Camber Theory

[Voodoovaj]

Your test is flawwed you dont add equal camb front and rear run laps and post irrelevant results, bro i think you lead on like you spend time at a track racing but I suspect more spectating...

Actually, his test is on the money considering this is a simulation rather than reality. Also, given that pretty much everyone is getting the same results, it's pretty valid.

As you might be able to tell from my avatar, I approach all this tuning stuff from a motorcycle perspective. I think it works because it's a simpler suspension than what you find in cars (and FAR less varied).

 

[Voodoovaj]

Most open wheel type race cars are running extremely soft tire compounds. Something which is rarely mentioned in most posts. More conclusive results would include a vehicle run with and without camber and let's say with Sports Hard versus Racing Soft compounds.

I agree, everyone should go to my site, use the wizard for camber settings, and then report back :tup:

 

[Marqus]

What about cars that have large amounts of negative camber BEFORE tuning?
i.e., the Mazda 787
Front: 2.0
Rear: 3.0
Would it be better to lower the camber to 0 or leave it be?

 

[Bo]

What about cars that have large amounts of negative camber BEFORE tuning?
i.e., the Mazda 787
Front: 2.0
Rear: 3.0
Would it be better to lower the camber or leave it be?

The GT3 cars have huge levels of camber stock, but they handle quite badly. I took the SLS to 0.5 degrees both ends and it helped hugely.

 

[Voodoovaj]

What about cars that have large amounts of negative camber BEFORE tuning?
i.e., the Mazda 787
Front: 2.0
Rear: 3.0
Would it be better to lower the camber to 0 or leave it be?

0 is definitely better in that case.

 

[sumbrownkid]

The GT3 cars have huge levels of camber stock, but they handle quite badly. I took the SLS to 0.5 degrees both ends and it helped hugely.

Same with the GT-R. Understeers like a refrigerator on a rubber mat. Then made the camber 0.0 and it's much more tolerable. Thanks to Ridox though for helping me with this car.

The only exception is the R8 Ultra LMS where camber seemingly gives it more stability which is boggling to me.

 

[Bo]

GTR GT3 has front end bite, then really tightens up. It's a weird feeling it gives you. The R8 LMS is just messed up in every way, so i'm not really surprised it differs from the rest in some way

 

[donpost]

Just done some testing. Took a car to Willow Springs short and measured what speed I could hold going around the skid pan at a variety of camber angles. Results:

Camber | Speed
0.0 | 47.5
1.0 | 47.0
2.0 | 46.5
5.0 | 45.0
10.0 | 44.0
​

That tallies with what everyone has been saying - it's still broken.

​

 

[FussyFez]

It's interesting that it causes a drop in grip. Rather than just not doing anything at all.

So it's not broken... It's backwards?

PD are great at this sort of thing.

To be fair, it should be obvious to any of their own staff /testers? So we should see it fixed at some point.

If there is no fix by the time we get the chance to ask some more questions to PD, this should be question number one.

"Are you aware of the fact that camber does not work as it should, and is there going to be a fix?"

Roll on 1.05

(am I the first to mention 1.05? )

 

[Geoff]

Just done some testing. Took a car to Willow Springs short and measured what speed I could hold going around the skid pan at a variety of camber angles. Results:

Camber | Speed
0.0 | 47.5
1.0 | 47.0
2.0 | 46.5
5.0 | 45.0
10.0 | 44.0
​

That tallies with what everyone has been saying - it's still broken.

​

'nuff said 👍 !

It's interesting that it causes a drop in grip. Rather than just not doing anything at all.

So it's not broken... It's backwards?

PD are great at this sort of thing.

To be fair, it should be obvious to any of their own staff /testers? So we should see it fixed at some point.

If there is no fix by the time we get the chance to ask some more questions to PD, this should be question number one.

"Are you aware of the fact that camber does not work as it should, and is there going to be a fix?"

Roll on 1.05

(am I the first to mention 1.05? )

Exactly what i was thinking! are they all 7 years old or what ??? don't they get it in the 1st corner they take?

 

[bread82]

I think this camber problem boils down to one of two things:

1) a simple numerical error, someone has put a wrong function in somewhere - this should be easy to fix. I'm betting against this since I expect that PD would have solved this by now.

2) the suspension geometry model lacks detail, or has not been fully coded/tested yet, so they're currently unable to model proper camber changes during suspension movement -this would depend on specific component dimensions but also more generally on suspension type (live axle, double wishbone etc). Thus they've stuck the current camber behaviour in as a temporary placeholder. This could also be linked to the fact that the default alignment settings (for the vast majority of cars) are camber 0/0? - I'm betting on this as I think GT6 was rushed into release for business reasons and what we have at the moment is more of a "prologue". Fingers crossed for the real deal "spec 2.0" down the line.

What is puzzling about 2) is that GT5 seemed to model some sort of sensible camber behaviour.... perhaps they've done such a big rewrite of the physics model that they couldn't just stick the GT5 camber model in temporarily?

I know this is very unlikely from PD, but it would really help the confusion/anxiety/potential placebo on many of these physics issues if they at least put something in the changelog "advanced brake model implemented for 1.04". Or even "hey guys we know the camber is wrong, we're working on it". Now I'm dreaming.

Lol, they could have at least made something like 1.0 deg the best camber value, or varied it a bit with tyre type - this would at least have kept us quiet for a couple more weeks while people hunted for the magic numbers! Having anything over zero as worse grip does show up rather blatantly.

 

[the_saint8]

Just done some testing. Took a car to Willow Springs short and measured what speed I could hold going around the skid pan at a variety of camber angles. Results:

Camber | Speed
0.0 | 47.5
1.0 | 47.0
2.0 | 46.5
5.0 | 45.0
10.0 | 44.0
​

That tallies with what everyone has been saying - it's still broken.

​

So these numbers are with camber settings front and back? What if the front suspension on the "generic" GT6 model is castered and the rear is not? Took a car to Willow Springs? FR configuration? Weight distritrubtion? Too many variables to say it's "broken".

 

[GTPMcBride]

I have done many laps in the KTM @Eiger, with multple Setups an each feeling resonably good, my TRL buddy who is 1st when i last checked sent me his setup before the update 1.04, i hadnt the time to test before the update, when i did the car was extremely difficult to drive, i know fast cars arent easy so i kept trying an it was just crazy, the entrance to corner was good, using the brake to get that little slip angle with slight counter an power out was nearly impossible on the first sector, the car feels like SRF wasnt on an driving on a less grip tyre because with little slip it would keep sliding an the tyres went red instantly, i asked Samurai to test an he agree's that the car he went fastest in has become undriveable or extremely difficult, his reply was very bad update

 

[DJay Silver]

Ok! So everyone has reached the conclusion that camber should grip more at 0.00! What about toe angle? Should that be at 0 as well? Why does GT always add +0.20 to the rear?

 

[PsuPepperoni]

Ok! So everyone has reached the conclusion that camber should grip more at 0.00! What about toe angle? Should that be at 0 as well? Why does GT always add +0.20 to the rear?

Good toe settings are different based on your application. Someone else could explain toe effects and their specific causes better than I can, but the in-game descriptions are a pretty good start.

 

[ADR_PILOFINO]

Ok! So everyone has reached the conclusion that camber should grip more at 0.00! What about toe angle? Should that be at 0 as well? Why does GT always add +0.20 to the rear?

they always set the rear toe angle stock at 0.20 so it is somewhat easy for anyone to get in a car and just drive it the same as the LSD 10 40 20 they are just general settings applied to almost all the cars

 

[Bo]

Ok! So everyone has reached the conclusion that camber should grip more at 0.00! What about toe angle? Should that be at 0 as well? Why does GT always add +0.20 to the rear?

Every car should have toe in. The only way to make Group C/LMP cars behave in the game is to give it the harder front and softer rear spring setup and add huge amounts of toe in. Effectively, toe in increases stability at the expense of balanced handling, i.e understeer. With the right setup this can be completely dialled out with the diff and spring ratios.

 

[BlueShift]

"Are you aware of the fact that camber does not work as it should, and is there going to be a fix?"

Somebody should tweet Kaz. I mean somebody.

 

[BlueShift]

Every car should have toe in.

No. Not only the 2CV, but my "about to be released" GT-R black, my ZZII, my TT-R, my LFA Nür, my GT350 for the FITT challenge and my C3 convertible for the FITT challenge doesn't need toe in.

The only way to make Group C/LMP cars behave in the game is to give it the harder front and softer rear spring setup and add huge amounts of toe in.

No. And no.

Effectively, toe in increases stability at the expense of balanced handling, i.e understeer.

And at huge expenses of braking in front, and accel on FF/4WD. +/- 0.03 = +5m for braking distances from 250kph to 50kph with the Zonda.

With the right setup this can be completely dialled out with the diff and spring ratios.

Not for the braking part. Not for the accel part on FF/4WD.

 

[Motor City Hami]

Ok! So everyone has reached the conclusion that camber should grip more at 0.00! What about toe angle? Should that be at 0 as well? Why does GT always add +0.20 to the rear?

From the tuning guide in my garage.

Toe Angle
- Front toe-in will increase entry turn in, but also reduces mid-corner to exit grip
- Front toe-out will increase mid-corner to exit grip, but also reduces entry turn in
- Rear toe-in will increase understeer
- Rear toe-out will increase oversteer
- Rear toe settings seem stronger, meaning lower increments of movement tend to produce
stronger results than higher increments of movement to front settings

Toe Angle - I tend to set rear toe first. Rear toe seems to have a stronger effect and front seems to be more of a fine tune. On most FR, MR and RR cars I will generally have between 0.05 and 0.25 positive toe. Some rare cars, like American Muscle, will need negative rear toe. FF and 4WD cars almost always need negative rear toe and I generally set between -0.05 and -0.35. I am looking for a good rotation around the apex of the corner. A lower number produces more rotation and a higher number provides more stability.

Then I move on to front toe. Front toe is simply used to balance the corner, to gain a similar level of turning ability at entry, through the middle and out to corner exit. Positive front toe provides more turn-in ability and negative front toe produces more front grip from mid-corner through corner exit.

 

[CyKosis1973]

Toe Angle - I tend to set rear toe first. Rear toe seems to have a stronger effect and front seems to be more of a fine tune. On most FR, MR and RR cars I will generally have between 0.05 and 0.25 positive toe. Some rare cars, like American Muscle, will need negative rear toe. FF and 4WD cars almost always need negative rear toe and I generally set between -0.05 and -0.35. I am looking for a good rotation around the apex of the corner. A lower number produces more rotation and a higher number provides more stability.

Then I move on to front toe. Front toe is simply used to balance the corner, to gain a similar level of turning ability at entry, through the middle and out to corner exit. Positive front toe provides more turn-in ability and negative front toe produces more front grip from mid-corner through corner exit.

I've a few MR cars that prefer negative rear toe, I found the same in GT5. Every other drivetrain, I usually use positive rear toe, even FWD...

{Cy}

 

[Bo]

No. Not only the 2CV, but my "about to be released" GT-R black, my ZZII, my TT-R, my LFA Nür, my GT350 for the FITT challenge and my C3 convertible for the FITT challenge doesn't need toe in.


No. And no.


And at huge expenses of braking in front, and accel on FF/4WD. +/- 0.03 = +5m for braking distances from 250kph to 50kph with the Zonda.


Not for the braking part. Not for the accel part on FF/4WD.

I like the fact you're using 1200hp cars to disprove my theory. I'm saying what works, as proven by my lap times, TT performances and online wins. And really, all cars can benefit in some way from toe in.

 

[Daisey327]

Every car should have toe in. The only way to make Group C/LMP cars behave in the game is to give it the harder front and softer rear spring setup and add huge amounts of toe in. Effectively, toe in increases stability at the expense of balanced handling, i.e understeer. With the right setup this can be completely dialled out with the diff and spring ratios.

No way, I use negative toe 95% of the time. Typically I start an out-of-the-box tune with -0.10 | +0.05 and then tweak from there. Although, this is just my tune style. Sometimes i'll end with negative rear as well just to get that extra rotation if the stability is there.

 

[Bo]

Just so we're all clear, I am referring to rear toe in here. Toe in on the front isn't going to get you very far.

 

[Daisey327]

Just so we're all clear, I am referring to rear toe in here. Toe in on the front isn't going to get you very far.

Ok no problems. But still I disagree that "all" cars need rear toe in. Toe out on the rear for many cars helps get that rotation you need, assuming your suspension and car properties can handle it. My 430 Scud works so good with toe-out for example (approx 550 to 600 pp, SS to RHs)

 

[Bo]

If you have a setup that can deal with it, fine. The only problem then is the window for a stable rotation is so narrow it throws other things way off if you get it just wrong.

 

[FussyFez]

I can agree with @Daisey273, rear toe helps a lot with cars that refuse to rotate and have exceptional rear stability.

The idea is that when you transfer weight into the outside rear wheel, you effectively are turning with the rear, similar to how a four wheel steering car steers.

That's why toe in gives stability, it causes the car to try and crab when you load the outside rear wheel.

I ran major toe out on my Focus RS on gt5 and it rotated at even the slightest hint of steering input. Probably too much.

All on the rear wheels.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

I have been driving my latest replica : TOM's ADVOX Supra RZ, I adapted real life values for the suspension and it managed to get very close to the real life lap time at Tsukuba. I prefer to stick with real life values when tuning. The car basically stock, except for coilover and corrected weight distribution + power.

TOM's ADVOX JZA80 Supra RZ 327PS

Tuned to replicate TOM's ADVOX Supra RZ
Best Motoring Tsukuba Trial - Comfort Medium​

View attachment 108382​

CAR : Toyota Supra RZ '97
Tire : Comfort Medium

Specs
Horsepower: 322 HP / 327 PS at 6000 RPM
Torque: 412.2 ft-lb at 3500 RPM
Power Limiter at : 94.4%
Weight: 1510 kg
Ballast : 167 kg
Ballast Position : 50
Weight Distribution : 53 / 47 - corrected weight distribution as in real life.
Performance Points: 46x


GT AUTO
Oil change
Wheels : +1 Inch Up - Boyd Coddington Wheels Legacy F-09
Car Paint : Deep Blue Metallic or any color.


Tuning Parts Installed :
Weight Reduction Stage 1
Fully Customizable Suspension



Suspension - TOM's ADVOX Height Adjustable Coilover + ADVOX alignment
Front, Rear

Ride Height: 105 105
Spring Rate: 7.70 6.60
Dampers (Compression): 2 3
Dampers (Extension): 6 8
Anti-Roll Bars: 2 3
Camber Angle: 0.3 1.3 ( ADVOX setup range : front 0.20-0.30, rear 1.35-1.65 )
Toe Angle: 0.04 0.19 ( ADVOX setup range : front -0.08 to 0.08, rear 0.15 to 0.23 )

View attachment 108383​

Brake Balance:
6/6 ( personal BB) or for ABS 0 wheel : 3/3, for ABS 1 - feel free to use your preferred brake balance.


Recommended setting for DS3 user :

Steering sensitivity at +1 or +2, all aids off, except ABS 1 ( if not comfortable with ABS 0 ) with 6/6 brake balance as starting point.



Notes :

The Toyota TOM's ADVOX Supra RZ was featured in Best Motoring, fitted with street tires and only have ADVOX coilover installed, the car was a demo for the newly released ADVOX suspension kit. The car with 327PS managed 1:08.61 lap time.

The GT6 replica is tuned to replicate the lap time, fitted with comfort medium and 322HP / 327PS. The weight distribution has also been fixed at 53/47. Suspension is based on retail ADVOX Height Adjustable Coilover Suspension with medium spring rate package selected, TOM's roll bar and the ADVOX specific wheel alignment setup also included ( camber and toe ). When tested, the car managed 1:08s with ease.

The TOM's ADVOX replica should work on sports tire as well and power up to 400+PS.

Tom's ADVOX coilover wheel alignment setup has rear toe in and more freedom to front toe from negative, zero to positive. Running both positive gives the car better stability at Tsukuba. Play around with ADVOX setup range for toe and camber, these changes alone alters the car balance and handling tremendously

The alignment works great on this Supra, running a bit of camber front and back.

 

[ace004]

Majority of my cars have both toe out of either end. I tend to like a car on the ragged edge for short online races. Especially after 1.03 that butchered half of my oversteer happy cars.

 

[Voodoovaj]

Just done some testing. Took a car to Willow Springs short and measured what speed I could hold going around the skid pan at a variety of camber angles. Results:

Camber | Speed
0.0 | 47.5
1.0 | 47.0
2.0 | 46.5
5.0 | 45.0
10.0 | 44.0
​

That tallies with what everyone has been saying - it's still broken.

​

That doesn't prove it's broken or backwards. It proves that large angles produce adverse results. Large angles are supposed to give adverse results.

I usually avoid the real world comparisons, but here is a relevant read. The HIGHEST angle quoted is 5, and that is only for one suspension type. You will notice that from 0 to 1.5 is stated a few times (which I've stated quite a bit in threads about this).

What kind of suspension does GT6 have? An educated guess is that the connection to the car is very simple 90 degrees.

The stock settings are most likely aesthetic, since race cars would have such angles in real life. However, as far as function goes, keep it under 1 for the most part.

You'll also notice the suggestions are always more in front and less in the rear. In the game though, I've found that it's best to have more on the light end, whether it be front or rear. I expected the opposite to be the case, but my cars' behavior says different. I still want to test in more places because I think it should be more on the heavy end or more on the front.

EDIT - hotfix when I started the game, now more camber on the heavy end works as I expected. I updated my wizard to match.