Non-linear throttle

[John G]

I'm all but convinced at this point that the reason for this mapping is the same reason why manufacturers do it on certain cars. It makes the car much harder to spin by requiring more pedal travel for better acceleration. In other words, if you're using the pedal believing it's linear, you're not really accelerating that much until you've straightened up the wheel.

I think you're much more likely to spin going from 50 to 100% throttle in an instant than you are going from 0-50% in an instant.

All sporty manufacturers, when they change the throttle mapping (like with the sports button), put more throttle opening into the first part of pedal travel, so its basically like pressing the pedal more than you actually have and it feels faster Especially in normal driving where actually you don't use full throttle often at all. No one (except PD) puts more throttle opening into the last part of pedal travel. Because it's a really bad idea.

 

[poumpoum]

IMO, it is difficult to adjust precisely the "power" between 80% and 100% IRL. It's more difficult to maitain precisely your RPM at 6500 than at 2000 ? so even if we don't like it perhaps it is more realistic...

I also think that having 75% travel for 50% of throttle input is a way to help us to not spin in the low speed corners (to counter the strange low speed physics and/or tyre model). If suddenly the throttle became linear Gtplanet would be full of "PD broke the game, not able to to take slow turns anymore !!!".

My theory is that they're working on a new tyre model and a new low speed physics and one day (perhaps) they will be added to the game and then (perhaps) we will get back linear throttle.

 

[barkohba]

IMO, it is difficult to adjust precisely the "power" between 80% and 100% IRL. It's more difficult to maitain precisely your RPM at 6500 than at 2000 ? so even if we don't like it perhaps it is more realistic...

I also think that having 75% travel for 50% of throttle input is a way to help us to not spin in the low speed corners (to counter the strange low speed physics and/or tyre model). If suddenly the throttle became linear Gtplanet would be full of "PD broke the game, not able to to take slow turns anymore !!!".

My theory is that they're working on a new tyre model and a new low speed physics and one day (perhaps) they will be added to the game and then (perhaps) we will get back linear throttle.

I find what you re saying highly accurate. Plus, GTP are not only working on a new tire model, they already jave one and it was used in the GT World Tour Championship.

Its soon to appear in the game, hopefully in the same patch with the weather one that Kaz has promised.

I read at some point on a youtube comment from a championship stream that the tire model was developed in colaboration with iRacing. Really hope that's true.

 

[barkohba]

I think you're much more likely to spin going from 50 to 100% throttle in an instant than you are going from 0-50% in an instant.

All sporty manufacturers, when they change the throttle mapping (like with the sports button), put more throttle opening into the first part of pedal travel, so its basically like pressing the pedal more than you actually have and it feels faster Especially in normal driving where actually you don't use full throttle often at all. No one (except PD) puts more throttle opening into the last part of pedal travel. Because it's a really bad idea.

No man, not at all. If you check out motorsports events, any kind, you ll quickly realize thats its ihe opposite. Its much easier to spin out in the lower speeds and throttle travel.

 

[John G]

No man, not at all. If you check out motorsports events, any kind, you ll quickly realize thats its ihe opposite. Its much easier to spin out in the lower speeds and throttle travel.

It's a lot more complex than just throttle pedal position (or throttle plate opening etc). 50-100% throttle is totally different starting at say 2000 rpm than it is starting at 5000 rpm. Then you have different torque curves for different engines etc. Downforce cars behaving different at low speed etc. So it's difficult to generalise.

For me (and a lot of others) the shape of the pedal map in GTS is wrong- there is just not enough finesse possible between say 60 - 100% throttle as it's covered by a tiny pedal travel.

Are you saying you are happy with the current pedal mapping with loads of control between 0-60% throttle? Not saying anyone is right or wrong as it's people's preferences, but am just interested.

 

[Griffith500]

I think you're much more likely to spin going from 50 to 100% throttle in an instant than you are going from 0-50% in an instant.

All sporty manufacturers, when they change the throttle mapping (like with the sports button), put more throttle opening into the first part of pedal travel, so its basically like pressing the pedal more than you actually have and it feels faster Especially in normal driving where actually you don't use full throttle often at all. No one (except PD) puts more throttle opening into the last part of pedal travel. Because it's a really bad idea.

Here's the "Sport" throttle map from an Aprilia Dorsoduro 750 (motorcycle). In fact, it's a torque "request" map for the ride-by-wire, the ECU uses a model to predict torque output from the operating conditions and trims the throttles accordingly. All very complicated, but also 10 years behind the curve by now. Designed by MM according to their experience with Ferrari.



The step up at full throttle is just to ensure you do get "full throttle" and the model doesn't accidentally limit the engine's output in particularly favourable atmospheric conditions. Notice it's otherwise linear at high rpm; this engine makes its torque in a band between 6 and 9 thousand rpm. One weird aspect of this system is that the throttles are automatically opened further for a given input / demand when at altitude. Of course, it still runs out of breath sooner.

The throttle (self-control, feedback) map itself looks like this:

That includes artificial limiting of the throttle opening at certain engine speeds to flatten the torque curve (no sudden surges: extra controllability?), and this limit takes precedence over the torque request.

When tuning systems like this, if the torque curve changes significantly, you have to go in and tweak the demand map as well.


This might all seem off-topic, but it's important to realise that all this chat about throttle position and engine torque are really not so straight forward in this day and age, as far as the real (esp. road) machinery is concerned.


In a race machine, the use of drive by wire throttles is for response and consistency (ECU model predicting output torque); i.e. it's made to be easy to modulate at all times. It doesn't need an abstracted layer of extra control for emissions, driveability and efficiency, just like the game.

The throttle just needs to be linear at the extreme, and soft at onset. In the game, the output torque can be controlled directly, so that should be easy to achieve.

 

[barkohba]

It's a lot more complex than just throttle pedal position (or throttle plate opening etc). 50-100% throttle is totally different starting at say 2000 rpm than it is starting at 5000 rpm. Then you have different torque curves for different engines etc. Downforce cars behaving different at low speed etc. So it's difficult to generalise. However it is true that the sports button on road cars puts more throttle opening into the initial pedal travel than the final pedal travel.

For me (and a lot of others) the shape of the pedal map in GTS is wrong- there is just not enough finesse possible between say 60 - 100% throttle as it's covered by a tiny pedal travel.

Are you saying you are happy with the current pedal mapping with loads of control between 0-60% throttle? Not saying anyone is right or wrong as it's people's preferences, but am just interested

Well, I've had a long discussion about this a few posts/pages back, and after some digging I found the closest real life analogue to what GTS does with its peddal/engine intake mapping as being the "lean" option on F1 engine maps.

I also stated that I've stopped having issues with throttle input when I switched from my old G29 setup to the T-GT. Not sure exactly what's the reason for that, it could be anywhere from the fact that the G29 pedals have 256 step resolution while the T-GT ones have 1024 resolution, to the way the pedals themselves are mapped into GTS (as GTS has many fixed settings on the supported wheels, not much customization there).

In short, as an avid Assetto Corsa player as well, at the moment I find very little bottom-line difference between the two games when it comes to many aspects, specifically throttle input. I pretty much manage to modulate the throttle the same on both games, and whenever I switch between one or the other (using identical settings and car setups, for example I tried Mercedes AMG GT3 on Nurburging GP and the Ferrari F40 on Monza) I have a very similar outcome - almost indentical lap times, and very very similar wheel movement, that is when pushing the cars the same I find that in both games I have to apply corrections (lift offs, counter steer corrections) at the same points in the respective circuits.

Basically, I know the throttle mapping IS an issue for some, especially G29 users, because I used to have this wheel, but it's almost completely gone, to the point where I genuinely am not hindered by it, on the T-GT. My main gripes with GTS are actually the break peddal mapping, specifically when driving w/o ABS, and the horrible H-Shifter implementation.

 

[Griffith500]

The lean map for an F1 car will not have the same torque curve, so the throttle map in isolation doesn't really tell us anything. I expect it's intended to combat turbo lag, which isn't actually modeled properly in GTS anyway.

In fact, turbo cars will be harder to control than they need to be because of the instant boost situation in GTS. Turbo cars tend to make lots of torque down low.

So I'd suspect that turbo cars will be comparatively difficult to control at mid-engine speeds and mid-throttle than at high speed and near full throttle. And by that same logic, an NA engine would generally (exceptions would be large displacement torque monsters: muscle) be harder to control in the last portion of travel at high speed, but fine in the midrange.

 

[John G]

Basically, I know the throttle mapping IS an issue for some, especially G29 users, because I used to have this wheel, but it's almost completely gone, to the point where I genuinely am not hindered by it, on the T-GT. My main gripes with GTS are actually the break peddal mapping, specifically when driving w/o ABS, and the horrible H-Shifter implementation.

Fair enough - i agree on the brakes and shifter (knowing from AC how good it can be) - and i do get the counter point too - maybe if PD were to change it, everyone might still complain cos they couldn't control the car at low throttle opening!!

However, it should be the easiest thing just to allow user to select their own pedal map.
A. More control at initial throttle
B. Linear
C. More control at final throttle

And then everyone can be happy!

 

[barkohba]

The lean map for an F1 car will not have the same torque curve, so the throttle map in isolation doesn't really tell us anything. I expect it's intended to combat turbo lag, which isn't actually modeled properly in GTS anyway.

In fact, turbo cars will be harder to control than they need to be because of the instant boost situation in GTS. Turbo cars tend to make lots of torque down low.

So I'd suspect that turbo cars will be comparatively difficult to control at mid-engine speeds and mid-throttle than at high speed and near full throttle. And by that same logic, an NA engine would generally (exceptions would be large displacement torque monsters: muscle) be harder to control in the last portion of travel at high speed, but fine in the midrange.

I don't experience instant-boost in GTS on older turbo cars (the ones that are actually prone IRL to accentuated turbo lag).

On the F40, and even the new Group C cars, there's quite a visible turbo lag, and in fact, the F40 in particular, since I tested it thuroughly on Monza on both GTS and AC using almost identical setups (GTS has some suspension options that AC doesn't, and viceversa), the turbo lag is felt just hte same and arrives at pretty much the same RPM.

 

[barkohba]

T

The lean map for an F1 car will not have the same torque curve, so the throttle map in isolation doesn't really tell us anything. I expect it's intended to combat turbo lag, which isn't actually modeled properly in GTS anyway.

In fact, turbo cars will be harder to control than they need to be because of the instant boost situation in GTS. Turbo cars tend to make lots of torque down low.

So I'd suspect that turbo cars will be comparatively difficult to control at mid-engine speeds and mid-throttle than at high speed and near full throttle. And by that same logic, an NA engine would generally (exceptions would be large displacement torque monsters: muscle) be harder to control in the last portion of travel at high speed, but fine in the midrange.

The "lean"-est mapping in F1 cars has nothing to do with turbo lag, as modern F1 cars have esentially eliminated turbo lag with the use of an exhaust powered turbo charger, which, in turn, is also spun with the help of an electric motor. This is how the turbo lag is eliminated from the cars and the charger is ready for action once the throttle is pressed. You don't need to wait for the pressure buildup when relying purely on exhaust power. This enables faster reaction.

The lean mapping in F1 cars is generally used for slow speed corners, and in wet conditions, as F1 cars have no TC.

 

[Traks1]

Sorry @barkohba but for me using using a G29, the AC throttle response could barely be more different than that of GTS. One is perfect and logical, the other is plainly bs. You'll forgive me if I prefer that PD adopt something more "normal" than I should have to go out and blow £700 on a peripheral as a semi workaround.

 

[barkohba]

Sorry @barkohba but for me using using a G29, the AC throttle response could barely be more different than that of GTS. One is perfect and logical, the other is plainly bs. You'll forgive me if I prefer that PD adopt something more "normal" than I should have to go out and blow £700 on a peripheral as a semi workaround.

I think you missunderstood what I'm saying. As I said, on the G29, the throttle response is truly not good on GTS - works great on AC. After switching to the T-GT, the throttle response improved quite a lot on GTS, and on AC it's slightly better. G29 - bad on GTS, good on AC ; T-GT (this is actually also valid for T300/T500 since it uses the same hardware and resolution for the pedals) - good on GTS ; good on AC.

 

[John G]

I have T300rs (T3PA) and i don't like the throttle response in GTS vs how it is in AC.

Even tho the pedal sets are the same, its possible that the T-GT setting in GTS puts a different throttle response to the pedal set than the T300RS setting.

I never tried G29 tho so that could be even worse!

 

[barkohba]

I have T300rs and i don't like the throttle response in GTS vs how it is in AC.

Even tho the pedal sets are the same, its possible that the T-GT setting in GTS puts a different throttle response to the pedal set than the T300RS setting.

I never tried G29 tho so that could be even worse!

I checked and they are actually not the same, quite, but I can't find definitive tech specs to find out what the difference are.

T300rs uses T3PA pedals while the T-GT uses T3PGT pedals. This according to thrustmaster.com.

The only visible difference is that the pedal arms on the T300 RS are black (are they made of metal?) while the T3PGT ones are exposed metal.

 

[superwally]

I think you missunderstood what I'm saying. As I said, on the G29, the throttle response is truly not good on GTS - works great on AC. After switching to the T-GT, the throttle response improved quite a lot on GTS, and on AC it's slightly better. G29 - bad on GTS, good on AC ; T-GT (this is actually also valid for T300/T500 since it uses the same hardware and resolution for the pedals) - good on GTS ; good on AC.

I switched from a G29 to a TGT a couple months ago. While the pedal input does seem smoother with the TGT, I don't think it's a big improvement when dealing with the odd mapping. No matter what pedal set you have, the mapping is still non-linear. Plus, you must be lucky and got a PERFECTLY assembled set of pedals. Mine were so poorly manufactured the throttle pedal barely worked. I wouldn't go buying a TGT just to get around this issue. I would buy a TGT because it's a spectacular wheel for GT Sport. But that's for another thread.

 

[barkohba]

I switched from a G29 to a TGT a couple months ago. While the pedal input does seem smoother with the TGT, I don't think it's a big improvement when dealing with the odd mapping. No matter what pedal set you have, the mapping is still non-linear. Plus, you must be lucky and got a PERFECTLY assembled set of pedals. Mine were so poorly manufactured the throttle pedal barely worked. I wouldn't go buying a TGT just to get around this issue. I would buy a TGT because it's a spectacular wheel for GT Sport. But that's for another thread.

I don't know who ever said that buying a T-GT is a way to get around this issue - i defninitely never stated such a thing. All I said, a few pages back, is that switching to the T-GT improved things for me. And this might be from person to person, but I don't have many issues keeping cars in line and modulating the throttle in this game. When I switch to AC, which I also play a lot, I feel nu major difference. I did find it dificult with the G29 though.

As a sidenote, at least as far as race cars like GT4/GT3 go, throttle inputs are never set up linear. They are always on a curve, depending on engine mapping. GTS and AC are no different, but each does it in its own way.

 

[Hammertime44]

First post so take it easy Have the G29 and if i remember correctly when playing with the beta test and first getting the game the throttle input was really great,smooth and linear.

To me after an update its really snappy past 50% wish PD would have a setting to alter throttle sensitivity or reset back to as it was.

 

[Griffith500]

Yes, many people noticed the beta was more controllable.

I don't experience instant-boost in GTS on older turbo cars (the ones that are actually prone IRL to accentuated turbo lag).

On the F40, and even the new Group C cars, there's quite a visible turbo lag, and in fact, the F40 in particular, since I tested it thuroughly on Monza on both GTS and AC using almost identical setups (GTS has some suspension options that AC doesn't, and viceversa), the turbo lag is felt just hte same and arrives at pretty much the same RPM.

I'm not looking for an argument, and I've glossed over you accusing me of being a troll for no good reason.

But this has been discussed to death. The dial does not necessarily represent the physics, it's just an animation.

Moreover, the animation itself pretty much follows the throttle pedal.

T


The "lean"-est mapping in F1 cars has nothing to do with turbo lag, as modern F1 cars have esentially eliminated turbo lag with the use of an exhaust powered turbo charger, which, in turn, is also spun with the help of an electric motor. This is how the turbo lag is eliminated from the cars and the charger is ready for action once the throttle is pressed. You don't need to wait for the pressure buildup when relying purely on exhaust power. This enables faster reaction.

The lean mapping in F1 cars is generally used for slow speed corners, and in wet conditions, as F1 cars have no TC.

Um? All turbos are "exhaust powered". Turbo lag has not been "eliminated" - greatly reduce, sure, but the whole turbo-compressor-motor rotating assembly still has significant inertia. But when the engine isn't running rich enough to drive the turbine proper and replenish the battery over a lap, this might become more of a problem, and it is massively hurt by the extra weight of the motor if it can't be used to help out.

In = out, rule number one - when trying to save fuel, there is less energy available to pre-spool the turbo. Having the throttle shut hurts economy and adds load to the compressor, the energy to accelerate which must be found at the turbine (or from the motor attached to it, which comes from the battery, which still comes from fuel, which we're trying to save). Opening the throttles wide helps the turbo spool quicker, the trick is catching the buildup of boost and trimming the throttles accordingly (again, using predictive models and a "torque demand" setup). Such an ability is useful in slow corners, and also in the wet.

I think we all know the hybrid powertrain allows TC of a sort by reducing the electrical assistance (when deployed) or by "harvesting" more from the turbine to control boost. I'm sure the FIA / FISA don't like it, but try regulating it out without hurting the very point of going hybrid.

 

[superwally]

I don't know who ever said that buying a T-GT is a way to get around this issue - i defninitely never stated such a thing. All I said, a few pages back, is that switching to the T-GT improved things for me. And this might be from person to person, but I don't have many issues keeping cars in line and modulating the throttle in this game. When I switch to AC, which I also play a lot, I feel nu major difference. I did find it dificult with the G29 though.

As a sidenote, at least as far as race cars like GT4/GT3 go, throttle inputs are never set up linear. They are always on a curve, depending on engine mapping. GTS and AC are no different, but each does it in its own way.

You didn't say it. Traks1 said he didn't want to go out and buy an expensive peripheral to get around the problem, referring to the TGT.

The TGT pedals are better than the G29, as they should be-when they are put together correctly at the factory. Having disassembled both pedals, I'm deeply unimpressed by the casting quality of the TGT aluminum arms. I wrote a long post about it somewhere on here.

 

[phil_75]

I find what you re saying highly accurate. Plus, GTP are not only working on a new tire model, they already jave one and it was used in the GT World Tour Championship.

Its soon to appear in the game, hopefully in the same patch with the weather one that Kaz has promised.

I read at some point on a youtube comment from a championship stream that the tire model was developed in colaboration with iRacing. Really hope that's true.

Aah to be young and innocent, when you believe Polyphony will fix things and make sense.

I remember those days..

 

[OutlawQuadrnt]

It's a lot more complex than just throttle pedal position (or throttle plate opening etc). 50-100% throttle is totally different starting at say 2000 rpm than it is starting at 5000 rpm. Then you have different torque curves for different engines etc. Downforce cars behaving different at low speed etc. So it's difficult to generalise.

I would say that applying too much power too fast may upset the overall balance.

When you have a game that has cars ranging from a road going Miatas to a monster Group C car, the "ideal" throttle map for each one is going to look different. If we're not given the option to change it, then what default mapping makes the most sense considering every single car under every imaginable scenario? Suffice it to saw that what I believe vs PD's don't line up.

 

[Outspacer]

This graph isn't accurate at all..

That's why I said "roughly"

Anyway, here is a much more accurate version:

This is from measuring the throttle voltage between pedals and T300 wheel, and comparing with various on-screen displays and DIView (which is numeric, and certainly applies no curve of its own). Obviously there is some innacuracy when trying to gauge 1/4, 5/8 etc on the displays, but the linearity of AC and DIView is readily apparent compared to GTS' curve.

T300 with G29 pedals. I might test with the TM pedals at some point (trickier, because I don't have an adapter to use), but I'm positive it won't change the curve at all. It might change the amount of deadzone at the start, which would move both the GTS curve and the linear others together (as in, any rescaling of the x-axis would affect both equally).

 

[FPV MIC]

T300 with G29 pedals. I might test with the TM pedals at some point (trickier, because I don't have an adapter to use), but I'm positive it won't change the curve at all. It might change the amount of deadzone at the start, which would move both the GTS curve and the linear others together (as in, any rescaling of the x-axis would affect both equally).

I'm a T-GT owner and the pedals are definitly not linear and I agree changing from one pedal set to another won't change the curve (but as you say, it might move the curve) but could you check something for me? I'm interested to know if the throw of the pedals is longer for the Thrustmaster pedals compared to the G29 ones. Thanks in advance.

 

[Outspacer]

I'm a T-GT owner and the pedals are definitly not linear and I agree changing from one pedal set to another won't change the curve (but as you say, it might move the curve) but could you check something for me? I'm interested to know if the throw of the pedals is longer for the Thrustmaster pedals compared to the G29 ones. Thanks in advance.

I'm afraid my TM pedals are packed away somewhere at the moment. If I get them out I'll try to remember to check, but from memory I think the travel is about same, possibly a little longer. It's hard to say, because I've hacked my G29 pedals to be longer, and I only tried the TM ones for about 5 minutes! My TM pedals are the T300 GT version (3 pedals, different plates), so are they the same as come with T-GT?

 

[FPV MIC]

I'm afraid my TM pedals are packed away somewhere at the moment. If I get them out I'll try to remember to check, but from memory I think the travel is about same, possibly a little longer. It's hard to say, because I've hacked my G29 pedals to be longer, and I only tried the TM ones for about 5 minutes! My TM pedals are the T300 GT version (3 pedals, different plates), so are they the same as come with T-GT?

Ahh, no worries. And yes they're basically the same, just cheap metal arms with different face plates instead of cheap plastic arms.

 

[winet]

I am new to the PS4 and console racing. Been doing GT Sport for a couple of months and of course noticed how easily some cars want to spin out without TC on. After reading this post checked out the throttle response and it is horrible !!!! 75% throttle is next to impossible. Using Thrustmaster T300 with TP3A Pro pedals. What's most disappointing is it can't be that hard a fix and yet it hasn't been.

 

[OutlawQuadrnt]

That's why I said "roughly"

Anyway, here is a much more accurate version:

View attachment 741610

This is from measuring the throttle voltage between pedals and T300 wheel, and comparing with various on-screen displays and DIView (which is numeric, and certainly applies no curve of its own). Obviously there is some innacuracy when trying to gauge 1/4, 5/8 etc on the displays, but the linearity of AC and DIView is readily apparent compared to GTS' curve.

T300 with G29 pedals. I might test with the TM pedals at some point (trickier, because I don't have an adapter to use), but I'm positive it won't change the curve at all. It might change the amount of deadzone at the start, which would move both the GTS curve and the linear others together (as in, any rescaling of the x-axis would affect both equally).

That graph is pretty close to the OP's video.



I only checked my G29 pedals visually and compared it to the in-game throttle bar at quarter intervals. Therefore, I'm not sure if there is an actual deadzone. However, the amount of power I get within the first quarter of travel is so low that it might as well be a deadzone in practice.

 

[user3392345]

It could be so easy, but they are kind of weird. All input linear, done. Adding a option to change it the way everyone likes, done. But what they do..... just stupid things.... LOL

 

[barkohba]

Yes, many people noticed the beta was more controllable.



I'm not looking for an argument, and I've glossed over you accusing me of being a troll for no good reason.

But this has been discussed to death. The dial does not necessarily represent the physics, it's just an animation.

Moreover, the animation itself pretty much follows the throttle pedal.



Um? All turbos are "exhaust powered". Turbo lag has not been "eliminated" - greatly reduce, sure, but the whole turbo-compressor-motor rotating assembly still has significant inertia. But when the engine isn't running rich enough to drive the turbine proper and replenish the battery over a lap, this might become more of a problem, and it is massively hurt by the extra weight of the motor if it can't be used to help out.

In = out, rule number one - when trying to save fuel, there is less energy available to pre-spool the turbo. Having the throttle shut hurts economy and adds load to the compressor, the energy to accelerate which must be found at the turbine (or from the motor attached to it, which comes from the battery, which still comes from fuel, which we're trying to save). Opening the throttles wide helps the turbo spool quicker, the trick is catching the buildup of boost and trimming the throttles accordingly (again, using predictive models and a "torque demand" setup). Such an ability is useful in slow corners, and also in the wet.

I think we all know the hybrid powertrain allows TC of a sort by reducing the electrical assistance (when deployed) or by "harvesting" more from the turbine to control boost. I'm sure the FIA / FISA don't like it, but try regulating it out without hurting the very point of going hybrid.

I've accused you of trolling (and I might add as an alternative being disrespectful for no good reason) when I shared my video regarding the throttle modulation, and you said something to the effect of I have no idea what i'm doing in the game when it comes to throttle input, literally out of nowhere. So you don't need to "gloss" over anything, just change your attitude.

More to the point, my first part when comparing AC to GTS has nothing to do with that throttle "graphic". I'm talking about the way I'm moving my actual foot, I need very little readjustments and I don't change my input style.

As far as F1, you might think the info I relayed is made up or false, explaining how turbo lag in mordern cars have been basically almost reduced, to the extent that the lean F1 setting, which you suggested is for combating turbo lag, is actually not for that (since it's almost a non issue in modern F1 cars, at least since 2014), but actually for different track layouts or weather.

I'm not going to enter an never ending argument with you, I'm basing my info on facts. You think turbo lag is still a thing in modern F1 cars? In that case, here are some articles on the matter, with very detailed tech explanations as to how this was achieved. In case you don't agree, please take it up with the engineers/motorsports journalists who wrote them. Fact is: F1 turbo lag has been essentially eliminiated, and the "lean" F1 setup is definitely not for that, but rather for slow corners and/or wet weather.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/technique-the-mgu-k-and-mgu-h-explained-791187/

https://metropolitan.fi/formula-1-fact/is-there-a-turbo-lag-in-formula-1-engines

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/turbocharged-engines-in-formula-one-18108.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antilag_system

Cheers.