SlipZtrEm
Excellent post Scaff, it's true that no matter how effective one's suspension and brakes may be, the tires are still the only connection between car and road.
I've been impressed with the improved braking in GT4 (it was way too strong in GT3), but I think most of the complaints in regards to the GT/Zonda/et al is just that they take a fair bit longer than other, comparable cars. I've been testing braking times from 60-0 and 100-0 in the game in various cars (Test Course -> hit those speeds -> brake -> pause as soon as indicator hits 0mph), and while I've seen the M5 do stops repeatedly in 2.32 and 3.75, respectively, the Ford GT struggles to manage 2.52 and 4.05. Plus, taking them around the 'Ring, I like to use the first turn as an indicator of how good the brakes work.
Speaking of which, I also think the complaints might centre around the brake indicator in the game. I know it should not be trusted as the defacto "okay, this is where you should start braking" final word, but most cars are able to take a particular circuit fine just by following it. Some won't be able to slow down sufficiently when the warning finally comes on... the GT and Zonda are the two prime examples.
Anyways, just my two cents.
Very valid point and putting aside contact patch size, lets look at what the Ford GT and Zonda (also the Elise from earlier) have in common. Drivetrain layout, they are all mid-engined and as such will have very different weight transfer characteristics to a FR car such as the M5 you tested they against.
Its all to do with weight transfer and brake bias (again see the StopTech details), and MR and RR cars are generally the most difficult to set-up effectively due to the lower level of weight transfered to front. This in theory should be offset by their ability to carry greater speed through corners (but thats another subject).
nasanu
Scaff the brembo stuff you posted backs up the theory that better brakes will stop you faster with the key words being at speed.
I highly doubt that at 200km/ph normal road car brakes would have the force to lock the brakes instantly. This is where fiting better brakes will make the difference. 60-0 tests will tell you nothing about stopping from a much faster speed.
I am a skeptic about weight not being an issue as well. I have my TV remote sitting here with me on my desk. I can hit it with a tissue and and the impact wont make it move, yet if I hit it at the same speed with a pack of cds it moves. But in each case it had the same traction and contact patch with my desk. Sure this is starting something to move rather than stopping something, and I have not slept in 24hrs, but I can't see why this would not translate into tyres.
Thinking along the same lines, I could stop a matchbox car from rolling with ease, but what if that car weighed 2 ton? I really don't think it would be as easy to stop it, do you? If its not easier to stop that means it requires more force to stop it. In the case of tyres more traction. Do tyres really produce more traction the more you add weight to a car?
To a degree you are right that it will depend on the car, but I can assure you that a lot of road cars are capable of locking the wheels at 100 mph+, just make sure you try it away from public roads. The problem they have is not the initial braking force, but maintaining it with out fade.
In regard to your TV remote and matchbox cars, both unfortunatly lack air-filled rubber tyres, which are an important part of the equation.
It can be a hard one to get your head round, but this may help. Its not a true comparison, just one of those things that helps.
If I take my mobile phone (Nokia 6310) and a Bic pen (both are handy at my desk) and drop them from the same height of five feet, they will both hit the ground at the same time. This is despite being very different in mass and size. Its a nother good example of weight not playing a part, and in a situation when a lot of people think it should.
Get some sleep (I know how you feel) and have a look over the Physics of Racing stuff again.
Its also worth remembering that it is often very difficult to compare braking distance between cars (both in GT4 and real life) due to the huge number of variables that exist in the tyres themselves. Contact patch size being about the simplest of the lot.
Pressure, ambient temp, tyre temp, road temp, sizewall size, profile, compound, air mixture in the tyre, track surface materials, etc; all these have to be factored into the equation.
Edited to just bring this back to my reason for starting the thread and a hope that all of the above (and my thanks to all who have contirbuted so far) helps to show that I do not believe that PD 'messed up' on the braking performance of certain cars.
From my experience of the cars I've driven in GT4 (and its not all 700 - yet) I have nothing by praise for the improvements in this area; its not perfect but for the PS2 it is damn impressive.
) some to more complete understanding of your posts with deft politeness.
??
