- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
The only saving grace is I can fine tune tire grip level to aid in making replica, when I need a tire between Comfort Medium and Soft, I use Comfort Soft with some camber 
Camber Theory
- Thread starter PsuPepperoni
- 589 comments
- 61,541 views
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
If you are not looking for all out pace then its fine to use, really changes the driving experience and can totally transform a car. Your FITT street spec Imprezza is a perfect example, feels amazing and totally different to drive but just can't match the pace of 0.0 cars no matter what you do with itThe only saving grace is I can fine tune tire grip level to aid in making replica, when I need a tire between Comfort Medium and Soft, I use Comfort Soft with some camber
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
Yeah, I leave that to the driver who uses my tune
I often put a note on my replica/tune post, to use zero camber for max grip if preferred As for the current FITT shootout Sti vs Evo, my entry are for feedback gathering purpose only, the tune do not differ much from the replica it was based on, fastest lap time is not the goal
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
Its not far off the pace but no matter how good a lap felt it was always down on time, I expect it will do well on driver score though.Yeah, I leave that to the driver who uses my tune
- 451
I'm glad to see you have you come round to the general consensus on camber, you are after all the keeper of the GT6 General Tuning Guide. 👍
There are some really nice tunes around here that include camber but when it comes to racing, the first thing to do is remove it.
However, it should also be noted that some cars can be faster with the use of camber. It's not uncommon to apply a small amount to rear of FF cars (as the OP does) to get them to turn faster.
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
True enough, can work for big power 4wd cars as well at the rear to stop them understeering as much.
The thing that was throwing me was the way camber works so well at what it does in terms of balance but there was never an actual grip improvement. My thinking was that if it is working in some form then there must be a way to make it work completely and we haven't found the right mix of settings yet, unfortunately it just never came together and there was never even a hint of grip improvement. If it existed, someone would have stumbled across it by now.
I think it is half working, the way it adjust balance is spotless, unfortunately the grip multiplier side of the programming is just not functioning or working backwards.
I would never have changed the tuning guide unless I came across hard evidence of performance gains anyway, I cannot recommend something unless I truly believe it. The stuff written there on camber is true enough for reference purposes but the "Not Working" caveat will stay until exploitable gains are evident and understood.
- 368
- Taiwan
I have to agree 0 camber gives the most grip.
Well, maybe it's because I've been mostly dealing with 'difficult' cars, so the additional tuning factor brought by camber is often beneficial.
I tried more different cars last night and found the following:
1. On cars with balance problem, camber is indeed doing good things to the overal performance. Or I should say, it's providing another factor for approaching an overall better tune.
2. For cars already well-balanced, it's hard to gain improvement by camber alone. Small angle setting does little harm, but no help, either. And the loss of grip becomes obvious when the angle gets larger than a certain point. So there's no net beneficial in this case.
There might be a debate that the balance problem can be tuned by other factors, so why not just leave camber alone? Maybe, but not for all. We'd hit the limit of effective adjustments on some difficult cars if camber is ruled out.
For example, some difficult MR cars are too grippy at the front, so the rear end would be relatively too slippery. And the rear tires are already wearing faster, so it's impractical to use softer compound. Adjustments of spring rate/damping/ABR ... etc can hit their limits of effectiveness. Now camber is handy to alter the balance, thus beneficial to overall drivablity and performance.
As to the handling feel, what I feel is quite different -- 0 camber usually bites harder at the moment of turn-in, while some camber does it softer and more rounded. Into the steady state of the curve, the difference would be less (if the cambers are kept small enough).
My 2c.
Well, maybe it's because I've been mostly dealing with 'difficult' cars, so the additional tuning factor brought by camber is often beneficial.
I tried more different cars last night and found the following:
1. On cars with balance problem, camber is indeed doing good things to the overal performance. Or I should say, it's providing another factor for approaching an overall better tune.
2. For cars already well-balanced, it's hard to gain improvement by camber alone. Small angle setting does little harm, but no help, either. And the loss of grip becomes obvious when the angle gets larger than a certain point. So there's no net beneficial in this case.
There might be a debate that the balance problem can be tuned by other factors, so why not just leave camber alone? Maybe, but not for all. We'd hit the limit of effective adjustments on some difficult cars if camber is ruled out.
For example, some difficult MR cars are too grippy at the front, so the rear end would be relatively too slippery. And the rear tires are already wearing faster, so it's impractical to use softer compound. Adjustments of spring rate/damping/ABR ... etc can hit their limits of effectiveness. Now camber is handy to alter the balance, thus beneficial to overall drivablity and performance.
As to the handling feel, what I feel is quite different -- 0 camber usually bites harder at the moment of turn-in, while some camber does it softer and more rounded. Into the steady state of the curve, the difference would be less (if the cambers are kept small enough).
My 2c.
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
Agreed, I wouldn't use camber if I was going for ultimate lap time and cornering pace but to refine the feel of a car and make it more suited to my driving style I might use small amounts.
I'm not a fan of cars that dart into corners (usually MR) so I might put a little bit of camber on to make the initial turn in less dramatic and easier for me to work with. A driver who preferred the instant response would certainly be faster at 0.0 but personally my times would be more consistent if I was happy with the balance.
I also use it on drift cars to make transitioning between corners smoother and less likely for the front wheels to dig in and spin out, having slightly reduced grip in this scenario is definitely a positive because ultimate lateral grip is not the main aim.
I'm not a fan of cars that dart into corners (usually MR) so I might put a little bit of camber on to make the initial turn in less dramatic and easier for me to work with. A driver who preferred the instant response would certainly be faster at 0.0 but personally my times would be more consistent if I was happy with the balance.
I also use it on drift cars to make transitioning between corners smoother and less likely for the front wheels to dig in and spin out, having slightly reduced grip in this scenario is definitely a positive because ultimate lateral grip is not the main aim.
Thorin Cain
Premium
- 2,298
- Glasgow
- THORIN-RAYVEN
It's pretty evident that the grip levels will never be has high as a 0/0 setting. But none the less, there are some positive points to using it as you guys have said. Chiefly among which is the feel of the car. If the driver is more comfortable, they will be more likely to get the best out of the car. Through my testing the main thing I noticed above all, was the stability I had gained in the corners, less body-roll coupled with better rotation. As well as what I suppose is a more linear grip/slip curve.
The main reason I think I have found more use for it is the fact I tune for the "Super unrealistic ultra-grippy" Racing Soft tyres, and I don't think for a second the camber is giving me more grip. It's pretty obvious that I am using it to allow the tyres to slip more but more importantly it is allowing me to manage the grip a lot better than I can with any of the other settings, it's just that simple.
For me, it takes away that all or nothing feeling I get with the grip from the tyres and allows me to balance the car better with the other settings. Yes, this may result in a slower "ultimate" lap-time but it does allow me to use different lines to achieve consistent times which are not that much slower (And in some cases quicker because I feel more confident to attack certain corners which with 0/0 setting I just couldn't). This is a pretty important point for me when it comes to racing. After all, there are going to be times that you can't use the line you want in a corner because some other inconsiderate driver put his car there, so there goes your fastest lap. But remember, it's not always the fastest car that win's the race.
It's a personal preference thing I suppose. If it's the fastest lap you are looking for then yes! You've got a far better chance of finding it using 0/0 camber. But if you are looking for a nicely balanced, fast and predictable car which will put a smile on your face and win you some races, try using it. It's made my GT experience a lot more fun recently.
The main reason I think I have found more use for it is the fact I tune for the "Super unrealistic ultra-grippy" Racing Soft tyres, and I don't think for a second the camber is giving me more grip. It's pretty obvious that I am using it to allow the tyres to slip more but more importantly it is allowing me to manage the grip a lot better than I can with any of the other settings, it's just that simple.
For me, it takes away that all or nothing feeling I get with the grip from the tyres and allows me to balance the car better with the other settings. Yes, this may result in a slower "ultimate" lap-time but it does allow me to use different lines to achieve consistent times which are not that much slower (And in some cases quicker because I feel more confident to attack certain corners which with 0/0 setting I just couldn't). This is a pretty important point for me when it comes to racing. After all, there are going to be times that you can't use the line you want in a corner because some other inconsiderate driver put his car there, so there goes your fastest lap. But remember, it's not always the fastest car that win's the race.
It's a personal preference thing I suppose. If it's the fastest lap you are looking for then yes! You've got a far better chance of finding it using 0/0 camber. But if you are looking for a nicely balanced, fast and predictable car which will put a smile on your face and win you some races, try using it. It's made my GT experience a lot more fun recently.
- 368
- Taiwan
I've done some more tests with camber.
I was using the F3 car at Tsukuba, the tune is all there, the lap times are there and there is a little graph there also. The laps were all done straight out, all 1st lap, all consecutively. I was hoping to see a more clear cut trend with camber and lap times.
Anyway, the lowest lap times are generally with camber 1.0 - 2.0, lap time deteriorates as camber gets above 2.4, lap times are really very close with camber anywhere from 0 to 2.4.
A second test I did was with samber van to see if I could get a setup that would not roll over with 0 camber but would with camber added. Camber assisted the samber van to roll. Camber added grip, 0 camber myth busted again. Very easy test to repeat for anyone that wants to confirm this for themselves. Very definitive result.
I was using the F3 car at Tsukuba, the tune is all there, the lap times are there and there is a little graph there also. The laps were all done straight out, all 1st lap, all consecutively. I was hoping to see a more clear cut trend with camber and lap times.
Anyway, the lowest lap times are generally with camber 1.0 - 2.0, lap time deteriorates as camber gets above 2.4, lap times are really very close with camber anywhere from 0 to 2.4.
A second test I did was with samber van to see if I could get a setup that would not roll over with 0 camber but would with camber added. Camber assisted the samber van to roll. Camber added grip, 0 camber myth busted again. Very easy test to repeat for anyone that wants to confirm this for themselves. Very definitive result.
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
Some very thorough testing there but I'm failing to see any patterns or definitive results? The time difference is small enough to be coincidental and I'm not seeing any kind of discernible trend emerging.I've done some more tests with camber.
I was using the F3 car at Tsukuba, the tune is all there, the lap times are there and there is a little graph there also. The laps were all done straight out, all 1st lap, all consecutively. I was hoping to see a more clear cut trend with camber and lap times.
Anyway, the lowest lap times are generally with camber 1.0 - 2.0, lap time deteriorates as camber gets above 2.4, lap times are really very close with camber anywhere from 0 to 2.4.
A second test I did was with samber van to see if I could get a setup that would not roll over with 0 camber but would with camber added. Camber assisted the samber van to roll. Camber added grip, 0 camber myth busted again. Very easy test to repeat for anyone that wants to confirm this for themselves. Very definitive result.
Please explain more thoroughly what you think you are seeing here? I'm not looking to trash your results, just not sure what I'm looking at
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
The most definitive thing is, with zero camber at the rear, add camber at the front, even 0.5, the car will have increased tendency to understeer as the front tire loses grip, and vice versa with zero camber front and more camber at the rear, even 0.5 will make the rear easily break loose ( less grip ) - very noticeable on cars like F40, Stratos. This is how I create BOP for GT4 cars replica I 'm currently working on, a variety of cars built for SS tires and above, I have set a certain lap time range to replicate based on best lap IRL during GT4 European Championship. I have to add camber front and rear to REDUCE grip so I can lower cornering speed - higher lap time, even 0.5 camber affect grip and noticeable. I tested them on a track I'm familiar with and can run consistently again and again.
I have done over 45000km driving in GT6, most of them tuning and testing replicas ( GT3, GT4 cars, wangan midnight and real life tuner car ). I spent 9000+km alone at Tsukuba, more than 5000km at Bathurst, and camber does not work as it should, if it worked, I wouldn't have to make a note on my tune/replica to get more grip by using zero camber, anyone who drove my replica will realize instantly the moment they use zero camber, more added grip is the result.
I have done over 45000km driving in GT6, most of them tuning and testing replicas ( GT3, GT4 cars, wangan midnight and real life tuner car ). I spent 9000+km alone at Tsukuba, more than 5000km at Bathurst, and camber does not work as it should, if it worked, I wouldn't have to make a note on my tune/replica to get more grip by using zero camber, anyone who drove my replica will realize instantly the moment they use zero camber, more added grip is the result.
Last edited:
332i
(Banned)
- 855
- Morocco
- yadeegson
Camber should affect horizontal stability far more than it affects breaking grip, unless it is something stupid, like 3.5* +. Then you're going to throw both out. Adding or running x amount camber in real life ≠ more grip. Reducing camber can, though. To an extent of course. Unless you're already running optimally.
Look at the contact patch of a tire at 3.5*, then look at one at 1.5 or 2*. It depends on the entire suspension. You don't just aimlessly add or use camber and expect it to up traction. Running mor camber DOES decrease traction in real life. It increase stability through turns, otherwise, you're removing contact patch and pressure. Think about it.
Camber works in the game. The problem is the scaling is off. That is for sure, but it is not 100% broken. It does provide stability to an extent with the right suspension settings through a turn.
I look at what most tuners are doing and no kidding camber makes your setups lose grip. A lot of tuners set their sway bars higher than setting 3, damper settings at 5 or higher, lower the car and run springs settings too high. What are you trying to create? A flat plane on wheels? And the ridiculous toe settings. If you're running anything outside of + or - .05 up front, start over. The rear is too dependent on nose dive, rear suspension travel, diff and camber settings. Seems like the goal is zero body roll. If you have any body roll, 0 camber is not advantageous.
I'm sure a lot of people won't like/will disagree with that, but it works for me and my setups. Just a very limited amount, that's all.
Same thing with the diffs. Something is wrong in your tune, if you can't run at least 30% lock and 15-20 initial torque. You're front end is not tight enough and if increased lock is creating oversteer, something is wrong in your formula for pairing up your rear springs, ride height, camber toe and compression settings.
Look at the contact patch of a tire at 3.5*, then look at one at 1.5 or 2*. It depends on the entire suspension. You don't just aimlessly add or use camber and expect it to up traction. Running mor camber DOES decrease traction in real life. It increase stability through turns, otherwise, you're removing contact patch and pressure. Think about it.
Camber works in the game. The problem is the scaling is off. That is for sure, but it is not 100% broken. It does provide stability to an extent with the right suspension settings through a turn.
I look at what most tuners are doing and no kidding camber makes your setups lose grip. A lot of tuners set their sway bars higher than setting 3, damper settings at 5 or higher, lower the car and run springs settings too high. What are you trying to create? A flat plane on wheels? And the ridiculous toe settings. If you're running anything outside of + or - .05 up front, start over. The rear is too dependent on nose dive, rear suspension travel, diff and camber settings. Seems like the goal is zero body roll. If you have any body roll, 0 camber is not advantageous.
I'm sure a lot of people won't like/will disagree with that, but it works for me and my setups. Just a very limited amount, that's all.
Same thing with the diffs. Something is wrong in your tune, if you can't run at least 30% lock and 15-20 initial torque. You're front end is not tight enough and if increased lock is creating oversteer, something is wrong in your formula for pairing up your rear springs, ride height, camber toe and compression settings.
Last edited:
Thorin Cain
Premium
- 2,298
- Glasgow
- THORIN-RAYVEN
This is not all that de-similar to the results I found doing the tests with the camber and wheel sizes on my F430. I didn't find any real difference in lap time between those runs either. Looking at your results it's fair to say that you ran a 55.5 with a plus or minus 0.4 seconds for the best part. But the main differences were all about the feel of the car rather than any decrease or increase in lap times. In some cases braking was better in straight lines but trail braking was an issue but on others the opposite was true. And mid-corner it always felt better with camber.I've done some more tests with camber.
I was using the F3 car at Tsukuba, the tune is all there, the lap times are there and there is a little graph there also. The laps were all done straight out, all 1st lap, all consecutively. I was hoping to see a more clear cut trend with camber and lap times.
Anyway, the lowest lap times are generally with camber 1.0 - 2.0, lap time deteriorates as camber gets above 2.4, lap times are really very close with camber anywhere from 0 to 2.4.
A second test I did was with samber van to see if I could get a setup that would not roll over with 0 camber but would with camber added. Camber assisted the samber van to roll. Camber added grip, 0 camber myth busted again. Very easy test to repeat for anyone that wants to confirm this for themselves. Very definitive result.
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
Don't forget the F430 has built in aero that works like flat floor 150/200 I think, this adds grip even on any speed above standing still, similar to flat floor. I have to run high camber ( same alignment used on F430 Scud in real life for club racing on factory tire ) to get slower to replicate F430 Scud real life lap at Spa, 2:40s on CS tire, and I can still beat it by almost a second easily
I double checked with the owner who track his F430 Scud, and camber generally works best at front close to 3.0 or a bit more and rear at least 2.0 - on stock suspension and tire. With uprated springs and damper + sticky tire, some even run 3.0+ front and 2.4+ rear.
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
I've noticed that camber seems to make a car feel lighter and rotate more easily at low speeds but loses masses of grip in mid - high speed corners.
Now, by my understanding these characteristics would be more consistent with the effects of adding positive camber. My thinking is that visually you are adding negative camber but the physics engine thinks that you are adding positive. Only seems to affect the variable camber as listed in the suspension options (you select -1.2, it appears in sum as +1.2), when the suspension is under compression and visually there is negative camber being added it is not reading this as positive camber increase (if -1.2 is achieved under compression, it appears in sum as -1.2).
Now, by my understanding these characteristics would be more consistent with the effects of adding positive camber. My thinking is that visually you are adding negative camber but the physics engine thinks that you are adding positive. Only seems to affect the variable camber as listed in the suspension options (you select -1.2, it appears in sum as +1.2), when the suspension is under compression and visually there is negative camber being added it is not reading this as positive camber increase (if -1.2 is achieved under compression, it appears in sum as -1.2).
Thorin Cain
Premium
- 2,298
- Glasgow
- THORIN-RAYVEN
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
I don't think the physics works like that, you generally have to launch your car over a curb to get it to roll, it won't do it via weight transfer. It would be easy to check if we could add positive camber and started seeing performance gains
It's not necessarily supposed to illustrate a point or support an opinion, just to provide a set of data from testing camber, but like you said, the time difference is small enough to be coincidental, which is exactly the point I made earlier in the thread.
Consider it a challenge for someone to provide some good evidence for 0 camber providing max grip, because so far in 11 pages of thread, there hasn't been any.
This is what I was taking about. Take a samba bus, add all horsepower parts(but fit mid turbo), fit flywheel, LSD (10,25,25), full suspension, racing medium tyres.
set roll bars and shocks all at 1, set camber to 0 and ride height to max.
Drive it and it should roll easily, lower ride height until it is very difficult to roll, add negative camber... easy to roll again.
Last edited:
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
@MrGrado
I think I was a little thrown by this statement -"Camber added grip, 0 camber myth busted again. Very easy test to repeat for anyone that wants to confirm this for themselves. Very definitive result.".
I'm still utterly baffled by what point you are trying to make?
Evidence for 0.0 providing the best grip comes in the form of all cars using camber being faster when set to 0.0. This extra track performance is gained because the cars can maintain a higher cornering speed (a direct result of grip).
What are you suggesting the camber is doing to the Samba bus? Sounds like it confirms my positive camber idea perhaps
I think I was a little thrown by this statement -"Camber added grip, 0 camber myth busted again. Very easy test to repeat for anyone that wants to confirm this for themselves. Very definitive result.".
I'm still utterly baffled by what point you are trying to make?
Evidence for 0.0 providing the best grip comes in the form of all cars using camber being faster when set to 0.0. This extra track performance is gained because the cars can maintain a higher cornering speed (a direct result of grip).
What are you suggesting the camber is doing to the Samba bus? Sounds like it confirms my positive camber idea perhaps
Thorin Cain
Premium
- 2,298
- Glasgow
- THORIN-RAYVEN
Fair enough, I just wondered is all. It would be really easy to check if that was the case, but I don't think it is a case of simply being backwards, but it's always possible I suppose. I can go along with it being a scaling issue of sorts. There's still more to learn here I feel and some more tests still to be done!....speaking of which
A couple of good points there MrGrado, especially your second paragraph. I have been of that same mind for a while now and I don't think I'm the only one. It is easy to say this and that but it is an entirely different thing to be able to back it up. So far all the data I have seen supports only one conclusion. Using camber makes the car feel/behave differently and there is no real big difference one way or the other on laptimes.
Guys, really, stop typing so darn fast
Some of us are half blind and this takes a bit longer.I think he was suggesting that there was an increase in grip which in turn lead to higher G-Forces acting on the bus therefor rolling it.
Edit: And yes, I thought that about the positive camber idea when I saw it too. I'm going to try something similar with a car which is not as susceptible to rolling later when I get to my PS. It is something worth exploring.
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
Maybe those who doubt about camber should be testers at current FITT Sti vs Evo
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
The grip increase gained by negative camber (if it was working correctly) wouldn't be sufficient to make a bus roll at minimum ride height because of the increased overall width (if the bottom of the tyre is sticking out an inch, your car is effectively 2 inches wider eg. track width 42"/body width 40" - narrower at top than base = more stable). If on the other hand it was narrowing the width then you would be far more likely to roll (eg. track width 38"/body width 40" - wider at the top than it is at the bottom = falling over)
Thorin Cain
Premium
- 2,298
- Glasgow
- THORIN-RAYVEN
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
Yeah I know, I was just filling out the explanation for the sake of others.
I think one of the reasons that most cars are so hard to roll normally is because of the inclusion of oddly proportioned vehicles such as the Samba Bus, the physics engine has to work with all vehicles equally and therefore not make tall, slab sided, narrow wheelbase vehicles dangerously unstable.
- 3,784
- London, Ontario
- voodoovaj
I have found a use!!!
I put 0.1 on the rear of the 97T to make the turn arc a little tighter. I tried it on my Z06 as well with good results. It seems like the only application is when you want to turn the grip down on one end or the other for better balance.
I put 0.1 on the rear of the 97T to make the turn arc a little tighter. I tried it on my Z06 as well with good results. It seems like the only application is when you want to turn the grip down on one end or the other for better balance.
- 11,207
- Adrian, Mich.
- cargorat323
- CargoRatt
Camber has supposedly been fixed in this update. 5am here and just woke up so haven't had a chance to test things yet. If I can get to it, I'll do some testing otherwise I'll keep checking back here to see if anyone else has come up with anything regarding this.
Taken from the update log:
The v1.09 update also brings the usual raft of detail and driving physics alterations:
Adjustments to the physics simulation model
The physics simulation model of “Gran Turismo 6” has been updated with the following changes:
Taken from the update log:
The v1.09 update also brings the usual raft of detail and driving physics alterations:
Adjustments to the physics simulation model
The physics simulation model of “Gran Turismo 6” has been updated with the following changes:
- The dynamics of the car on surfaces with cornerstones and bumps have been improved
- The effect of the tyre geometry has been changed (mainly for the “Camber Angle” option)
- The handling of some rear heavy cars has been improved;
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
Fantastic, thanks for the heads up 👍
- 4,016
- New Jersey
- crash27wwjd
Someone please play around and check camber, @Ridox2JZGTE you have plenty of tunes that use it, is there really a difference or not?
