@
Zenmervolt, I didn't said loose suspension makes camber work right, or stiff make it work wrong,
I never said you did say that. Please kindly keep to the points I'm actually making and try to avoid inventing new arguments with every post.
What I said was that softer springs cause
more negative dynamic camber. As suspension compresses, the compression induces additional negative camber, beyond the amount that is set when the car is at rest. If camber were modeled correctly, cars with softer springs would do
worse with more negative static camber than cars with stiff springs because the stiffer springs would prevent the suspension from compressing and thereby prevent the increased negative dynamic camber while cornering.
You are saying that softer springs allow the overall car to "roll over" on the inflexible tires and thereby benefit from static camber. What you are neglecting is the fact that, as the suspension compresses, that adds its own amount of negative camber (which cannot be adjusted in the car's settings). When under cornering load, a car with soft springs has more negative dynamic camber than a car with stiff springs, because the car with softer springs is compressing its suspension more.
Let's play with some hypotheticals here. Say a car with soft springs compresses the suspension in a particular corner enough to increase negative camber by 1.0 degrees, while a car with stiff springs only compresses the suspension enough to increase negative camber by 0.5 degrees.
Even with static camber set to 0.0 degrees, the actual dynamic camber experienced by the outside wheels on the above cars will be -1.0 degrees for the softly sprung car and -0.5 degrees for the stiffly sprung car.
If having -1.0 degrees of camber in the corner is optimal, then the softly sprung car will need a static camber of 0.0 degrees, while the stiffly sprung car will need a static camber of -0.5 degrees in order to achieve the proper total camber (dynamic plus static) in the corner.
You can see clearly here that in real life, a softly sprung car needs
less static camber than a stiffly sprung car.
This is the opposite of what you are claiming is happening in GT6.
Even if we accept the "brick tire" hypothesis as true, the result should still be that soft springs make the negative effects of camber worse, not better, because of the increase in negative dynamic camber induced by suspension compression. You yourself admit that this is not happening. Your own observations are inconsistent with your conclusion.
Want to see you on track with 10bar tires.(and still it's too soft to compare to GT6 tire structure)
Oh look, we're back to strawman arguments.
Still, GT6 Camber itself works, tires not.
For the reasons outlined above, plus repeated testing, I have to disagree.