Is camber fixed? Discuss it here.

[super_gt]

But if you open throttle gently with camber you could start acceleration earlier.

No you can't

 

[Lionheart2113]

But if you open throttle gently with camber you could start acceleration earlier.

That can depend on driving style as well. I did this test a few months ago but I still stand by my findings...
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/thre...r-list-dec-24-2014.302113/page-4#post-9836060

To save the long read...sort of...

These are my thoughts based on the scenario that I tested for. Yes, they may vary with different cars, tracks, TOE, stiffer suspension, LSD, tires, and even triple clutch, I understand that. But until we have more testers/tuners putting out new tunes with all sorts of combinations, we will all have to walk before we can run.
Camber has never been a major adjustment in my eyes. If anything it was a tool used, along with toe, in order to get the car more comfortable. If your car is not 95% of how you want it to behave through the major suspension parts and you are looking at adjusting camber last, I'm sorry to say that Camber is not going to be your saving grace. Like GT5 I believe there will be sweet spots with these settings.

Front Camber
Increasing the value of front camber lets you drive the car into the corner further. It also seems more nimble/agile on it's feet. If you over adjust, and miss the "sweet spot", then you will be sliding the car more through the turn only to be pushing up the hill on exit.

Rear Camber
Rear camber is where it seems to be the hot topic. Some say that it adds more grip or stablizes the car, and that might be the correct way of putting it, but to me I would say it goes tight/stable. Most of the time the more rear camber you add, the slower the lap times get and it shows on the graph, sort of. Plus, it goes along with a lot of people's theory, which is great, because it can feel like it has sooo much grip thru the center of the turn. I put it down to the turn itself and how people take the turn. Notice how sometimes there was a dramatic drop in lap times even though rear camber was increased? I realized it was all about how I took turns 3&4. Since it went tight, I started to arc the car into the turn later than normal and go after the apex. But if I rode the white line, it would feel great...until I looked over at my speed...the tight condition killed it. But if I moved up 1/2 a lane, I was able to carry more of the entry speed through the corner, but it was still tight on exit and would push up off the preferred line. I was only able to do this because of the track I was on, most tracks do not allow you to "search" for that special line so you are forced to ride the apexes and this tightness will hurt your time even though it felt good. Kinda like Initial Torque on the LSD, the more you raise it, the better it feels, but kills your time, especially the chicanes. If you go over the "sweet spot" on this adjustment, you will find yourself pushing up the track and looking the wall straight in the eye.

 

[Kurei]

For 🤬's sake people, can any of us discuss a topic here without insulting others ?, or taking offense to the most minor of words (as far as 'internet' goes) ?, or acting like some all-knowing faux-mod ?

I'm starting to see why this specific sub-forum gets referred to as a 'laughing-stock' of GTP. This was an interesting thread/subject, but it's fallen to a disappointment imho.

 

[GTP_CargoRatt]

For 🤬's sake people, can any of us discuss a topic here without insulting others ?, or taking offense to the most minor of words (as far as 'internet' goes) ?, or acting like some all-knowing faux-mod ?

I'm starting to see why this specific sub-forum gets referred to as a 'laughing-stock' of GTP. This was an interesting thread/subject, but it's fallen to a disappointment imho.

My thoughts exactly, not only to the bolded part, but to all of your post actually. That's why I decided to bow out of this debate. That and because I'm not a top driver or tuner so my words are irrelevant anyway, so it seems. I will say this though as my last parting words on the matter. Going along the lines of what @Lionheart2113 has just said, I seriously doubt that we will ever know, or be able to come to one grand conclusion, if camber works in the game or if it doesn't. All the testing in the world can be done, but due to so many variables, mostly driving styles, I really don't think any concrete evidence is going to come out of it all to determine one way or the other. You're always going to have people believing camber doesn't work and vice versa, regardless of what testing shows. As you all know, I am one of those people that believes it does work. You can show me all the numbers in the world and its still not going to convince me otherwise because I have my own test data that supports my belief. The only way that we will have a definite answer to this debate, in my opinion, is if whoever is responsible for the suspension programming comes out and tells us one way or the other, and then explains the hows and whys. I don't see that as happening so I'm afraid this is just going to be a never ending debate between us all.

Another reason I'm not going to continue in this debate is because I can see things can get a bit heated. With me being the way I am in taking things a bit too personally, I can see things getting a bit nasty and that's sincerely the last thing that I want to happen. There are a great many here in the tuning community who I consider to be very good friends and who have also helped me along in my early days and have helped made me who I am today in regards to my tuning. At the end of the day after everything is said and done, I still have much respect for you all and I really don't want to jeopardize the friendships I have made here over the years by me taking things too personal or otherwise taking things too seriously to the point that my feelings for you all change. Its a fine line that I personally have to walk therefore its just better that I keep to myself on this matter while respecting everyone elses opinion. I have to keep reminding myself that its just a game and its not worth losing friends over. At the end of the day, the main objective here with the game is to get from point A to point B the fastest. Whether that can be done with or without camber is really up to each person. Doesn't really matter how you get there, just as long as you get there.

I know I may have said things in the past that may have offended people here, and for that I apologize. I have learned different things from @Highlandor @Lionheart2113 @DolHaus @Otaliema @Motor City Hami @Ridox2JZGTE @praiano63 @Johnnypenso and many, many others and it would be a shame to let some debate ruin the great friendships I have made here. I hope you all understand what I'm trying to say here. I commend everyone's commitment to testing here, but I honestly don't think we will ever have a definitive answer to camber. Much respect to you all and CargoRatt wishes everyone to have a safe and happy New Year.

 

[OdeFinn]

But if you open throttle gently with camber you could start acceleration earlier.

No you can't

Yes you can, if you haven't break traction on your rear tires, or first get it back. Balancing on that traction edge is the thing for camber, you can keep higher cornering speed and start acceleration sooner with camber. How easy that balancing is depends how good other suspension setup is, our test model is not "tuned" car, just car with somehow decent camber values to demonstrate how camber can be quick.

 

[super_gt]

Yes you can, if you haven't break traction on your rear tires, or first get it back. Balancing on that traction edge is the thing for camber, you can keep higher cornering speed and start acceleration sooner with camber. How easy that balancing is depends how good other suspension setup is, our test model is not "tuned" car, just car with somehow decent camber values to demonstrate how camber can be quick.

Make offline test,post your lap time,setup and MoTeC data.

 

[Imari]

When I'm less drunk I may do some more testing with this one. It does help that I think that the '13 Schulze is one of the better handling stock cars I've tried in the game.

I've been unable to get a significant laptime difference between the stock '13 Schulze, and the '13 Schulze with zero camber around Laguna Seca (my personal choice of test track). They drive a bit different, but every time I go a bit faster in one I switch over and I'm able to find the same amount of time in the other.

I don't get it. I was expecting at least some difference. I might try another track in case Laguna somehow manages to balance out any differences.

It is still nice to drive either way, though.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Yes you can, if you haven't break traction on your rear tires, or first get it back. Balancing on that traction edge is the thing for camber, you can keep higher cornering speed and start acceleration sooner with camber. How easy that balancing is depends how good other suspension setup is, our test model is not "tuned" car, just car with somehow decent camber values to demonstrate how camber can be quick.

I think modulating throttle on exit is part of driving skill and a good damper + ARB setup would help a lot I haven't really take a good look of what different camber would do on RUF CTR Yellowbird, but I have been testing RUF CTR replica ( based on extensive real life data gathered from test / lap run as far as back in 1987 to 2013 ) The correct tire for the car is comfort medium, and on this tire at Tsukuba ( I tested there for low - medium corners ), the CTR can lap in 1:06s range easily with rear camber at 2.5 and high lock + preload LSD ( the real car has high lock rate and Best Motoring test did 1:06s there ). Also I like to point out that on lower speed track, damper + ARB setup is crucial, a properly tuned ARB, rear compression and extension can make a rear wheel drive car have more traction / better stability. Even with camber properly working, badly set damper and ARB would turn it into widowmaker

What I can easily tell is prior to 1.09 or 1.08 when camber was a mess, running 2.5 camber on the rear tire (CM) of CTR Yellowbird would make it slippery ( I built several Blackbird replica back then ) and on CS, camber setup was tricky to drive even at SSSR7, where mostly are high speed curves. I had to recommend closer to zero or zero camber. The Blackbird had 600-800PS though.

 

[OdeFinn]

Make offline test,post your lap time,setup and MoTeC data.

Would like to do so, maybe later, too much on real life at this moment. Hopefully someone with time will do it.
CTR
F
0.0 / 0.0
0.5 / -0.01
1.0 / -0.02
1.5 / -0.03
2.0 / -0.04
2.5 / -0.05
3.0 / -0.06
3.5 / -0.07
R
0.0 / 0.00
0.8-0.9 / -0.01
1.7 / -0.02
2.6 / -0.03
3.5 / -0.04
Near by..

 

[Johnnypenso]

I think modulating throttle on exit is part of driving skill and a good damper + ARB setup would help a lot

Take the Yellowbird, make your damper and ARB adjustments, do the testing, post the results and the tune for everyone to see. Maybe @super_gt or someone else will try it out and see if it helps:tup:. Maybe you have the hidden answer.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

This is a response I see quite often when the tests fail to support someone's postion. "Oh if only you adjusted ABC then it would be different". And yet not once have I ever seen someone actually take the tune and add the adjustments that magically make camber work. So take the Yellowbird, make your damper and ARB adjustments, do the testing, post the results and the tune for everyone to see. Maybe @super_gt or someone else will try it out and see if it helps:tup:. Maybe you have the hidden answer.

I have some replay from early test on the replica when it was under continuous changes, it's on 1.09 though, so it will need someone with newer version GT6 to convert it to Motec format I know about the ARB and damper can transform a car even on the high real life alignment camber, because I specifically tune step by step at Tsukuba, from damper to ARB using real life alignment and spring rate ( stays fixed ). It's a tune based on preset limitation. I make changes like I would IRL, until I found one click ARB change will ruin the balance.

I also run the car at Spa, compared to real life run and Assetto Corsa as reference ( Assetto Corsa data still waiting from AC sub forum, maybe you can help ? ) I already found one visual aspect that AC got it wrong on the Yellowbird, not many would notice it. Hopefully it will be the last

Just to let you know, I don't think camber works as well as I wanted in GT6, PD might have fixed some portion of the calculation, but the window of the sweet spot for camber seems too narrow and varied on different tire grip level - comfort vs sports vs racing tire.

At least, even on CM and 2.5 rear camber, the Yellowbird can still corner at slightly higher speed than in AC

 

[Rotorist]

Tsukuba Circuit
RUF CTR "Yellow Bird" '87
No AIDS,No ABS,Real grip,no oil change.
Sports hard tires front and rear.

Camber front 0.5 rear 1.7
Toe front -0.01 rear -0.02
Standart brakes set to front 10 rear 10
Everything else Stock
I did 15 laps with this setup
Best lap time: 1:01.016

Camber front 0.0 rear 0.0
Toe front 0.00 rear 0.00
Standart brakes set to front 10 rear 10
Everything else Stock
I did 15 laps with this setup
Best lap time: 1:00.983

This test is made offline with DFGT steering wheel

Nice job there and thanks. I can see that lowest speed in all corners is higher when camber applied. If I see correctly, then camber works. And camber's effect would show off even better if you put tires closer to the real ones Ruf had on when tested in Tsukuba. I tested it yesterday full stock and managed a time to the 0.1" of RL on CM tires. Pretty dangerous vehicle I must say though, especially on those tires...

Happy new year everyone!

 

[Johnnypenso]

I have some replay from early test on the replica when it was under continuous changes, it's on 1.09 though, so it will need someone with newer version GT6 to convert it to Motec format I know about the ARB and damper can transform a car even on the high real life alignment camber, because I specifically tune step by step at Tsukuba, from damper to ARB using real life alignment and spring rate ( stays fixed ). It's a tune based on preset limitation. I make changes like I would IRL, until I found one click ARB change will ruin the balance.

I also run the car at Spa, compared to real life run and Assetto Corsa as reference ( Assetto Corsa data still waiting from AC sub forum, maybe you can help ? ) I already found one visual aspect that AC got it wrong on the Yellowbird, not many would notice it. Hopefully it will be the last

Just to let you know, I don't think camber works as well as I wanted in GT6, PD might have fixed some portion of the calculation, but the window of the sweet spot for camber seems too narrow and varied on different tire grip level - comfort vs sports vs racing tire.

At least, even on CM and 2.5 rear camber, the Yellowbird can still corner at slightly higher speed than in AC

I don't know about real life or Assetto Corsa , just post a tune that's as fast as you can make it with all the "proper" adjustments. Then if someone wants to, they can take the camber and zero it out and compare the two. We're looking for measurable differences here, not comparisons to other games or real life.

 

[super_gt]

Nice job there and thanks.

You're welcome 👍

Happy new year everyone!

Same to you

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

I don't know about real life or Assetto Corsa , just post a tune that's as fast as you can make it with all the "proper" adjustments. Then if someone wants to, they can take the camber and zero it out and compare the two. We're looking for measurable differences here, not comparisons to other games or real life.

Not going to do that kind of tune, I have made a replica to simulate the real car performance and handling and set within constraint of realistic lap time, and I will post it on my garage sometime later. I invite anyone to test it if interested in driving something closer to a sim in performance or for camber tests ( should be easier to find the difference with replica based setup ). I have not much time to do elaborate test as nowadays finding time to turn on PS3 and post my replica already hard. I have been meaning to post the Ruf since last week.

For what it's worth, I tested the same replica tune in GT5 at Spa, and it drives horrible, slide machine on CM Unlike in GT6.

 

[Imari]

For what it's worth, I tested the same replica tune in GT5 at Spa, and it drives horrible, slide machine on CM Unlike in GT6.

But GT5 had the issue of not modelling tyre width, correct? Which is why all the mid- and rear-engined cars which rely on fat rear tyres to balance them are kind of twitchy, because the tyre balance was off.

Thankfully, GT6 corrected that, or at least cars with different tyre widths front and rear now have believable grip characteristics.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

But GT5 had the issue of not modelling tyre width, correct? Which is why all the mid- and rear-engined cars which rely on fat rear tyres to balance them are kind of twitchy, because the tyre balance was off.

Thankfully, GT6 corrected that, or at least cars with different tyre widths front and rear now have believable grip characteristics.

I think the tire width bug was from GT6 early days I used to do hybrid back in GT5, tire width were okay back then, I built 1000+HP Camaro Dragster back then and the NSX, Miura, 512BB Twin Turbo was excellent car on CS tire ( even with 600+HP ) It's more to do with tire model and might also be the RR weight transfer model, I tried zero camber to 2.5 rear camber on GT5 Ruf CTR replica ( same setup with GT6 that I have ) and it was worse than GT6. The slip progression in GT5 was too abrupt.

 

[Imari]

I think the tire width bug was from GT6 early days

That's not what I was talking about.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/tire-testing-strange-but-interesting-results.160821/

Grip in GT5 was fixed by tyre type, regardless of the width of tyre fitted to the car. It doesn't matter for most cars, and it isn't a big deal on things like a Miura or a BB which have a 10mm stagger at best. It's not correct, but it's probably not going to massively affect performance if you've got 215s instead of 225s.

It really does matter for RUFs and the like that have an extra 40mm of tyres at the back. That's quite a lot of rubber.

This is why you can't switch tunes for a RUF between the two games: any tune for GT5 would have to compensate for the relative grip imbalance on what is already by design a pretty hairy car. A tune in GT6 doesn't have to, it's working with a car that has more grip at the rear by default.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

That's not what I was talking about.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/tire-testing-strange-but-interesting-results.160821/

Grip in GT5 was fixed by tyre type, regardless of the width of tyre fitted to the car. It doesn't matter for most cars, and it isn't a big deal on things like a Miura or a BB which have a 10mm stagger at best. It's not correct, but it's probably not going to massively affect performance if you've got 215s instead of 225s.

It really does matter for RUFs and the like that have an extra 40mm of tyres at the back. That's quite a lot of rubber.

This is why you can't switch tunes for a RUF between the two games: any tune for GT5 would have to compensate for the relative grip imbalance on what is already by design a pretty hairy car. A tune in GT6 doesn't have to, it's working with a car that has more grip at the rear by default.

Sorry, but I don't buy that at all The grip of the tire in GT5 can be easily altered via several methods without changing the tire type. The RUF CTR grip balance was tied to the chassis code and to some extent suspension code, which can alter the grip level, just like all cars in GT5. If grip is fixed by tire type, I would have massive issue when I built 1000+HP Corvette ZR1 or the Callaway C4 Sledgehammer replica. I have also used RUF BTR chassis on RUF CTR, did it as I was curious for wide stanced Yellowbird, the handling wasn't changed much, but then I used CTR2 chassis ( same 40mm tire stagger as Yellowbird ), and boom, much better balance. The Camaro '69 RM also a good example - used it for the dragster replica, with sticky racing slick, it barely can steer above 100mph and still hard to steer on sports tire.

In GT6, chassis code still exist along with suspension code, and they work in similar way to GT5. If back in GT5, the same bug in early GT6 did occur, then the same result would happen IMO, there would be much less grip on the rear tire when the wheel changed - front tire width used for the rear tire ( only on staggered setup )

 

[Stotty]

Can't run anymore TT laps as my G27 throttle is FUBAR, so ran a few in the Yellowbird.... nothing scientific, just an hour rotating between stock/no camber/more camber.

Stock car on CM tyres;

f 0.5*, r 1.5* 1'04.831 (stock settings)
f 0.0*, r 0.0* 1'04.413
f 1.5*, r 2.5* 1.04.984

The car feels much better with camber on entry (more stable when turning on the brakes, so much less risk of losing the rear) but it doesn't actually have any more lateral grip . The grip however, is less on/off at the limit.

So it feels easier to push the car with camber, but the problem is exit grip just disappears as camber increases... much harder to get the power down, wheels spin up more easily... and as we all know, exit speed is king when it comes to lap times!

This is actually a good car/track combination to see the effect of camber.

 

[OdeFinn]

@Stotty, pick camber from these for CTR:
Front
0.0 / 0.0
0.5 / -0.01
1.0 / -0.02
1.5 / -0.03
2.0 / -0.04
2.5 / -0.05
3.0 / -0.06
3.5 / -0.07
Rear
0.0 / 0.00
0.8-0.9 / -0.01
1.7 / -0.02
2.6 / -0.03
3.5 / -0.04

Suggesting to try with 1.0 / 2.6 and those negative toe vales as on table.

 

[Stotty]

-ve toe on the Yellowbird?

Even with +0.60 (stock), it wants to oversteer on entry... -ve rear toe would make it a nightmare

I dislike using toe when tuning. If I was setting the car up properly, I'd remove the toe and use LSD decel and dampers to improve the balance.

 

[OdeFinn]

-ve toe on the Yellowbird?

Even with +0.60 (stock), it wants to oversteer on entry... -ve rear toe would make it a nightmare

I dislike using toe when tuning. If I was setting the car up properly, I'd remove the toe and use LSD decel and dampers to improve the balance.

Try before judging.. you'll be surprised.

 

[Stotty]

I tried it with 0 rear toe... and was 0.8s slower than stock with no other changes.

 

[Aussie_HSV]

I've had a bit of a fumble around trying some testing myself.
Although I'm not overly satisfied with my progress.
One or two uncharacteristic fast laps throughout the session makes me question my results.

I was considering testing using some sort of average lap time.
Perhaps get comfortable with the car, then run 10 laps.
Knock out say the 2 fastest and the 2 slowest and then average the remainder.
I was thinking that may be a truer representation of the performance of the car.

Are there any flaws to this approach that I haven't considered?

 

[Imari]

I've had a bit of a fumble around trying some testing myself.
Although I'm not overly satisfied with my progress.
One or two uncharacteristic fast laps throughout the session makes me question my results.

I was considering testing using some sort of average lap time.
Perhaps get comfortable with the car, then run 10 laps.
Knock out say the 2 fastest and the 2 slowest and then average the remainder.
I was thinking that may be a truer representation of the performance of the car.

Are there any flaws to this approach that I haven't considered?

That approach is probably going to be less consistent than simply taking the absolute fastest laps you can get.

Generally, it's going to take less laps for your fastest lap to converge on your "true" fastest lap, than it is for your lap average to converge on your "true" lap average.

Those uncharacteristically fast laps are what you should be looking for. Keep an eye on your sector times and your ghost, and you'll start to get a feel for when you've still got more time to find if you managed to string together a "perfect" lap. (Perfect for you anyway, but you can only do as well as your own skill will allow.)

 

[Aussie_HSV]

That approach is probably going to be less consistent than simply taking the absolute fastest laps you can get.

Generally, it's going to take less laps for your fastest lap to converge on your "true" fastest lap, than it is for your lap average to converge on your "true" lap average.

Those uncharacteristically fast laps are what you should be looking for. Keep an eye on your sector times and your ghost, and you'll start to get a feel for when you've still got more time to find if you managed to string together a "perfect" lap. (Perfect for you anyway, but you can only do as well as your own skill will allow.)

Cheers. 👍
I see what you are saying.
I didn't put much fore-thought into it last time I tried, which was probably my first mistake.
I'll be a bit more prepared the next time my friends leave me high and dry.

 

[OdeFinn]

I tried it with 0 rear toe... and was 0.8s slower than stock with no other changes.

Run as pair, camber & toe, those pairs are all "true neutral", if used not as pair you'll have toe in or out depending your values.
Good pairs for CTR is front camber 1.0 with -0.02 toe and rear camber 2.6 with -0.03 toe.

 

[Stotty]

Run as pair, camber & toe, those pairs are all "true neutral", if used not as pair you'll have toe in or out depending your values.
Good pairs for CTR is front camber 1.0 with -0.02 toe and rear camber 2.6 with -0.03 toe.

Are you talking about GT6 or real life?

If you're talking about GT6, how do you know that?

Balancing on that traction edge is the thing for camber, you can keep higher cornering speed and start acceleration sooner with camber.

When you make a statement like this (which is simply not true) I start to wonder if you have actually driven the car or, if like some others, you're simply trying to transfer real life theory in to the game... which as I have said before, is madness.

 

[OdeFinn]

Are you talking about GT6 or real life?

If you're talking about GT6, how do you know that?

Speaking about GT6, knowing because my eye-hand-arse-brain connection what can measure similar effects out from real life car too, meaning at my physical senses are so sensitive at i can just feel and see things like that.

When you make a statement like this (which is simply not true) I start to wonder if you have actually driven the car or, if like some others, you're simply trying to transfer real life theory in to the game... which as I have said before, is madness.

This comment comes out from game playing, beating up my own ghost on several times when driving out from corner with full gas, where i know camberless would just push (slide/slip/lose control) out and cambered just stays on rails.