Is camber fixed? Discuss it here.

[Rotorist]

Hey guys. When someone says that he is much faster when using 0 camber than when having stock settings, it means that camber exists and makes a vast difference. Question is if it works as intended to. For low to medium powered factory cars, camber is minimal (0-0.5). And this is because they aren't track cars to gain anything from it and camber over 0.5 destroys tires much faster. So, to judge if camber works properly, best way is to go to a track which has low speeds, not long straights, long corners and have 10 laps in a car of 300-400 HP, SH tires just on or just over the limit. Then compare times but most important, compare consistency in laptimes. Camber makes car predictable in cornering when on or above the grip limits. An remember, every track-circuit needs new settings in suspension and cambering of course to get best laptimes and consistency. Just an opinion. Merry Christmas to Christians, happy holidays to the rest.

 

[Motor City Hami]

For low to medium powered factory cars, camber is minimal (0-0.5). And this is because they aren't track cars to gain anything from it and camber over 0.5 destroys tires much faster.

You are speaking real life, correct? Is this from experience or a handling book?

My real world experience differs greatly from this. Even low speed Autocross in my Mazda 626 GT was helped by camber. Then moving to track days and SCCA racing, if you ran only 0.5 camber, you would wear our the outside of your tires in like four sessions. The inside and middle would have 15 more runs in them, but you've corded the outside. Even on low power street cars, the magic number for front was always more like 2.5 to 3.5 degrees. Rears were more like 1.5 to 2.5 degrees. If I run those settings in GT6, I am slower.

 

[Stotty]

Camber makes car predictable in cornering when on or above the grip limits.

I'd forget real life if I were you - GT has been shown on numerous occasions to have little relation to real life, and using real life knowledge or theory when trying to tune in GT6 will simply lead to you to making the wrong choices.

My experience of camber testing in GT6 is;

With no camber, you have a higher grip limit, but the limit is more defined and grip loss more sudden.

With camber, the transition from grip to slip is more progressive, but the limit is ultimately lower.

So, as long as you're a good enough driver to find (and sit on) the grip limit, you will be faster with no camber. Though the car may feel to some that it's harder to drive and therefore slower.

I did some camber/toe testing at Suzuka East in a BMW CSL (on SH) some months ago and posted it in the general tuning guide thread (in the tuning forum) - it's on page 9 or 10 IIRC.

 

[Rotorist]

You are speaking real life, correct? Is this from experience or a handling book?

My real world experience differs greatly from this. Even low speed Autocross in my Mazda 626 GT was helped by camber. Then moving to track days and SCCA racing, if you ran only 0.5 camber, you would wear our the outside of your tires in like four sessions. The inside and middle would have 15 more runs in them, but you've corded the outside. Even on low power street cars, the magic number for front was always more like 2.5 to 3.5 degrees. Rears were more like 1.5 to 2.5 degrees. If I run those settings in GT6, I am slower.

I agree to all you said. But! I just suggested a method for GT6, to help one see if camber is working properly. Low-powered vehicles are easy to find consistency on the limit and it is not easy to get results ingame.

 

[OdeFinn]

Presumably one can determine the potential straight line speed differential, if any, by using a ghost and running their very best lap with camber and then without and if it shows different straightline or cornering speed it should be easy to tell. And of course there's also the Motec info.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/o-d-engineering-dusty-garage.321014/#post-10302475

That car&tune on 550pp on comfort medium noABS motegi oval offline track settings "real".
41.215

Tested first on 1.14 and then 1.15, heavy difference on handling, not do much on time when on camber, without camber started to slip on 1.15.
On both versions biggest difference is wheel turning angle, on camber you need 2/3 to 3/4 from what you need without camber, and tires are glowing red thru turns when no camber.

If I say world is flat as pancake would you believe that?

 

[Motor City Hami]

My results in version 1.14 are similar to the work that @DolHaus is doing in his camber experiment thread https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/thre...tage-1-high-speed-test-drivers-wanted.320272/

Angles from 0.0 to 1.0 seem to produce very similar lap times on most cars, most tracks. It becomes about feel and that is very, very difficult to study, report, prove, etc. I think I feel a little bit more responsiveness under braking and at turn in that is an advantage. But this advantage is offset by understeer mid corner through exit. Maybe this is why the lap times are so close with settings within this range?

So does the above mean that I think camber is fixed? No. Not in the slightest. How can anyone use 0.6 degrees of camber, as the tune posted above does and say that camber is fixed? Camber is nowhere close to being fixed. And by fixed, I think everyone alludes to being closer to real world. Look at real world race cars, track day street cars, rally cars, F1, off road trucks, remote controlled cars, anything with adjustable camber. Most everything will run somewhere in the range of 1.5 degrees and 3.5 degrees of camber. We would tell the rookies in remote controlled car racing to set their touring cars up with 2.0 degrees of camber. It was the best place to start to optimize tire wear and traction. As they learned how to drive better and then tune, we would show them the gains and losses of higher/lower adjustments. GT6 should work the same way. We should be able to put 2.0 degrees of camber (or some other mid-line common number) on any vehicle and be somewhat quick with it. This is just not the case today in GT6. Everything I have seen so far in the tuning forum is showing "meh" results between 0.0 and 1.0 then a patterned drop off in grip as camber angles are raised higher. So therefore, no camber is not fixed (at all close to real world).

I am starting all tunes currently using 0.5/0.5 camber and adjusting from there. I hope to have time over the holiday to help @DolHaus with his tests.

 

[NixxxoN]

I think camber is fixed, yes. At least when I modify the values, the car behavior changes make sense

 

[OdeFinn]

@Motor City Hami , if camber scale is 30 to 400 can that be ever working?
Point is not number, point is how changing number changes car behavior.
I have driven over one million kilometer with real car, I might know something.

 

[Motor City Hami]

@Motor City Hami , if camber scale is 30 to 400 can that be ever working?
Point is not number, point is how changing number changes car behavior.

I am not really sure what you mean? Camber scale? Point?

I have driven over one million kilometer with real car, I might know something.

Is someone a little sensitive? I do not recall challenging your real world experience or your knowledge. I just disagreed with your point that posted a tune showing 0.6 degrees of camber and calling the game fixed. My post wasn't solely directed at you as an individual. A few others on this site have said the same thing. They add 0.2 degrees of camber and call the game perfect.

 

[OdeFinn]

I am not really sure what you mean? Camber scale? Point?



Is someone a little sensitive? I do not recall challenging your real world experience or your knowledge. I just disagreed with your point that posted a tune showing 0.6 degrees of camber and calling the game fixed. My post wasn't solely directed at you as an individual. A few others on this site have said the same thing. They add 0.2 degrees of camber and call the game perfect.

Lets open new thread "LIMITED SLIP DIFFERENTIAL IS BROKEN", coz never seen such values on real world LSD's
- you understand my point now?

Sensitive, yes on physical manner, not on psychological manner.

Camber functionalities are working on this point, and better on 1.15 than 1.14.
That tune and motegi you cannot drive without noticing angle of your steering wheel, ~40 degree with camber and ~55 degree without.

 

[Rich S]

You are speaking real life, correct? Is this from experience or a handling book?

My real world experience differs greatly from this. Even low speed Autocross in my Mazda 626 GT was helped by camber. Then moving to track days and SCCA racing, if you ran only 0.5 camber, you would wear our the outside of your tires in like four sessions. The inside and middle would have 15 more runs in them, but you've corded the outside. Even on low power street cars, the magic number for front was always more like 2.5 to 3.5 degrees. Rears were more like 1.5 to 2.5 degrees. If I run those settings in GT6, I am slower.

0 camber here in all the Red Bulls, Lotus 97T all other hyper fast cars I use in GT6, wishing for camber though used it nicely in GT5. Crying shame really that they could make GT5 camber & ride height work and this game not.

 

[killerjimbag]

Oh boy,here we go again. Unless someone can show that camber works now,I'm inclined to believe it is still broke. Please do not use real word physics for a comparison to this game. It is a video game,it is not even remotely close to real world.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Lets open new thread "LIMITED SLIP DIFFERENTIAL IS BROKEN", coz never seen such values on real world LSD's
- you understand my point now?

Sensitive, yes on physical manner, not on psychological manner.

Camber functionalities are working on this point, and better on 1.15 than 1.14.
That tune and motegi you cannot drive without noticing angle of your steering wheel, ~40 degree with camber and ~55 degree without.

You can measure the effectiveness of camber any way you like, but for the purposes of this thread, I think we can only go by one measure and that's lap times. It is the only really objective measure.

 

[Motor City Hami]

You can measure the effectiveness of camber any way you like, but for the purposes of this thread, I think we can only go by one measure and that's lap times. It is the only really objective measure.

This ^

And I think that the Motec data for corner speed and lateral Gs may show some promise if we can figure out how to use it. By that, I mean an acceptable, standard measure.

 

[OdeFinn]

You can measure the effectiveness of camber any way you like, but for the purposes of this thread, I think we can only go by one measure and that's lap times. It is the only really objective measure.

And how many times I see besides my lap time?
Racing "endurance" with tyre wear on 0-camber drivers are sitting ducks on pit, game physics model eats their tires. Taking few laps on Motegi will prove it.

There is car, tune and time, everyone can easily go and test it and figure out how their front tires are drawing line on corner when camber is not used. Camber drivers open their throttles way earlier than guys without.

 

[Highlandor]

And how many times I see besides my lap time?
Racing "endurance" with tyre wear on 0-camber drivers are sitting ducks on pit, game physics model eats their tires.

Agreed..

So much emphasis is put on "laptime", but this isn't everything for all situations. For many or most it probably will be, but for everyone in all situations, definately not.

Others take a different approach, a bit like the hare and tortoise scenario. There's no way I'm a 'fast' driver, I rarely get within 1 1/2 seconds of top 20 GT academy times, but occasionally in some online races (varying from 20/30 miles to longer endurance races) I've beaten far faster guys because I've setup the car for race distance, not fastest lap, and managed to do consistent laps throughout the race gaining time through less pitstops or less 'lost time' owing to tyre wear.

A friend of mine won the 12 hrs (real time) race at GTRP in a GT500 against LM cars that were much faster over a single lap. He setup the car for long distance and did consistent laps, when others went for outright speed and lost owing to tyre wear related issues.

It doesn't mean this is 'best', it just worked at that time.

Admittedly these occurances are a small % of all scenario's, but it can and does happen - yet so much emphasis is put on a single laptime as being a rule or applicable for 'everything', when it most definately isn't..

Some or most "aliens" will have driving skills/abilities that allow them to overcome most issues, whether that be handling issues or tyre issues, they can put in superfast laptimes regardless, so they don't have the need to worry about tyre wears as much.

Try giving an 'alien' setup to a group of people with basic driving skills, using a controller, and will all of them be able to extract their best laptimes from it? Some might even be slower if they simply can't put the power down and would be faster on the setup they were using before, as this was was suited to their needs.

Does this prove something is fixed/broken, better or worse?

If more focus was applied on the variables that can have an impact on individual aspects (of a setup), then there'd more clarity over these (what 'works' or is/isn't 'broken'/'fixed etc) issues that have plagued both GT5 and GT6, but so few people are interested in that..

Just look at this thread, we've got people talking about GT, others real life, some hot lapping, offline/online, tyre wear irrelvant/relevant, ending up in the usual scenario of people holding on to some 'fact' they can use to justify or prove they are 'right'..

What's crazy is that most people are right, however, because the context of what they are saying is not the same, or not taken into consideration, it ends up in conflict instead of understanding, agreement or progression to a solution/answer.

As this is so often the norm and what people are used to, just like many things in life that are the 'norm', why bother changing......which is the craziest thing of all as most of the people who contribute all want the same thing - resolution i.e. finding out what does and doesn't 'work'.

 

[Motor City Hami]

As this is so often the norm and what people are used to, just like many things in life that are the 'norm', why bother changing......which is the craziest thing of all as most of the people who contribute all want the same thing - resolution i.e. finding out what does and doesn't 'work'.

A lot said in your post yet little about your thoughts on camber settings. I quoted just this bit above because I found it odd that you cast others as following the norm and being unwilling to change, yet you've been posting tunes using generally the same amount of camber since the beginning of GT6. So which is it? Was camber broken and is now fixed with the 1.15 update (or update 1.09 for that matter)? Or has camber always been programmed correctly and we are all just in the dark and unwilling to truly test and evaluate.

 

[Highlandor]

A lot said in your post yet little about your thoughts on camber settings. I quoted just this bit above because I found it odd that you cast others as following the norm and being unwilling to change, yet you've been posting tunes using generally the same amount of camber since the beginning of GT6. So which is it? Was camber broken and is now fixed with the 1.15 update (or update 1.09 for that matter)? Or has camber always been programmed correctly and we are all just in the dark and unwilling to truly test and evaluate.

You seem to be a bit confused.

I've used various camber between 1.0 to 0 since the start of GT6, there's still cars in my tuning thread that have setups with 1.0 camber, and there's others that have 0.

You're saying camber set to 1.0 and camber set to 0 is...

generally the same amount of camber

?

Please explain why 1.0 camber and 0 camber is, as you've said, "...generally the same..." when so many others, including yourself in your tuning guide ("...Zero camber currently has the most grip in GT6. I start with zero front and zero rear.) say 0 gives the most grip.?

If, as you say, 1.0 and 0 are "generally the same", then why say just 0 gives the most grip when you also say 1.0 and 0 is generally the same?

 

[LeoStrop]

My results in version 1.14 are similar to the work that @DolHaus is doing in his camber experiment thread https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/thre...tage-1-high-speed-test-drivers-wanted.320272/

Angles from 0.0 to 1.0 seem to produce very similar lap times on most cars, most tracks. It becomes about feel and that is very, very difficult to study, report, prove, etc. I think I feel a little bit more responsiveness under braking and at turn in that is an advantage. But this advantage is offset by understeer mid corner through exit. Maybe this is why the lap times are so close with settings within this range?

So does the above mean that I think camber is fixed? No. Not in the slightest. How can anyone use 0.6 degrees of camber, as the tune posted above does and say that camber is fixed? Camber is nowhere close to being fixed. And by fixed, I think everyone alludes to being closer to real world. Look at real world race cars, track day street cars, rally cars, F1, off road trucks, remote controlled cars, anything with adjustable camber. Most everything will run somewhere in the range of 1.5 degrees and 3.5 degrees of camber. We would tell the rookies in remote controlled car racing to set their touring cars up with 2.0 degrees of camber. It was the best place to start to optimize tire wear and traction. As they learned how to drive better and then tune, we would show them the gains and losses of higher/lower adjustments. GT6 should work the same way. We should be able to put 2.0 degrees of camber (or some other mid-line common number) on any vehicle and be somewhat quick with it. This is just not the case today in GT6. Everything I have seen so far in the tuning forum is showing "meh" results between 0.0 and 1.0 then a patterned drop off in grip as camber angles are raised higher. So therefore, no camber is not fixed (at all close to real world).

I am starting all tunes currently using 0.5/0.5 camber and adjusting from there. I hope to have time over the holiday to help @DolHaus with his tests.

^I think this is the answer since the 1.09 update.

Since 1.09, in my opinion, camber values can produce positive results on your car, but it will also produce negative results.(btw, 0.0~1.2)

In my experience, using front camber helps in changing directions, and turning in, while braking. The extra front grip on that point, helps on moving the rear and rotating the car, on turn in. Great for 4WD cars. But it will lose front grip, when the weight moves to the back again.

Camber on the rear, helps keeping the car more progressive and easier to catch, but it will lose traction.

 

[super_gt]

The tires in Gran Turismo are not flexible enough,this causes the camber problem.
And I doubt that this problem will be resolved in GT6.

 

[Rotorist]

The tires in Gran Turismo are not flexible enough,this causes the camber problem.
And I doubt that this problem will be resolved in GT6.

That is the key point to make camber changes effective as in RL. Now we just watch some signs of camber changes effects, but not the full working potential. And to apply tire flexing we need 3-point tire temperature monitoring (outside-middle-inside) in order for the tire wear to become realistic enough to cause camber angle become the key for long races.

 

[Marqus]

So, if camber is not fixed, then my VGT cars will inadvertently be slower because stock setups (now) come with 1.5 front and 3.5 rear camber? This makes me even more annoyed that I'm not allowed to tune them.

 

[Motor City Hami]

Please explain why 1.0 camber and 0 camber is, as you've said, "...generally the same..." when so many others, including yourself in your tuning guide ("...Zero camber currently has the most grip in GT6. I start with zero front and zero rear.) say 0 gives the most grip.?

If, as you say, 1.0 and 0 are "generally the same", then why say just 0 gives the most grip when you also say 1.0 and 0 is generally the same?

You seem to be having your usual comprehension issues so let me say the same thing over again. Generally the same lap time can be achieved in version 1.14 from what I have seen in my recent testing. There is a different feel in the lap. Zero camber feels much better from mid corner through exit. 1.0 camber feels better on corner entry. Maybe that is why the lap times are "generally" the same. The @DolHaus testing in 1.15 seems to be confirming something very similar. That is what I said.

And as for the quote you dug out of my guide, from game version 1.13, that was exactly my experience. Zero camber produced more grip. I am at least willing to hear other theories and test them myself. I cannot wait to get deep into testing version 1.15 this week. I am always willing to evolve my theories as the game evolves. Are you?

 

[Highlandor]

You seem to be having your usual comprehension issues so let me say the same thing over again. Generally the same lap time can be achieved in version 1.14 from what I have seen in my recent testing. There is a different feel in the lap. Zero camber feels much better from mid corner through exit. 1.0 camber feels better on corner entry. Maybe that is why the lap times are "generally" the same. The @DolHaus testing in 1.15 seems to be confirming something very similar. That is what I said.

And as for the quote you dug out of my guide, from game version 1.13, that was exactly my experience. Zero camber produced more grip. I am at least willing to hear other theories and test them myself. I cannot wait to get deep into testing version 1.15 this week. I am always willing to evolve my theories as the game evolves. Are you?

You seem to be having your usual double standards/antagonising issues - try reading my first post again and see if you're able to comprehend the point I was making.

If it's too much for you to work out, maybe try asking someone 👍

 

[Imari]

You seem to be having your usual double standards/antagonising issues - try reading my first post again and see if you're able to comprehend the point I was making.

If it's too much for you to work out, maybe try asking someone 👍

Maybe you should try providing some testable insight into the camber system instead of taking shots at the people who are doing the majority of the work to elucidate what's going on?

 

[stash]

i think camber helps make your car more raceable overall.. you can tune for certain corners and use camber that way but i like to use it to recover when someone pushes me off the racing line

 

[Highlandor]

Maybe you should try providing some testable insight into the camber system instead of taking shots at the people who are doing the majority of the work to elucidate what's going on?

You mean like posting all my findings re setups throughout GT5 & 6, including formulas that worked at the start of GT5 that still work now....?

Or maybe you mean posting information that is helping the guy doing the camber experiment to obtain valid data, unlike a certain other person who posted information that would do the complete opposite i.e. invalidate the test data...?

Or maybe trying to get members to understand how the context of what they're posting in just as important, if not more so, than the content itself - otherwise useful threads or info just gets lost in the ubiquitous war of ego's...

No problem, I'll keep all / any future findings to myself and watch so many go through another 4 years of either chasing their tails or 'ego wars' 👍

 

[OdeFinn]

No problem, I'll keep all / any future findings to myself and watch so many go through another 4 years of either chasing their tails or 'ego wars' 👍

"Pearls to the pigs" - Finnish phrase

Sometimes that phrase is just so true. I like to share ideology of my learnings to keep others on same baselevel, level where they can start their own journeys. Too often those ideologues are understood so wrong, like it was written on stone and no thinking allowed.

Back to topic, still there is no comments on Skyline @ Motegi, no comparison times, nothing at all.
Was it too obvious car and case to show camber working?

 

[Imari]

You mean like posting all my findings re setups throughout GT5 & 6, including formulas that worked at the start of GT5 that still work now....?

Are you saying that the physics haven't changed since the start of GT5? What "formulas" are you talking about that are still valid between GT5 1.01 and now? Go ahead and link me to them, and if they provide testable insight into the camber system I'll be happy to apologise.

No problem, I'll keep all / any future findings to myself and watch so many go through another 4 years of either chasing their tails or 'ego wars' 👍

You can do whatever you like. I'm interested in anything that teaches us how PD have made their physics system. Anything else is, as you say, an ego war.

I'm less interested in your protestations that you're knowledgeable about the GT physics system, and more interested in any understandings that you've made. You can tell me how much you've learned until you're blue in the face, but it doesn't help me or anyone else here until you actually tell us what you've learned.

I'll say it again: provide some testable insight into the camber system and I'll be happy to apologise. I'm not going to dig through 4+ years of posts for them, so you'll have to help me out.

 

[iLex]

Agreed..

So much emphasis is put on "laptime", but this isn't everything for all situations. For many or most it probably will be, but for everyone in all situations, definately not.

Others take a different approach, a bit like the hare and tortoise scenario. There's no way I'm a 'fast' driver, I rarely get within 1 1/2 seconds of top 20 GT academy times, but occasionally in some online races (varying from 20/30 miles to longer endurance races) I've beaten far faster guys because I've setup the car for race distance, not fastest lap, and managed to do consistent laps throughout the race gaining time through less pitstops or less 'lost time' owing to tyre wear.

A friend of mine won the 12 hrs (real time) race at GTRP in a GT500 against LM cars that were much faster over a single lap. He setup the car for long distance and did consistent laps, when others went for outright speed and lost owing to tyre wear related issues.

It doesn't mean this is 'best', it just worked at that time.

Admittedly these occurances are a small % of all scenario's, but it can and does happen - yet so much emphasis is put on a single laptime as being a rule or applicable for 'everything', when it most definately isn't..

Some or most "aliens" will have driving skills/abilities that allow them to overcome most issues, whether that be handling issues or tyre issues, they can put in superfast laptimes regardless, so they don't have the need to worry about tyre wears as much.

Try giving an 'alien' setup to a group of people with basic driving skills, using a controller, and will all of them be able to extract their best laptimes from it? Some might even be slower if they simply can't put the power down and would be faster on the setup they were using before, as this was was suited to their needs.

Does this prove something is fixed/broken, better or worse?

If more focus was applied on the variables that can have an impact on individual aspects (of a setup), then there'd more clarity over these (what 'works' or is/isn't 'broken'/'fixed etc) issues that have plagued both GT5 and GT6, but so few people are interested in that..

Just look at this thread, we've got people talking about GT, others real life, some hot lapping, offline/online, tyre wear irrelvant/relevant, ending up in the usual scenario of people holding on to some 'fact' they can use to justify or prove they are 'right'..

What's crazy is that most people are right, however, because the context of what they are saying is not the same, or not taken into consideration, it ends up in conflict instead of understanding, agreement or progression to a solution/answer.

As this is so often the norm and what people are used to, just like many things in life that are the 'norm', why bother changing......which is the craziest thing of all as most of the people who contribute all want the same thing - resolution i.e. finding out what does and doesn't 'work'.

You are right about the 'problems' you present. However, there currently doesn't seem to be a good solution to them.
When it comes to camber (and a lot of the other 'individual aspects (of a setup)') there is no objective way to measure the result. It will always result in 'It feels better/worse'-discussions.

If I am not mistaken we only have lap times and limited telemetry data to measure anything.
In the case of camber, which should help give more grip in corners, lap times can be a good indication of whether or not camber is working like it should in real life.

I take ~100% better lap times with 0 camber compared to 1 camber as a good indication that camber is not working like it should.