- 3,131
- IL, USA
- DigitalBaka
- DigitalBaka587
FITT - Federation of International Tuners and Test-Drivers
- Thread starter DigitalBaka
- 2,660 comments
- 166,280 views
Pete05
Premium
- 7,082
- Melbourne, Australia
@Ronald6
Wow those PP numbers came out closer than I thought hey would.
Not sure too many people would want to spend $2m on a Veyron for a FITT challenge though.
I've been crunching the numbers on a David vs Goliath & am still not satisfied with what I've ended up with so am putting that to one side as a WIP.
332i
(Banned)
- 855
- Morocco
- yadeegson
You havent watched f1 in a very long time, sir. There has never been as much passing in f1 history as there has been the past couple seasons. There are infographics all over the web.
Top five on the grid finishing the race up there...not quite anymore lol... Probably worth your while to tune in again. I don't recall a season in a long time (more like there never has been) where things were this diced up and there's serious competition and gains being made by the day right now with the new era. Biggest rule revamp in FIA history. Ever. A caterham or marussia could win this weekend for all we know. Largest US viewership and fan base ever at the moment.
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
Its a bit of an unruly twitch monster in standard form, give it more power and it does the same thing only much faster and with even less chance of catching it.
If you did it around 550PP you could have lightweight cars such as the GSXR-4 / Rocket / Fireblade (might need detuning) and put them up against some American/German muscle. I think you would need to have it over 2 courses, one thats very twist and one that has a lot of fast straights otherwise the lightweights are going to dominate.
- 5,489
- mid west USA
- Otaliema
not necessarily use a mid type course and the lightweights will catch up in the turns and highpowered will pull away in the straights. it's just a question of which will do better. not to mention in a fireblade or gsxr full ballast full power with in the PP range will beat min weight min power set up even on twisty courses. Currently very little makes up for raw power in GT6
- 5,489
- mid west USA
- Otaliema
IRL yes, GT6 not so much right now. Look at the hot hatch challenge. lighter cars got destroyed. look at the sti evo challenge street racers the winning cars where heavier with more power. the winning cars in the spec street where the heavier cars as well and a wet Tesbuka is not a power friendly course. in GT5 I would dominate in my elise over cars that had 100hp more than me in online, In GT6 *currently* I would get my back side handed to me.
I do agree in Real life light weight will beat heavy any day of the week on a balanced course or twisty course. and even some high speed courses depending on how many turns it has and how long the straight is. Look at the orig Mini in rally, it looked at the rest of the field with more than 150 bhp than it had and laughed all the way to 3 world championships.
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
I don't know man, I've found that when working to a PP range losing weight gives far better results than improving power.
The street racers had a big variable in the form of track conditions that negated handling bonus and the street spec were all the same weight. I don't remember the FF challenge well enough to comment on that.
Higher power only seems to give you an advantage past about 110mph and even then its slight, the real advantage comes once you are past 135mph. If the tracks don't have long enough straights between cornering sections then the advantage is never gained in a hot lap scenario.
Pete05
Premium
- 7,082
- Melbourne, Australia
@DolHaus
@Otaliema
My original idea was for pre 1970 cars on one course using different compounds of Comfort tyres to keep it simple. Which track is proving difficult as I'm biased towards a real life circuit.
I can see the lightweight cars having a party on somewhere like Ascari & Suzuka whereas the heavy-hitters would dominate at somewhere like Daytona road course.
Choosing the entry list isn't giving me any relief either.
How do you make a '65 Alfa Romeo GTA competitive against '64 Pontiac GTO? Different tyres? Limit the GTO to original gear ratios with the final drive ratio being free? Maybe having a limit on braking such as 2/1, 3/2 or 4/3 for the GTO? How does the balancing work for those in between? Toyota 2000GT for example.
Another idea I've had is:
2000-current 4 doors up to 500pp
(Evo & WRX excluded)
Looking over an entry list of cars between 400 & 500pp, do you guys think a BMW 330i starting at 420pp can be competitive against a Jaguar XFR '10 at 498pp?
Feedback is most welcome
@Otaliema
My original idea was for pre 1970 cars on one course using different compounds of Comfort tyres to keep it simple. Which track is proving difficult as I'm biased towards a real life circuit.
I can see the lightweight cars having a party on somewhere like Ascari & Suzuka whereas the heavy-hitters would dominate at somewhere like Daytona road course.
Choosing the entry list isn't giving me any relief either.
How do you make a '65 Alfa Romeo GTA competitive against '64 Pontiac GTO? Different tyres? Limit the GTO to original gear ratios with the final drive ratio being free? Maybe having a limit on braking such as 2/1, 3/2 or 4/3 for the GTO? How does the balancing work for those in between? Toyota 2000GT for example.
Another idea I've had is:
2000-current 4 doors up to 500pp
(Evo & WRX excluded)
Looking over an entry list of cars between 400 & 500pp, do you guys think a BMW 330i starting at 420pp can be competitive against a Jaguar XFR '10 at 498pp?
Feedback is most welcome
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
If you check the BTCC-8 thread in the online race series forums you will see how they're balanced in there (mostly 4 door saloons), basically you have to set a weigh/hp limit for each car in order to make it fair. Its a lot of work
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/btcc-8-round-2-indy-road-course-2-spaces-open.306584/
Last edited:
- 5,489
- mid west USA
- Otaliema
true with in the same car lighter is almost always better but two cars at the same pp, the one with more power will almost always win. I had this problem with the Pro spec when i first started it was PP limited and I couldn't make the STi competivite at all. thats why it ended up limited by weight and power.
True enough on the street spec. I'm tired i forgot it was weight and power limited =/ *how could I forget that in my own challenge
*when you have two vastly different cars the only way to keep them around the same time on the track is to spec them. set power and set weight. and you need to set the numbers so that each car has to make concessions to reach it. i.e. the bmw gets to say 1100 kg with full reduction and the jag only gets to 1200, set the limit at 1250 or so that they both can go full weight and add ballast. or use less reductions.@DolHaus
@Otaliema
My original idea was for pre 1970 cars on one course using different compounds of Comfort tyres to keep it simple. Which track is proving difficult as I'm biased towards a real life circuit.
I can see the lightweight cars having a party on somewhere like Ascari & Suzuka whereas the heavy-hitters would dominate at somewhere like Daytona road course.
Choosing the entry list isn't giving me any relief either.
How do you make a '65 Alfa Romeo GTA competitive against '64 Pontiac GTO? Different tyres? Limit the GTO to original gear ratios with the final drive ratio being free? Maybe having a limit on braking such as 2/1, 3/2 or 4/3 for the GTO? How does the balancing work for those in between? Toyota 2000GT for example.
Another idea I've had is:
2000-current 4 doors up to 500pp
(Evo & WRX excluded)
Looking over an entry list of cars between 400 & 500pp, do you guys think a BMW 330i starting at 420pp can be competitive against a Jaguar XFR '10 at 498pp?
Feedback is most welcome
same with power pick a target number that both cars can reach with out being maxed or have have to striped and limited to reach.
Spec'ing a entry list is tuff finding the right balance of weight and power.
Pete05
Premium
- 7,082
- Melbourne, Australia
Oh my headtrue with in the same car lighter is almost always better but two cars at the same pp, the one with more power will almost always win. I had this problem with the Pro spec when i first started it was PP limited and I couldn't make the STi competivite at all. thats why it ended up limited by weight and power.
True enough on the street spec. I'm tired i forgot it was weight and power limited =/ *how could I forget that in my own challenge
when you have two vastly different cars the only way to keep them around the same time on the track is to spec them. set power and set weight. and you need to set the numbers so that each car has to make concessions to reach it. i.e. the bmw gets to say 1100 kg with full reduction and the jag only gets to 1200, set the limit at 1250 or so that they both can go full weight and add ballast. or use less reductions.
same with power pick a target number that both cars can reach with out being maxed or have have to striped and limited to reach.
Spec'ing a entry list is tuff finding the right balance of weight and power.
Thanks for the advice
- 5,489
- mid west USA
- Otaliema
@Pete05 also going with @DolHaus has said, make sure your test group includes the top and bottom base PP cars from your entry list so that either you can accept one/both of them into the challenge or eliminate one/both of them, or change the challenge if you really really want both of them in the challenge.
- 4,016
- New Jersey
- crash27wwjd
I would also recommend feedback from only a few others (too many cooks in the soup comes to mind
), @Otaliema got help from @Motor City Hami and @DigitalBaka I believe and I asked for opinions before hand as well. But final structure is up to you.
), @Otaliema got help from @Motor City Hami and @DigitalBaka I believe and I asked for opinions before hand as well. But final structure is up to you.
- 5,489
- mid west USA
- Otaliema
@Pete05, Very good point @Bowtie-muscle too many cooks in the kitchen ruins the soup so to speak. I did ask for help from @Motor City Hami and @DigitalBaka and they made great sounding boards and veto men, but all major choices where left up to me entriely.
You don't want a committee but unless you've done this a bunch of times you don't want to fly solo.
One thing I did was looked over past events, looked the balance that was there. how did the spec classes get set up?
The quick and dirty was, all cars could get 3-6 power upgrades, all had a max power limiter of ~95% all had a weight that could achieved by all cars with full reductions and ballast or skipping a reduction or two.
The power to weight ratio tuning option was tried with the pro spec in the sti evo challenge but @Motor City Hami found it hard to tune to it and still had problems of one car dominating with all but one set up, and the other only being competitive with one set up. which why i suggested straying away from that a few days ago. It's a great idea sorta the PtWR should be a base figure that stands up in all country's but like setting HP limits when the power type changes to say PS the PtWR also changes.
One things I'd suggest is maybe give a sample set up on of the cars in the group to ensure everyone can get a base line for their game for power. Thankfully all weight is done in kg so that needs no translation.
You don't want a committee but unless you've done this a bunch of times you don't want to fly solo.
One thing I did was looked over past events, looked the balance that was there. how did the spec classes get set up?
The quick and dirty was, all cars could get 3-6 power upgrades, all had a max power limiter of ~95% all had a weight that could achieved by all cars with full reductions and ballast or skipping a reduction or two.
The power to weight ratio tuning option was tried with the pro spec in the sti evo challenge but @Motor City Hami found it hard to tune to it and still had problems of one car dominating with all but one set up, and the other only being competitive with one set up. which why i suggested straying away from that a few days ago. It's a great idea sorta the PtWR should be a base figure that stands up in all country's but like setting HP limits when the power type changes to say PS the PtWR also changes.
One things I'd suggest is maybe give a sample set up on of the cars in the group to ensure everyone can get a base line for their game for power. Thankfully all weight is done in kg so that needs no translation.
- 506
- uk
- bulletproofbrian
I really enjoyed tuning and testing for the Sti vs EVO challenge, and learnt loads. But, can we have a simpler challenge next? 2 classes and 1 track per class? Maybe one of the classes have a specific car, the other a choice of 3 or 4? With the recent physics changes it would be good to see a whole bunch of tunes for the same cars. 👍
- 4,016
- New Jersey
- crash27wwjd
I agree 1000%
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
The physics update is definitely going to make for some interesting approaches to tuning
- 506
- uk
- bulletproofbrian
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
I'm getting my head around it I think, the effects are subtle and there's a lot of new tricks to find. I don't think there are going to be any massive gains with camber, maybe 1/2 a second on certain circuits in some cars but not sweeping improvements. Will be very interesting to see what people come up withFrom what i`ve read in "Camber Theory" you`ve got it all buttoned down already!👍
- 1,494
- Portland / Or /
- Barefoot_Driver
After some testing the Caterham Fireblade vs the Jaguar XKR-S '11 on Autumn Ring and High Speed Ring is a good setup.
A stock Caterham is 1.5 seconds faster at Autumn Ring but the Jaguar is 2.2 seconds faster at HSR.
So I propose as the next FITT event:
David vs Goliath
The Caterham Fireblade vs the Jaguar XKR-S '11
At Autumn Ring and High Speed Ring
The Caterham cannot have power upgrades but all else is allowed, max PP is 562.
The Jaguar cannot have any weight reduction but all else is allowed up to 562 PP. Engine detune 5% max.
The total time from both tracks and total Drivers Choice for both tracks will determine the winners, two for each class.
Two classes, one for Sports Hard tyres, one for Sports Soft tyres.
Tuning will be open from June 29 till July 13.
Testing will be from July 14 till July 21.
Two cars, two tracks, two weeks to tune and one to test.
Sound good?
A stock Caterham is 1.5 seconds faster at Autumn Ring but the Jaguar is 2.2 seconds faster at HSR.
So I propose as the next FITT event:
David vs Goliath
The Caterham Fireblade vs the Jaguar XKR-S '11
At Autumn Ring and High Speed Ring
The Caterham cannot have power upgrades but all else is allowed, max PP is 562.
The Jaguar cannot have any weight reduction but all else is allowed up to 562 PP. Engine detune 5% max.
The total time from both tracks and total Drivers Choice for both tracks will determine the winners, two for each class.
Two classes, one for Sports Hard tyres, one for Sports Soft tyres.
Tuning will be open from June 29 till July 13.
Testing will be from July 14 till July 21.
Two cars, two tracks, two weeks to tune and one to test.
Sound good?
- 12,635
- paracuru
- praiano63
From what i`ve read in "Camber Theory" you`ve got it all buttoned down already!
I don´t think that camber represent a gain in lap time. Only people talking about feeling, it seems that.....
Why not a shootout with a unique neutral good car, like the S2000 around 500PP , on Autumn Ring with 10 tuners.
In this shootout the only setting available would be the suspension and LSD
5 tuners tuning the car with camber 0.0
5 tuners tuning the car with free camber value.
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
Does anyone know which tracks would likely benefit from camber? The only one I can think of where I've seen race cars running big camber is Bathurst.
I say this because I think that much like real life, camber will be beneficial in some situations but not others. Its not supposed to be a fix-all, just useful in certain scenarios for adjusting the balance and potential of a car. My thought is that from what I've experienced so far, it allows you to make a stiffer high speed setup function better on occasional tight twisty sections.
Take Grand Valley as an example, 2/3rds of that track is high speed, high load corners where a more stable, stiff car is faster. If you set up this way then you will struggle to get optimum performance in the slower, tighter bits. Conversely if you run a softer setup you will gain performance in the tighter sections but lose speed in the fast bits. Standard gain vs. loss that you have to balance in every tune, right? Maybe by using camber you could improve the low speed handling of a stiff car and have to make less sacrifices to get the best lap time perhaps? It might only be a tenth or something, but every little helps.
I'm not claiming that this is true by any means, just trying to find some answers really
I say this because I think that much like real life, camber will be beneficial in some situations but not others. Its not supposed to be a fix-all, just useful in certain scenarios for adjusting the balance and potential of a car. My thought is that from what I've experienced so far, it allows you to make a stiffer high speed setup function better on occasional tight twisty sections.
Take Grand Valley as an example, 2/3rds of that track is high speed, high load corners where a more stable, stiff car is faster. If you set up this way then you will struggle to get optimum performance in the slower, tighter bits. Conversely if you run a softer setup you will gain performance in the tighter sections but lose speed in the fast bits. Standard gain vs. loss that you have to balance in every tune, right? Maybe by using camber you could improve the low speed handling of a stiff car and have to make less sacrifices to get the best lap time perhaps? It might only be a tenth or something, but every little helps.
I'm not claiming that this is true by any means, just trying to find some answers really
