Example of MoTeC data analysis

[Johnnypenso]

Oh, so he was someone that had been banned before... Ahh.. ok... When I first started conversing with him in this thread his username did not seem familiar to me. Now, I'm not foolish enough to pretend that I have even come across 20% of the registered users of GTPlanet, but when you stick to certain forums, you tend to see who the active posters are and you remember their username, or avatar, or occasionally, even their writing style.

I'd be lying if I said there haven't been times that I've wanted to just lash out at another member, for whatever reason, but I knew that A) I would just be sinking to their level and B) I'll be risking my account on a website I visit 7 days a week. It's not worth it, in my opinion. Oh well...

Back on topic:

I think tire compound is going to play a significant factor in the numbers we produce, of course. I don't know what GT5's tire situation was like. GT6 is my first go with the series. If the game is able to reproduce 1/4 mile times fairly accurately, shouldn't that mean that air resistance is being calculated and calculated properly at least up until those 1/4 mile speeds? I know I am asking you to speculate, but for those of you interested in these issues, do you think PD is just calculating it incorrectly? Or do you think they have just forgone calculating air resistance at all? I don't know how much air resistance affects cars at low, medium or high speeds.

I know that @YZF has been very vocal about the issues with top speeds in GT6 for many months. Personally, I think it has to be an issue of air resistance not being calculated properly.

It's not hard to spot the duplicate members. They tend to jump in like they've been here forever, instantly familiar and comfortable, and they tend to pick up their old arguments where they left off.

@YZF has already proven the top speed physics are way, way off, so far off it's arcade level off. On many cars this won't affect 1/4 mile times because they won't get to the speed that the physics begin to break down, or if they do, won't spend much time there. It's on longer runs with higher speeds the real differences will show up in the higher powered cars. Tracks like Monza, Spa, Nurburgring etc. The best solution to compensate for this would be to reduce the tire compound and horsepower, or perhaps, when possible, nerf 5th and 6th gear so that acceleration is artifically slowed.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Back on topic:

I think tire compound is going to play a significant factor in the numbers we produce, of course. I don't know what GT5's tire situation was like. GT6 is my first go with the series. If the game is able to reproduce 1/4 mile times fairly accurately, shouldn't that mean that air resistance is being calculated and calculated properly at least up until those 1/4 mile speeds? I know I am asking you to speculate, but for those of you interested in these issues, do you think PD is just calculating it incorrectly? Or do you think they have just forgone calculating air resistance at all? I don't know how much air resistance affects cars at low, medium or high speeds.

I know that @YZF has been very vocal about the issues with top speeds in GT6 for many months. Personally, I think it has to be an issue of air resistance not being calculated properly.

Air resistance increases proportionally to the square of the speed, so it will make a much bigger difference the faster you go. Interestingly, as wiki points out... power required to overcome drag increases at an even higher rate, it is the cube of the speed... perhaps this is where the calculation is falling down.

 

[ALB123]

Do either of you, @MatskiMonk or @Johnnypenso play any other sims/driving games? Have they successfully reproduced cars 0-200mph times? As we've established, the problem isn't so pronounced at lower speeds. Unfortunately, I have never played another driving game that tries to be serious with its physics. Now, I don't want to turn this into a catch-all for physics complaints in GT6, but I'm curious how the other respected sims hold up here.

I might be way off, but I would imagine a fairly simple (simple for a mathematician) mathematical formula would be needed to calculate a car's acceleration through air. Yes, we can get more sophisticated with humidity and barometric pressure and all that jazz, but in a straight line it should be just a matter of mathematics. Of course, turning the wheel a centimeter here or there and the road not being perfectly flat -- now we bring in other aspects of physics to the mix.

It's funny. I've always thought that the cars felt too quick 0-60mph and now I'm finding out that many of them are very close to their real world times. Granted, most of the examples have been with exotics. I'll have to see how sedans and 4 cylinder bangers do with some MoTeC data imported into i2.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Do either of you, @MatskiMonk or @Johnnypenso play any other sims/driving games? Have they successfully reproduced cars 0-200mph times? As we've established, the problem isn't so pronounced at lower speeds. Unfortunately, I have never played another driving game that tries to be serious with its physics. Now, I don't want to turn this into a catch-all for physics complaints in GT6, but I'm curious how the other respected sims hold up here.

I might be way off, but I would imagine a fairly simple (simple for a mathematician) mathematical formula would be needed to calculate a car's acceleration through air. Yes, we can get more sophisticated with humidity and barometric pressure and all that jazz, but in a straight line it should be just a matter of mathematics. Of course, turning the wheel a centimeter here or there and the road not being perfectly flat -- now we bring in other aspects of physics to the mix.

It's funny. I've always thought that the cars felt too quick 0-60mph and now I'm finding out that many of them are very close to their real world times. Granted, most of the examples have been with exotics. I'll have to see how sedans and 4 cylinder bangers do with some MoTeC data imported into i2.

I might be able to test a couple of cars in Assetto Corsa. I've never used it but there's a couple of drag strips, I think 400 and 1000 metres. Off the top of my head the 458 Italia and F40 might be good cars to try. The MP4-12C is there, Huayra, Zonda R. I think the F40 comes with a vintage 90's tire option as well as one or two more modern tires.

 

[YZF]

Do either of you, @MatskiMonk or @Johnnypenso play any other sims/driving games? Have they successfully reproduced cars 0-200mph times? As we've established, the problem isn't so pronounced at lower speeds. Unfortunately, I have never played another driving game that tries to be serious with its physics. Now, I don't want to turn this into a catch-all for physics complaints in GT6, but I'm curious how the other respected sims hold up here.

I played many different racing games in the past, and 0 to Top Speed acceleration was more or less correct (I am not talking about arcades). And it is not hard to implement. This is not an issue about 'hard to achieve', this is an issue about miscalculation. GT3/GT4/GT5 has all those speeds more or less correct.

 

[super_gt]

@Jimmy Howlett video

 

[YZF]

@Jimmy Howlett video

This video could have acceleration above 130mph, up to 180mph, because that's where difference starts to be noticable.

Up to 130 mph it is not noticable, because air resistance is weak.

 

[NandoRock]

Hi, I have received this conversation from the guy that is always banned. I hope this can help. Cheers.

"To those who may be under the belief that cars are accelerating twice as fast as they should be from 200km/h to 300km/h

Example of MoTeC data analysis - GTPlanet

They are comparing acceleration in the game to data from a web site that did a 0-300-0 test of many of the current supercars available in GT6 with detailed posted results.

This is GTP Source of 0-300-0 Test Done by "Sports Auto"

The problem is the test in real life were done on a banked corner and not on a flat straight like the times in GT6 are being done. The cars will not accelerate at the same rate while making a banked corner.

This is a video the web site made of them doing the speed runs and it clearly shows the test being done on a banked corner.

Video of the 0-300-0 km/h Test done by "Sports Auto" showing banked corner used


Cheers"

 

[MatskiMonk]

** please note ** I'm not really trying to determine anything about the Veyron, simply demonstrate how the probably variables might interact.

@ALB123 Okay, so technically speaking, the original Veyron set a record at 253.81mph (113.632 metres per second). According to standard equations for Drag, at that speed a Veyron, at sea level (Ehra-leissen as a town is ~63m above sea level), with an air pressure of 100kPa, and at 15°C is experiencing 5802.176 N of resistant force thanks to drag. In order to overcome this drag, it requires 895.08 PS (metric Horsepower). SSRX at 12 noon is 27° from memory... so if we simply change the air temperature to 27°, the PS required to hit that speed drops to 859.28... or flipped over it would reach 257.36mph assuming everything else stayed the same.

Assuming PD use the same relatively simple equation for determining drag... they would include...

Air Temperature - We see that PD display the air temperature of the circuit at the start of the race, so let's assume they do factor this in to air pressure and therefore air resistance, in which case they need the following two things as well...
Air Pressure - I've assumed 100kPa - PD could use a constant, or a local average? this is required for Drag force.
Specific gas constant - This is a constant, I'm assuming PD base this on 'Dry' Air, adn therefore the value would always be the same... it would vary if we were talking about humid air for instance....

from these three things we get Air Density, so
Air Density - as above
Relative Velocity - i.e. the cars speed, although it's relative to the air the car moves through, so a head wind, or tail wind would have an effect. (5 mph tailwind takes the 859.28 PS above down further to 825.75 PS).. however the game doesn't appear to factor in windspeed... so this is just the car speed.
Drag Coefficient - 0.36 according to Bugatti when the car is hunkered down.
Frontal Area - 2.07m²

I would say this is not difficult, and I'm pretty sure that PD factor all this stuff in. The question of environmental conditions does mean that SSRX can give a different top speed to other tracks -- for instance if all fake tracks are considered to be at Sea Level for instance. They may use a constant Air pressure across all tracks, they might give each it's own air pressure, hell.. it could even be dynamic!

So, given that I think this would give a reasonable calculation... what else could the game be doing? The answer is probably, lots. But I'm focusing now on Aero-limited top speed.

What is that top speed? It's the speed measured by a real-world car, that will most probably have been at a different altitude, atmospheric pressure, temperature, probably with a wind-speed vector of some-sort.. and these are just the variables that affect the Aero calculation.

Where am I going with all this? Nowhere really, but @YZF it's all very well and good to say it's simple to achieve an accurate speed, but actually, it isn't. The more variables you factor in the harder it is to arrive at a value set in the real-world, because you have to make sure they all relate to each other properly, and to do that, you kind of need to factor in as many variables as you can... especially if you want it to be scaleable. If you simply set an equation for a car that says Vmax = 250mph The only thing you are simulating is the top speed (over any distance, over any time, in any state of tune, any gearing, any track, any conditions, , any wheel size, any surface, any tyres, any gradient, any slipstream)... and you're setting it to match a real-word value that was arrived at by the laws of physics using a massive amount of natural variables. You can fudge it, by having a table of values for every car, that sets waypoints for a time/displacement curve... but again, those points only simulate those points... the more you have to fudge, the more accurate the game may appear, but the less of a simulation it will be. As I've stated before, I think PD ad GT get the respect they do from manufacturers because PD attempt to do the job very realistically, but for whatever reason (hardware limitations ) they don't arrive at the right answer...

 

[YZF]

Hi, I have received this conversation from the guy that is always banned. I hope this can help. Cheers.

"To those who may be under the belief that cars are accelerating twice as fast as they should be from 200km/h to 300km/h

Example of MoTeC data analysis - GTPlanet

They are comparing acceleration in the game to data from a web site that did a 0-300-0 test of many of the current supercars available in GT6 with detailed posted results.

This is GTP Source of 0-300-0 Test Done by "Sports Auto"

The problem is the test in real life were done on a banked corner and not on a flat straight like the times in GT6 are being done. The cars will not accelerate at the same rate while making a banked corner.

This is a video the web site made of them doing the speed runs and it clearly shows the test being done on a banked corner.

Video of the 0-300-0 km/h Test done by "Sports Auto" showing banked corner used


Cheers"

The guy also sent PM to me too, and I have replied to him with explanation that he is not right and his assumptions are incorrect. The test was not made on banked corner.

This is the copy of reply which I wrote back to him, explaining why his is wrong:

Hi,

Actually you are wrong. At one point I also thought that maybe test was done on banked corner, as maybe the track was a huge oval and nothing more (like Nardo test track in Italy or Laredo in Texas, US).

However this is not the case. The track they tested is in Germay, and this is how it looks like:

http://www.gtspirit.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Papenburg-Teststrecke1.jpg

As you can see, there are two long straights on this track to not use banks. What you see in the video is just a promotion-video fragment, where TV camera man just records 'something in action', and naturally, car on a steep bank looks impressive for the viewer, but this is not the record of the run itself.

Actually in the same video, at 10sec mark, you can see Veyron going in straight line.

Here is another picture from the action on the straight:

http://img2.sportauto.de/Jaguar-XKR-S-fotoshowImage-177bdad9-546729.jpg


To confirm these results, I also checked some other tests on google, and found some videos where, for example, Veyron had 0-300 time within 1 second of the time from these tests. Another video had SLS AMG acceleration, with estimated time to be more or less the same than the one from this test.

So what you found out is, in fact, not true. And GT6 still has unrealistic acceleration and top speed issue.

These two pictures look 'sad'...

http://s28.postimg.org/6tdi81w4t/GT5_GT6_Enzo.jpg

 

[YZF]

Where am I going with all this? Nowhere really, but @YZF it's all very well and good to say it's simple to achieve an accurate speed, but actually, it isn't. The more variables you factor in the harder it is to arrive at a value set in the real-world, because you have to make sure they all relate to each other properly, and to do that, you kind of need to factor in as many variables as you can...

I could agree with your theory (although trying other games and seeing how they implement it correctly - maybe I wouldn't lol ), but the fact that they have done it more or less correct in GT5 (and GT4 and GT3), I'd say they are capable of doing it properly in GT6 as well.

Look at the last picture in my post above.

 

[azidahaka]

Big question, you use to change oil when you do tests?

@Ridox2JZGTE if i remember well stated that the oil change usually gives incorrect power figures by a significant % and this might be a reason for really strange results... IIRC oil change adds around 5% extra hps, in a normal car is not very important but on a 1000hps monster it does start to make a difference, if to it you add incorrect weight and weight balance, wrong (non existant super sticky compounds that do not exist in real life) tyres and lastly incorrect ride heights and gear ratios. Putting all of that toghether it might mean A LOT.

 

[NandoRock]

I could agree with your theory (although trying other games and seeing how they implement it correctly - maybe I wouldn't lol ), but the fact that they have done it more or less correct in GT5 (and GT4 and GT3), I'd say they are capable of doing it properly in GT6 as well.

Look at the last picture in my post above.

Maybe that's why PD did not provide drag tests on GT6 lol

 

[MatskiMonk]

I could agree with your theory (although trying other games and seeing how they implement it correctly - maybe I wouldn't lol ), but the fact that they have done it more or less correct in GT5 (and GT4 and GT3), I'd say they are capable of doing it properly in GT6 as well.

Look at the last picture in my post above.

They got one number right in GT5, the formula that derives a 0-100 (or whatever) time used to generate that number may not have been correct.

Using info to hand (I'm at work at the moment) the Polynomial equation that relatively closely defines the DP-100 VGT time/displacement curve is: speed =-8E-08x^6+E-05x^5 - 0.0016x^4 + 0.0752x^3 -1.8854x^2 +27.833x where x is time spent under maximum acceleration. It's an equation derived from a trend line in excel, it could be used to predict the Zero to any given speed of the car. I'm not suggesting for a second that this is the kind of thing PD use but it would give a relatively accurate number. But, what would happen, if I shifted from 3rd to 4th too soon, what happens if I had CH tyres on, or RS, how would it affect the result... what happened if the track actually had a 3% gradient, how would it affect the result.

My point is that you don't know how the game arrives at a speed of a given time and displacement. I'm saying in order to give an accurate outcome to a combination of variables, the formula needs to be the thing that is correct, not just the outcome.

We don't know if GT5's method gave a more accurate acceleration curve, we just know it his various points at the right time. The "new physics" in GT6 could be the result of trying to build-up an answer from known variables using extensive equations, rather than an old (GT5) method of working back to a formula from an answer using known outcomes and limited variables.

 

[super_gt]

This video shows that Ferrari Enzo top speed on Nurburgring Nordschleife is 308.9km/h
You can skip ahead to 9:40


Stock Ferrari Enzo in GT6 no oil change no AIDS no ABS sports hard tires and the top speed on Nordschleife is over 340km/h

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Big question, you use to change oil when you do tests?

@Ridox2JZGTE if i remember well stated that the oil change usually gives incorrect power figures by a significant % and this might be a reason for really strange results... IIRC oil change adds around 5% extra hps, in a normal car is not very important but on a 1000hps monster it does start to make a difference, if to it you add incorrect weight and weight balance, wrong (non existant super sticky compounds that do not exist in real life) tyres and lastly incorrect ride heights and gear ratios. Putting all of that toghether it might mean A LOT.

Not only power, but oil change also increases torque across all rev range. I recently tested a C6 ZR1 built for max PP, and on CS tire it could just reach 290kmh at Big Willow main straight, then simply fitting RH tire ( no other changes ), it easily reach over 300kmh ( close to 310kmh ) before braking point for 1st turn. Higher grip tires has less slip and better traction. Getting the proper tire with similar grip in real life test is crucial.

 

[NandoRock]

I could agree with your theory (although trying other games and seeing how they implement it correctly - maybe I wouldn't lol ), but the fact that they have done it more or less correct in GT5 (and GT4 and GT3), I'd say they are capable of doing it properly in GT6 as well.

Look at the last picture in my post above.

I have tested the Enzo on GT6, SSRX, front straight, and the Enzo is redline limited at 354.6 km/h. To reach the speed you have shown on your picture, one should change the gear ratios. However, if you've changed the gear tune on GT6, did you use the same gear tune on GT5?

 

[azidahaka]

This video shows that Ferrari Enzo top speed on Nurburgring Nordschleife is 308.9km/h
You can skip ahead to 9:40


Stock Ferrari Enzo in GT6 no oil change no AIDS no ABS sports hard tires and the top speed on Nordschleife is over 340km/h

Not only power, but oil change also increases torque across all rev range. I recently tested a C6 ZR1 built for max PP, and on CS tire it could just reach 290kmh at Big Willow main straight, then simply fitting RH tire ( no other changes ), it easily reach over 300kmh ( close to 310kmh ) before braking point for 1st turn. Higher grip tires has less slip and better traction. Getting the proper tire with similar grip in real life test is crucial.

I have tested the Enzo on GT6, SSRX, front straight, and the Enzo is redline limited at 354.6 km/h. To reach the speed you have shown on your picture, one should change the gear ratios. However, if you've changed the gear tune on GT6, did you use the same gear tune on GT5?

Exactly what i thought, the extra hps from oil change, wrong weight, unrealistic tyres, and wrong gearing is what makes things off...

 

[YZF]

Big question, you use to change oil when you do tests?

Big answer - no changes to car at all. Go to dealership, buy car, go to test track immediatelly.

Again, don't look for excuses. There are none. It's mistake from PD. That's it.

Not only power, but oil change also increases torque across all rev range. I recently tested a C6 ZR1 built for max PP, and on CS tire it could just reach 290kmh at Big Willow main straight, then simply fitting RH tire ( no other changes ), it easily reach over 300kmh ( close to 310kmh ) before braking point for 1st turn. Higher grip tires has less slip and better traction. Getting the proper tire with similar grip in real life test is crucial.

Your test could be inconsistent because with higher grip tyres you can exit at a higher speed from the last corner, before straight, which would allow you to reach higher speed at the end of the straight respectively

 

[YZF]

I have tested the Enzo on GT6, SSRX, front straight, and the Enzo is redline limited at 354.6 km/h. To reach the speed you have shown on your picture, one should change the gear ratios. However, if you've changed the gear tune on GT6, did you use the same gear tune on GT5?

I increased gear ratios for both cars to match maximum engine power and speed, i.e. both cars reach their maximum possible top speed. I had to do this because by default, PD also implemented wrong (too short) gears and both cars hit rev limitter in six gear which is not the case in real life. You can find more detailed info here:

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/will-you-fix-the-incorrect-top-speed-physics.309298/

Exactly what i thought, the extra hps from oil change, wrong weight, unrealistic tyres, and wrong gearing is what makes things off...

No it does not, you don't get 'extra boost of 500-600HP changing tyres and oil and weight (which, btw, I didn't do at all)'. Because to make Enzo go from indicated 360kph (gps ~350) to gps ~410, you need no less than extra ~600hp in real life.

P.S. I'm having issues with this multi-quote-remember-everthing forum feature. I can't delete empty messages.... I hope mods will clean them...

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Big answer - no changes to car at all. Go to dealership, buy car, go to test track immediatelly.

Again, don't look for excuses. There are none. It's mistake from PD. That's it.



Your test could be inconsistent because with higher grip tyres you can exit at a higher speed from the last corner, before straight, which would allow you to reach higher speed at the end of the straight respectively

Nope, I held on to a steady 100mph / 160kmh exit speed ( CS and RH ) on the last corner before the straight, and full on gas to the 1st turn braking point. The last right turn at Willow Springs is very easy to get consistent, simply hold entry to exit speed at 100mph. It can clearly be seen from how rapid the acceleration from 200kmh to 290kmh on both tires ( RH accelerates quicker )

And I would state once again :

All cars in GT 5 and 6 are big mistakes, almost none of them are completely accurate for stock specs and setup ( power, weight, distribution, tire, gearing, springs, alignment and LSD ) If I have to go through on each car, I would have to built / fix each of one them, research on real life datas, find a proper tire to replicate factory stock tire, and find any real life lap time + data for reference. I haven't found a car in GT6 that satisfy my criteria for being accurate to the real car, even Nissan GTR '07 has so many things wrong and PD loves Nissan.

 

[azidahaka]

Seems you do not want to listen to what most people are telling you about weight, tyres and gearing so i guess it's completely useless to keep this up.

As me and @Ridox2JZGTE tried to explain to you many times, many cars in gt6 have wrong weight, weight ration from front/rear, wrong gearing, some even have wrong hps.

Ridox has been for ages creating replicas of real cars in GT6 by inserting the real life weight, power, weight ratio, camber etc etc in a ******** of cars and after is work is done, he just changes the tires to what is most realistic.

BAM the times are the same up to 100ths of second, all speed of:

turn in
turn out
corner speed
braking point
later grip (G values)
top speed
and finally lap times are PERFECT

All of this inputting real life values and changing just tires. If you think this is just a chance that happens on all the cars Ridox took care of, well you should look at his tune list




"Someone" told me this (has some interesting points):

The straight on the track they did the test on is not long enough for most of the cars to get up 300km/h, all cars were in the banked corner at the time of hitting 300km/h, they held 300km/h out of the bank and did the 300-0 test. The video shows one of the cars hitting 300km/h and the banked corner it can be seen clearly. At 1:15 they are showing a car on the bank as it reaches 300km/h, YZF is pitching ********. The data is a combination time of the acceleration test done on the first straight, time to 300km/h hit in the banked corner, and 300-0 done on the straight after the banked corner.


Video of the 0-300-0 km/h Test done by "Sports Auto" showing banked corner used


The reason the Veyron is a sneaky choice is because its one of the few cars that did the test that can accelerate so fast it builds up most speed before hitting the banked corner. That’s why the Veyron results are not ridiculous like the rest. Only person greatly mistaken would believe the LFA takes 50.6 seconds to hit 300km/h.

MOST IMPORTANT

Most of the cars tested will have the 200-300km/h times being on the banked corner and this is why they are the slowest and don’t compare to test done by Road & Track, Car & Driver, Motor Trend etc…. They don’t makes sense at all if you look at them Lmfao


Take some proper testing from Road & Track, Motor Trend, & Car & Driver of the Lexus LFA


0-261kh/h in 21.2 seconds that’s real world tested and you think its going to take 29.4 seconds to go from 261km/h to 300km/h (+39km/h) are you kidding me?!?!?!?!?!?!? ROFLMFAO


Introducing \PROPER Testing using PROPER data


Lexus LFA Performance Testing

LFA Real World Performance

0-97 km/h (60 mph) 3.6 sec (w/ launch control.)

0-160 km/h (100 mph) 7.6 sec

0-201 km/h (125 mph) 11.4 sec

400 m (1⁄4 mi) 11.6 sec (@ 201 km/h (125 mph))

0-261 km/h (162 mph) 21.2 sec

Braking
113–0 km/h (70–0 mph) 48 m (156 ft)


LFA GT6 STOCK Performance Test @ SSRX with MoTeC i2 Pro

0-97 km/h (0-60 mph) 3.94 sec (TCS Set to 1 to simulate Launch Control)

0-160 km/h (0-100 mph) 7.86 sec

0-201 km/h (0-125 mph) 11.43 sec

400 m (1⁄4 mi) 11.96 sec (@ 206.1 km/h (128.1mph))

0-261 km/h (0-162 mph) 18.96 sec

Braking
113–0 km/h (70–0 mph) 47.24 m (155 ft) 7894ft - 8049ft



After repeating the LFA test a number of times without TCS I cannot get a faster 0-60mph than 4 seconds

I was able to do a 3.8 0-60mph again with TCS set to 1, & using the HUD to shut off TCS in 2nd gear and up I pulled off a 11.7 1/4 mile @ 127mph

With TCS on or off I get the same 0-162mph in 18.9 seconds


Final Results


Gran Turismo 6 / Real Life


0-60mph = 3.8 sec / 0-60mph = 3.6 sec

0-125mph = 11.43 sec / 0-125mph = 11.40 sec


1/4 mile = 11.7 @ 127mph / 1/4 mile = 11.6 @ 125mph


0-162mph = 18.96 sec / 0-162mph = 21.2 sec


113–0 km/h (70–0 mph) 47.24 m (155 ft) / 113–0 km/h (70–0 mph) 48 m (156 ft)

 

[YZF]

Seems you do not want to listen to what most people are telling you about weight, tyres and gearing so i guess it's completely useless to keep this up.

As me and @Ridox2JZGTE tried to explain to you many times, many cars in gt6 have wrong weight, weight ration from front/rear, wrong gearing, some even have wrong hps.

Ridox has been for ages creating replicas of real cars in GT6 by inserting the real life weight, power, weight ratio, camber etc etc in a ******** of cars and after is work is done, he just changes the tires to what is most realistic.

BAM the times are the same up to 100ths of second, all speed of:

turn in
turn out
corner speed
braking point
later grip (G values)
top speed
and finally lap times are PERFECT

All of this inputting real life values and changing just tires. If you think this is just a chance that happens on all the cars Ridox took care of, well you should look at his tune list




"Someone" told me this (has some interesting points):

To be honest, I am not discussing (and I am not interested in) comparing GT6 laptimes vs Real Life laptimes, and tyre grip differences. I didn't say anywhere that weight and tyre grip is definitely right or wrong in GT6. I don't know, I haven't done extensive tests. I'll leave this comparison to others.

However, what I am interested in is this aero/top speed issue and I want PD to notice this and to fix it. That's what matters to me and hopefully to other players so PD does something about it.

 

[MatskiMonk]

I have tested the Enzo on GT6, SSRX, front straight, and the Enzo is redline limited at 354.6 km/h. To reach the speed you have shown on your picture, one should change the gear ratios. However, if you've changed the gear tune on GT6, did you use the same gear tune on GT5?

I see Auto Motor und Sport tested the Enzo and got 355km/h at Nardo. Sorry @YZF if you are claiming times are stock, on tyres that are known to be slightly arcadey, whilst altering gear ratio's, and comparing to real world times where you have no information on other variable details... I don't think you can be so sure of all your claims.

 

[azidahaka]

To be honest, I am not discussing (and I am not interested in) comparing GT6 laptimes vs Real Life laptimes, and tyre grip differences. I didn't say anywhere that weight and tyre grip is definitely right or wrong in GT6. I don't know, I haven't done extensive tests. I'll leave this comparison to others.

However, what I am interested in is this aero/top speed issue and I want PD to notice this and to fix it. That's what matters to me and hopefully to other players so PD does something about it.

Again:

Ridox has been for ages creating replicas of real cars in GT6 by inserting the real life weight, power, weight ratio, camber etc etc in a ******** of cars and after is work is done, he just changes the tires to what is most realistic.

You can't understand your values if you do not take into account that real life weight, power, weight ratio, camber of cars in gt6 is almost always wrong.

You want to make a good test and understand what is wrong? Take all real life values (again cambers ride height, power, weight ratio, total weight gear ratio tires etc etc), stick them in the car you are complaining about and see what happens.

If it'll still all completely messed up you are right, then.

 

[YZF]

Again:



You can't understand your values if you do not take into account that real life weight, power, weight ratio, camber of cars in gt6 is almost always wrong.

You want to make a good test and understand what is wrong?

No. I don't care which internal functions, responsible for internal physics engine calculation, are incorrect. (or if it's because of tyres, weight, camber, etc.) What matters to me is the final outcome: 0-300km/h time, 0-400km/h time, top speed. That's it.

It's enough for me to compare seconds or km/h to see huge difference. And to call it unrealistic.

P.S. Although from the general education, apart from aero and engine power, the next thing which influences acceleration is weight calculation and all other things have minimal effect to straight line acceleration / top speed overall.

I see Auto Motor und Sport tested the Enzo and got 355km/h at Nardo. Sorry @YZF if you are claiming times are stock, on tyres that are known to be slightly arcadey, whilst altering gear ratio's, and comparing to real world times where you have no information on other variable details... I don't think you can be so sure of all your claims.

GT5/GT6 Enzo hits ~350 because it bangs rev limiter in 6th gear. AutoMotor un Sport did not hit rev limiter in 6th gear as real life Enzo has long enough gears to not reach limiter. I am not following what are you saying? Do you think if you put long enough ratios in stock enzo it will do 400kmh? Unfortunately no...

However, there are hundreds of sports cars in GT6. If you don't want Enzo, that's ok. Take any other one.

How about MB SL55AMG, for which I made NO CHANGES at all:

 

[azidahaka]

If this matter is so serious to you, WORK out what is wrong, else the direction is to the whining thread -> there lol

If you want real results ingame, try and put real settings ingame. This is what all people told you all the time.

Are the results you get running on your 10kms long straight wrong? Yes they are.
Are you interested in understanding what is wrong so you can get proper results? No you are not.
Are you willingly to input right values in car so that you can check if it is physics wrong? No you aren't.

Basically i'm puzzled about what you want or are trying to prove.

If you do not make tests your "fix high speed physic" request could be 100% wrong and you might instead ask "please pd give us correct stock values to cars" because with no tests the physic might be ok but cars input values off.

 

[YZF]

If this matter is so serious to you, WORK out what is wrong, else the direction is to the whining thread -> there lol

No, I don't need to work out anything. I want PD to find their mistakes and fix them. I am not working at PD and I can't tell them exactly which variable in which function is doing something wrong. All I can do is present the outcome: wrong numbers.

It is acctually a waste of time figuring out exactly to detail what is wrong. I will not find that out and you won't find that out as well.

I did acceleration comparisons, I did top speed comparisons, I checked real life data from different sources, I compared against GT5 (and from memory - GT4 / GT3). That's it. There is more than enough proof that something is wrong. And based on numbers, I'd say something with aerodinamic calculation.

If you want real results ingame, try and put real settings ingame. This is what all people told you all the time.

That's total BS. If I want real results ingame, PD must release a patch with the fix. That's it. I can't do anything more.

 

[ALB123]

Who is this person who keeps creating accounts and PM'ing me the same stuff, over and over, just to keep getting banned?!

 

[YZF]

I browsed some youtube videos and found another one, doing 0-300 km/h with Mercedes Benz SL 55 AMG. So I made some runs in GT6 and here are the results:

0-300km/h: 36.9sec (GT6, Sport Hard tyres)
0-300km/h: ~51 sec (Real Life)

I also decided to test tyre influence for 200km/h - 300 km/h tests, as some users tried to make a big deal out of it. So here are the results:

200-300km/h: 22.9sec (Comfort Hard) - worst tyre in game
200-300km/h: 22.7sec (Sport Hard)
200-300km/h: 22.4sec (Sport Soft)
200-300km/h: 21.4sec (Racing Soft) - best tyre in game

Between Sport Soft and Comfort Hard tyre, there's half a second difference, and between real life and GT6 there's about ~12 sec difference.


Video I took as comparison. Not ideal, but you get the general impression: