FITT - Federation of International Tuners and Test-Drivers

[ImToLegitToQuit]

The long list of options is to give the host the options to pick what they want the challenge to be more focused around. Do they want to see more stable race type tunes or more hot lap style, etc. Good call on the mid corner I knew I was forgetting part of the corner


Exactly this idea is great but needs more work, how do we set up the grading, do we mandate certain categories for every challenge or give the host free call on them, do we limit the list to four or five, do we allow weighting of a category to force a shift of style for a challenge, etc.

I don't think adding variables is a good idea, the scoring system needs to fit every circumstance rather than being custom tailored every time.

I don't think giving preference is a good idea because cars will start to be tailored to the point system instead of just trying to be the best overall. I do think we could have overseer choice on the 4th category though. we need corner entry and exit for sure. we vote for a third because there has been a few tossed around. those will be permanent and then the 4th would be the choice of whoever is running the challenge ? i think that would be fair and still allow a bit of personality.

 

[shaunm80]

i think I understand your question. It's not actually going to be percentage based like we are used to in school. It's point based but broken into categories. An example of a 4 score system would look like this:

Corner entry: 20pts
it turns in quickly but if you don't get the apex right and have to make an adjustment it won't regain that initial grip.
Corner exit: 25pts
it stays planted on exit and lets you use the throttle early without fear of spinning out
Braking: 15pts
it feels like I am braking longer than other cars, perhaps due to the high toe settings combined with the 2/6 brake balance.
Personal preference: 19pts
it's a good car that needs to be driven with precision, it doesn't like to make changes once you've started turning though. the losses had during the longer braking are more than made up for on the corner exit though.

DC Total: 79

so with a perfect score being 25 points in each category this car had a total of 79. Rather than normally scoring a 7.5 or 8 on our current scale, the tuner can see that braking needs work and maybe softening up the front to help with entry might work. I hope that answers your question.

It still seems a little tester subjective when it comes to what score a tester would allocate though. Whilst I can understand and clearly see where you are coming from, I would have thought that having 4 area (or more??) criteria (broken evenly into 100 points) would need some form of guidance as to what score should be given for a car which has brakes that are weak and require longer than normal to slow down. If there is no guidance, apart from giving tuners guidance on where their tune is lacking, what other positives will come from unguided scoring?.

 

[ImToLegitToQuit]

It still seems a little tester subjective when it comes to what score a tester would allocate though. Whilst I can understand and clearly see where you are coming from, I would have thought that having 4 area (or more??) criteria (broken evenly into 100 points) would need some form of guidance as to what score should be given for a car which has brakes that are weak and require longer than normal to slow down. If there is no guidance, apart from giving tuners guidance on where their tune is lacking, what other positives will come from unguided scoring?.

im not sure what you are asking now. DC score has always been tester preference because there are different skill levels and driving styles. can you explain what you mean by guided or unguided ?

 

[shaunm80]

im not sure what you are asking now. DC score has always been tester preference because there are different skill levels and driving styles. can you explain what you mean by guided or unguided ?

Well, subjective scores (to me) is a testers personal opinion of a tune. They allocate a number on a scale of 1-10 for the tune as a whole - This is the model which is sort of used now. I know that it is a little more scientific than that (reading the testing section on the FITT rules) but really, a tester will have preference for a certain style. This for me is unguided scoring.

Guided scoring is when the criteria for scoring is clearly laid out and points are given if a car meets the criteria stated.

Does that make sense? I hope so..

 

[DolHaus]

It still seems a little tester subjective when it comes to what score a tester would allocate though. Whilst I can understand and clearly see where you are coming from, I would have thought that having 4 area (or more??) criteria (broken evenly into 100 points) would need some form of guidance as to what score should be given for a car which has brakes that are weak and require longer than normal to slow down. If there is no guidance, apart from giving tuners guidance on where their tune is lacking, what other positives will come from unguided scoring?.

DC is always subjective, there is no real way of making it exact and that is sort of the point.

Lets say we have a car that is a very stable under braking, some folks will love that because it fits their driving style and give it 20/25 (Comment: Great! Felt really confident on the brakes so I could push harder)
I on the other hand would find that doesn't fit with my driving style and is prohibiting me from driving the way I want to and so I might only give it 12/25 (Comment: Functional but a little bit too stable which prevented trail braking and didn't allow me to push as hard)

This doesn't mean that the car is good or bad, just means it fits some and not others and would get an average overall score

 

[shaunm80]

DC is always subjective, there is no real way of making it exact and that is sort of the point.

Lets say we have a car that is a very stable under braking, some folks will love that because it fits their driving style and give it 20/25 (Comment: Great! Felt really confident on the brakes so I could push harder)
I on the other hand would find that doesn't fit with my driving style and is prohibiting me from driving the way I want to and so I might only give it 12/25 (Comment: Functional but a little bit too stable which prevented trail braking and didn't allow me to push as hard)

This doesn't mean that the car is good or bad, just means it fits some and not others and would get an average overall score

I am cool with that side of things. Everyone is different and requires different things to be just so for them to like it. I know that you can't take the subjective away from testers, it would be impossible to do that. I think what I am trying to say is that we need guidelines (generalised) which they can grade against, if the car doesn't meet their driving style, obviously that tune would not receive a high mark in that area. The point (I think) i am trying to make is that testers need to base this subjective opinion into some official guidance to give a DC score..

 

[Otaliema]

Guided scoring is when the criteria for scoring is clearly laid out and points are given if a car meets the criteria stated.

Basically semi-standardized scoring system? the car brakes in X distance while maintaining a good amount of control it gets between X-X points?

@DolHaus agreed the DC is a subjective score hence why it's called the drivers choice. Not all tunes are for everyone, a tune that scores high from all drivers is a rare and exceptionally well done tune.

What I like about the new system is if a tune doesn't fit a style well in one area but is great every place else than it will still score very well even if that area hurt the lap time it doesn't hurt the scoring of the other areas, or most of them depending on what the issue was.

 

[ImToLegitToQuit]

Well, subjective scores (to me) is a testers personal opinion of a tune. They allocate a number on a scale of 1-10 for the tune as a whole - This is the model which is sort of used now. I know that it is a little more scientific than that (reading the testing section on the FITT rules) but really, a tester will have preference for a certain style. This for me is unguided scoring.

Guided scoring is when the criteria for scoring is clearly laid out and points are given if a car meets the criteria stated.

Does that make sense? I hope so..

I understand you point now and it is a really good one. The new system would in a way, take away the complete subjectiveness that comes with the way we score it now. I think the trade off is that it is more informative for the tuners and it allows a way for DC to count towards the total score and find a true winner.

which would you consider is more important ? I feel like there is still some subjectiveness because you are allowed to score each category as you wish. Also a good compromise would be to have the 4th category be kind of a bonus points so to speak. we could have 3 categories and then up to 25 bonus points ?

It's not how I would personally do it but I'm sure we can find a way that keeps everyone happy (mostly) nothing is set in stone yet for sure.

 

[shaunm80]

Basically semi-standardized scoring system? the car brakes in X distance while maintaining a good amount of control it gets between X-X points?

@DolHaus agreed the DC is a subjective score hence why it's called the drivers choice. Not all tunes are for everyone, a tune that scores high from all drivers is a rare and exceptionally well done tune.

What I like about the new system is if a tune doesn't fit a style well in one area but is great every place else than it will still score very well even if that area hurt the lap time it doesn't hurt the scoring of the other areas, or most of them depending on what the issue was.

Yes.. Thats it. Perfectly said. "Between X-X points". I too agree that DC is subjective, It can't be any other way but like you eloquently put, if one area is bad but the others are good, it won't hurt the overall score of a tune. So glad what I put made a little bit of sense. Right now my head is in Glomerular filtration and tubular reabsorption.. I am attempting to multitask but studying is making my thought process a little slow at the moment.

 

[ImToLegitToQuit]

Yes.. Thats it. Perfectly said. "Between X-X points". I too agree that DC is subjective, It can't be any other way but like you eloquently put, if one area is bad but the others are good, it won't hurt the overall score of a tune. So glad what I put made a little bit of sense. Right now my head is in Glomerular filtration and tubular reabsorption.. I am attempting to multitask but studying is making my thought process a little slow at the moment.

1 issue with that is that it would not be subjective anymore. It would be strictly mathematical and would also be affected by ABS preference. then it would no longer be a drivers choice score, it would be just checked against a list of stats.

With the new way, you still are choosing the score yourself but kind of being helped in delivering your score. A good example would be continuing with braking. A straigtline braker would score a longer braking zone worse than a trail braker would.

With the current scoring system you would say it got an 8.5 because of the braking. with the new way though you are coming to the same subjective conclusion but it is more finely tuned or defined. I'm having a bit of a hard time explaining it I think.

Either way, i gotta go to work and drive some exotics, that'll clear my head lol.

 

[shaunm80]

I understand you point now and it is a really good one. The new system would in a way, take away the complete subjectiveness that comes with the way we score it now. I think the trade off is that it is more informative for the tuners and it allows a way for DC to count towards the total score and find a true winner.

which would you consider is more important ? I feel like there is still some subjectiveness because you are allowed to score each category as you wish. Also a good compromise would be to have the 4th category be kind of a bonus points so to speak. we could have 3 categories and then up to 25 bonus points ?

It's not how I would personally do it but I'm sure we can find a way that keeps everyone happy (mostly) nothing is set in stone yet for sure.

Your idea isn't bad at all. a certain number of categories (i.e. 3) are mandatory for scoring via guidance. i.e. X-X points for a car which has excellent turn in with no under or oversteer present. and a fourth category can be scored base on individual perceptions of that area. Give it a broad range of scores. (if it was out of 25 points, 0-5 points - car was terrible at this criteria, 6-10 points - the tune lacked finesse in this area, 11-15 - the car was generally okay but nothing special 16 - 20 - the car was really good in this area but has a minor issue with... 21-25 - Excellent in this area, able to extract everything out of the tune and more..

Something like that would suit driver preference then, as it is how that category felt to them as a driver, not going off something which says that a certain number of points need to be given if a car was able to do....

This fourth category could be one chosen by the host for the FITT challenge they have created.

 

[DolHaus]

I am cool with that side of things. Everyone is different and requires different things to be just so for them to like it. I know that you can't take the subjective away from testers, it would be impossible to do that. I think what I am trying to say is that we need guidelines (generalised) which they can grade against, if the car doesn't meet their driving style, obviously that tune would not receive a high mark in that area. The point (I think) i am trying to make is that testers need to base this subjective opinion into some official guidance to give a DC score..

I know what you mean but I think breaking the scoring up into sections will give more accurate feedback. Currently people are working on a 5 point scale (5/10 being equal to stock settings) so scoring is difficult to be concise, with the new system you would be able to be more subjective on each element rather than grading the car as a whole.

I don't think it needs to be as precise as "Braking = X points for stopping in Y distance from Z speed" because that doesn't really cover the criteria adequately. It also means a lot of extra analysing for testers to be accurate in scoring. We also don't have adequate data feedback to grade acceleration or other data driven subjects so giving a grading criteria becomes impossible. It needs to remain subjective - "How well does this element compliment this tune/contest?"

 

[ImToLegitToQuit]

Your idea isn't bad at all. a certain number of categories (i.e. 3) are mandatory for scoring via guidance. i.e. X-X points for a car which has excellent turn in with no under or oversteer present. and a fourth category can be scored base on individual perceptions of that area. Give it a broad range of scores. (if it was out of 25 points, 0-5 points - car was terrible at this criteria, 6-10 points - the tune lacked finesse in this area, 11-15 - the car was generally okay but nothing special 16 - 20 - the car was really good in this area but has a minor issue with... 21-25 - Excellent in this area, able to extract everything out of the tune and more..

Something like that would suit driver preference then, as it is how that category felt to them as a driver, not going off something which says that a certain number of points need to be given if a car was able to do....

This fourth category could be one chosen by the host for the FITT challenge they have created.

I think what you are saying is actually going to happen naturally anyway, If a tester likes a car he is going to score it high regardless if its in 1 lump or multiple categories. even considering the bonus points idea, it will still happen naturally. a well like car is going to get a lot of bonus points.

 

[shaunm80]

I think what you are saying is actually going to happen naturally anyway, If a tester likes a car he is going to score it high regardless if its in 1 lump or multiple categories. even considering the bonus points idea, it will still happen naturally. a well like car is going to get a lot of bonus points.

If we do change the DC scoring system, multiple categories would be my preference (for obvious benefits) and if as you say, testers will naturally score higher for cars they get on with, loose guidelines such as the the examples I pondered would fit in well. Subjectiveness will always be a part of testing other peoples tunes, and it would be wrong to stifle that element. I would be happy with broad guidelines in multiple categories if that is the route chosen.

 

[ImToLegitToQuit]

When I get home I will do a mock challenge with one car and we can test it and score it to see what we like and don't like. What do you guys think ?

 

[DolHaus]

When I get home I will do a mock challenge with one car and we can test it and score it to see what we like and don't like. What do you guys think ?

Sounds good to me, a dry run would help to show how it will work in practice 👍

 

[shaunm80]

When I get home I will do a mock challenge with one car and we can test it and score it to see what we like and don't like. What do you guys think ?

Sounds good to me too. be good to see how this new format will progress.

 

[Otaliema]

When I get home I will do a mock challenge with one car and we can test it and score it to see what we like and don't like. What do you guys think ?

I like that idea too. Grab a random non-FITT challenge tune from the data base and we will have at it.

 

[shaunm80]

Photo art from South East Asia

 

[MrGrado]

Imagine a contest with a samba bus and a motorsport elise. With the current DC scoring the samba bus can out score the elise for DC, but I doubt it can happen if DC is allocated based on performance (even if the elise was terrible and the samba bus was great). That's why there is a DC score.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Shameless plug, any chance of using this Use the car at current A spec Expert Seasonal at Ascari, aim to win with the car, grab some credits, spill the score, profit

Expert Level Ferrari Challenge|Ascari Full Track, 5 Laps|550 PP|SS

Nicks Forza Ferrari Dino 246 GT Customer Car
450 PP|SM|No Aids|ABS 1

View attachment 249216 View attachment 249217 View attachment 249218 View attachment 249219 View attachment 249220 View attachment 249221 View attachment 249222 View attachment 249223 View attachment 249224 View attachment 249225 View attachment 249226 View attachment 249227
11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, Winning Overtake , Checkered Flag!

Excellent! Big pleasure! 👍​

NICKS FORZA FERRARI DINO 246 GT '71 ( Street / Track )

Tuned to replicate Nicks Forza Ferrari Dino 246 GT Customer Car
Comfort Soft / Sports Hard​

View attachment 110731​

CAR : Ferrari Dino 246 GT '71
Tire : Comfort Soft or Sports Hard

Specs
Horsepower: 251 HP at 6600 RPM
Torque: 206.7 ft-lb at 6100 RPM
Power Limiter at : 97%
Weight: 1080 kg
Ballast : 0 kg
Ballast Position : 0
Weight Distribution : 46 / 54 as stock
Performance Points: 450


GT AUTO
Oil change
Wheels : Standard Size - Stock
Car Paint : Cafe Au Lait



Tuning Parts Installed :
Engine Tuning Stage 1
Sports Computer
Sports Exhaust
Catalytic Converter Sports
Intake Tuning
Adjustable LSD
Twin Plate Clutch
Fully Customizable Suspension




Suspension - NICKS FORZA FERRARI Custom Coilover ( Street )
Front, Rear

Ride Height: 115 115
Spring Rate: 5.37 4.47
Dampers (Compression): 7 4
Dampers (Extension): 6 4
Anti-Roll Bars: 6 5
Camber Angle: 0.1 0.1
Toe Angle: -0.08 0.17


Suspension - NICKS FORZA FERRARI Custom Coilover ( Street ) -
1.09 UPDATE
Front, Rear

Ride Height: 115 115
Spring Rate: 5.37 4.47
Dampers (Compression): 7 4
Dampers (Extension): 6 8
Anti-Roll Bars: 6 5
Camber Angle: 1.0 1.0
Toe Angle: -0.08 0.17

Ferrari Alignment Range for Street / Track - HIGHLY Recommended to run with Track Pack Springs ( 7.73 / 6.44 )
Camber Angle : 0.2 1.1 ( Camber Front Range : 0.16 +- 0.16, Camber Rear Range : 1.1 +- 1.4 )
Toe Angle : 0.03 0.41 ( Toe In Front Range : 0.03 to 0.16, Toe In Rear range : 0.41 to 0.53 )

Suspension - NICKS FORZA FERRARI Custom Coilover ( Track Pack ) -
Ferrari Alignment
Front, Rear

Ride Height: 115 115
Spring Rate: 7.73 6.44
Dampers (Compression): 7 4
Dampers (Extension): 6 8
Anti-Roll Bars: 6 5
Camber Angle: 0.2 1.1
Toe Angle: 0.03 0.41

For stiffer spring rate ( track pack ) use : front : 7.73 and rear 6.44 ( recommended for Nordschleife/Ascari/Willow Springs etc ) or front : 9.27 and rear 7.73 ( less bumpy track / High Speed Ring/ SSR5 / SSR7 / Tokyo etc)

For even sharper handling, suitable for tarmac / dirt rally racing : front : 8.19 and rear : 10.65 ( care necessary as the car will be more responsive and wild )



LSD - ZF 2 way high preload
Initial Torque : 26
Acceleration Sensitivity: 30
Braking Sensitivity: 30

Alternate LSD for looser handling-Highly RECOMMENDED
LSD - ZF 2 way high preload
Initial Torque : 26
Acceleration Sensitivity: 26
Braking Sensitivity: 26



Brake Balance:
7/5 ( personal BB) or for ABS 0 wheel : 7/5, for ABS 1 - feel free to use your preferred brake balance.


Recommended setting for DS3 user :

Steering sensitivity at +1 or +2, all aids off, except ABS 1 ( if not comfortable with ABS 0 ) with 7/5 brake balance as starting point.



Notes :
I made this replica to replicate a what if version of a Nicks Forza Ferrari customer car who wants to do track racing with a Dino 246. The base custom coilover has soft spring rate, yet provides ample improvement over stock Dino suspension. While the stiffer rates are meant for higher speeds of track racing and higher grip tires. The car was tuned and tested both at Tsukuba and Nordschleife.
With 250+HP, the car is quick, agile and very rewarding to drive around the track

UPDATE 1.09 : Added Ferrari Alignment Range, revised rear damper extension for more stable rear and better traction from mid to exit. Updated Camber on original setup to 1.0 all around. Added Alternate LSD with more freedom / loose, highly recommended for less experienced driver

The Nicks Forza Dino 246 GT has been updated with new camber for original setup, revised rear damper extension, added Ferrari Alignment and alternate LSD for easier driving

Highly recommend this for Ascari :

Suspension - NICKS FORZA FERRARI Custom Coilover ( Track Pack ) -
1.09 Update
Front, Rear

Ride Height: 115 115
Spring Rate: 7.73 6.44
Dampers (Compression): 7 4
Dampers (Extension): 6 8
Anti-Roll Bars: 6 5
Camber Angle: 1.0 1.0 ( OPTIONAL Ferrari Alignment F 0.2 R 1.1 )
Toe Angle: -0.08 0.17 ( OPTIONAL Ferrari Alignment F 0.03 R 0.41 )

and LSD :

Alternate LSD for looser handling-Highly RECOMMENDED
LSD - ZF 2 way high preload
Initial Torque : 26
Acceleration Sensitivity: 26
Braking Sensitivity: 26


Enjoy

 

[Otaliema]

Imagine a contest with a samba bus and a motorsport elise. With the current DC scoring the samba bus can out score the elise for DC, but I doubt it can happen if DC is allocated based on performance (even if the elise was terrible and the samba bus was great). That's why there is a DC score.

even with the proposed DC system the bus could still win. As most testers base their scoring off a untuned version of the car/truck/bus other than power and weight. you tune it up and it's loads better than it will score well. The proposed system will just allow you as a tuner find out where the tester felt it was lacking, as consequently if the tune has say not so good corner entry but everything else is good, that's only upto 25% of score and the tune will still do well. So in thorey what could have been a 5-6 DC with the current system scores 70-80 with the propsed sytem.

 

[MrGrado]

So if there's a contest with 8 unique tunes entered, I'm supposed to drive each car untuned as a reference?

 

[DolHaus]

So if there's a contest with 8 unique tunes entered, I'm supposed to drive each car untuned as a reference?

The proposed new system isn't perfect but its better than than what we have at the moment

 

[Otaliema]

So if there's a contest with 8 unique tunes entered, I'm supposed to drive each car untuned as a reference?

No that upto the tester to do that. I do it so I have a base reference on how the power parts affected the car in one make races and in more than one type of car races so I have a refernce as to how well the car was tuned over stock set, because that to me is the idea behind tuning in GT, get the cars driving better than the provided numbers, and unless I know the car I need a reference to judge off of.
I used to do it based soly on how I felt with the tune but I found I was giving scores that ended up being low compared to most others, so I redid how I scored the cars. it takes me longer to test them but I get a much better feel on tune.

 

[Otaliema]

@ImToLegitToQuit I've modded a base scoring sheet to allow for testing the new 200 point system. so we have a working sheet to use. Just don't have the break down section built, but I will do that only if this is implimented as it's 6 formula cells per tuner and tester so my 20/10 sheet will have 1200 cells in use for the break down section... the display area will only 100 cells as it will be the average of for each scored ranking by tuner only.

 

[ImToLegitToQuit]

I'm going to move the samba/elise comparison to the side. It's pretty unrealistic. You will be scoring the cars 99% the same way as you are now. Think of my proposed system as a set of conditions to help guide you towards you score by giving you areas to focus on while testing.

Right now we have a system in place that is completely subjective. We basically say "I like how it does this but not the way it does that so I give it a 7.5"

The new system will still get you around a 75 (or 7.5) but there's a system in place to back it up and provide more detailed feed back, while also allowing the score to be combined with the lap score to have a 1 best tune winner.

As @DolHaus said, it's not perfect but that's what we are doing now is figuring it out. I'll be happy to add you to the dry run we are going to do in the next 2 days.

 

[ImToLegitToQuit]

@ImToLegitToQuit I've modded a base scoring sheet to allow for testing the new 200 point system. so we have a working sheet to use. Just don't have the break down section built, but I will do that only if this is implimented as it's 6 formula cells per tuner and tester so my 20/10 sheet will have 1200 cells in use for the break down section... the display area will only 100 cells as it will be the average of for each scored ranking by tuner only.

The extra cells won't be needed. When I post the dry run car test I will include my review so everyone can see how it will look.

 

[DaBomm4]

I apologize in advanced, I have not thoroughly read through all of this proposed idea, but from what I gather, to simplify it for myself, this lays out a more detailed process for a tester to explain what they liked about the tune, and where they felt it excelled. The numbers side of the scoring is to make it easier to be exact with how well the tester liked the tune, instead of possibly giving a more rounded score. Did I follow this correctly?

 

[ImToLegitToQuit]

I apologize in advanced, I have not thoroughly read through all of this proposed idea, but from what I gather, to simplify it for myself, this lays out a more detailed process for a tester to explain what they liked about the tune, and where they felt it excelled. The numbers side of the scoring is to make it easier to be exact with how well the tester liked the tune, instead of possibly giving a more rounded score. Did I follow this correctly?

yeah that's basically it. I think the most important aspect of it is that it can be combined with the lap time score so we can have a true 1,2,3 podium and then we can have a fastest lap honorable mention and a Highest DC honorable mention.