Camber

[Vegard]

This is correct, though the model is not finished yet. I've found improvements with adding camber, more than I have been using before the 1.04 update. Reaction to camber can be improved some though.

I also think the implementation of this is tied into the postponement.

 

[Raddad1591]

Hami I thought you gave up on this self proclaimed ass... I came here to learn
here's what I learned:
- i've wasted at lot of time reading his posts
-that insulting people get's u the attention you crave(child)
-you can say anything you want an ya don't have to backit up if ya just keep typin
oh ya.. the f1 themo cam is not a regular feature on the broadcast but you see it once in a while... for at least 2 or more seasons now

 

[Zuel]

I also think the implementation of this is tied into the postponement.

I also agree with you. I've been been using the proper camber, or setting to track to my driving style and I haven't slowed down as much as some have when adding camber. I've also been adding camber to some of my street cars and picked up come time. Even the set I got from a friend for a Z06 that was ran in N.A.S.A at laguna is working better now. I could go on a little more but there is really no reason at the moment.

 

[HOOT44]

I also think the implementation of this is tied into the postponement.

Does that mean that we get to use this in the game ?
Very FAN-tastic.

 

[FussyFez]

Does that mean that we get to use this in the game ?
Very FAN-tastic.

We can only hope .

Even the drop function from lfs would be nice.

 

[FordMKIVJ5]

No, that would be 0 absolute camber, i.e. relative to the road surface. You'd still need camber angle relative to the body to compensate for body roll.

But camber relative to the body (without affecting camber relative to the road surface) is king pin inclination. Which is both non-adjustable in GT6 and doesn't really relate to body roll.

 

[Verbal]

But camber relative to the body (without affecting camber relative to the road surface) is king pin inclination. Which is both non-adjustable in GT6 and doesn't really relate to body roll.

Nope, kingpin inclination is the angle of the steering axis when viewed from the front.

 

[Vegard]

If only static camber is modelled then negative camber applied would increase the contact patch on the outside wheels in a situation where you have asymmetrical surface camber relative to the car, like when you ride the inside curb.

If only static camber is modelled then negative camber applied would decrease the contact patch on the outside wheels in any situation where the surface, realtive to the car, is completely level, like on a flat track where you don't ride the inside kerb.

If only static camber is modelled then negative camber, applied to compensate for dynamic camber change, caused by - caster effect, tyre deformation and suspension design would lead to a reduced contact patch on the outside tyre.


The hypothesis about static-only camber implemetation would explain my own impressions, and as far as I can see, the results presented by the majority of members here.

But even if this is the case it's a moot point, as we have no official information and probably never will.

 

[FordMKIVJ5]

Nope, kingpin inclination is the angle of the steering axis when viewed from the front.

I know.

But I don't understand what you mean by "camber relative to the body".

 

[FussyFez]

For anyone who is a bit confused by dynamic and static camber, this link explains quite well with good examples.

The article also highlights the very real need for split tyre temp data.

http://www.circletrack.com/techarticles/camber_change_static_dynamic_tire_traction/


(it also mentions nothing about the inside front tyre needing flattening mid corner, as far as I can see.)

 

[Verbal]

I know.

But I don't understand what you mean by "camber relative to the body".

Ok, maybe a few pictures will help.
Let's say we have this SLA suspension on a testrig:

The body is fixed and we move one wheel up and the other one down by the same amount:

In our case the wheel going up will gain some negative camber, the wheel going down some positive camber.
Translated into a cornering situation this would mean the body is rolled to the right:

Because the camber changes don't match the body roll, the outside wheel leans to the right.
To compensate for this we add some camber offset (this is what we're trying to set in the tuning menu):

So in the end the outside wheel ends up perpendicular to the road surface, which would be the optimum w/o tire deformation...

 

[HOOT44]

 

[FordMKIVJ5]

Ok, maybe a few pictures will help.
Let's say we have this SLA suspension on a testrig:

The body is fixed and we move one wheel up and the other one down by the same amount:

In our case the wheel going up will gain some negative camber, the wheel going down some positive camber.
Translated into a cornering situation this would mean the body is rolled to the right:

Because the camber changes don't match the body roll, the outside wheel leans to the right.
To compensate for this we add some camber offset (this is what we're trying to set in the tuning menu):

So in the end the outside wheel ends up perpendicular to the road surface, which would be the optimum w/o tire deformation...

But surely the vehicle then has camber relative to the road surface (static), as well as to the body?

Unless you mean that the outside wheel in a turn has 0 camber relative to the road, but does have camber relative to the body?

 

[Verbal]

Unless you mean that the outside wheel in a turn has 0 camber relative to the road, but does have camber relative to the body?

Yes - if the wheel is perpendicular to the road and the body at an angle, the wheel will obviously have to be at an angle relative to the body. Depending on suspension type and layout you get some of this from the kinematics, the rest you need to apply as offset.

 

[FussyFez]

Great video hoot. It implies that 1.5 degrees was used as static camber on the SLA car.



Makes me smile to know my real car has fully adjustable SLA front and multi link rear suspension from the factory. And it's an estate.

 

[donpost]

How many pages do you think we'll reach before either camber is fixed or PD tell us what is going on?

@Verbal those diagrams are great.

(While we're talking about what suspension we have on our cars - MacPherson strut at the front and Torsion Beam at the rear )

 

[FordMKIVJ5]

Yes - if the wheel is perpendicular to the road and the body at an angle, the wheel will obviously have to be at an angle relative to the body. Depending on suspension type and layout you get some of this from the kinematics, the rest you need to apply as offset.

Right.

I was confused by the way you first phrased it was all. But I understand what you're saying. 👍

 

[Blood*Specter]

I am starting to think that Jack is actually a Jackie. She argues using the same method that my wife uses. Logic and reason need not apply.

I think you're on to something Hami. But the dead giveaway is the symbol Napier uses for an avatar.
Mars is the male symbol, Venus for female. Normally we don't have to emphasize our gender. Especially if we're comfortable with who we are. That’s especially true in a virtual environment. No one can look at you and disprove who you say you are. You are what you are and it shows it's just that simple. Unlike driving dynamics in GT6.

If Jack is indeed Jackie, just straight bring it. No need to hide. There is no problem being a woman who loves cars and racing and who posts on GTP. "See CZETA"

Every tune I make I start out with zero camber and ALL suspention adjustments set to their minimum values.
As for the matter of how negative camber is manifested in GT6 this much is clear:

1. This aint GT5 that's for sure. In GT5 camber worked "closer" to real world.

2. Appllying negitive camber to the front or rear of the cars I have reduces grip at that end of the car.

3. Small adjustments in rear (negitive) camber can result in a car being able to corner better.

4. Small adjustments in front (negitive) camber can result in a car pushing and add some stability to twitchy cars.

The value range for front and back seems to be -0.1 to -0.2 This is based on my findings and the findings of people on GTP who are pretty darn good at tuning cars. I am not a master tuner or driver. But I know what I feel when driving a virtual car. I can be wrong, but I am pretty honest and will admit an error. Just saying.

 

[FussyFez]

Bought a stock civic type r touring car.

Without looking at the settings I went to tsukuba and did 17 laps with a best of 1.00.222.


I then looked at the settings. 3.5 front and 2.0 rear.

Set to 0 all round and ran a 0.59.521 on my warm up lap. I have paused it to post this.


Loving the diagrams etc.


Edit :


Lap 2: 0.58.788
Lap 5: 0.58.624


3 4 6 and 7 were scruffy but all still under a minute. I was on for a 58.5xx but ran wide at the Dunlop right hander.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I also agree with you. I've been been using the proper camber, or setting to track to my driving style and I haven't slowed down as much as some have when adding camber. I've also been adding camber to some of my street cars and picked up come time. Even the set I got from a friend for a Z06 that was ran in N.A.S.A at laguna is working better now. I could go on a little more but there is really no reason at the moment.

Feel free to post one of your cambered setups so we can subject it to some testing.

 

[FordMKIVJ5]

Did a little test myself:

Lancer Evo. VI T.M.E. (the one you win) stock except fully customisable suspension with all wheel alignment set to 0.0 to start, and BB at 5-3 with no aids. Test done at a dry Brands Indy.

Format: Camber Setting - Lap Time - Lowest Speed through Graham Hill - Lowest Speed through Surtees
0.0/0.0 - 51.899 - 63mph - 94mph
0.5/0.5 - 52.103 - 62mph - 92mph
1.0/1.0 - 52.351 - 61mph - 91mph
2.0/2.0 - 52.569 - 61mph - 89mph

Adding camber just made the car understeer more and more, especially under power. Also lost a lot of the rotation off of the rear end.

Just as a note I chose those corners because Paddock hill and Clearways have too much funky road camber going on.

 

[ParkerMO125]

The base model gt300 rx7 and I have become best friends. We know each other in and out. As of now, regardless of track, she is quickest around it with 0 camber.

 

[transpaqua]

Ok, I tried to read this whole thread before posting but only made it to like page 6 or 7, as there is a lot of technical jargon thats a bit over my head, or.. petty troll-like bickering. *cough cough, Jack*

I just have a simple, quick, 2-part question:

1) has this been fixed yet, either through patch 1.04 or a hotfix?
2) on a car with camber values already in the stock tuning (Group C/LMP/etc.) will setting it to 0 improve it's handling and/or laptimes? (Specifically, Sauber Merc C9 and Bentley Speed 8)

I'm not much of a tuner, so please keep any replies down to earth.

DS3, no aids, ABS 1.

 

[Daniel Pinho]

1) no
2) yes

 

[transpaqua]

1) no
2) yes

Thank you!

 

[ace004]

Im subscribed to the positive camber theory. But I have been using camber to get quicker lap times out of certain cars. I have noticed a few cars that have overwhelming grip on either the front or rear. I believe when you exhaust all tuning efforts to balance said car that using camber can indeed improve the car. I use this method on several car across several platforms. For example my skyline gtr-32, i couldn't get this car to rotate enough for my liking with standard tuning alone. All my setting ended up at the extreme values and still no go. It was still understeering and not rotating smoothly. So I backed off some of the extreme settings and added a tiny bit of rear camber to loose grip at the rear. Ow the car is a beast. I have won many online 550-650pp races and have been complimented on it. Although I feel this method of balancing grip with camber should only be used when all other methods of tuning have been exhausted.

 

[Stotty]

Rather than reinventing the wheel, why not try and improve on Ramon's (@eclipse) tune here...

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/toyota-86-gt-super-lap-active-op.301526/page-5#post-9303838

It's the current top time in the GT86 Seasonal by a decent margin, and if Ramon posted it publicly he'll be sure it's close to the best he can produce.

Of course it's built with SRF and ABS, but I'm sure it will work without assists.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Personally, ABS tune usually don't work for me they tend to be unstable and loose when no ABS used and let's not start with SRF

The tune also has very soft spring rate ( almost stock level ), soft damper on front tire as well, not sure how often it will bottom out at Trial Mountain, with no ABS, that alone would cause some trouble when braking hard on some section at the track that usually compresses front suspension in a big way. I see why SRF is used with such tune to take advantage the added grip when instability sets in - nice exploits.

 

[Zuel]

Feel free to post one of your cambered setups so we can subject it to some testing.

I'll post some information after class tonight. The one area that is still puzzling me about the tires. With body roll in the cars and when the weight shifts corner to corner do the tire go flat under load along with side wall flex pending on the tire? If this is the case you'll have to take that into factor with camber.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

This is what happen to one of my replica :

The car has almost zero camber ( 0.1 front and back ), when it's on foxhole at green hell, as you can see, the camber increases as the suspension heavily compressed, I think this might be only visual for now.