FITT - Federation of International Tuners and Test-Drivers

[joaosoarescso]

How about a poll where people can vote on which type of DC they want to have, the old vs new and I'm not talking about the scoring im talking about categorizing it.

 

[Bowtie-muscle]

We are down to either leaving alone, which opens up Questioning (which is where this all started), or a simple ranking. Out them in the order you liked them. Host to make sure of points if tester does not. I prefer to try the new system out to see how it works.

 

[fordracer]

How about a poll where people can vote on which type of DC they want to have, the old vs new and I'm not talking about the scoring im talking about categorizing it.

OK, suggestion, split it between tuners and testers. Or do two seperate polls. Testers are a big part of making this go. It won't happen with out them. I know I've been very vocal about this, as I feel strongly about it.

 

[fordracer]

We are down to either leaving alone, which opens up Questioning (which is where this all started), or a simple ranking. Out them in the order you liked them. Host to make sure of points if tester does not. I prefer to try the new system out to see how it works.

Good place to start. Open to trying the ranking system myself.

 

[Motor City Hami]

Just a quick question for the founder members of FITT, which may only get answered by @Motor City Hami, as I think he's the only one still around.

Where and why did the concept of DC first arise. Has it always been in place or was there a specific reason for it's inclusion?

And a general question for all tuners. What do you get out of a DC rating?

To add to what has already been posted by the, let's say FITT 2.0 members, I do remember why we, the FITT 1.0 members, add DC scoring. There were tunes that drove really, really well, but were not able to pull the top time trial type of lap time. They handled very well, but let's say the tuner didn't quite get the transmission optimized. Or an even better example, in competitions that were more open to car selection where dozens of different cars were available, there were tuners who pick a car they liked vs. those who found that one, PP glitched car.

DC was a way to score a little bit differently and allow the tester to reward tunes based upon what they liked. It was more of a vote of respect for the tuner for building something that was really fun to drive, but not always the fastest lap time. Now, the DC score does not eliminate the fastest tunes. Often times, the fastest tunes ARE also the easiest to drive or the most fun to drive.

@krenkme of Clueless Tunes always picked the odd ball car, because... well... he was the starter of Clueless Tunes. Often times his cars handled really well, but were PP challenged and had no chance at top lap times. I miss him around. He was pretty fun.

 

[OdeFinn]

I understand your point, do you understand mine? I went back through the archives, I only saw where you tested one class in the last year. I have done 5 of the last 8. And one of them was 34 cars. The M Challenge was a big event also. Time IS a consideration, and it offends ME that you pass it off so lightly! You want to serve a bigger audience, then attract a bigger participation group. How to do that? Simplify first! Best place to start? YOUR butt in the seat! You feel this strongly about all this, then I EXPECT to see YOUR name at the next event in the TESTER column.

Well I understand your point, my time is limited and several car shows aren't things what I'm interested. If there is fitt event with single car tuning compo then I'm interested to test, in limits of my Freetime. Don't want to rush on testing if I don't have time what it needs.
This is again one cornerstone for fitt events and lack of testers, making too big compo and it's too heavy for testers. One model compo, even with small value restrictions, i.e. No LSD or stock weight, stock wheels etc. Would make tuning interesting, testers have cheap entry and probably three tunes at once on testing.
I'm willing to tests that type of compo.

I don't have the patience to sit all day long sitting testing car after car after car and filling in those "parameter"

Someone is over thinking this whole thing

There's only 1 way to show if this new separated dc thing works and its by doing it yourself in the next fitt challenge

Writing free essee is easier than answering three questions? Yes I can do it my self.

Edit: wrong quote, fixed right.

 

[Pete05]

To add to what has already been posted by the, let's say FITT 2.0 members, I do remember why we, the FITT 1.0 members, add DC scoring. There were tunes that drove really, really well, but were not able to pull the top time trial type of lap time. They handled very well, but let's say the tuner didn't quite get the transmission optimized. Or an even better example, in competitions that were more open to car selection where dozens of different cars were available, there were tuners who pick a car they liked vs. those who found that one, PP glitched car.

DC was a way to score a little bit differently and allow the tester to reward tunes based upon what they liked. It was more of a vote of respect for the tuner for building something that was really fun to drive, but not always the fastest lap time. Now, the DC score does not eliminate the fastest tunes. Often times, the fastest tunes ARE also the easiest to drive or the most fun to drive.

@krenkme of Clueless Tunes always picked the odd ball car, because... well... he was the starter of Clueless Tunes. Often times his cars handled really well, but were PP challenged and had no chance at top lap times. I miss him around. He was pretty fun.

I'm voting in favour of your new DC scoring system as I think it's well thought out.
I also miss @krenkme
He was not afraid of taking an oddball and doing his best with it. I hope he's doing well and, as a fellow Truckie, gets enough time to pull into a diner for some cake

 

[biffa3]

To add to what has already been posted by the, let's say FITT 2.0 members, I do remember why we, the FITT 1.0 members, add DC scoring. There were tunes that drove really, really well, but were not able to pull the top time trial type of lap time. They handled very well, but let's say the tuner didn't quite get the transmission optimized. Or an even better example, in competitions that were more open to car selection where dozens of different cars were available, there were tuners who pick a car they liked vs. those who found that one, PP glitched car.

DC was a way to score a little bit differently and allow the tester to reward tunes based upon what they liked. It was more of a vote of respect for the tuner for building something that was really fun to drive, but not always the fastest lap time. Now, the DC score does not eliminate the fastest tunes. Often times, the fastest tunes ARE also the easiest to drive or the most fun to drive.

@krenkme of Clueless Tunes always picked the odd ball car, because... well... he was the starter of Clueless Tunes. Often times his cars handled really well, but were PP challenged and had no chance at top lap times. I miss him around. He was pretty fun.

Seem to remember giving him a few high DC scores myself.

Thanks for sharing the reasons why DC was introduced. That was always my understanding of the DC score, and the bit i've bolded in your reply, in my opinion, puts any questions regarding DC score to bed.

 

[Motor City Hami]

Unfortunately I don't think it's possible. We are all humans with our own opinions, and we all tend to form biases, good or bad, towards the others in these groups. It cannot be helped as it is human nature.

I actually saw these DC results in a FITT competition before:

Tuner X (to protect the names)
Tester 1 - DC 10
Tester 2 - DC 9.5
Tester 3 - DC 10
Tester 4 - DC 10
Tester 5 - DC 10
Tester 6 - DC 10
Tester 7 - DC 10
Tester 8 - DC 9.0
Tester 9 - DC 6.5

Tester bias is really easy to spot, but we currently do not have a plan of action when it shows up.

 

[TheInfamousJEW6]

I also vote in favor of the the new Ranking DC score!

 

[Pete05]

I actually saw these DC results in a FITT competition before:

Tuner X (to protect the names)
Tester 1 - DC 10
Tester 2 - DC 9.5
Tester 3 - DC 10
Tester 4 - DC 10
Tester 5 - DC 10
Tester 6 - DC 10
Tester 7 - DC 10
Tester 8 - DC 9.0
Tester 9 - DC 6.5

Tester bias is really easy to spot, but we currently do not have a plan of action when it shows up.

That look familiar for some reason...

 

[Motor City Hami]

That look familiar for some reason...

 

[shaunm80]

I will work something into the current FITT event for two of the classes with the new system. Lets see what happens and the general feeling of it all. I have to chat to @Otaliema first and make sure we are both on the same page as he has a lot to catch up on. The only way to see if this the way forward is to test it and no time like the present in my book. What harm can it do and seen as all the testers involved have been speaking up in this thread already, i guess they won't mind being part of the test phase for this newly devised DC system.

@Motor City Hami - Bias.. What bias? No, seriously. I get what you mean and this is probably a different line of conversation, but you are right to raise this and we should probably come up with a plan that is agreed by a majority of FITT members.

Right, This is me signing off for tonight, Keep an eye out for Supersport Class and Open Track Day Class being DC scored in the new format. Once the event has ended, and before another FITT event begins, it would be good to get feedback on it to make a final decision on what is the best way forward. Does that sound fair?

 

[Pete05]

I will work something into the current FITT event for two of the classes with the new system. Lets see what happens and the general feeling of it all. I have to chat to @Otaliema first and make sure we are both on the same page as he has a lot to catch up on. The only way to see if this the way forward is to test it and no time like the present in my book. What harm can it do and seen as all the testers involved have been speaking up in this thread already, i guess they won't mind being part of the test phase for this newly devised DC system.

@Motor City Hami - Bias.. What bias? No, seriously. I get what you mean and this is probably a different line of conversation, but you are right to raise this and we should probably come up with a plan that is agreed by a majority of FITT members.

Right, This is me signing off for tonight, Keep an eye out for Supersport Class and Open Track Day Class being DC scored in the new format. Once the event has ended, and before another FITT event begins, it would be good to get feedback on it to make a final decision on what is the best way forward. Does that sound fair?

Sounds good Shaun 👍

 

[Motor City Hami]

I will work something into the current FITT event for two of the classes with the new system. Lets see what happens and the general feeling of it all. I have to chat to @Otaliema first and make sure we are both on the same page as he has a lot to catch up on. The only way to see if this the way forward is to test it and no time like the present in my book. What harm can it do and seen as all the testers involved have been speaking up in this thread already, i guess they won't mind being part of the test phase for this newly devised DC system.

@shaunm80 You said it in an earlier post. The test drivers are the most important opinion to have. You should probably PM the test drivers who are currently signed up for your event and consider their input, first and foremost.

 

[shaunm80]

@shaunm80 You said it in an earlier post. The test drivers are the most important opinion to have. You should probably PM the test drivers who are currently signed up for your event and consider their input, first and foremost.

Will be doing this tomorrow after uni. 90% of the testers are here in this thread this afternoon but you are correct, getting their opinion and consent is vital. I would not force any tester to change mid point if it causes them issues.

 

[DolHaus]

When ever we put these things to a vote the majority of people don't care, a vocal minority doesn't want change and those who might have supported the effort don't want to get caught up in the following fracas. I say just chuck it into the next event and see what sticks, the idea doesn't need any major changes to protocol and can be implemented even if some testers are unaware of the change of format

 

[MrGrado]

How about testers submitting DC scores to event host and not revealing them in the thread until all testers have completed testing?

For DC scoring how about testers announce their top 4 tunes only. top scoring 4 points. then 3, 2 and one points earned. Lap times could split dead heats. Or testers could list 5th and 6th best DC tunes to decide dead heats.

I also like tunes getting tested blind.

I'm not the slightest bit interested in splitting a tunes DC score into corner entry, mid corner, corner exit etc. A tunes performance is reflected in lap time. If testers were required to, what would prevent them from deciding what DC they think the tune is worth, then calculating what scores they need to distribute to achieve the score they what the tune to have.

I'm also not interested in having requirements with comments. If that becomes a requirement expect a completely useless comment from me testing.

Eg. Acceleration average, top speed average, brakes average, corner entry average... etc DC: 7.

That would be no value to a tuner and just annoying for me to have to comply with.

My notes on tunes are sometimes not very thorough, but quite often I keep fastest lap replays of every entry. If someone is interested in more info with their lap from a previous event let me know. Specifically the F3 and Ford GT testing was some of my best driving. It gets especially interesting sometimes loading the best lap I did and another tuners lap both into the data logger.

 

[Otaliema]

With the RUF Challenge
Winding down I'm putting forth the next challenge.
The adaptability challenge.
I'm still hammering out the final details but the basics are as follows
Track Deep Forest Reverse.
Car RX-7 (something to another)
PP 500-600ish (still hammering out the exact range)
Tires Sports

Tuners would have three weeks to tune a car to work inside the PP range the car can achieve with Power parts and Power limiter adjustments only.
Weight and ballast would be set at time of tuning. (by tuner)

Testers would be given a PP and Tire grade to test on and will test all cars as they see fit for power parts at the given PP with the given tires for them. The tuners will not know what level each tester has been given until they see the feedback.

Blind testing will be implemented for this challenge.

Tuner/Testers will be assigned their testing PP and tires AFTER They have submitted their tune.

Tire grades will be asigned based on a randomly picked PP. Thought about it and I don't want to give (just pulling names here nothing personal) Cory 500PP on SS and Shaunm 600pp on SH. That would be well um odd

 

[shaunm80]

With the RUF Challenge
Winding down I'm putting forth the next challenge.
The adaptability challenge.
I'm still hammering out the final details but the basics are as follows
Track Deep Forest Reverse.
Car RX-7 (something to another)
PP 500-600ish (still hammering out the exact range)
Tires Sports

Tuners would have three weeks to tune a car to work inside the PP range the car can achieve with Power parts and Power limiter adjustments only.
Weight and ballast would be set at time of tuning. (by tuner)

Testers would be given a PP and Tire grade to test on and will test all cars as they see fit for power parts at the given PP with the given tires for them. The tuners will not know what level each tester has been given until they see the feedback.

Blind testing will be implemented for this challenge.

Tuner/Testers will be assigned their testing PP and tires AFTER They have submitted their tune.

Tire grades will be asigned based on a randomly picked PP. Thought about it and I don't want to give (just pulling names here nothing personal) Cory 500PP on SS and Shaunm 600pp on SH. That would be well um odd

I agree, this does sound interesting. However, I am lost on how the average lap time score is going to work. With different PP ranges, obviously, those with more power will probably be faster. right? Unless you have a way to nullify that advantage?

Also, I think that a few others are looking to get in on hosting an event after the RUF has finished. To stop any issues about who goes next, I propose that someone puts all the events ready for running into one of those voting posts (like they did with the FT86 challenge a few months back) and let everyone decide which order the events go in? That way, people will be able to plan their event for a time slot. Not trying to put a dampener on your spirit @Otaliema, It is good to be keen but just thinking about how to minimise any issues that may arise with these events.

Edit: Also to consider, once RUF has finished, as a group, we will need to have a quick chin wag about the DC scoring going forward, the old 0-10 way or the newly trialled F1 scoring way where tunes are rated on driver preference and scored according to that.

I for one definitely favour the new way of F1 scoring as it hasn't caused any issues so far and I like that the scores total up like championship points.

 

[DolHaus]

Variable tracks (testers choice) would be a better approach if you want to build all rounders. By changing tyres and pp only the grip threshold changes, the car is going to feel basically the same and only the lap time will change.

Either way you'd need to use a similar point system to the new DC scores as lap time will be more or less irrelevant

 

[xande1959]

this event promises great emotions. now imagine PP (500 or 600 PP) with the same tire, would add if 600 PP, 2 adjustments one in another turbo another in the engine performance stages.

 

[Otaliema]

@shaunm80 i hear you on vote tally. Thought we had decided back when @DolHaus ran his last one I was going second for the year as I stepped on his toes and we had decided to run the RUF as the 2016 opener.
As for average lap time. It falls in the same category as faster/slower drivers because the tester gets a PP and tire set not the tuner.

On that note of average lap time, @DolHaus suggedtion of open track choice falls in the same category. If allowed the tester would obligated to test all cars at the track so the lap times are in comparison to each other still for that tester.
It could send average lap time all the map, if say two people test at Nurnbüring two at Deep Forest and one at Brands Hatch Indy. But it would really show the best all around cat wouldn't it?

@xande1959 you're right it would be very intesting with a 600pp car on SH tires. But it could also be very blah with a 500pp car on SS tires. That's why I was thinking the set ranges on tires, that way your not taking a 230hp cat out on SS or a 700hp cat out on SH

 

[MrGrado]

It seems to defeat the purpose of tuning a car in the first place, so I'm out.

 

[fordracer]

Do we have a time frame/specs package for the next challenge yet?

 

[Otaliema]

I'm in the process of refining the rules for testing. As the only normal part of this challenge is you don't get to pick a car
And I suppose tuning and testing and the such.
The basics are I will provide a car. A set pp range that is based soley on power parts. Weight and ballast will be set by the tuner.
Testing is will be done on one of three tire types and I'm still undecided if it will be at one location or free choice.

 

[ddsuperdee]

SOMEONE CAN HELP ME TO MAKE A SETUP OF (FORD MUSTAN MACH 1 '71 and GT BY CITROEN ROAD CAR max power with pad abs and asr)???

 

[Otaliema]

SOMEONE CAN HELP ME TO MAKE A SETUP OF (FORD MUSTAN MACH 1 '71 and GT BY CITROEN ROAD CAR max power with pad abs and asr)???

Welcome to the FITT thread, this thread is not a tune discussion thread, but rather for the FITT challenges that we run here in the tuning forum.

Have you searched for a tune in the data base or in one of the many garages here? If you can't find a suitable tune already made, make a thread requesting help, that includes the current working tune you have, the PP and tire type you are using and one or more of us will be happy to help with tips and possibly a tune.
Garages to try for exsisting tunes would be @Motor City Hami tunes and Extere Tuning (@shaunm80) as those two have the most tunes of anyone here. You may find the Mustang in @Bowtie-muscle Garage even though he is a Chevy guy he has most american muscle in garage.

 

[Bowtie-muscle]

Welcome to the FITT thread, this thread is not a tune discussion thread, but rather for the FITT challenges that we run here in the tuning forum.

Have you searched for a tune in the data base or in one of the many garages here? If you can't find a suitable tune already made, make a thread requesting help, that includes the current working tune you have, the PP and tire type you are using and one or more of us will be happy to help with tips and possibly a tune.
Garages to try for exsisting tunes would be @Motor City Hami tunes and Extere Tuning (@shaunm80) as those two have the most tunes of anyone here. You may find the Mustang in @Bowtie-muscle Garage even though he is a Chevy guy he has most american muscle in garage.

If @Motor City Hami Has one, it will be better than mine. Mine is track dependant and only 525pp.

 

[DaBomm4]

SOMEONE CAN HELP ME TO MAKE A SETUP OF (FORD MUSTAN MACH 1 '71 and GT BY CITROEN ROAD CAR max power with pad abs and asr)???

There are 3 tunes built for the first FITT challenge that might be a good start for helping with your Mustang. As for more assistance, @Otaliema is correct, more people will see a thread asking for tuning help rather than looking in this thread.