- 10,551
- Columbia, MD.
- Parnelli_Bones
I think the license tests (or at least some of them) are driven by humans also, which could be why they're so inconsistent: some tests are way easier than others for gold.
Learn physics with extreme, body roll angle
- Thread starter sucahyo
- 67 comments
- 7,604 views
- 1,020
I have to take this with a pinch of salt as Sucahyo doesn't listen to people who blatantly know a great deal more than he does.
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=74732
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=74732
- 10,551
- Columbia, MD.
- Parnelli_Bones
Comment removed
Last edited:
- 2,171
Well, because asking GT4 people to do just what I do is impossible. I really want to see 255 damper in GT4, and nobody can do it. And because I play GT2, and believe that damper is programmed to react in linier or logarithmic way (not sinusoidal), there is no way I am gonna believe that 10 is stiffer than 1.FastEddie12
0 damper is stiff, 128 damper is softer, 255 damper is softest, then my conclusion is 1 is stiffer than 10.
I admit that I don't know how damper GT4 does, I am just afraid that you judge damper wrongly as I did in previous 2 years.
About a pinch of salt, any suggestion that can make you believe it?
- 10,551
- Columbia, MD.
- Parnelli_Bones
sucahyo
Anyone who bravely goes against the grain inevitably gets chastised for their actions.
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,441
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
Parnelli Bone
PB, if you go to the thread in question (GT and Dampers) and read the full thread you will see that the concerns I have with regard to the claim that 10=soft with GT2 damper settings are in my opinion valid.
I have concerns with regard to the methodology used to obtain these assumptions, which I have clearly documented and covered. I have not made any statement blindly, nor without due cause.
It is certainly not just a case of dismissing the claim out of hand, far from it. I did not dismiss or disagree with the claim until I actually tested it myself.
I would b every interested in you're thoughts on this issue, after you have brought yourself up to speed on the enture issue.
Regards
Scaff
- 1,020
Parnelli Bone
That's hardly the most controversial claim in this thread, now is it? No, I'm talking about the damper stuff. Sucahyo doesn't appear to understand what he is experiencing when it comes to suspension, and refuses to listen to people that do. I just can't take the things he says as gospel as a result.
However it does appear as though he may have a point in regard to GT2, but I will have to investigate myself as it's very hard to discern the truth in these cases. However don't expect to see the results of my tests in these pages as I do NOT consider myself an expert on the subject (hint hint).
- 10,551
- Columbia, MD.
- Parnelli_Bones
Scaff
I read that thread...I think everyone's getting a bit huffy over it. I'm not saying I agree with Sucahyo's research or not. All I'm saying is that he has a right to at least research the game, and I really dig what he's done. He includes plenty of pictures to show us what he's discovered. Unless anyone here knows how to write code or worked at Polyphony Digital in the late 90's programming GT2, I'd say all of us are going on assumptions.
By the way...this is not the first time this issue has been raised. Over at Racing-Line.org, the new owner asserted that the bound and rebound dampers in GT2 are reversed, as well as toe. This plus a few other issues caused a MASSIVE flame war! It resulted in the new owner banning hundreds of long-time devoted GTers from what used to be an awesome website. Besides this, there have been a few others over at GranTurimsoForum.com who have come to the same conclusion as Sucahyo...all Sucahyo has done is back up this old theory with computer data and pictures.
Personally (thru my own driving observations) I think bound and rebound dampers are the way the manual says: 1=softest and 10=hardest. I can't say for sure which direction toe is negative and which is positive because the effect on my driving is so minimal...all i know for sure is that overall, toe slows you down just a little, so I rarely use it in GT2. I've based both my toe and damper ideas on how I observe my cars to handle thru all kinds of turns. However, I can't ignore Sucahyo's research. Even if it turns out he's completely wrong, I don't think it's right to jump on the guy.
Everyone who doesn't like what Sucahyo's done just say I disagree, and leave it at that.
Last edited:
- 10,551
- Columbia, MD.
- Parnelli_Bones
FastEddie12
Cool, I see what you're saying.
Last edited:
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,441
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
Parnelli Bone
I quite agree and with regard to GT2 I havn't jumped on him at all, just disagreed with what he has said. Just as he has a right to state his belief and show his tests, I have the same right to comment on it, and to point out my concerns (which I believe are very valid - particularly in regard to the use of a keyboard which completely removes feel).
I also believe its very valid to question his understnding of how dampers function as its a critical point in the discussion.
My main issue was however being told how GT4 dampers work by someone who has not ever experienced them, now that I believe is very assumptive.
Parnelli Bone
Rather that getting huffy, I think most of it is frustration over Sucahyo's understanding of how real world dampers work, nothing more than that.
Please remember I did not comment on GT2 dampers until after I had tested them myself.
I regard to the code, that is exactly my point, the values alone mean and/or prove nothing unless we know how they are used, now while Sucahyo's tests are interesting, without any indication of how the settings 'feel' I consider them to be flawed.
Parnelli Bone
I was not, I confess, aware of that, so thanks for the info. I have to say that if the new owner ended up banning users on mass just for disagreeing with him, then I would have my own concerns (for total different reasons) about anything they said!!!
Regards
Scaff
- 10,551
- Columbia, MD.
- Parnelli_Bones
All good then. Let's all be friends...that's why I come here to find like-minded videogamers cuz I'm fascinated with Gran Turismo despite all its flaws. In regards to the Racing-Line.org issue...I would like to know if anyone here was posting at Racing Line when Shifter took over. He completely ruined that place. This would have been about September thru October of 2004...
I was new there at the time and got caught up in the middle of the debate. All of which has been erased by Shifter, of course.
I was new there at the time and got caught up in the middle of the debate. All of which has been erased by Shifter, of course.
Last edited:
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,441
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
Parnelli Bone
What, people disagree with you, so you ban them and then delete all evidence that they and the opinions they held ever existed.
Almost make me want to become a troll (LOL), some people are beyond help.
God bless Jordon and GTP, at least we can have open discusions and disagreements without that kind of thing happening.
I mean I totally disagree with Sucahyo about the dampers in GT2 thing, but would defend totally his/her right to say it.
Regards
Scaff
- 10,551
- Columbia, MD.
- Parnelli_Bones
Scaff
Not only did he ban people, but there was a long line of folks who publicly deleted their accounts. One after the other. And somebody managed to hack or sabotage a good portion of the Gold: many Time Trial records as well as online racing records. It would be like if all the sudden all the online racing here was tampered with. So far as I remember, nobody knows who did it. By the time I stopped visiting, there were literally a handful of people left. I think somebody from Racing-Line started a new website...GTX or GTN...I forget. Ask Pupik, he knows. I wish I had cut & paste all that text. If I had known it woulda been erased some day...
Yeah, Jordan rocks. One of these days I'm gonna get the full membership and axe all the friggin' google ads. That's how much I love GT Planet.
Last edited:
- 2,171
Glad to be GTP member 
. I can show what I think freely 👍 .
About damper, if my next video is not convincing, I wouldn't argue anymore, It's up to everybody to decide which is which, but I will continue to believe 1 is stiffest in GT2 because I can make no stop code exist proof easier than the opposite. As you know, I can't proof my feeling.
. I can show what I think freely 👍 .About damper, if my next video is not convincing, I wouldn't argue anymore, It's up to everybody to decide which is which, but I will continue to believe 1 is stiffest in GT2 because I can make no stop code exist proof easier than the opposite. As you know, I can't proof my feeling.
- 10,551
- Columbia, MD.
- Parnelli_Bones
sucahyo
Bro, you're on your own!
- 2,171
Yeah, maybe I'll do poll in the end of this argumentation to see if there is someone that believe me ...........Parnelli Bone
I don't feel right if I don't post video link in here too
each video file is about 8 MB, 150 MB total.
default spring rate
d1, d10, d15, d17, d20, d30, d40
10/10 spring rate
s10d1, s10d10, s10d15, s10d17, s10d20, s10d30, s10d40
20/20 spring rate
s20d1, s20d10, s20d15, s20d17, s20d20, s20d30, s20d40
Next test, body roll angle
, Silivia Spec R
, wrong car, how can I measure body roll if the angle is this small ..................
- 10,551
- Columbia, MD.
- Parnelli_Bones
Correct..you won't see much body roll in that Silvia, which I would assume alrady has pretty decent anti-roll bars and suspension. Instead, take your pick from THIS list: Mazda Demio, Suzuki Wagon R whatever, any Jag sedan or coupe, any Aston Martin, Subaru Forester, any Alfa 155 to 166 series sedan....
That's just for starters! We could be here all day adding and adding.
That's just for starters! We could be here all day adding and adding.
Last edited:
- 2,171
Damper for balancing the car, GT1 vs GT2
I try a quick test using fully tuned Supra RZ in GT1 and GT2. As I imagine, damper behaviour is different beetwen this GT. Test done using maximum and minimum value (10 and 1).
In GT1 using higher front will create more understeer, higher rear will create more oversteer.
In GT2 using higher front will create more oversteer, higher rear will create more understeer.
So, this prove that GT1 have different damper tuning from GT2. Wether 1 is softer or stiffer was already explained.
Test it yourself if you have doubt.
I try a quick test using fully tuned Supra RZ in GT1 and GT2. As I imagine, damper behaviour is different beetwen this GT. Test done using maximum and minimum value (10 and 1).
In GT1 using higher front will create more understeer, higher rear will create more oversteer.
In GT2 using higher front will create more oversteer, higher rear will create more understeer.
So, this prove that GT1 have different damper tuning from GT2. Wether 1 is softer or stiffer was already explained.
Test it yourself if you have doubt.
- 2,171
Body roll angle of some car
Seeing this data, I think I will use Evo II, Subaru Forester and RUF BTR II for my body roll test.
It's interesting that this data show some hint of car weight distribution. On RUF with heavier rear, both angle almost the same (assume that my measurement is within 0.5 accuracy). On Forester with really heavy rear, the rear angle is greater than front. On balance car, it seems the ratio is 3:2. On FF car the ratio is about 2:1.
Code:
car angle
front rear
Evo II 3.6 2.2
Gts-t Type M 2.7 2.2
156 V6 2.6 0.9
Forester 3.3 4.1
Elise 0.0 0.5
V8 Vantage 3.2 1.8
XJR 2.9 1.1
Musclecar 2.9 1.4
Midget 2.3 0.0
Gts4 2.5 1.0
Cougar 1.7 0.6
BTR II 3.8 3.7Seeing this data, I think I will use Evo II, Subaru Forester and RUF BTR II for my body roll test.
It's interesting that this data show some hint of car weight distribution. On RUF with heavier rear, both angle almost the same (assume that my measurement is within 0.5 accuracy). On Forester with really heavy rear, the rear angle is greater than front. On balance car, it seems the ratio is 3:2. On FF car the ratio is about 2:1.
- 1,418
I allways set the dampers at 5 and never notice any difference.
- 10,551
- Columbia, MD.
- Parnelli_Bones
Yeah, how can you notice any difference if you never change your dampers from 5?
aside from this: I don't think it's fair to compare suspensions from GT1 and GT2 because they have radically different physics engines. I recently did a few spot races in GT1 this weekend in a Honda CR-X. I was observing its behaviour in GT1 and GT2 so I could write a review for my website. In GT1, there is obviously much more bouncing and body roll because you have your stabilizers separate from your suspension. Even when using the stabilizer, the car still has a tendency to lean and bounce a lot more than it ever would in GT2.
In GT2, the CR-X never left the ground unless I hit a huge bump or curb or something. In GT1, all it took was taking a corner too fast and I would be literally on 2 wheels. My point is: the 2 games are too different. Do your tests if you want to prove a point, tho. I'm still curious what you find.
aside from this: I don't think it's fair to compare suspensions from GT1 and GT2 because they have radically different physics engines. I recently did a few spot races in GT1 this weekend in a Honda CR-X. I was observing its behaviour in GT1 and GT2 so I could write a review for my website. In GT1, there is obviously much more bouncing and body roll because you have your stabilizers separate from your suspension. Even when using the stabilizer, the car still has a tendency to lean and bounce a lot more than it ever would in GT2.
In GT2, the CR-X never left the ground unless I hit a huge bump or curb or something. In GT1, all it took was taking a corner too fast and I would be literally on 2 wheels. My point is: the 2 games are too different. Do your tests if you want to prove a point, tho. I'm still curious what you find.
Last edited:
- 2,171
Yes, it's not fairParnelli Bone
. I only prove that you should go to different direction when tuning the damper.In GT1 there is no damper multiplier, damper is written as predefined value. In GT2 there is damper multiplier, different car have different multiplier.
Damper in GT1 can go a lot softer and a lot stiffer than GT2. Based from feeling, damper 10 in GT2 feels like damper 3 in GT1, damper 1 in GT2 feels like damper 6 in GT1.
The sure thing is, you can never feels too soft or too stiff in GT2.
- 2,171
Body roll angle test
Initially, I want to do this test to find what factor affecting body roll. But, it turn out to be dissapointing. I can't significantly notice any other factor other than the obvious spring rate and ride height. So, I decide to stop testing.
The conclusion is clear, if you change spring rate or ride height you should change your camber too.
My decision not to use any camber at all can be wrong, because in this test the test car do not have zero body roll angle (measured) even when using hardest spring rate and lowest ride height. In previous test the car can have zero body roll angle when using 10/10 spring rate. So, my decision not to use camber result in less optimal grip in corner for car that have high body roll.
I can't think words to explain if some of you decide not to change the camber no matter what spring rate and ride height in use, I don't have reference for this, this is only my logic.
Initially, I want to do this test to find what factor affecting body roll. But, it turn out to be dissapointing. I can't significantly notice any other factor other than the obvious spring rate and ride height. So, I decide to stop testing.
Code:
car weight spring height damper stabilidownforc tire f angler angle
Cobra 2299 2/2 150/150 10/10 1/1 34/53 N 5.6 4.3
Cobra 2299 2/20 150/150 10/10 1/1 34/53 N 3.3 1.9
Cobra 2299 20/2 150/150 10/10 1/1 34/53 N 1.3 0.6
Cobra 2299 10/10 150/150 10/10 1/1 34/53 N 3.0 1.5
Cobra 2299 20/20 150/150 10/10 1/1 34/53 N 3.2 1.4
Cobra 2299 2/2 120/120 10/10 1/1 34/53 N 3.8 1.5
Cobra 2299 2/2 95/95 10/10 1/1 34/53 N 2.4 1.0
Cobra 2299 2/2 150/95 10/10 1/1 34/53 N 2.9 1.1
Cobra 2299 2/2 95/150 10/10 1/1 34/53 N 3.8 1.7
Cobra 2299 2/2 150/150 10/10 1/1 78/99 N 4.4 3.0
Cobra 2299 2/2 150/150 10/10 1/1 34/53 SS 4.9 3.9
Cobra 2299 2/2 150/150 1/10 1/1 34/53 N 3.9 3.4
Cobra 2299 2/2 150/150 10/1 1/1 34/53 N 5.4 3.8
Cobra 2299 2/2 150/150 1/1 1/1 34/53 N 4.1 3.5
evo III 2778 2/2 250/250 10/10 1/1 12/21 N 3.9 2.6
evo III 2778 20/20 250/250 10/10 1/1 12/21 N 2.3 1.0
evo III 2778 2/2 119/119 10/10 1/1 12/21 N 1.2 0.0
evo III 2778 2/2 250/250 1/1 1/1 12/21 N 4.0 3.0
evo III 2778 2/2 250/250 10/10 7/7 12/21 N 3.9 2.9
evo III 2778 2/2 250/250 10/10 1/1 12/21 SS 3.8 3.5
evo III 2372 2/2 250/250 10/10 1/1 12/21 N 3.7 2.4
evo III 2372 2/2 250/250 10/10 1/1 47/76 N 3.6 2.6The conclusion is clear, if you change spring rate or ride height you should change your camber too.
My decision not to use any camber at all can be wrong, because in this test the test car do not have zero body roll angle (measured) even when using hardest spring rate and lowest ride height. In previous test the car can have zero body roll angle when using 10/10 spring rate. So, my decision not to use camber result in less optimal grip in corner for car that have high body roll.
I can't think words to explain if some of you decide not to change the camber no matter what spring rate and ride height in use, I don't have reference for this, this is only my logic.
