Ferrari Enzo

[Nick-RD]

I've used a combination of RKM and Avid Racing tunes for this Enzo, and as it is my favorite car, I'm not so much horrified, but ashamed at the way it handles.
Anyway, I tended to favor Avid's tune to some extent, but with essences of RKM.
Nothing though seems to cure it's understeer, and its skittishness under breaking.

Despite this I was glad to hear that in the new update PD decided to add a ballast setting. This was great, cars that understeer is normally due to the lack of pressure the front wheels have acting on the road. I spent some time adjusting the settings, putting its position all the way to the front at (-50) and with a ballast of about 25-40, it does not cure, but helps with the beast of a car that ferrari have produced.

Tell me what you think, I'm no tuner just thought I'd help out.

Nick

 

[Randum311]

I just purchased this car last night and was blown away by its massive understeer - I'll try your suggestions and see what happens. The 430 I thought, handled great. I did only minor adjustments to my dampening, height and a slight camber.

 

[Nick-RD]

I just purchased this car last night and was blown away by its massive understeer - I'll try your suggestions and see what happens. The 430 I thought, handled great. I did only minor adjustments to my dampening, height and a slight camber.

It's unbelievable right?

 

[oppositelock]

More weight up front means more understeer, not less. The centrifugal force pushing the extra weight towards the outside of the corner is always greater than the increased friction caused by the weight on the tire. As such, people usually put weight on the nose of a rear-heavy car to cure oversteer. The Enzo's inherent understeer is most likely due to the extreme tire stagger: 245 mm front versus 345 mm rear. Not much you can do about that but tune, tune, tune.

 

[Nick-RD]

More weight up front means more understeer, not less. The centrifugal force pushing the extra weight towards the outside of the corner is always greater than the increased friction caused by the weight on the tire. As such, people usually put weight on the nose of a rear-heavy car to cure oversteer. The Enzo's inherent understeer is most likely due to the extreme tire stagger: 245 mm front versus 345 mm rear. Not much you can do about that but tune, tune, tune.

True, but the 30kg is not enough to upset the centripetal force (centrifugal is a theoretical force), however it helps apply the smallest of pressure onto the front tires because the nose is light, giving more surface area in contact with the road therefore increasing traction.

 

[oppositelock]

The nose isn't that light. A quick google search shows 44/56 weight distribution, which is actually more balanced than your average MR and not even close to a RR which is usually between 40/60 and 38/62. I'd say the problem lies elsewhere.

 

[Nick-RD]

The nose isn't that light. A quick google search shows 44/56 weight distribution, which is actually more balanced than your average MR and not even close to a RR which is usually between 40/60 and 38/62. I'd say the problem lies elsewhere.

Irrelevant weight distribution has only a small amount to do with the handling of the car, front downforce is what it needs to push the front down, therefore as a semi solution adding force to the front helps.

 

[oppositelock]

Irrelevant weight distribution has only a small amount to do with the handling of the car, front downforce is what it needs to push the front down, therefore as a semi solution adding force to the front helps.

That frankly doesn't make sense. Mass is not a substitute for aerodynamic downforce, not even as a semi-solution. Aerodynamic downforce only pushes downward on a car. Not only does mass push laterally while cornering, if cornering at over 1 g it actually creates more lateral force than downward. It has virtually the opposite effect of aerodynamic downforce.

 

[Nick-RD]

That is why the mass is no more than 40 kg. I'll put forward my example comparing the honda NSX type R, which is another mid-engined rear wheel drive car. The NSX at full tuning is still heavier and less powerful than the Enzo, this is because its weight distribution on all four tires is almost, if not exactly 50-50 (thanks to Ayrton), nevertheless with both cars with TCS off and 1 abs, I have lapped the NSX 0.436 s faster round TSUKBA (mind my spelling), it also was faster at the Top Gear Track and Suzuka, now I'm not saying curb weight is a substitute, however because its (Enzo) weight is somewhere ~860 kg (whilst tuned) with a distribution of 44/56 would mean 481.6 kg would be on the rear and 378.4 kg on the front, a difference of 103 kg, a relatively significant amount. by increasing the weight by 30 kg, lets say, you would improve distribution to 48/52, which is good.
Doing Calculations on the lateral G you will find that the position of both positive and negative ballast does not go beyond the wheel base, yes over 1G the lateral effects of the ballast theoretically have an effect, however the cornering speeds that are necessary to reach beyond 1G are that when the cars natural aerodynamic downforce of 775 kg is helping it stay on the track. That 30 kg is still not enough to off set that downforce on the tires.

oppositelock I do not want to create an argument, I just have found a semi-solution to improve my lap-times around technically difficult tracks.

 

[oppositelock]

I don't wish to argue either, I've had plenty of that recently. As long as you find something that works for you that's all that really matters. I just like to lay out my case so that others can decide for themselves. Happy motoring.