Aerodynamic Drag / Speed Test (2.08)

  • Thread starter bigbear
  • 94 comments
  • 11,086 views
The effect is looking substantial, good work guys. I have my own data to compare once I get home from work in a couple hours, hopefully someone else besides me recorded PP values for all levels of downforce as well.
 
Calsonic Impul GT-R '08 2.07
  • Minimum Downforce: 186.3 MPH
  • Maximum Downforce: 184.3 MPH
  • Unchanged Values: 185.2 MPH
  • Total Difference: 2.0 MPH

Calsonic Impul GT-R '08 2.08
  • Minimum Downforce: 189.3 MPH (+3.0 MPH)
  • Maximum Downforce: 182.5 MPH (-1.8 MPH)
  • Unchanged Values: 185.2 MPH
  • Total Difference: 6.8 MPH
 
I've updated seven cars in the OP so far.

Cars with non-customizable downforce, such as the McLaren F1, and cars with default aero settings don't seem to be affected at all by the update. For race cars the difference between maximum and minimum downforce speeds looks to be about triple what it was before.

I got an interesting result from the 458.

Ferrari 458 Italia '09 (w/ GT Auto Aero Kit)
Downforce/ v.2.07/ v.2.08/ Change
None......... 204.4... 204.4.... same
Min............ 204.3... 203.8....(-0.5)
Default....... 204.2... 201.8....(-2.4)
Max........... 204.1... 200.9....(-3.2)

PP values have changed a bit.
 
Last edited:
Wardez
The effect is looking substantial, good work guys. I have my own data to compare once I get home from work in a couple hours, hopefully someone else besides me recorded PP values for all levels of downforce as well.
Click to expand...
I did 👍
I haven't updated yet...I'll work on that another day...
 
Looks like most of my database is now invalid :( Time to do it all again

EDIT: I'm currently doing tests now to alter my database and it seems to me that the only cars that seem to benefit from this are race cars or cars with down force already without buying it
 
Last edited:
Gained just under 30mph top speed on my GTOne by removing the aero level from the rear, now running 334.5mph! My Redbull is now only running 340ish, seriously PD,,,, 800 extra horsepower seemingly doing nothing!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Smuttysy
Gained just under 30mph top speed on my GTOne by removing the aero level from the rear, now running 334.5mph! My Redbull is now only running 340ish, seriously PD,,,, 800 extra horsepower seemingly doing nothing!
Click to expand...

The GT One should not be going that fast.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SimonK
The GT One should not be going that fast.
Click to expand...

Yes, a 300 mph GT-One means something is wrong.

These initial results are definite improvements, but it seems like the effect varies car to car. The impact to the X1 and F1 seems good, but the Calsonic GT-R seems to only be very weakly affected. The Viper GTS-R and XJR-9 top speeds also vary less than I would have thought, but at the very least these might make a difference on high speed tracks.

Another interesting test to try might be to plot the top speed vs downforce curves for a couple of cars. It should be non linear with a greater change in top speed with high downforce values (example, Changing a rear wing from 70 to 60 should net a greater speed increase than going from 30 to 20).
 
My normal Nascar Indy setup which uses full downforce has lost 5mph on the straights. Went from 212mph to 207mph.
 
Smuttysy
Gained just under 30mph top speed on my GTOne by removing the aero level from the rear, now running 334.5mph! My Redbull is now only running 340ish, seriously PD,,,, 800 extra horsepower seemingly doing nothing!
Click to expand...

Doesn't work like that. The X1 is built for track speed ie downforce not land speed record.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
phil_75
Doesn't work like that. The X1 is built for track speed ie downforce not land speed record.
Click to expand...

Well, the X1 was designed to achieve downforce without high drag, and it does that in the low downforce setting. However since the X1 produces much more downforce than most other cars at max downforce, the drag is higher. The higher speeds also amplify the apparent effect of the drag.
 
Exorcet
Well, the X1 was designed to achieve downforce without high drag, and it does that in the low downforce setting. However since the X1 produces much more downforce than most other cars at max downforce, the drag is higher. The higher speeds also amplify the apparent effect of the drag.
Click to expand...

Thats a better explanation of what i meant:-)
 
I wonder if there's any difference between the online vs offline physics regarding the aero update?
 
I've updated all of the cars on page one.

Unfortunately the ACR's performance has not changed after the update. It still doesn't have customizable downforce so the result was expected.

Top Speed 2.07: 209.9
Top Speed 2.08: 209.9

Acceleration times are the same as well.
 
Windfire1010
There is no difference between online and offline aero physics.
Click to expand...

Have you tested the same cars online/offline & came up with the same numbers to confirm this?
 
Acceleration times don't tell much of a story but should affect lap times.

Minimum D.F. settings yield slightly faster times all 'round than before.
Maximum D.F. settings yield slightly slower times all 'round than before.

Chevrolet IMPALA (Stock Car) '11
MINIMUM D.F.
2.07:... 3.836(0-60)... 6.856(0-100)... 11.302(1/4)... 26.462(1M)
2.08:... 3.835(0-60)... 6.848(0-100)... 11.295(1/4)... 26.408(1M)

MAXIMUM D.F.
2.07:... 3.806(0-60)... 6.766(0-100)... 11.253(1/4)... 26.526(1M)
2.08:... 3.811(0-60)... 6.802(0-100)... 11.283(1/4)... 26.787(1M)

All of the cars I've tested so far show similar results. High dowforce still gives the car a faster launch and initial acceleration, and low downforce gives the car better speed on long straights.

Low downforce cars gain the advantage earlier now. They should be able to chase down high D.F. cars more effectively on long straights.


Front/Rear Downforce Ratios:
Before the update the Jaguar XJR-9 was fast with low downforce in front and high downforce in back.

high/low.... 60 front, 50 rear, 110 total, speed: 236.1
high/high... 60 front, 85 rear, 145 total, speed: 237.9
low/low....... 30 front, 50 rear, 80 total, speed: 241.7
low/high.... 30 front, 80 rear, 110 total, speed: 243.6 (fastest)

After the update this particular car was faster with low downforce both front and rear. Maximum downforce is now slower than high/low as well.

high/low.... 60 front, 50 rear, 110 total, speed: 239.4
high/high... 60 front, 85 rear, 145 total, speed: 236.5
low/low....... 30 front, 50 rear, 80 total, speed: 248.9 (fastest)
low/high.... 30 front, 80 rear, 110 total, speed: 247.6

Because downforce slows the car down more than before, you have to take more care when adding wing. This falls in line with the other speed tests. And, I think, is what people have been hoping for.
 
Last edited:
Good work, bigbear 👍

I'm looking forward to trying this out. I've always been annoyed that you don't gain speed with less downforce in GT.
 
Hello,

which is faster?

a production street car with no aero wing,
or the same car, with a minimum set downlforce wing?
 
What about the aero bug where you jack up nose and drag tail end on ground on high downforce car and go 50mph faster(maybe more/less)?
 
BWX
What about the aero bug where you jack up nose and drag tail end on ground on high downforce car and go 50mph faster(maybe more/less)?
Click to expand...
That ride height still makes the car faster, but adding Aero on the rear slows the car down.
 
Niop
That ride height still makes the car faster, but adding Aero on the rear slows the car down.
Click to expand...

As before more rear aero would make it faster with that crazy settup you mean? (I hope)

I've only experimented with that setup once pre 2.08.. but I got my 787B going faster than 99% of the people on GTP at the time. Can't remember how fast, but it wouldn't steer, and sparks out back, but was flying.
 
BWX
As before more rear aero would make it faster with that crazy settup you mean? (I hope)

I've only experimented with that setup once pre 2.08.. but I got my 787B going faster than 99% of the people on GTP at the time. Can't remember how fast, but it wouldn't steer, and sparks out back, but was flying.
Click to expand...
Yep, correct.
 

Similar threads

Sail IC
Test - Down force vs. Top speed
Replies
11
Views
19K
Johnnypenso
Johnnypenso
Morphisor
Top Speed Parameters; interesting results! - Now with summary
2 3 4
Replies
95
Views
12K
BWX
BWX
Cristobal1234
Ferrari 296 GTB 2022
Replies
0
Views
1K
Cristobal1234
Cristobal1234
S
A Test on Aerodynamic Setups and Values
Replies
10
Views
5K
budious
budious
llNovall
**SERIES ON HOLD** SNAIL Michelin Pilot SuperCar Challenge, "PS5 Users ONLY",GS/GT4 Spec'd MR/RR Supercars
2
Replies
49
Views
7K
Chris Kelley
Chris Kelley

Latest Posts

Back