosnt utilize 6th gear. How come?
Ive tired to do some laps with this tune but found it undriveable. Sorry. The car just slides around to much. Turn 1, the car just dosnt like it. If the car could be tuned to be stable then there would be a lot of extra time to be found.

Main problem is when you lift off the throttle. If that could be fixed so it dosnt want to swap ends then this car could have a lot of potential.

I wont be beaten by this car and will have a go at tuning it one day. Just not today lol.
 
MONSTAR-1
1 thing i noticed with Noobsters tune is that it dosnt utilize 6th gear. How come?
Ive tired to do some laps with this tune but found it undriveable. Sorry. The car just slides around to much. Turn 1, the car just dosnt like it. If the car could be tuned to be stable then there would be a lot of extra time to be found.

Main problem is when you lift off the throttle. If that could be fixed so it dosnt want to swap ends then this car could have a lot of potential.

I wont be beaten by this car and will have a go at tuning it one day. Just not today lol.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's a YellowBird.

Have you driven it default? The YB has a character all it's own. We are trying to tame it but keep that character. Before testing it's a good idea to run the car stock, then tuned with default settings before running a Tune.

But since you jumped in and had a hard time, try out the other set ups, run her default then go through them again so you can see where each Tune's good/bad points are.
 
Yeah i run the thing stock and it was hell lol. When i jumped in your's i instantly found the car to be a lot better. But as you say its the " yellowbird". This thing is the devil!!

Ill try the other tunes and see what happens, but im not expecting something stable.
 
MONSTAR-1
Yeah i run the thing stock and it was hell lol. When i jumped in your's i instantly found the car to be a lot better. But as you say its the " yellowbird". This thing is the devil!!

Ill try the other tunes and see what happens, but im not expecting something stable.
Click to expand...

Kool!

Da Slump's got one there for yah.

Don't give up on the YB, she's the Devil that's true, but "you ever dance with the Devil under the pale moon light" it's an exhilarating dance.
 
dr_slump
Yeah, why not? It would be very interesting.

1: Ok, I tested your setup (sways 2/1).
Test Track was, of course, Grand Valley Speedway.

2: Ehhhmmm Adrenaline tell me the truth, did you ever a 1:48.XXX or even a low 1:49.XXX with this tune?
Because I couldn't. My lap times were just high 1:49.

3: The car has not a main problem, it's just overall less grip (slow corners, fast corners, brake, exit...). I think it's caused through the high ride height.

4: The good is that it's very easy to drive, not as easy as No_OBsT33Rs, but faster.
Lap times increased, madness decreased.

4.5: Adrenaline told me once that GVS isn't a good track for his tune. Well, no problem, I tested it on Deep Forest too.


5: And the tune worked a lot better on this bumpy DF thing. No bottom out, very stable and it doesn't bounce around like a crazy horse.
The last corner was a little problematic, it was just too slippy.
Lap times were high and low 1:12.XXX (had you really done a 1:11.6XX with this setup?)
I tried also my setup on this track. It was the first time on DF and I was almost as fast as with yours.

Your tune is fantastic on bumpy tracks, but it looses a bit on flat circuits.
The driving behavior is very neutral with a little tendency to understeer at corner mid (especially in fast curves) and has just a bit oversteer at the corner exit (hey, it's a YB!).
Click to expand...

1: Just for clarification, when you say 'your setup sways 2/1'
Did you mean the one RJ posted in #210 or hte one I posted a page back?
When referring to the 2/1 sways I was talking about the setup RJ posted, that we've been working on. Just wanna make sure you're on the right tune.

2 & 3: Low 1:49's, don't think I hit 1:48's with the update, but that's to be expected considering how much softer we went on the suspension. Stiffer is usually better for nice flat and smooth tracks. Softer is safer for bumpy tracks like Nurb, Deep Forest & Trial Mountain. Just felt it's better to be on the safe side when trying to create an 'overall' tune.

4 & 4.5: Yeah, Noobster's tune is by far the easiest to drive of any I've driven, but like a few of us have mentioned, it required too much sacrifice to speed and lap times. So it will depend on the driver and what they are looking to get out of the car. Variety is never a bad thing.

5: The 1:11.6 was on the old tune, I THINK I can beat that with the updated one, I haven't tested it out yet. Took some time away from the YB for the LFA testing and now I'm doing this weeks WRS event, so trying to stay focused on this damn NASCAR at Indy Road Course, so I'm not jumping between cars until I hit my goal for the WRS submission.

Thanks for the feedback, look forward to hearing more from Monstar, as well as Ronald6. I also invite anyone else who's interested to try out this beast of a car and let us know what you think. I'll post up that PM later for people to dissect as they wish, as long as RJ doesn't have any objections, since it might reveal certain aspects of his tuning process.
 
Where's NOOBSTEER and Adrenaline's tunes?

Ill them out today.
1st got to take my staffy for a walk then watching my Bombers play.
 
@ Monstar
Dr_slump: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=5236851#post5236851
praiano63: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=5247428#post5247428
Adrenaline: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=5248287#post5248287
Rotary Junkie: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=5266746#post5266746
No_OBst33R: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=200971

Noobster's is the easiest to drive, but as a side effect, seems to produce slower lap times.
Praiano, slump & Rotary Junkie's should all be pretty equal in regards to lap times, but all 3 seem to suit different drivers. So it's a toss up, based on the driver.
Mine was just something I mixed together between the first few drafts that I felt was a good combination. Rotary Junkie's is the one I've put all my time and effort into. I'd skip my old one, and I'll probably end up deleting it, as I'll claim the final draft of our current to be superior in just about every way. I'll post up that PM in a bit.
 
The below is a PM conversation between RJ and myself, that includes his starting point of the tune, and 20 some-odd things he wanted me to try out. I did all of these tests back to back on Deep Forest Raceway, some lap times are included, but what we were mainly focusing on, is overall feel, and a balance between control and speed. It can be an interesting road to some, as you may be able to pick up on how making minor adjustments can effect the car a large amount. There are many things below that I didn't know or expect to experience and I learned quite a bit myself, by trying RJ's recommendations. For better or worse, this is the process that we put the Yellow Bird through, as just 1 more step towards our goal. Still not done yet, as I'm sure RJ will have a few more things for me to try out. :crazy:
Adrenaline
Rotary Junkie
Time to try some smallllllllll tweaks.

-20 / -15
6.2/6.4/6.6/6.8 / 13.9
9 / 7/8/9
8 / 4/5/6
2/3/4 / 1/2

2.0/2.2/2.4 / 2.6/2.8/3.0
+0.15 / +0.25

Ballast position at -50/30/10.

LSD: 13/20/10-20-30 then 2 in either direction from whichever feels best, 2 further, find happy place.
Click to expand...

Baseline...
6.8/13.9
9/9
8/6
4/1
2.0/2.8
.15/.25
0/0
13/20/10

Okay, after the LFA stuff, I thought it would be best to reset.
I ran 1:24.514, was a solid lap. (The .2 I ran early must have been top notch)
This one, is lacking forward bite, hard to get to full throttle, too tail happy on exit, but that's it. I jumped right back in it, and the 2nd lap was the .514, 3rd lap was .640. So 1 lap of warm up, and I'm good to go in this car. Which means, I'm probably a bad candidate to be testing it, but I'm all you got baby!

Test 1: Front Springs 6.6
Seems to help the car stay a bit tighter/lower through the center of the turn, but also seems to hurt forward bit and rear tire traction. No difference in lap times.

Test 2: Rear Ext 8 (Kept 6.6 F spring)
I can't feel a difference but I ran a 24.117 :/

Test 2: Rear Ext 7 (Kept 6.6)
Okay, now I feel something! it helps the nose plant through the entire corner, and made a rather large difference to drive off, helping reduce exit understeer by a large amount. Which also helps reduce the cars tendency to lose traction in the rear, because all 4 tires are going in the same direction... If that makes sense. 1:23.948 badabing bodaboom.

Test 3: Rear Comp 5 (Kept 6.6, and RE7)
This made entry more stable. More control into the turn, prevents slides from happening, which allows me to drive in a bit deeper. More traction on entry, means the car is staying planted through the center, then because of that, I assume I'm carrying more momentum, meaning less 'acceleration' on exit needed, which helps cut down rear traction issues. Indirectly of course, but still. Lap times remained the same, I'm sure with more laps I could beat it, but too much stuff to test, to put more than 2-3 laps in per change.

Test 4: Rear Comp 4 (6.6 & RE7)
I can't explain what's happening, but it's worse than when set at 5 above. Entry is less stable, and on full throttle shifts, now I'm getting a little kick sideways, where that didn't happen at 5. Gunna stick with 5.

Test 5: Front Sway 3 (6.6 RE7, RC5)
Seemed to loosen the car up on entry, and tighten it on exit... dislike.

Test 6: Front Sway 2 (6.6, RE7, RC5)
Ummm... This felt similar to the front sway at 4. I'd have to do compare the front sway at 4 vs 2 back to back to be sure, but based on feel, 2 seemed to make all 3 parts of the turn, more consistent. Where as I think 4, gave better drive off, but sacrificed a tiny bit on entry?
Okay, compared back to back... and then back again, lol.
I think for our goal, 2 is the better option, it makes the car more predictable. Might want to remember this, so we can try 4 at a later update of suspension and try it out again to see what happens.

Test 7: Rear Sway 2(6.6, RE7, RC5, FS2)
It bothers me when I can't feel the difference... :(
I think I preferred it at 1, 2 seems to make it feel a bit more understeerish, although this is all going the exact opposite of how I thought sway bars were suppose to work. It looked like it helped the full throttle shifts, the back end didn't 'kick' as much as usual. I did run a new best of 1:23.870. Of course I did something stupid the lap prior, so it was pre-red-flagged.

Test 8: Sways at 4/2 (6.6, RE7, RC5)
Just out of curiosity... It was just as quick, and was on track to run another .8 when I blew the last chicane. But, this sway set made the car more prone to sliding on both ends of the corner, so, no go.

Test 9: Front Camber 2.2 (6.6, RE7, RC5, 2/1 sways)
Good. 24.029 Helped the front end, but kinda threw off the balance of the rear and added a bit of oversteer. But if I had my say, I'd keep this, add 1 more ride height to the rear, and try to get 2 birds w/ 1 stone. I still don't think 5 is enough, although the LSD admittedly isn't ready for business yet.

Test 10: Front Camber at 2.4 (6.6, RE7, RC5, 2/1)
Same thing as Test 9, but now getting a bit of oversteer on entry as well as exit. Still got my eye on that rake. Thinking we can lengthen the gears to help traction too.

Test 11: Rear Camber 2.6 (6.6, RE7, RC5, 2/1, FC2.4)
Meh, entry is a tiny bit less likely to kick the rear out.

Test 12: Rear Camber 3.0 (6.6, RE7, RC5, 2/1, FC2.4)
Didn't seem to effect entry/exit, but hurt the roll through the center.
24.1

Test 13: RAKE BITCH (6.6, RE7, RC5, 2/1, FC2.4, RC2.8)
-22/-15... Didn't change much. Gave me a tiny bit better forward bite, but... I didn't really like it overall. Consider this, me flinging poo at you.

Test 14: Ballast... Okay, so we experienced a bit of oversteer with the above set up, minus ride height, so lets start at -50. Lost a bunch of rotation, didn't gain anything really.

Test 15: Ballast -25
Meh... Not really getting anything worth while here. I'm gunna take a few steps backwards and put front camber back at 2.0

-20 / -15
6.6 / 13.9
9 / 7
8 / 5
2 / 1

2.0 / 2.8
+0.15 / +0.25
is where I'm at.

1:23.933 on my 1st lap... This is my happy place.
Still missing forward bite, rear traction and it's a touch prone to slide-age on entry.
Tried Rear camber at 2.6 and 3.0, but neither felt as good as 2.8. I think maybe tweaking Brake balance could help, as well as the LSD tune.

Test 18: LSD
10/20/12 fail
20/19/10 fail
18/20/9 closer
17/19/8 win..ish = 1:23.626
Adds stability as well as overall traction. Made a slight gear adjustment, so that the shift into 3rd is a bit more calm now. Helped a bunch. With these 2 combined, the car is now a bit on the understeer side on exit.

I tried lowering the front spring to 6.4 and 6.2, as well as front camber to 2.2 and 2.4 and mixed them together, but they didn't seem to help the understeer. Tried lowering the rear spring to 13.3 and 13.7 but didn't really do much, a little bit easier to get to full throttle. But, when I ran the 23.626 I was already down 20 horses, now I'm down 30, so I'm pretty sure that means this test session is over.

Final Set up for the best lap thus far: 1:23.626

-20 / -15
6.6 / 13.9
9 / 7
8 / 5
2 / 1

2.0 / 2.8
+0.15 / +0.25

17/19/8

No ballast
Brake bal at 7/4

Transmission (In order of needed adjustment)
Top Speed: 155mph/249kph
Final: 2.500 (This is my 'base' final, for shorter tracks adjust it higher, for example at Deep Forest you'll barely get into 6th with 2.500)
1st: 2.893
2nd: 2.065
3rd: 1.655
4th: 1.360
5th: 1.140
6th: 0.950
Click to expand...
 
Alrighty chaps...

I've given the 3 primary cars in this thread a good thrashing. Those being Noobsters tamed version of the Yellowbird, Adrenalines tune from a few pages back (which at the time was his finalized one, though it appears as though a new one is about to pop up, and Dr slumps finalized one.

As I mentioned, I think that these lap times are coming down mostly through learning the cars nuances and not as much because of the tuning. I don't want people to take that the wrong way (internet serious business style) I'm trying to be constructive and contribute. I think the tuning is good, and in many cases makes the car better than if you simply accepted the stock "racing suspension settings" that GT5 gives you when you purchase. And CLEARLY (as is further evidenced by adrenaline and RJ's last post) you guys are finding ways for this car to be faster by altering the tuning. But...

When I tested the three (and if others would like theirs tested, by all means let me know... I chose those 3 as they seemed to be the most "original" and what the crowd has defaulted to) I mentioned that:

Dr. Slumps ran a 1:19:050 at Deep Forest on a DS3, COLD, in a 5 lap set. I suspect I could easily grab another 2-3 seconds with some significant time... but its a testing thread. This one feels to me (as I said) like a "stock yellowbird" which is saying something considering it has another 300 odd HP, and is however many kilos lighter. So... good job, but it's still a yellowbird? Haha... not sure what to say about it. It certainly isn't bad though...

Adrenalines tune ran a 1:19:396. Same deal, Deep Forest, Cold (I was working on real cars all day, so I had considerable breaks in between each testing), in a 5 lap set. Adrenalines feels the best. It feels like the car actually CAN do what you ask of it, if you ask nicely, as opposed to simply willing it through a turn as is with a stock YB. I think though that this tune as it was listed and Slumps tune while feeling vastly different, are capable of nearly identical times if you looked at them from the perspective of the gamer.

This leads me to the weird part. Noobsters. All the drama aside, noobster DID start out with a noble goal of making the YB a car that anyone should be able to pick up and race. And you know what... thats exactly what happened. Again running the same set of circumstances... I was able to lay down a 1:15:437 on the second lap. The FIRST lap, I ran a 1:19 something though. This tells me a few things...

1. All three tunes are completely different, but to 98% of the GT5 community, are going to be exactly the same.

2. The ghost car was a much bigger factor with noobsters tune. With the others, I felt like I could go faster, but the car is so crazy that getting it down to the 1:15 mark would be more from learning the car and less from the tuning. With noobsters, I was able to push the car much farther because the "insanity" of the YB had been tuned out so to speak. Once I realized the car had real, definable limits... (ie on my second lap) it wasn't only possible to go faster, but it was easy to go faster.

That said... I think noobsters tune does have a bit of snap oversteer to account for, buuuut it's also basically a Kusari-fundo (meteor hammer).

In all seriousness... noobsters tune should really get some credit. He started out with a project of making a fast user friendly yellowbird, and while I suspect there may be a few SLIGHT modifications to be made to polish the tune up, this tune is EASILY the "best" for most GT5 users. That shouldn't discredit in any way, shape, or form the other tuners or their tunes though. These other chaps have good solid tuning reputations around here (though I need to be objective) and I full well expect that their tunes will serve the direct purpose they intend.

Porsche is that classic example of a company that won't just admit how silly and wrong they are for putting the engine in a "rear" config. Just move the damn thing already... instead of spending decades trying to tune it so that the car handles properly.

I encourage and welcome you questions... look forward to tune updates, and am eagerly waiting a placemark where I can REALLY get into these tunes and give some full reviewing... even if it means getting married to this car. :P
 
Wow, thanks for the Positive feedback, glad to see you enjoy the Tune.

It's a fun car, with an awesome Nurb video of it online (real car) anybody who hasn't seen it should check it out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6Thomd4BQg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

It's RUF's Test Driver "Sideways" Stephan piloting the beast, and uhhh, he's pretty sick. When GT4 came out and the Yellowbird & Nurburgring were featured. I almost blew a gasket. However the cars lacked a certain "Je Ne C'est Qua" and the YB was one of the cars that exposed many of the physics flaws in GT4. This time around they have done a better job on the grip/slip controlled oversteer & you can get a better impression on car feel. Not to mention driving in GT4 felt slow until close to 200mph.

I hope people give the car and my tune a chance, they make a fun pair.
 
Adrenaline
@ Monstar
Dr_slump: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=5236851#post5236851
praiano63: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=5247428#post5247428
Adrenaline: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=5248287#post5248287
Rotary Junkie: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=5266746#post5266746
No_OBst33R: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=200971

Noobster's is the easiest to drive, but as a side effect, seems to produce slower lap times.
Praiano, slump & Rotary Junkie's should all be pretty equal in regards to lap times, but all 3 seem to suit different drivers. So it's a toss up, based on the driver.
Mine was just something I mixed together between the first few drafts that I felt was a good combination. Rotary Junkie's is the one I've put all my time and effort into. I'd skip my old one, and I'll probably end up deleting it, as I'll claim the final draft of our current to be superior in just about every way. I'll post up that PM in a bit.
Click to expand...


Which track should i drive these?

Ive just installed Noobsteer's tune and it handles 100% better. Ive only about 5 laps around TM and its quit fun to drive. So far ive managed to do 1.27.7xx and getting faster every lap.
 
Rotary Junkie
Trial isn't DF.

And according to Adrenaline we've got a mostly-kinda drivable setup at Trial... Mid 1:23s if I'm not mistaken.

-20 / -15
6.6 / 13.9
9 / 7
8 / 5
2 / 1

2.0 / 2.8
+0.15 / +0.25

17/19/8

Brake balance at probably 7/4. Not quite entirely final yet I don't think but close. Ballast at 0kg, 0 position. Feedback from someone else would be welcomed in case Adrenaline is driving through issues on me.
Click to expand...


Tested at Trial Mountain.
A 1:23:xx is a dam good lap. Is that without any aids?
Just tried this out. I did a 1:26:8. Its a bit faster but more skitish. I didnt get a super lap in cause its hard to drive. If it was more stable under breaking it would be a lot easier to drive.

At 1st i accidentally left Noobsteer's ballast in and it handled pretty well under breaking so maybe look into that.

Although Noobsteer's was slower it was actually a nicer car to drive. More predictable. Just needs more pace.


BTW my YB only has 732 hp. Your has more yeah Noobsteer?
 
Last edited:
MONSTAR-1
Tested at Trial Mountain.
A 1:23:xx is a dam good lap. Is that without any aids?
Just tried this out. I did a 1:26:8. Its a bit faster but more skitish. I didnt get a super lap in cause its hard to drive. If it was more stable under breaking it would be a lot easier to drive.

At 1st i accidentally left Noobsteer's ballast in and it handled pretty well under breaking so maybe look into that.

Although Noobsteer's was slower it was actually a nicer car to drive. More predictable. Just needs more pace.

BTW my YB only has 732 hp. Your has more yeah Noobsteer?
Click to expand...

Glad to hear your liking the settings.

My YB has a few miles on it and right now has 731hp.

I'm going to adjust the ballast a bit see if I can get a little more pace out if her without sacrificing control, gonna have to be tomorrow, I'm going to crash.
 
MONSTAR-1
Tested at Trial Mountain.
A 1:23:xx is a dam good lap. Is that without any aids?
Just tried this out. I did a 1:26:8. Its a bit faster but more skitish. I didnt get a super lap in cause its hard to drive. If it was more stable under breaking it would be a lot easier to drive.

At 1st i accidentally left Noobsteer's ballast in and it handled pretty well under breaking so maybe look into that.

Although Noobsteer's was slower it was actually a nicer car to drive. More predictable. Just needs more pace.


BTW my YB only has 732 hp. Your has more yeah Noobsteer?
Click to expand...

I use the driving line and ABS at 1. Automatic for the Yellow Bird as there is far too much going on to shift for me. Some cars I use MT, but not this one, not yet anyways. Although my lap times would definitely increase if I could. Engine braking is a phenomenal tool.

This is a car that you have to get use to, to go fast.
Noobster's goal was to make it easy enough for anyone to hop in and drive, and he has succeeded. Mine was to make it reliable lap to lap, but still rip off laps. It's still a work in progress. It's going to be my sleeper! If we could bet our credits in online rooms, I'd make a lot of money from hustling people with a Yellow Bird ;)

As for the stability on entry, as you can see from my notes above, that was one of my complaints as well. If you need more stability under braking, you can change the brake balance to suit your style. Probably more front bias and if that's not enough, or put 0kg ballast, at the -50 position. These are things I consider to be driver preference, without having any side effects on the tune.

It really is a car I'm growing to love. I've gotten so comfortable with it, I can controllably and consistently drift any of the corners of the 3 tracks I've been tuning on, lol.

Enjoy it!
 
EivlEvo
Porsche is that classic example of a company that won't just admit how silly and wrong they are for putting the engine in a "rear" config. Just move the damn thing already... instead of spending decades trying to tune it so that the car handles properly.
Click to expand...

Porsche did try with the 928, 944, etc. In the early 70s Porsche envisioned a fufutre without the 911. It's just that the 911 sells better, and it is also one of the most successful race cars ever. Why change a winning team?
 
Something to note: I have now added the gear ratios to my last post w/ the tune now that Adrenaline PM'd them to me. They make quite a difference in both traction and how the LSD acts so give it another go if you've already tested it... If not, definitely give it a shot with the gearing (and I invite you to try the gearing on other tunes).
 
I'm glad people are giving my Tune a fair run, I don't have the established Rep at GTP that other Tuners have, plus I have a misleading user name.

I have a few cars being tuned that have no compromises. :) Keep an eye on the HQPS Garage.
 
sanmusa
Porsche did try with the 928, 944, etc. In the early 70s Porsche envisioned a fufutre without the 911. It's just that the 911 sells better, and it is also one of the most successful race cars ever. Why change a winning team?
Click to expand...

Yeah... the 928 was poor timing (all that emissions nonsense) and it ended up being killed off because of that. I believe Porsche has debuted another newer version, and it'll be fascinating to see how it is.

The 944 sucked. The 968 was ok...

Either way... they haven't really put much effort into the FR layout except for the 928 which was then ultimately killed by the government.

The 911 will always be a legend though and thats why you can make a car that looks the same for 50 odd years and it will still sell.

------------

Another thing about noobsters tune is that the gearing is both great and horrible at the same time. Someone mentioned it already... but you never utilize 6th gear. I'm not certain whether altering the gear ratios into usability would make the car faster, or bring it back to yellowbird. If it's the later though, perhaps there's more to be found in the tuning?

Also as adrenaline mentioned, the noobster YB is sort of a brake straight, coast through a turn, hit the gas at about 80% of the corner... thats something that would definitely help with the tune.

The other 2, adrenaline and dr slumps (I'm still waiting for some time to review the next final adrenaline/rj tune) were easy to drift. No snap oversteer, etc... and there's no questions that if I learned these cars, they'd be fast as hell. This is evidenced mostly by the video adrenaline posted of him driving (to prove noobster or whoever wrong about the SRF). His lap was smooooooooth. And my lap isn't anywhere close to that... again, because of the fact (I believe) that he has learned the nuances of that car, and I have simply driven it.
 
I'm not sure what you guys mean. My tune does use 6th. You adjust the Top Speed Tuner first, then Gear ratios, and finally the final drive gear.

Weird.
 
Yeah sorry for the confusion. There is obviously a 6th gear, but what I'm saying is that your gearing is set so high that the 6th gear almost never gets utilized.

Perhaps what you're saying is that we should just adjust the top speed pertinent to the track we're running on? Though I thought that messed up the ratio's in GT5's silly gearbox tuning?
 
Its Dr slumps tune that doesn't seen to use 6th. I tested it on GVS like he did and it only just got to the top of 5th on the front straight. But anyway doesn't really matter.
 

Similar threads

KAlex122
My first tuning project - Questions how to adapt to more Power - Mazda Eunos Roadster
Replies
3
Views
1K
bread82
bread82
KAlex122
  • Question
Weight and weight distribution
Replies
9
Views
2K
MrHorsepower
MrHorsepower
C
  • Solved
Weight Distribution
Replies
1
Views
1K
eran0004
eran0004
lbpomg95
Camber and Damping - Not Making Much Difference?
Replies
0
Views
733
lbpomg95
lbpomg95
cleanLX
Transmission Tuning... Love it.
Replies
1
Views
2K
Meythia
Meythia

Latest Posts

Back