Driving fast in FC

  • Thread starter Biggles
  • 58 comments
  • 4,704 views
I always have the bonnet view as its the most realistic in terms of speed. Also you can see your braking and turn markers better. On that note, its interesting how many people don`t seem to be using any sought of marker whilst racing and just fly into the corners hoping to get round!
 
sarrinen69
I always have the bonnet view as its the most realistic in terms of speed. Also you can see your braking and turn markers better. On that note, its interesting how many people don`t seem to be using any sought of marker whilst racing and just fly into the corners hoping to get round!
Click to expand...

I suspect as of today, everybody in these forums will be using bonnet view. :lol:

Good to see you here. 👍


Edit: Kidding aside, when I first started playing GT5P & FC:TP in October, I initially chose the bumper view as I found the full screen view easier to come to terms with. (Before October my only racing sim experience was a single Mac/PC sim from back in 2001 which I hadn't actively played in years so it was a big adjustment for me and I found the interior view too restrictive). But about a month ago, I switched to cockpit view because I found the bumper view both too close to the ground (and I couldn't see up the road) and too far forward of the wheels and I thought it was compromising my turn in points. Maybe I will try the bonnet.
 
Last edited:
Bonnet/hood view (or "dashboard view" as some people call it) works best for me in FC. The cockpit view in FC is generally too claustrophobic & has no sense of speed.

I had assumed that a lot of people using the RB "aid" in FC (like Sarrinen) were driving in cockpit view - otherwise I can't see the point, as in bonnet view you can clearly see the tachometer.
 
I always drive in the cockpit just for the experience, whether i'm using any sort of line or not....i just find it suits me. Maybe it goes back to my gtr2 days. Either way i just prefer it. The only time i leave cockpit is if im about to finish the race i sometimes switch to external to enjoy the view lol
 
When picking a point of view I look for information. Which view will give me the most important and accurate information? What this important information is may differ from time to time.

When learning the layout of an unfamiliar track I often choose an outside view. That way I get more information about the surroundings. Looking a bit from above also makes it easier to estimate distances, the width of the track and how a curve actually bends and connects to the next. From an inside view some curves just seem to go on forever and you don't get a get a clear idea of the layout in your head. When learning a new track you want to convert the 2D information from the screen to a 3D model in your head. Once you get that clear 3D model in your head you can get by with much less information. Your brain will fill in the blanks and compensate for the things you can't see and even the restricted information you get from an cockpit view will be quite sufficient.

Once you know the track you want to maximise the information you get from the car. My personal preference is a “stationary “ cockpit view; That is the car tilts and rocks but my head doesn't . That way I get information about my position and velocity relative to the track and the cars pitch, roll and skew relative to me. Some prefer a point of view that follows the cars pitch and roll. Problem is that the “skew-information” (understreer/oversteer) is much more difficult to interpret. Furthermore given a bumper view like the one you get in GT4 you run in to severe problem when driving a car with soft suspension around the Ring. Every time you step on the brake the car dips and you can only see a couple of meters in front of you. (In case you drive the Volvo 240, you also get the additional sparks from metal grinding against the track...)

In FC I have settled for the bonnet view as a fair compromise. The cockpit view works quite well for some marques but in some cars I can't read the tachometer. Once you learn to judge the revs from the sound of the engine you could probably do without.
 
The most significant "view' in FC, is the "look-back-at-your-car" view. Although it is obviously totally "unrealistic", it seems like the best way of compensating for lack of peripheral vision i the game environment. I think it's one of the reasons there are less accidental collisions in FC than in GT5P. Do any other racing sims have this kind of view?
 
Yea i have generally gotten used to not seeing the tacho or the speedo in cockpit, these things just feel instinctive after a fair few hours playing the game. Even when you can see the gauges the numbers are amazingly small. But i love the game, warts included.
 
Given this game a good 3-4 hours and I am finding just about impossible to drive with no aids. :crazy:

Hats off to those who have mastered it.

It's a very rewarding game if you get it right 👍
 
Given this game a good 3-4 hours and I am finding just about impossible to drive with no aids.

Hats off to those who have mastered it.

It's a very rewarding game if you get it right
Click to expand...

I never felt the need to use any aids when I was starting out. I honestly think it's a lot easier than starting in F1CE was, where I found it hard to drive a single lap in a race without stuffing the car somewhere or other! As you are so fast in F1CE I would assume that you'll pick up FC pretty fast, but 3 or 4 hours just isn't enough to get the hang of it & unlike F1CE, the cars are dramatically different from each other (with the 430 probably being the easiest of the lot), so each car takes a while to get used to...
 
Biggles
I never felt the need to use any aids when I was starting out. I honestly think it's a lot easier than starting in F1CE was, where I found it hard to drive a single lap in a race without stuffing the car somewhere or other! As you are so fast in F1CE I would assume that you'll pick up FC pretty fast, but 3 or 4 hours just isn't enough to get the hang of it & unlike F1CE, the cars are dramatically different from each other (with the 430 probably being the easiest of the lot), so each car takes a while to get used to...
Click to expand...

Great thanks for the advice, probably was more along the lines of 2 hours, but it felt like 4 hours play. Well you know the saying "Time flies when you're having fun" But this seemed to be the opposite. :lol:

I do enjoy this game, I was trying to find the best view, learning the track, looking for the right time to upshift/downshift etc.

There is a lot to this game, I got a long way to go.
 
Last edited:
I posted a comment in a GT5P thread about how to drive faster a while ago. I realized that my comment was the exact OPPOSITE of what some others were suggesting - they were suggesting it was vital to constantly be on the brake or throttle - in effect, always accelerating or braking. My "style" of driving is to be as smooth as possible through corners, braking hard early at the end of fast sections, but otherwise only applying light braking & throttle, often staying in a higher gear & always trying to keep the car balanced & conserve momentum.

I've noticed, by looking at top ten GT5P replays that different drivers seem to achieve fast times in significantly different ways, but I can't help feeling that FC, which models weight transfer and the instability that goes with it much more aggressively than GT5P, really demands a lighter touch than GT5P, & in that way is actually more like RL. Opinions?
 
I agree with you. However, when I consider Sarrinen's style and how fast he is, I guess agressiveness pays off if you have the needed skill to have split second reactions to what the car is doing.
 
In my opinion it's important to understand the difference between smooth and light.

When you are racing with a car you want to drive it to the limit. The limit is often of the amount of grip available. (When driving old cars with drum brakes the brakes might be the limit in some situations.) This grip limit is constantly changing. If you transfer weight to the front you increase the grip at the front and loose some at the rear.

Depending on how much weight is transferred you can apply different amount of brake before the front wheels lock up. If you have a car with 50-50 weight distribution an instant input of 30% braking might be enough to lock up the front wheels, while the car might handle up to 90% braking when all weight has been transferred to the front.

If you make a "light" input of 25% you will never lock up your wheels and the car will not deviate far from its original 50-50 weight distrubution. However your will have a longer braking distance and you will not benefit from the positive effect of weight distribution.

The trick of driving a car fast is to only feed inputs the car can handle. If you give too much input too quickly the car won't be able to respond you will lock up wheels, understeer or spin the car. If you feed too little too slowly you will keep the car on the track but you will not drive the car at its limit and hence loose time and speed.

The problem with the concept "smooth" is that it is easily interpreted as "slow", and further more you will get away with "slow", that is you will not crash with "slow" but you will be slow around the track.

The car can be viewed as a mass on a spring, and a mass on a spring can been seen as a pendulum. (This is an over simplistic view, but it is an analogy I am trying to use to make a point.) This means that the car in a sense will behave as a pendulum. A pendulum swings from side to side, but it never moves at a constant speed. It starts slow, accelerates and then decelerates, stops and swings back. Following this motion is being "smooth".

So when braking. Start slowly, feel the weight transfer, "accelerate" the brake pedal, that is brake harder and quicker as more grip gets available as the car swings forward.

The same applies to accelerating and turning. Let your input follow the car's weight transfer as is swings back and forth and from side to side.

Balancing a car is not about try to keep it balanced at 50-50, but to balance your input to what the car can handle.

Enough already with the "theory". My posts tend to get long, theoretical and over analysing. So I suggest we try to connect theory with practical experience. Take a car of interest to the Monza track. I believe it is quite good for testing. You have two long straights connected by Parabolica, a curve with increasing or decreasing radius depending if you are going clockwise or not.

Use the long straights to get a feel for the car and the suspension. Brake, acclerate; How quickly is the weight transfered? What happens if you slam the brakes or floors the accelerator? Then try to modulate the input to follow the cars motion. By doing this you will learn find the "frequency" of the car; How quickly the car is able to respond to you inputs. Realising that quicker inputs than that, will not result in quicker responses and quicker driving, but in wheel lock ups, under- and oversteer.

When you get a feel for the front to back weight transfer. Try a little slalom along the straights. How dose the car respond to turning? Repeat the exercise for different speeds.

Take an other car and do it all over again, and try to feel the difference in handling between the cars.

I have some suggestions for other "exercises" at the Monza track, but that will have to wait for another post. This post is far too long as it is. If you don't bother to read the whole post, I guess the take home message is:

"The key to driving fast is to drive smooth; and driving smooth is to only make inputs that the car can handle."
 
A great car to test your theories is the 550m because all of the car's reactions seem to happen in slow motion so you notice it more. Your spot on though good post.

Someone once said i never stick the throttle down until im sure i wont have to take it off again....think it may be jackie stewart.
 
I found to drive the F430 challenge fast you need to be smooth. I also found that I drive faster and more consistent in cockpit view. Not sure why, but on bonnet cam I tend to miss apex's a lot. On GT5:P i'm pathetic in cockpit view, so I don't know.:lol: Completely the opposite to FC.
 
I found to drive the F430 challenge fast you need to be smooth. I also found that I drive faster and more consistent in cockpit view. Not sure why, but on bonnet cam I tend to miss apex's a lot. On GT5:P i'm pathetic in cockpit view, so I don't know. Completely the opposite to FC.
Click to expand...

I find the exact OPPOSITE! I always drive with bonnet cam in FC, but have found that when switching back to GT5P I am more comfortable with racing with the cockpit view in GT5P than I used to be before I started playing FC.

With regard to Marty's analysis: first off, I have to say that Monza (with all respect to its "classic" status) is actually one of the least interesting tracks in FC - it's basically like an extended oval with 3 chicanes - other than the chicanes there are no corners with alternating right/left sections which cause the car's weight to shift around. I would choose Spa, Mugello, Virginia, Mont Tremblant or even Silverstone & Valleulnga to show-off the weight transfer in FC (which, not co-incidentally, are my favourite tracks in FC).

Out of the cars, the TR 250 is probably the most effected by weight transfer, as it has bad tires & bad brakes (by today's standards) & a high center of gravity.

Being hard on the brakes or hard on the accelerator all the time (which is what was suggested in the GT5P thread) means the car is constantly lurching forwards or backwards (& "sideways"), upsetting the balance of the car & resulting in slower times through the corners. I favour an approach which tries to "conserve momentum" wherever possible, by not braking more than necessary - I may be wrong, but I tend to believe that this is true in most RL racing classes (perhaps not in F1 with its insane amount of grip, downforce & acceleration & braking power).
 
FWIW, Biggles, I've always agreed with your 'slow in - fast out' policy and the importance of keeping the car balanced in order to maximize acceleration from the apex forward. But I did want to post this as an opposing, and perhaps confusing, perspective on approaching corners and driving quickly, from somebody who knows a thing or two about it.

Last weekend I was in a lobby with the F430 at Monza. On lap 1, I was in 3rd position and approaching the 2nd chicane (Variante della Roggia) and started slowing down (a bit early) at around 180/190 meters from the corner. I wasn't sure when and where the cars in front of me would brake and wanted to have the option of accelerating through the chicane and over the curbs in order to both avoid any cars that may have received a penalty and also to have a good run up to the Lesmos and pass any cars that butchered the chicane and were struggling to stay in control. At that point I saw a car coming up behind me at impossible speed. I'm guessing it was a car that cut the 1st chicane and had been on the gas ever since. But more than that, he was already at the 150 meter point and I quickly decided there was no way he would make the chicane with the speed he was carrying. So I stood on the brakes longer than I normally would have to allow him to pass by me on the left and I assumed he would get a penalty and I would go flying past him a few seconds later.

An instant later I noticed two things. (1) instead of getting a penalty, the car sailed through the chicane at impossible speed and kept going and (2) it was Sarrinen69 and I had clearly just lost ANY chance I had of keeping him behind me. :ouch:

Ironically, I had this same experience with him at Monza once before and I haven't been able to come to terms with how he can carry so much speed through that chicane. But that was nearly two months ago and I like to think that I've improved a great deal since then so I put my head down and took off after him. For all the good it did. I finished the race in 2nd but predictably, he pulled away from me like I was standing still and indeed, by the end of the race my best lap was a 1:50.xx and he was in the 1:46.xx range. After this race, I went to Time Trial and tried hard to duplicate his lines and speed. The result was:

...penalty...penalty...penalty...penalty...penalty...penalty...crash...penalty...penalty...penalty, etc...

So I sent him a message asking for tips and he was good enough to come back with this:

Heres a lap of Monza for you.
1st chicane, break at 150 metres, down to 1st gear or 3rd gear if you want to exploit the curbs.
2nd chicane, break at 100 metres, down to 5th gear and touch the inner curb as you pass through the chicane.
Corner 6, engine should peak in 5th before you get their, break at 50 metres and downshift to 3rd and turn in. Accelerate mid corner and change up to 4th for the next straight.
Corner7, break where the curb starts and downshift to 3rd, clip the apex so you just scrape the barrier. Use all the track on the way out!
Corner8, Flat out
Corner9, break at about 75 metres and downshift to 4th. Carry lots of speed and clip the green curb and grass at the apex.
Corner10, same again, clip the curb and grass to help straighten the exit of the chicane
Corner11, hard on the gas in 4th and use all of the track but not the gravel!
Corner12, break at 100 metres and downshift to 3rd. Two options:-

a) Turn in nice and early with less corner speed but less chance of running wide
b) Turn in later with more corner speed but more chance of running wide (shortshift to 4th)

You can post this on the forum if you want but everybody drives different!
Sorry about the lateness of my reply.
Click to expand...

After reading this, I think I was even more frustrated than I was before. One, because his style just goes against the grain of what I learned and what I believed to be the reason for my improving form--a careful attention to the balance of the car at the sacrifice of corner entry speed. And two because the braking points he suggests above just seem impossible. In fact they are impossible, at least for me, becasue I've tried them and they usually result with either a quick trip to the sand trap or a car that's totally out of control.

I don't know if Sarrinen uses a controller or a wheel or he has some special code for adding additional grip to his tires. I believe what he's telling me because I've seen first hand the speed he carries through corners. But I fail to comprehend how he can maintain it, control it, and avoid penalty zones. I don't know what I was expecting as an answer but I think I may have actually felt better if his response at been, "HAH! Dude I CHEAT! :P" At any rate, it clearly seems that extremely late braking is an alternative and one that certain drivers are able to exploit to great advantage and blistering lap times. How they pull it off, is still a mystery.
 
Last edited:
Yes, Sarrinen is a late braker, that I have noticed. But somehow (lots of skill, millisecond adjustments and reactions, whatever ... ) he keeps it going. I remember perfectly the way he passed me at Mugello once. I saw him coming, started braking, gave him room (I don't like holding out people that I know are clearly faster) and my jaw dropped when I saw him pass me at speed, only then braking, doing the full corner with his car drifting (lots of smoke, I could almost smell the burning rubber :D ) and ... fly away.

If this game had pits, that's where I would decide to go in that lap ... pretending to have a gear box problem, flat tyre or something like that :lol:
 
@Biggles: I can completely understand if you didn't bother to read the entire post. However, I tried to motivate why I picked Monza, and the reasons are exactly the ones you are stating "Monza... is actually one of the least interesting tracks in FC - it's basically like an extended oval with 3 chicanes". I WANTED to keep things simple, and for my demonstration I only needed the two straights.

To demonstrate weight transfer on a track I would probalbly pick the first roller-coaster-like part of Infineon, where no braking is done in a straight line.

Then I have a confession to make: I haven't been able to find the original GT5P thread you are referring to. So if someone could post a link, that would be excellent.

Reading Biggles post it is pretty obvious that I wasn't able to get my message across. So I give it another go and try to explain a bit further.

My main points is that:
You don't have to be light to be smooth;
The car can be "balanced" with an uneven weight distribution.


Imagine a car that is stationary. The suspension will counteract the weight of the car, and "balance" the car. We can also imagine that it is a rather sporty car and that the weight distribution is 50-50.

Take the same car an make it travel at a constant speed. If the road surface is smooth, the suspension will not be moving. The suspension will be in balance" and the weight distribution will still be 50-50.

Now let us slow down the car. The car will tilt, and the weight will shift forward. The suspension will move at first but if we apply the same brake pressure for some time the suspension will settle and become stationary; in
balance. The weight distribution will be far from 50-50, but the suspension will be stationary and balance the car.

My point is that the car and suspension can be balanced far from the stationary weight distribution. That is you can change the weight distribution of the car without unsettling the balance.

Unsettling the balance - this is where smooth comes in. We have seen that the car can be balanced when stationary; moving at constant speed and under braking. The tricky part is the transitions. Even if we make jerky inputs the car will finally settle down. However, before the car settles down it will be the opposite: "un-settled". The weight distribution will shift back and forth, and the amount of grip available will shift between the tyres making the car unstable and unpredictable. So instead let us be smooth. That way the car and suspension will be balanced all the time, independent of weight distribution. The grip will be more stable and the car more predictable.


The take home message is that you don't unsettle the balance of the car by changing the weight distribution. You unsettle the balance of the car by not being smooth, that is changing the weight distribution quicker than the suspension can handle.
 
I think many people are thinking too much! The basics of racing is this; get into the corner as fast as possible, get out as fast as possible, be it sideways, straight or upside down! And when you race, think about what you are doing, not how you should be doing. Might sound simple but alot of people give up when they've been passed because of these reasons, they think they're doing bad and lose concentration!
 
I agree: Don't think and drive! When you are driving you shouldn't be thinking. Problem is I don't have enough time to drive, so all I can do is to think about it...
 
Sarrinen mate you are an incredibly quick driver and what i am now aiming for. When we raced at Misano the other day i gave up after chasing you for two laps. At one point i could not believe the speed and agility you used at the chicane!! I thought i was quick through there but i was just like wow.
 
1) This is the thread from GT5P - see The359's comments (coincidentally, I had just run a few races with The359 on Daytona Road the night before & we were pretty evenly matched - although I was a bit erratic having not playing GT5P for a while).

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=114231

2) I DID read your entire post Marty! I understand what you are saying.

3) My "go faster" tips are aimed at the FC newcomer, struggling to adjust to the different feel of FC.

4) There ARE places where I would apply full braking - the end of straightaways leading to tight corners - like the end of the long straights at Monza or Mugello, but through a sequence of corners - like the esses at Suzuka in GT5P, or the middle of Mugello in FC - I would only tap the brakes lightly to adjust the speed of the car going into the corners.

5) The F430 seems to be the most "stable" car in FC (& as a result, for me one of the less interesting cars to drive) & the easiest one to "muscle" through the turns.

6) Sarrinen appears to be driving a different model of F430 with higher BHP, better brakes/tires...

or SOMETHING

... so my comments don't apply to him. :indiff:
 
I will say one further thing:

in GT5P, with a wheel, you don't get much feel for the weight-transfer through the FFB, so balancing a car at its limits is very difficult & requires many laps to develop the precise knowledge of the braking points in order to maximize your speed around the track. In FC you get a much better sense for what the car is doing, BUT because of the "dead zone" there is always an element of "unpredictability", particularly on chicanes like at Monza & that @#$%#! chicane at Redwood, that requires extra care & a greater margin of error. For that reason, I can see that driving fast with a pad might be somewhat "easier".
 
Hey guys,
Any tips on driving in the wet?
I find that my times plummet in wet conditions.
I'm not sure if its loss of grip or psychological...
 
Brake alot earlier, that's the most important thing! Also anticipate the turn alot earlier so you can be ready for any mistakes you make and correct them.
 
Here's my observation about FC wheel vs. pad:

it seems to me that the pad allows faster driving through chicanes (perhaps because there's no deadzone to deal with), while the wheel allows faster driving around sweeping corners & tight hairpins (perhaps because it's easier to balance the steering & throttle). This is, of course, assuming driver skill is similar.
 

Similar threads

SPOOLMAN
Countersteering Assistance Still enabled Bug.
Replies
3
Views
631
timekiller001
T
M
Driving with Sophy without assists
Replies
4
Views
893
cvjoint
cvjoint
wlashack
Circuit experiences with new phsics question
Replies
1
Views
630
Vule
Vule
I
Driving licence
Replies
5
Views
845
Farnell42
Farnell42
LeGeNd-1
Early Apex = Faster? (featuring Sophy & Max)
Replies
4
Views
3K
Earth
Earth

Latest Posts

Back