Maximum vs. Minimum Downforce

[FishHunters]

I had to know if and how it worked in GT5 so I did a test. Had run a race with the WSCC 20 something laps of Nurb 24hr layout. I practiced with max downforce. Needed to conserve tire wear so back off the downforce for the actual race to about 60%. Should have made me faster but less stable. Found my lap times to be virtually the same. So...ergo the test.

Took the same car Corvette ZR1 RM 502HP, 1150kg of weight on Racing Soft tires instead the Racing Hards I did the race on. Went to the High Speed Ring and ran 4 laps each on with Min then Max downforce. Here is what I found.

Yes, less downforce makes you faster. The Min Ghost shot out ahead of the Max run. That was going to prove that GT5 actually got it right. However, turn one and turn two found the Max car had caught up! Why you might ask? Better handling in the corners. The Max DF car was able to hold the turns at higher speeds. So GT5 DID get the DF simulation correct.

Result for tuning...if the track is a flat out track like La Sarthe lower your downforce. But if you're on the Nurburgring Max it out!

Best Lap Times of High Speed Ring:
Max DF: 103.746
Min DF: 104.009

 

[davelis]

it's pretty obvious, isn't it?
Max downforce pushes the car down on the road so you get better grip in mid-to-high speed corners!
Min downforce is good for low-powered cars or when you are trying to go faster in a straight line because there is less weight applied on the car!

 

[FishHunters]

it's pretty obvious, isn't it?
Max downforce pushes the car down on the road so you get better grip in mid-to-high speed corners!
Min downforce is good for low-powered cars or when you are trying to go faster in a straight line because there is less weight applied on the car!

In theory. However, how well does it work in the game or not couldn't tell until I actually tested it.

 

[Adrenaline]

it's pretty obvious, isn't it?

Yes.

 

[Daniel46]

it's pretty obvious, isn't it?
Max downforce pushes the car down on the road so you get better grip in mid-to-high speed corners!
Min downforce is good for low-powered cars or when you are trying to go faster in a straight line because there is less weight applied on the car!

👍

 

[friedi]

well on highspeedring you dont need high downforce...

test it at nordschleife i think you will end up the walls

 

[Sauber_C9]

it's pretty obvious, isn't it?
Max downforce pushes the car down on the road so you get better grip in mid-to-high speed corners!
Min downforce is good for low-powered cars or when you are trying to go faster in a straight line because there is less weight applied on the car!

Exactly!

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

it's pretty obvious, isn't it?
Max downforce pushes the car down on the road so you get better grip in mid-to-high speed corners!
Min downforce is good for low-powered cars or when you are trying to go faster in a straight line because there is less weight applied on the car!

Weight has little to do with top speed. (see 4,000lbs Bugatti Veyron) It's more like the negative side-effect of added drag slows the car down.

 

[killa_kandy]

Weight has little to do with top speed. (see 4,000lbs Bugatti Veyron) It's more like the negative side-effect of added drag slows the car down.

The bugatti has two engines producing 500bhp each with four turbos....

 

[dropsonde]

it's fun running supercars with no downforce

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

The bugatti has two engines producing 500bhp each with four turbos....

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.

 

[sumbrownkid]

Low downforce should work in theory at a high speed track like La Sarthe and High Speed Ring, but in reality (as in my GT5 copy) is that high downforce can actually decrease your lap times.

At La Sarthe, My Bentley can post around 3:19:000 with high downforce.

With a low downforce, I do get somewhat more speed (236 mph compared to 232 mph) on the straights, but I lose 2-4 seconds on the Porsche Curves and at Indianapolis alone.

The downforce in this game is really negligible in terms of drag.

 

[sumbrownkid]

Deleted

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Low downforce should work in theory at a high speed track like La Sarthe and High Speed Ring, but in reality (as in my GT5 copy) is that high downforce can actually decrease your lap times.

At La Sarthe, My Bentley can post around 3:19:000 with high downforce.

With a low downforce, I do get somewhat more speed (236 mph compared to 232 mph) on the straights, but I lose 2-4 seconds on the Porsche Curves and at Indianapolis alone.

The downforce in this game is really negligible in terms of drag.

I disagree. Turn up the downforce all the way on the X2010. Top Speed (for my current gearset) was reduced by over 60mph.

 

[davelis]

Weight has little to do with top speed. (see 4,000lbs Bugatti Veyron) It's more like the negative side-effect of added drag slows the car down.

im not talking about the car's weight here, but the vertical weight exerted on the car as a result of the air pushing on the wing

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

im not talking about the car's weight here, but the vertical weight exerted on the car as a result of the air pushing on the wing

Which, to the car, is the same thing.

 

[davelis]

Which, to the car, is the same thing.

well,i think that there is a difference here: first, the car's weight can be expressed as the asprung mass that the suspension and chassis has to carry, whereas downforce is weight pushing vertically on the back of the car, which (mostly when the car is rear-wheel drive) is more likely to lose grip in cornering!

And the Veyron that you mention has a self-operating wing!

 

[FishHunters]

👍

Exactly!

Well I guess I'm just an idiot who shouldn't have done a test because it was sooooo obvious what the results were going to be.

 

[Midnight Snacks]

People didn't know this stuff?

 

[dark_ruffo]

Well I guess I'm just an idiot who shouldn't have done a test because it was sooooo obvious what the results were going to be.

But when driving an FGT for example, you'll always be faster when you have full downforce.

The first time I entered the FGT championship, on Monza I thought, well this is a speed track, I must lower the downforce to the minimum, boy was I wrong. I couldn't see a kmh gain on the straights and the cornering was so awful, that it was better to "hold" the speed during cornering, so I can reach a higher top speed on the straights even on full downforce.

And I don't think the FGT is the only one suffering from this. I think there is something wrong on how the wind is simulated that top speed on no or full downforce makes almost barely to no difference at all.

And that paired with the awful simulation of the drafting, it only make sense to have full downforce everytime. See, If you have full dowforce, you'll corner faster, If you are trailing, you will close the gap faster, and if in need of overtaking, the draft will make you way faster than the car in front so you can overtake. If you are pulling away in the lead, it only makes sense to have more downforce, because, even if you were in front with less wing, you wouldn't make the extra kmh to fight on the straights and defend against the one chasing you on draft.

 

[FishHunters]

People didn't know this stuff?

Midnight the question is: Did it acutally work in GT5 and how WELL does it work.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

well,i think that there is a difference here: first, the car's weight can be expressed as the asprung mass that the suspension and chassis has to carry, whereas downforce is weight pushing vertically on the back of the car, which (mostly when the car is rear-wheel drive) is more likely to lose grip in cornering!

And the Veyron that you mention has a self-operating wing!

If you have a cars weight, lets call it force A. So in static situation, the car's weight is simply A.

At 200mph there is a total downforce of B. The net total forces acting on the suspension, and therefore tires, is the summation of all vertical forces. Which is A and B. So A + B = C. Again, to the car, there is no difference if the extra force is generated from aerodynamic downforce, the car's static 'weight' or pixie sticks, it's just a force.

 

[bass264]

The bugatti has two engines producing 500bhp each with four turbos....

Lol you haven't read the specs of the Veyron, it has a single W16 cylinder Quad turbo engine.

 

[Angst72]

Thanks for taking the time FishHunters! Logic states that it should be as your tests showed, but that doesn't necessarily mean it would work that way in GT5.

It's not like aerodynamics is 100 % accurately simulated in the game... slipstream anyone?

 

[friedi]

But when driving an FGT for example, you'll always be faster when you have full downforce.

The first time I entered the FGT championship, on Monza I thought, well this is a speed track, I must lower the downforce to the minimum, boy was I wrong. I couldn't see a kmh gain on the straights and the cornering was so awful, that it was better to "hold" the speed during cornering, so I can reach a higher top speed on the straights even on full downforce.

And I don't think the FGT is the only one suffering from this. I think there is something wrong on how the wind is simulated that top speed on no or full downforce makes almost barely to no difference at all.

And that paired with the awful simulation of the drafting, it only make sense to have full downforce everytime. See, If you have full dowforce, you'll corner faster, If you are trailing, you will close the gap faster, and if in need of overtaking, the draft will make you way faster than the car in front so you can overtake. If you are pulling away in the lead, it only makes sense to have more downforce, because, even if you were in front with less wing, you wouldn't make the extra kmh to fight on the straights and defend against the one chasing you on draft.

I would say the FGT got allways bit low grip (with max downforce its a slider too...)
but when i set max downforce at a LMP example: gearbox 400kmh Max downforce

you end up in 380~kmh NOT 400kmh would say thats because of the downforce... on this way i think they simulated right

 

[zanxion]

Best Lap Times of High Speed Ring:
Max DF: 103.746
Min DF: 104.009

Looks like a marginal difference to me, not really justifying the change in the downforce.

 

[marshy10156]

The only time i change the downforce or feel that it is needed is in PP limited races online where some tracks it is better to sacrifice downforce so that you can run a higher BHP.
i.e. Running a JTGC at 600PP is usually lower than the PP of it maxed out so for a track like high speed ring i will put the downforce on half its maximum and reap the rewards of the extra 25-50bhp on the straights

 

[FishHunters]

Thanks for taking the time FishHunters! Logic states that it should be as your tests showed, but that doesn't necessarily mean it would work that way in GT5.

It's not like aerodynamics is 100 % accurately simulated in the game... slipstream anyone?

Thanks Angst!

Looks like a marginal difference to me, not really justifying the change in the downforce.

You're right, but I believe it's track dependent. On a track like La Sarthe Min DF should be the way to go, because of the long highspeed straights. On Fuji I think it wouldn't make a difference and on Nurburgring GD/F I think the Max DF would be best because of all the tight turns.

 

[friedi]

Thanks Angst!



You're right, but I believe it's track dependent. On a track like La Sarthe Min DF should be the way to go, because of the long highspeed straights. On Fuji I think it wouldn't make a difference and on Nurburgring GD/F I think the Max DF would be best because of all the tight turns.

i think in tight turns you dont need downforce ... 50kmh dont generate really downforce

 

[Corpsey]

black or white? expand your horizon to less or more....
less: understeer*
more: oversteer*

Balance: comfortable and fast 👍

*Edit, got these terms mixed up my bad :\