drag suspension settings for rwd
- Thread starter 213101
- 19 comments
- 12,247 views
- 1,128
well heres my two bits. by the way some of this stuf is verry unrealistic for real life, but since you can do it in the game without consiquence, why not.
all the power goes to the rear so you want to put all the weight on the rear. front ride height all the way up, rear all the way down. the dampers should just be set in relation to the springs and you want weight transfer to hapen so set springs as soft as they will go. if you must curb all this fantasy with a bit of real world then set the rears so that the suspension compreses half way down on the launch. that will keep the rear of the bump stops and leave a bit of room for the suspension to absorb imperfections. not that there are any on the test course. toe settings front and rear to 0, camber settings at 0 in the rear, and (dont laugh) full camber out in front. use super soft tiers on the rear and sims on the front. as far as gear ratios your on your own. sometimes i find it faster to not use all the gears. if you could see your engines powerband it would really help but the goal is to keep the engine in its power band while having to get off the gas as few times as posible. (as in shifting) LSD initial and accel set to full lock. downforce set to minimum, TCS set to 2, and turn off the ASM. although you'd have to run a pretty funny loking quarter mile to activate it I just turn it of since in a game you never know exactly how things work.
this should get some interesting responses.
all the power goes to the rear so you want to put all the weight on the rear. front ride height all the way up, rear all the way down. the dampers should just be set in relation to the springs and you want weight transfer to hapen so set springs as soft as they will go. if you must curb all this fantasy with a bit of real world then set the rears so that the suspension compreses half way down on the launch. that will keep the rear of the bump stops and leave a bit of room for the suspension to absorb imperfections. not that there are any on the test course. toe settings front and rear to 0, camber settings at 0 in the rear, and (dont laugh) full camber out in front. use super soft tiers on the rear and sims on the front. as far as gear ratios your on your own. sometimes i find it faster to not use all the gears. if you could see your engines powerband it would really help but the goal is to keep the engine in its power band while having to get off the gas as few times as posible. (as in shifting) LSD initial and accel set to full lock. downforce set to minimum, TCS set to 2, and turn off the ASM. although you'd have to run a pretty funny loking quarter mile to activate it I just turn it of since in a game you never know exactly how things work.
this should get some interesting responses.
haha...the car just looked so funny....- 347
I use settings a bit different from inferno:
Springs: for FR, full hard in back, soft in front. I'm not sure the front makes a big difference but the hard rear does.
Height: full up front and rear
Camber: the full front camber seems to help on some cars, but not all. Zero in the rear always.
Toe: never
Stabs: Don't think they matter
Downforce: Oddly, I find that the FRs do better with full rear DF (minimum front) at the 400m, but minimum front and rear for the 1000m.
Tires: I use Normal in front when possible
Gears: critical, but vary from car to car depending on the torque/hp characteristics. GT1 had great torque and hp vs rpm charts that updated as you added mods, but they were discontinued in the later versions.
These settings, on a Viper GTS were the fastest FR 400m at racing-line before slipping to number two, and then being deleted due to the recent political imbroglio there. The time was 9.091 I believe.
4 20
127 127
10 1
1 10
12 0 camber
0 0 toe
3 3 stabs
60/60/5
1 1.988
2 1.422
3 1.138
4 0.945
5 0.800
6 0.673
F 3.660 (tranny trick)
2nd gear start with the tach bouncing over the redline, finish in 5th if I recall correctly.
Springs: for FR, full hard in back, soft in front. I'm not sure the front makes a big difference but the hard rear does.
Height: full up front and rear
Camber: the full front camber seems to help on some cars, but not all. Zero in the rear always.
Toe: never
Stabs: Don't think they matter
Downforce: Oddly, I find that the FRs do better with full rear DF (minimum front) at the 400m, but minimum front and rear for the 1000m.
Tires: I use Normal in front when possible
Gears: critical, but vary from car to car depending on the torque/hp characteristics. GT1 had great torque and hp vs rpm charts that updated as you added mods, but they were discontinued in the later versions.
These settings, on a Viper GTS were the fastest FR 400m at racing-line before slipping to number two, and then being deleted due to the recent political imbroglio there. The time was 9.091 I believe.
4 20
127 127
10 1
1 10
12 0 camber
0 0 toe
3 3 stabs
60/60/5
1 1.988
2 1.422
3 1.138
4 0.945
5 0.800
6 0.673
F 3.660 (tranny trick)
2nd gear start with the tach bouncing over the redline, finish in 5th if I recall correctly.
- 347
Quite right. I developed the settings based on trial and error without any real consideration for theory, or what might work well in the real world. While it's always great when GT3 successfully emulates the real world, being ruled by such considerations (i.e. being a "Shifter") is generally a losing strategy.213101
- 1,128
Yes hopefully. As I base all of my tuning for GT in my knowledge of vehicle dynamics and common sense. very rarely (if ever) have I bothered to try to find and exploit the little loopholes in GT's physics engine. I.e. The Wheelie Trick for example. I consider it cheating, although others will argue without pushing past the known realities, you run into a perverbial brick wall. As far as inovation is concerned its the only way left to push the envelope.
So in conclusion, My regretfull congatulations to you and your setup.
So in conclusion, My regretfull congatulations to you and your setup.
- 347
Thank you, I guess!infernoYes hopefully. As I base all of my tuning for GT in my knowledge of vehicle dynamics and common sense. very rarely (if ever) have I bothered to try to find and exploit the little loopholes in GT's physics engine. I.e. The Wheelie Trick for example. I consider it cheating, although others will argue without pushing past the known realities, you run into a perverbial brick wall. As far as inovation is concerned its the only way left to push the envelope.
So in conclusion, My regretfull congatulations to you and your setup.
While the wheelie trick, or maybe the freaky physics aberration in GT2, are fairly readily identifiable, there is a lot of grey area outside of that. In any kind of competition, "cheating" needs to be clearly defined. Trying to enforce a rule that only "realistic" settings could be used (without specifically limiting the settings) would reduce a competition to an endless rules squabble. GT3 is a sort of alternate reality, and I say "when in Rome, do what works in Rome".
- 1,128
Pretty much word for word what I said... oh wait that was the quote.
seriously, though, Gt truly is an alternate reality. (belive me the setup I posted was thinking outside the box) and someone not bound by the afore mentioned "known realities" like youself is far better qualified to answer a question like this than myself. I am primarily a car guy. I don't realy like video games per se. I'm not infatuated with my controller if you know what I mean. I use GT as sort of a proving ground for ideas I have, and plan to implement in the real world. actualy your setup makes sense to me now. I have trouble acknoledging when things initialy apear at a total loss for reason. hence my regrets. so yes you have my congratulations. "I guess!"
seriously, though, Gt truly is an alternate reality. (belive me the setup I posted was thinking outside the box) and someone not bound by the afore mentioned "known realities" like youself is far better qualified to answer a question like this than myself. I am primarily a car guy. I don't realy like video games per se. I'm not infatuated with my controller if you know what I mean. I use GT as sort of a proving ground for ideas I have, and plan to implement in the real world. actualy your setup makes sense to me now. I have trouble acknoledging when things initialy apear at a total loss for reason. hence my regrets. so yes you have my congratulations. "I guess!"
- 347
Had an hour and some nervous energy to burn, so thought I'd fool around with the RX7 RZ. Tricked up the prize car to 709 hp and 1079 kg. All the following done with super softs front and rear, and all upgrades except LSD.
Right out of the box, with a first gear start it was running 10.492.
Tried a second gear start: 10.397. (Starting in second with just enough throttle to bounce the tach above the redline, finish in 6th).
Set ASM to 0 and TCS to 2: 10.359.
Set height to 89/89: 10.355
Set height to 135/135: 10.274
Set springs to 1/20: 10.226
Set camber to 2/0: 10.213
Tweaked the gears a little (pulled down 6 to finish near redline, and spaced 3-5 evenly): 10.181
Took the car to the 1000m and ran low 18's, badly rev limited in 6th. Moved final from 4.500 to 3.400 and ran 17.874, but what really caught my eye was the 400m split: 10.111. the Mazda had a wider torque curve than I had thought!
Went back to the 400m and ran 10.121 with the 1000m gearing.
Lowered 5th to finish nearer the redline (finish in 5th rather than 6th), and ran consecutive:
10.104, 10.103, 10.107
Finished all this with 16.2 miles on the odometer.
This car might get down to the upper 9's with some effort. I'd be willing to collaborate if anyone wants to give it a try.
Right out of the box, with a first gear start it was running 10.492.
Tried a second gear start: 10.397. (Starting in second with just enough throttle to bounce the tach above the redline, finish in 6th).
Set ASM to 0 and TCS to 2: 10.359.
Set height to 89/89: 10.355
Set height to 135/135: 10.274
Set springs to 1/20: 10.226
Set camber to 2/0: 10.213
Tweaked the gears a little (pulled down 6 to finish near redline, and spaced 3-5 evenly): 10.181
Took the car to the 1000m and ran low 18's, badly rev limited in 6th. Moved final from 4.500 to 3.400 and ran 17.874, but what really caught my eye was the 400m split: 10.111. the Mazda had a wider torque curve than I had thought!
Went back to the 400m and ran 10.121 with the 1000m gearing.
Lowered 5th to finish nearer the redline (finish in 5th rather than 6th), and ran consecutive:
10.104, 10.103, 10.107
Finished all this with 16.2 miles on the odometer.
This car might get down to the upper 9's with some effort. I'd be willing to collaborate if anyone wants to give it a try.
- 347
I don't think that's the kind of attention I'd appreciate, unless it's a hybrid contest. Sorry, especially to 213101 that I haven't gotten back to this, but real life has really eaten up all my time the last few weeks. Fooled around with the gearing a little,trying a three gear run (2-4), but didn't improve on the 10.103. I did see a 10.04x (can't remember exactly) posted for this car in another thread. Wonder how they did that.GT40 MKII
Similar threads
