Negative Toe and alternatives

[ampire]

Anyone else "overuse" negative toe on their understeering cars? I have had to use it on a few cars I bought the chassis stiffening on. It results in decent driveability but I don't think its realistic and its fortunate that tire wear in this game is so minimal. I like the chassis stiffening upgrade because it makes the street cars feel comparable to the race cars, but it definitely makes understeer prone cars impossible to turn. It seems like these cars are easily identifiable by having 55% or more weight in the front and 45% or less in the rear. The alternative is adding weight but I think that toe accomplishes the same thing with better performance.

These are a few example cars that I run a lot of negative toe (on the rear wheels as well as front):

Cars are fully tuned.

2000 Mustang Cobra R (1:30 on Trial Mountain)
Nissan Skyline GT-R Nur (1:25 on Trial Mountain)

The results are decent but I don't like the method. I run about -.20 front and rear toe and usually I also run +5 height on the rear and -20 on the front.

 

[DLR]

I change up Anti-Roll bars to help with controlling understeer and oversteer. Never really messed with toe in in circuit racing but very important part in dragging

 

[dr_slump]

You usually want to use toe as less as possible. Small values aren't a problem, but high numbers cause (or are caused trough) some inefficiency. A stiffer (especially bars and springs) front than rear should make it a bit less understeering in general.

 

[Motor City Hami]

You usually want to use toe as less as possible. Small values aren't a problem, but high numbers cause (or are caused trough) some inefficiency. A stiffer (especially bars and springs) front than rear should make it a bit less understeering in general.

I experience the exact opposite with springs that what you have described here. Softer front springs, damping and swaybar with stiffer rear produce more steering. Not saying you are wrong, but also don't want people to take your comment as "the rule" when others are making it work a different way.

 

[dr_slump]

I experience the exact opposite with springs that what you have described here. Softer front springs, damping and swaybar with stiffer rear produce more steering. Not saying you are wrong, but also don't want people to take your comment as "the rule" when others are making it work a different way.

Yes, there are always exceptions. That's why I say "should". But thanks for your input.

 

[Motor City Hami]

I run about -.20 front and rear toe and usually I also run +5 height on the rear and -20 on the front.

-0.20 isn't over using toe settings, in my opinion. Up to .25 is still in the safe zone where I don't worry about scrubbing speed. I do remember having -0.50 on one car... a 4wd... but can't remember the car right now. That's what the car needed to get it to turn, so that's what it got.

 

[Motor City Hami]

Yes, there are always exceptions. That's why I say "should". But thanks for your input.

I like that. I am the way I tune is "the exception."

 

[dr_slump]

The results are decent but I don't like the method. I run about -.20 front and rear toe and usually I also run +5 height on the rear and -20 on the front.

Try less negative front toe. It's right what Hami says, it isn't that "overused", but you could still try it. A ride height of -20/5 usually causes understeer and doesn't reduce it.

I like that. I am the way I tune is "the exception."

In my opinion...........yes!