Adrenaline Tune Reviews ~ Honda HSV - Part 1

  • Thread starter Adrenaline
  • 137 comments
  • 39,192 views
Based on the review of one person with a driving style that goes against how the car was set up? I think you need to look at the fact that a tune that borrowed your LSD settings and nothing else, was faster than your own.
That means, using 25% of your tune and 75% of his tune makes the overall car better than your singular efforts, according to one person.

True.

Thing is, (as mentioned above) that remark was 90% in jest. It's also a beginner's attempt at tuning with very small tweaks by me in an attempt to show said person (by the words of others) that he can actually make a very good tune.

Also, the LSD is a fairly critical part of the tune; apparently here, it was off by enough to cause roughly half a second of change in lap time. I've actually not seen many say any of Avid's tunes work perfectly well with the supplied differential settings so it's a place he could stand to improve noticeably in.

And I hope he does.
 
I don't hold LSD settings against any tune. I feel as if any person that isn't tweaking the LSD settings to better match their driving style, isn't getting the full potential of the tune. I don't expect any tuner, to be able to create a universal LSD that all drivers will like. I expect them to provide the best LSD settings that provided them the best lap times. I'm sure that for every person who disliked the posted LSD settings, there was one who loved them.

I'm willing to bet there's someone who had the exact opposite results I did. They ran 5 tenths slower, by using RKM's LSD vs Avid's. There's no such thing as the best LSD settings for a tune, only the best LSD settings for a driver.
 
Adrenaline,

This is a fantastic thread. Thank you for creating it!

I would like to request a review of the tunes for the Pagani Zonda R '09.

I would like to know which tune is the best of the 3 listed on the GT5 Tuning wiki.

Avid Racing Factory - Vett'e

BlueShift

Tharain's Tuning Temple

I know the Zonda R wasn't on yur original list, but maybe if you have time after your initial list is complete? I'll donate the car if that helps?

Either way, thanks again for the thread!

I'll do my best, but be warned, that this car and I don't really seem to get along very well. I played with Avid's tune for a very short while, and I couldn't control the damn thing. But I'll put some more time in with the car, and see what I can do for you.

RJ, I'll work on the 111R today.
The Zonda probably tomorrow?
 
Tuner: Tharain's Tuning Temple
Review: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showth...=9#post4543336
Notes: Definitely an improvement over the tune above. Was forced to modify this tune to work, but doing so paid off.
I feel as if the changes I made, drastically change the car, so I've included them below. The car still has a bit of understeer on exit for me, but I feel it's due to a lack of front Aero.
Grand Valley Speedway: 1:49.712
-25 / -30.........Camber: 1.0 / 1.0
9.9 / 13.0........Toe: 0.0 / -.08
7 / 6..............LSD: 12, 16, 5
5 / 6..............Brake Bal: 10 / 7
3 / 7..............Tranny: 186

I'm not sure how you can post that this is a definite improvement when you have nearly edited every aspect of the car. I'll admit my car needs improvement and I am currently working on a new version, but to post a review of a tune that is quite frankly yours.. shouldn't you be giving credit to yourself lol?

Tuner: Team Lotus Tuning
Review: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showth...=5#post4532923
Notes: Slight mid corner understeer.
Deep Forest Raceway: 1:09.307

Tuner: Precision Motorsports
Review: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showth...50#post4532936
Notes: A bit on edge, not a comfortable drive, unstable.
Deep Forest Raceway: 1:08.532

Also, not quite sure how my car could lap a nearly identical lap, yet you write that mine is "on edge", "not a comfortable drive", and "unstable". Those are some harsh words when the other comparable tunes get things like "slight mid corner understeer" for a tune that was slower than mine..

It appears after looking at this thread that you have unintentionally made all of my tunes look worse than they actually are.. and obviously I don't like that.. I am extremely grateful for your feedback and your unbiased reviews of several of my tunes. You have in fact encouraged me to try new things and to improve tunes I thought were at their best. However, it would appear that some of the presentation of these results should be more uniformally written in order to prevent misinterpretations. I spend an great deal of time fine tuning and attempting to perfect my tunes, and to have one person write a review on one track is kind of an insult to all of the hard work and details that go into my posts.

/end rant, sorry if I came off worse than I intended, I just wanted to express my opinion :dunce:
 
1: I'm not sure how you can post that this is a definite improvement when you have nearly edited every aspect of the car. I'll admit my car needs improvement and I am currently working on a new version, but to post a review of a tune that is quite frankly yours.. shouldn't you be giving credit to yourself lol?

2: Also, not quite sure how my car could lap a nearly identical lap, yet you write that mine is "on edge", "not a comfortable drive", and "unstable". Those are some harsh words when the other comparable tunes get things like "slight mid corner understeer" for a tune that was slower than mine..

3: It appears after looking at this thread that you have unintentionally made all of my tunes look worse than they actually are.. and obviously I don't like that.. I am extremely grateful for your feedback and your unbiased reviews of several of my tunes. You have in fact encouraged me to try new things and to improve tunes I thought were at their best. However, it would appear that some of the presentation of these results should be more uniformally written in order to prevent misinterpretations. I spend an great deal of time fine tuning and attempting to perfect my tunes, and to have one person write a review on one track is kind of an insult to all of the hard work and details that go into my posts.

/end rant, sorry if I came off worse than I intended, I just wanted to express my opinion :dunce:

1: All reviews are based on the tune 'as written'. Additional adjustments, experiments and their resulting lap times, are specifically mentioned in the review. If you read the review you'll find that it is based on the tune 'as written' the notes explain what I changed, and how much improvement was gained from it.

2: Lap times, again, are not the focus of my reviews, they are simply a way to quantify differences. There are plenty of tunes that 'feel like crap' but run better lap times. Does that make them better or worse? It depends on the driver. Just because the lap time is faster, doesn't mean the car is automatically more enjoyable to drive, or that it's easier to obtain that fast lap. In the review I specifically said "Overall the Car is great, and more importantly gave me the better lap time. It wasn't as forgiving due to the issues above, but I've learned to accept the faster a car becomes, the less stable you should expect it to be. If I'm just trying to rip off a single fast lap time, this tune works great, but if I'm looking at a longer race, with many laps and tire wear, this tune would frighten me, and I'd prefer to use TeamLotus'." I don't know how much more clear I can be than that?

3: I'm not going to sugar coat my reviews. If that offends you, I completely understand, but I'm not going to lie about what I experienced to make you feel better. No one wants to read a review that says "all cars were great, but Tuner #7 was the fastest." If those are the reviews you want, then browse the threads where people say "Thanks, Worked great, I won the Championship." As fas as I'm concerned that's useless and it's not what I'm here to provide.

As for the single track... I already took this request into consideration, and have been slowly adding additional tracks to tunes as I go. Plus, read the review where it specifically states: "Both tunes work great, and work very well as a baseline. From there, fine tuning to suit your personal style may be needed, and will pay off. Also keep in mind I only tested on one track, and you shouldn't use a single track to dismiss a tune. I recommended everyone try them both on a variety of tracks, to see what suits you best, if not both for separate conditions."

Then we spoke through PM's and I tested your updated tune, based on my review. You gained, I think, 3 tenths and the overall stability and comfort, for me to say that I would no longer need an the TeamLotus tune for longer races. You fixed multiple issues with 1 swing at the tune, but never posted the updated tune, for me to re-write an updated review.
 
I don't have any issues with your reviews, just the information displayed in the initial post, at first glance without reading the review things can look.. misleading? maybe its just me idk lol, again, I'm not trying to discredit your reviews or anything, they are very accurate.

Also, I finally updated the 111R RM tune.
 
Last edited:
2: There are plenty of tunes that 'feel like crap' but run better lap times.

I understand completely what you are saying here. I have ran faster lap times on certain tunes, however I was working very hard to keep the car under control. Some might say, who cares you ran a faster lap time. The problem with this is in a 3-7 lap race it becomes very difficult to consistantly run the "faster" lap time. I normally can knock off 1 or 2 fast laps then lose control and spin out. A slightly slower more consistant lap will normally allow me to finish in a higher position.
 
As requested I've put the four Pagani Zonda R '09 tunes head to head.

All 4 tunes were tested the the exact same Assists, Horsepower and Tranny Top Speed and on Racing Tires in order to provide the best comparison of the suspension settings, rather than power output. Please understand that I am just one driver. My results are not universal; the fastest for me, may not be the fastest for you. Also, some of these tunes are designed around different power:weight ratios, and due to this, may have some negative side effects do to not using the tune specifically as designed. Finally, these tests were preformed on a single track and do not represent the tune across multiple tracks, where the results could quite possibly be reversed. I reccomend you test them all for yourself, and find what suits your need. :dunce:

Okay, that's all the hubjub.

I started with Avid Racing Factory. I've come to really enjoy Avid's tune, but through multiple tests of their tunes, it's extremely clear that their recommended LSD settings, couldn't be further away from my personal needs. To rectify this, I've added a second review, which includes the use of an altered LSD set up. As with many of my reviews, I will do some minor tuning, to try and produce the fastest lap I can, but I always try to review the tune 'as written' before making any changes.

The Avid tune, is supposedly based on Racing Hard tires. This absolutely did not work for me. I threw some Racing Softs on, and even that wasn't enough to combat the LSD preference difference, but I was able to post a decent lap time of 1:41.683. For those unfamiliar with why Avid LSD don't work for me, it's because I'm rather aggressive with my cornering technique, and I like to get back to the gas quickly and I don't want to drive in a state of paranoia that the car is going to constantly swap ends on me.

Once I adjusted the LSD to something more forgiving to lead footed people like myself, I managed to drop off 8 tenths 1:40.863. Not a bad pick up for a shot in the dark LSD guesstimate. Avid's tunes are always very balanced and rather conservative. By conservative I mean, the car isn't going to be what I consider 'on edge'. Now, on edge can be a great thing when you're willing to sacrifice comfort, consistency and multiple laps. If all you want to do, is go balls to the wall and break a lap record, that you'll more than likely never be able to duplicate, then on edge is great. But for those of us, who expect to spend multiple laps in a car, for say... a 5 race, 10 lap series event, consistency is far more important. It's a smart choice to sacrifice 2 tenths a lap, rather than to risk spinning out at any given corner and blowing the entire race, if not series. Even further proving this point, is online racing, where not only will you be running multiple laps, but tire wear will be taken into account. On edge, means your tires will get ripped to shreds a lot quicker than the competition, making that wild ride, a lost cause. Avid shines in creating tunes that you can depend on. With some minor adjustments to Avid's tune, to match those of the following contenders, I feel Avid could quite possibly provide the best results, but this has yet to be tested.

Next up was seoulspirit. This was not a tune created by an actual garage. Simply a person who designed a tune of their own, that wanted to share it with the forums. A great notion, but I'm sorry to say it fell short on producing. Unfortunately, this tune simply couldn't keep up, but to be fair, was only 1.2 seconds per lap behind 3rd place, 1:42.855, which is respectable in the broad scheme of things. This car was far too tight for me, the tightest of all 4. I, personally, can't stand a tight race car. I actually prefer on edge to tight, lol. The tune stands out from the rest, just at first glance, but I'm willing to try anything, as I'm loyal to results, not realism!

The third tune tested was that of Tharains Tuning Temple. I've expressed concerns previously with Tharains neglect of toe and camber settings, and this tune doesn't stray from that trend. Moving on from that, Tharain's tune provided the most turn-in of all 4 tunes. If that's what you're looking for, then this tune may suit you best. For myself, I'm forced to see the entire corner as a whole. Turn in is great, but not at the expense of center and exit ability. I'm not sure if that's what happened here, or if possibly this is more turn in than I personally feel comfortable with. This could very well match up with a driving style that differs from mine, and it wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Despite all of the above, Tharain managed to turn a 1:42.812, but this lap time is not a fair portrayal of the tunes ability. What this actually displays is that my driving skill lacks the finesse needed to nurse this car around the track. So, I again swapped LSD settings to try again. Doing so resulted in a near identical lap time to that of Avid, with a 1:40.867. Only a difference of .004! But I do feel that Tharains tune had more potential than this .867. So to be fair, I'd say this hybrid was quicker than Avids, but I feel this is more based on the Downforce difference between the 2 tunes, where Tharain used Max, and Avid's were considerably lower. The second glaring issue, is that Avid's Ride height was roughly 10mm higher than Tharains, but oddly enough so is Blueshifts. Drop the ride height, up the downforce, and I think Avid will take the lead of these 3.

Fourth and Final is Blueshift. A smaller shop, that I was skeptic about. One that completely took me by surprise, both in location as well as application. On the track, this tune literally didn't feel faster than the others. It felt like it was slower, looked like it wasn't getting that great of grip, didn't feel like it rotated as much as I prefer, and was a bit tight on exit, but the tight exit, seems to be the car's natural tendency as this was present in all 4. Or possibly just my driving. Either way...

Well, after driving a clean, but what felt lack luster, lap the time came out to be 1:40.540. The best of all 4 on only the second lap. I was literally stunned and confused. It actually made me double check that I wasn't a full second off, lol. So, not only did this obliterate the best 'as written' tune by a full second, it also managed to beat the hybrid LSD set up by 3 tenths. And just in case you're thinking this was one of those cars that can rip 1 great lap, and then put you into the grass the next 9 times out of 10, let me assure you, it was not. 3 out of the 5 laps I ran, were all sub 1:41. This was no random occurrence. The car was extremely comfortable, relaxed and consistent. It still felt stiff and uneventful through the remaining laps, but it just seems as if it calmly carries more speed throughout the track, without making any scenes. This LSD setting was actually quite great. I felt it needs to actually be bumped up a tiny bit, to give the car a little more bite off the corners.

Hopefully this will suffice AnsonMaddox? :sly:
 
Excellent job Adrenaline!

Perhaps I should start tuning some cars with specific LSD tunes for Adrenaline, after all I don't doubt we have driving styles that are worlds apart. Anyway, I'd like to pit my Castol Supra '97 in for a fight! Or any other JGTC car you see fit. I honestly cannot stress how much I love those cars.

Thanks again and I look forward to more of your reviews!
 
True.

Thing is, (as mentioned above) that remark was 90% in jest. It's also a beginner's attempt at tuning with very small tweaks by me in an attempt to show said person (by the words of others) that he can actually make a very good tune.

Also, the LSD is a fairly critical part of the tune; apparently here, it was off by enough to cause roughly half a second of change in lap time. I've actually not seen many say any of Avid's tunes work perfectly well with the supplied differential settings so it's a place he could stand to improve noticeably in.

And I hope he does.

I shall take note, thank you for your advice.

thanks
 
Excellent job Adrenaline!

Perhaps I should start tuning some cars with specific LSD tunes for Adrenaline, after all I don't doubt we have driving styles that are worlds apart. Anyway, I'd like to pit my Castol Supra '97 in for a fight! Or any other JGTC car you see fit. I honestly cannot stress how much I love those cars.

Thanks again and I look forward to more of your reviews!

I really like my au CERUMO Supra '01, even sitting on stock suspension and alignment specs, it still does me wonders online!

I need to take a break soon and focus on the WRS qualifier though, I haven't even ran it once yet :/
 
Excellent job Adrenaline!

Perhaps I should start tuning some cars with specific LSD tunes for Adrenaline, after all I don't doubt we have driving styles that are worlds apart. Anyway, I'd like to pit my Castol Supra '97 in for a fight! Or any other JGTC car you see fit. I honestly cannot stress how much I love those cars.

Thanks again and I look forward to more of your reviews!
Gift me the Supra to practice with:)
 
I don't want to disturb you, but the other Camaro SS '10-tunes are around 550 HP. The requested Camaro (without Engine tuning stage 3) gets to 610-620.. It would be a little unfair to review it, based on circuit times, won't it?
 
I don't want to disturb you, but the other Camaro SS '10-tunes are around 550 HP. The requested Camaro (without Engine tuning stage 3) gets to 610-620.. It would be a little unfair to review it, based on circuit times, won't it?

Car: 2010 Camaro SS
Disclaimer: Both the LDP & RKM tunes were tested with a power rating of 592HP.
This includes max upgrades for everything with the exception being: Semi-Racing Exhaust was used rather than Full Racing Exhaust & Zero Engine Tuning Upgrades, ECU was still purchased though.

Tuner: RKM Motorsports
Review: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=4561042&posted=1#post4561042
Notes: I don't like Sport Soft Tires...
Grand Valley Speedway: 1:55.835
Deep Forest: 1:15.060


Tuner: Lion's Den Performance
Review: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=4560884#post4560884
Notes: Tight, Tight, Tight...
Grand Valley Speedway: 1:57.795
Deep Forest: 1:15.112

Always read the fine print ;)
 
Pagani Zonda R '09
Yata ! \o/ :D

All 4 tunes were tested the the exact same Assists
Hey maybe your understeer problems comes from setting assists too high ?

I used very low assists, as always.

-edit- no assists, oh I see... I understood why I did sligthly better than the others : putting the assists ON was my final setting, I tuned the whole car without this at the first place. So at 775hp it's caviar-land for me.

So, with no assists if you want some more oversteer like you said, please try this modification on this setup like I tell in the thread, you'll be surprised I think :
- Dampers (Extension) : 3/6
- Dampers (Compression) : 5/10

I'm not sure you'll have better chronos though. :D

I think what you are really searching is more camber, like -0.7/-0.9 which was an option I tried too. Keep the first suspension and you could try this too. Thank you !

If you try other tunes, I would be curious to see how other of my tunes behaves vs other garages, especially the Scuderia or the Stingray (I'm confident with these setups) or the untamable beast, the Yellow bird (there I'm not confident at all but I'd be curious to see how I did with "The Beast" :D) ^^

Also, of course with 775hp, I could have put a proper LSD... But at 970 I couldn't :/
The problem is the LSD (initial/accel mainly, and decel a little less) is dependant of the power you put on a car. So if you try setups, please try them with the max hp you can between the four, or the lsd have to be redone. Frankly I think I can grab another second at least, with a camber and a LSD, at 775 hp.

(quick, quick, let's finish that ZZII before it's too late ! :D)
 
Last edited:
Honda Amuse S2000 GT1 Turbo aka Awesome Hood

This was a car that caught my eye, the first time I saw it. I have rather eccentric tastes, and when I saw a picture of this car in a random thread the hood stood straight up and screamed DRIVE ME at the top of it's lungs. Upon some looking around, I came to realize this car had at least 3 tunes already floating around; So here we are...

We head to our first track, Laguna Seca. Most people say not to use this track, it's this, it's that, blah blah blah. I feel Laguna Seca magnifies any and all flaws of a car. Lots of cars can handle a corner when it's banked 25* but it takes a true tune to cut a flat track without issues. Before and after each unbanked corner, lies a nice length of straight. This is where good cars pull away and bad cars realize they would have been better off with Dirt Tires.


First up was Tharain's Tuning Temple... No particular reason, other than his was the furthest tab to the right in my window! If you have to go first on the first track, you get to enjoy going last on the second track. At Laguna Tharains tune had no major defects, but at the same time, no notable attributes to brag about. In short this just means the car was rather balanced front to back, corner to corner. The only issue that came up, was one that appears in all 3 of the tunes, which is this cars nasty habit of a dramatic pivot as soon as you realize the brake pedal. Brake hard into a corner, let off to start coasting and make the transition to throttle, but before you can, it looks as if the car is going to spin out of control. You have to learn to trust the car, because not once through all 3 tunes and 50+ laps did this little 'habit' ever actually cause a spin. A few smokey drifts? Sure, but no uncontrollable outbursts. I gave this tune the most laps of the 3, mainly because I had to get comfortable with this car, and even moreso with it's 'habit'. After the learning curve I managed to run a time of 1:20.824. Rather impressive for a 600hp non race car.

Next up on the Chrome Tab List was Avid Racing Factory. Just installing the suspension specs, you notice how much stiffer settings Avid went with. I believe this is where Avid was able to minimize the 'nasty habit'. A stiffer car, allowed for less body roll and less exaggeration of that off brake pitch. This allowed the car to maintain more grip, allowing it to carry the most un-interrupted amount of inertia through the turn and into the straight away. But make no mistake, the habit was very much so still present. Avids tune just seems to have done the best controlling it, as to not sacrifice the cars overall grip. Avid wasted no time jumping to the front when the 2nd lap I ran was a very high .99x. Then on lap 9 I ran my best lap of 1:19.910 to seal the deal.

Last but not least we come to Wienish' Tuning Garage. Unfortunately this falls into Wienish's quantity category, but I am quite looking forward to the new tunes Wienish will be producing where he places more focus into quality, I have high hopes. Despite his quantity this tune was no slack. It might not have come out on top, but it did land itself in between the two above with a lap time of 1:20.600. The habit was very much alive in these laps, but seemed to be more severe than in the others. When combined with Wienish' tune, the car took that dive, and then in this case, carried it into a 4 wheel slide. This cost me a lot of time, until I got the hang of it, and altered my entry. I wouldn't have been able to alter my entry, had not it been for the fact that this tune did possess what I felt to be the best turn in of all 3 tunes. But immediately following the entry, I came to realize that the center had more understeer than it's previous competitors.

Next up, we head to Test Track #2. I wanted something with some medium speed sweeping corners with some banking to them. I also wanted something quick and easy. Tadaaahh Deep Forest Raceway. Here the Wienish tune felt much more balanced overall. I didn't notice as much turn in on this track as I felt on Laguna, but I assume this is due to a higher entry speed on average. I was able to turn a 1:08.385 and have no specific complaints. A slight lack of turn in the center, which carried through exit. The car still does the crazy crap off braking, but there's only really the first corner of the track where this comes into play, although it did lead to a few more 4 wheel drifts in that corner.

Stuck in the middle with you... we come to Avid once again. Avid wastes no time getting down to business. First lap out 8.7, then 8.9, then 8.1, then 7.8 and then 7.7 Every lap I drove I feel the car getting faster and faster until I plateaued at a 1:07.355. Ladies and gentlemen this is a full second faster than my best lap in the Elise 111r RM. If that doesn't speak volumes for this car & tune, then I'm surely wasting my breath.

Buuuuuttttttttttttttttttttttttt... This tune is tight Tight TIGHT on exit. I've literally got that front right tire GLOWING red on every one of the big sweeping left handers this track has, from start to finish. The first of the final 2 turns on this track was probably the most difficult turn for me to navigate with this tune. I was pushing the boundaries of stability trying to keep this car on the track, and let me tell you, about 50% of the time, I failed. I had 1, 2 sometimes all 4 tires flying through the grass, begging to make it back onto the asphalt in time to set up for the last and final turn, so I can breathe a sigh of relief at the start/finish line!

Although, I must praise you on the stiffness of the car for the other 80% of the track. The braking ability is far more controlled than the softer set ups, the comfort level is 10 times higher and as you can see, the consistency is ever present. The car was very responsive and I liked that. It's just too damn tight coming off those corners, making me scrape my way to every last tenth off my lap time.

Okay, settle down, back to business. Let's put the Tharain set up back on and hit the track 1 final time before crashing... Real life crashing, I'm tired! The process repeats itself where Tharain starts out with a decent time and each lap I find myself cutting tenths off, but unfortunately Tharains quick laps started at an 8.9 and proceeded to plateau at a 1:07.884. Due to the higher brake balance and slightly free-er set up, the Tharain tune actually jumps ahead of Avids in the first 3 corners. It's once you find yourself making the quick transitions from left to right turns, where the stiffer set up starts to take stride. From here on chasing the Avid Ghost you can quickly see why it's faster; Although Avid's set up is all around tighter, doing so allows the car to avoid the large offset imbalance caused by the 'nasty habit'. Where Tharain and Wienish tunes are losing traction into the corner with even the slightest slides, Avids car is biting forward. You can see this clear as day when watching the ghost and my car enter the corner. So while Avid is taking advantage of that traction, they in turn had to sacrifice corner exit ability. In this case it seems to have paid off for them, but Tharain still manages to break the 7 brackets, which is fast by all means.

Story time is over kids!
Goodnight
 
Always loved your reviews which saved me much time picking the better setup from the numerous tunes on-site.

I'm wondering whether you can also do a review for the NSX Type R. There are simply so many of them out here; while I've been using LDP's tune with no complaints at all, I'd be very interested to see which one is exactly the fastest.

Reminds me of the Elise 111R - I was using another garage's tune until your review proved that Vengence's one was the fastest and most stable. I can now say that I concur with your view entirely!
 
Always loved your reviews which saved me much time picking the better setup from the numerous tunes on-site.

I'm wondering whether you can also do a review for the NSX Type R. There are simply so many of them out here; while I've been using LDP's tune with no complaints at all, I'd be very interested to see which one is exactly the fastest.

Reminds me of the Elise 111R - I was using another garage's tune until your review proved that Vengence's one was the fastest and most stable. I can now say that I concur with your view entirely!

You might be in luck. Currently is appears as if the NSX Type R '02 is going to win the monthly poll for Tuner Garage Battle. This would mean I'll actually have 12 reviews coming out by the end of February for this specific car. The only catch is, I won't know who's is who's until after I've driven all of them, leaving me to play a matching game at the end of it. Either way, I'll be sure to add the NSX to my list. I'll have to keep an eye out at the UCD.
 
Always loved your reviews which saved me much time picking the better setup from the numerous tunes on-site.

I'm wondering whether you can also do a review for the NSX Type R. There are simply so many of them out here; while I've been using LDP's tune with no complaints at all, I'd be very interested to see which one is exactly the fastest.

Reminds me of the Elise 111R - I was using another garage's tune until your review proved that Vengence's one was the fastest and most stable. I can now say that I concur with your view entirely!

Yey! Go me! lol
 
Excellent, unbiased reviews, Adrenaline! This will always be my last stop after checking garages and individual tunes.

Your detailed explanations in the reviews and what might be changed to suit an individual's certain style or feel makes this a "bookmarked" thread.

Taking into consideration the quality of the ride, as well as lap time is appreciated...while explaining what one might do to change the setup to a head-banging ride..:nervous:....which is a good thing sometimes. :)

Thanks for a daily forum read.
 
I was wondering if you could compare my lotus elise 111r RM tune against the others?

So... I tossed on the Deutsch Rennsport tune and managed to run a 1:07.991. 4 tenths quicker than my previous best. I put a lot of laps on the 111r at Deep forest, so immediately when I saw a large improvement such as we did here, I assume something is wrong. Because I doubt I magically got better :P I took a look around and came to find that previously all reviews were written, as admitted in the posts, without a custom LSD.

So to be fair to all tunes submitted I decided to re-test all 7 tunes I've been presented with for this car. I was quite impressed with the large improvements made. The new rankings are as follows:

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)
NMRacing - 1:06.919

(V1) / (V2) Precision Motorsports made an update to their tune at some point between my initial review and this updated review. Oddly enough, I found the original tune to be 3 tenths quicker.
RKM's tune was based on Sport Tires, but this test was done on Racing Tires.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the review bro, it should be noted that the car was set up for the nürburgring norschleife and not for a short technical track I suggest just taking it out for a spin on the norschleife against a stiffer tune, it should explain my choice of spring rate and downforce distribution, especially during the Section immediately following hatzenbach where it is important to have a bit looser tail for transition. Following your review I've been prompted to create a short track version of the vehicle as that's what I'm assuming the others where using.
 
Just curious about your driving setup, are you using a wheel? Which one, manual shifting I assume? That would be a nice bit of information to put in first post as a frame for reference on your lap times as trying the same tunes I might be a second or two off with a pad.

I also notice a lot of these tested tunes for the Lotus 111R RM use a rather conservative acceleration in LSD, jack that thing up to 47-50 and retest with each and you might find they run another .5 second faster on deep forest.

All tunes tested with the same tires, tranny and aero settings.

While the first two conditions may set an equal playing field for testing suspension quality, I would disagree with the last. Some tuners may target a specific aerodynamic ratio of F:R downforce when setting up the suspension, altering the aero ratio may degrade their tune.
 
Last edited:
Just curious about your driving setup, are you using a wheel? Which one, manual shifting I assume? That would be a nice bit of information to put in first post as a frame for reference on your lap times as trying the same tunes I might be a second or two off with a pad.

I also notice a lot of these tested tunes for the Lotus 111R RM use a rather conservative acceleration in LSD, jack that thing up to 47-50 and retest with each and you might find they run another .5 second faster on deep forest.



While the first two conditions may set an equal playing field for testing suspension quality, I would disagree with the last. Some tuners may target a specific aerodynamic ratio of F:R downforce when setting up the suspension, altering the aero ratio may degrade their tune.

I use a DFGT and automatic shifting. I've been meaning ot add this to the OP with a small explanation of my driving style.

As for LSD that's something I fine tune in an online lobby, so for my offline reviews I leave them as is, unless I feel it's masking the cars ability. For example I'll use a generic LSD setting and run laps seconds quicker than I could with the old LSD on the same suspension. Oddly enough, I felt the quickest tune (anon) had the most glaring LSD settings, where I felt it was missing a LOT of forward bite on exit.

Consistent Aero is something I consider track specific for my tunes. On a small technical track like Deep Forest, I feel that not using max, or very close to it, is an immediate disadvantage, nearly removing any possibility for that tune to run the best lap. This is just personal opinion, but it's also why I specifically mention it as a disclaimer. Actually, nothing proves this more than the anon tune. As written that tune used very low aero and the best lap was 1:09.9xx Maxing the aero removed over 2 and a half seconds from the best lap time, and allowed it to become the fastest of all tunes tested.
I feel that a weaker tune, with higher downforce, can easily beat a better tune that neglected downforce. At least in regards to Deep Forest.
 
You don't think the two have a complementary nature? A softer tune has more grip and needs less aero for the same results, a harder tune has less grip and needs more aero for the same results. You can argue about which is better, but I would still test with the aero specification from the tuner if you want to judge car handling ability and ride quality over lap time as the performance metric.
 
I would still test with the aero specification from the tuner if you want to judge car handling ability and ride quality over lap time as the performance metric.

I did!
All reviews are based on the 'as written' tune.
Lap time comparisons are based on the standards I feel best suited to be the fastest possible and that will be used online.
 
Back