Observations on suspension settings
- Thread starter Stotty
- 611 comments
- 78,647 views
The only way a car will turn better with the front raised up is when the front camber was too high to start with. You raise the front, the car has more body roll at the front and you will get more contact area on your tires when you have high camber. It's kinda why changing just one setting at a time can give bogus results sometimes.
- 10,456
- United States
- WrecklessAbandon
You haven't said what you consider "backwards".
It sounds like you won't consider it backwards unless it meets very specific criteria, of which you have not shared.
What is "too much camber", or "too stiff a spring"? You can't just throw vague answers like this and expect it to have credibility, can you?
What is "normal" camber? What is "normal" toe? Any other settings you're going to bring up after the fact I should be aware of?
I can't provide what you personally have determined "realistic" so rather than play a guessing game with you for a couple days, just tell me.
How about a FR car with 50/50 weight with 0 toe and camber equal front and rear that oversteers from having front spring rate 4.0 or more higher than rear or a car that oversteers from having the front 25mm or more higher than the rear. Choose a car 900-1600kg and 200-600 horsepower and not a bogus car like Shelby Cobra.
Or show me any car that you know for certain oversteers from having high front spring rate or high front ride height, Without having completely bogus settings like 15.0 front spring rate and 3.0 rear spring rate or a rear end that is dumped and has spring rate below 7.0 that might bottom out under acceleration.
Or show me any car that you know for certain oversteers from having high front spring rate or high front ride height, Without having completely bogus settings like 15.0 front spring rate and 3.0 rear spring rate or a rear end that is dumped and has spring rate below 7.0 that might bottom out under acceleration.
- 10,456
- United States
- WrecklessAbandon
You're still thinking pre Spec II then.
We have something that tells us when a car bottoms out.
And to answer your question(s), any car in the game.
The problem you face, is that you're still blaming "extreme" settings, which is last years topic.
That's been settled online, where you don't need crazy settings to make a car simply neutral. Ride height and spring rate function is still the same as offline, but since the cars don't all plow like dump trucks, you don't need nor can you even drive a max/min setup 99.9% of the time, if ever.
I generally use camber to create extra rotation, so you won't find squat in my tune that you believe in.
Problem is, a tiny amount of toe, or extra front camber doesn't override the rest of the car.
No worry, I can easily make a car fit your criteria though. Anything else? Am I allowed to raise the front spring rate 5.0 higher? Am I allowed to use ride height and spring rate?
Example:
+30 / 0
16.5 / 11.0
6/4
4/6
3/3
1.5/1.5
0.00/0.00
Is this ok?
- 7,711
- Indiana-USA
- OwensRacing
CSL- Try this in with the Ride Ht
I've actually gotten away from ride height as of now. However will try it as my last adjustment.
I've actually gotten away from ride height as of now. However will try it as my last adjustment.
- 10,456
- United States
- WrecklessAbandon
There are many random exceptions in GT5. The trick is to not go by these random cars as a rule, but a category.
Some cars over-steer on throttle and under-steer on deceleration, some vice verse, and rare ones are equal on all 3.
When I say over-steer or under-steer, I mean relative to the balance of the car, mid-corner. If a car under-steers mid corner, it might be neutral coming out, which would be over-steer prone, because if you adjust the mid corner balance, it will then over-steer exiting corners.
Some cars I set the bump higher, some lower, front and rear, same with rebound. The best use of shocks I've found is for handling while accelerating or decelerating.
Bump - Higher front than rear will help rotate, lower front than rear will rotate less.
Rebound - Same as bump, but on deceleration.
I am the only person I know of that tunes shocks this way, and I'll never go back. Whether they can work in other ways I'm not sure, but they can't do more for me than they already do. They are by far the best tool I have to control a cars balance through all phases of cornering.
Ride height, spring rate, arb, camber, or rear toe can only control the set balance of the car, but can never take a push on exit away, without also increasing rotation at all times, nor can they decrease lift throttle over-steer, without decreasing rotation of the car at all times.
Some cars over-steer on throttle and under-steer on deceleration, some vice verse, and rare ones are equal on all 3.
When I say over-steer or under-steer, I mean relative to the balance of the car, mid-corner. If a car under-steers mid corner, it might be neutral coming out, which would be over-steer prone, because if you adjust the mid corner balance, it will then over-steer exiting corners.
Some cars I set the bump higher, some lower, front and rear, same with rebound. The best use of shocks I've found is for handling while accelerating or decelerating.
Bump - Higher front than rear will help rotate, lower front than rear will rotate less.
Rebound - Same as bump, but on deceleration.
I am the only person I know of that tunes shocks this way, and I'll never go back. Whether they can work in other ways I'm not sure, but they can't do more for me than they already do. They are by far the best tool I have to control a cars balance through all phases of cornering.
Ride height, spring rate, arb, camber, or rear toe can only control the set balance of the car, but can never take a push on exit away, without also increasing rotation at all times, nor can they decrease lift throttle over-steer, without decreasing rotation of the car at all times.
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
That's really the way dampers should be used, albeit with some sacrifice to the wanted entry/exit characteristics in trade for ability to deal with curbs if needed.
You're still thinking pre Spec II then.
We have something that tells us when a car bottoms out.
And to answer your question(s), any car in the game.
The problem you face, is that you're still blaming "extreme" settings, which is last years topic.
That's been settled online, where you don't need crazy settings to make a car simply neutral. Ride height and spring rate function is still the same as offline, but since the cars don't all plow like dump trucks, you don't need nor can you even drive a max/min setup 99.9% of the time, if ever.
I generally use camber to create extra rotation, so you won't find squat in my tune that you believe in.
Problem is, a tiny amount of toe, or extra front camber doesn't override the rest of the car.
No worry, I can easily make a car fit your criteria though. Anything else? Am I allowed to raise the front spring rate 5.0 higher? Am I allowed to use ride height and spring rate?
Example:
+30 / 0
16.5 / 11.0
6/4
4/6
3/3
1.5/1.5
0.00/0.00
Is this ok?
Sure.
- 10,456
- United States
- WrecklessAbandon
Do you play in online lounges or lobbies at all?
As I was doing some testing last night, I noticed on 50/50 cars (what you specified) the difference from max/min to min/max in handling is still pretty minor, and it's greatly increased on vehicles with an artificial 50/50 (with ballast doing the work) or especially cars that aren't 50/50 weight distribution.
Of course with any car, the difference offline is very minor compared to online, so if you've been testing with 50/50 cars, it's pretty easy to see why you haven't found "the big deal."
Because I know anyone in their right mind would notice their car wildly spinning out of control online, using a fast offline setup, as has been discussed and proven repeatedly.
Loving the flame-bait sig though.
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
Well that's massively old news.
I figured that out around the time I figured out how to make my RX-7 behave offline... Took it online, died in Turn 3 at Trial.
And it wasn't set up with "backwards" tuning as far as ride height or spring rate went, just with what I knew from GT4 and what I was finding needed to change for GT5.
Wait, that's "backwards" to some as it is, neeeeeevermind.
- 10,456
- United States
- WrecklessAbandon
What I'm saying is, the same tune I slapped on the RX7 listed a few posts before this, which only rotates slightly more than stock offline, will kill you online.
I will admit I was very surprised to see the ride height did so little on the RX-7 last night, but then I slapped 200kg's on an Elise 111R, set the weight to exactly 50/50 (in the middle of the 50/50 range) and sure enough the ride height difference was more noticeable instantly.
I then tried it on an ACR, natural 50/50, again with surprisingly little effect, so I'm thinking the more lopsided the car, the greater effect ride height will have.
I'll probably do some more tinkering to see if it's related to weight distribution, since I know it works miracles on FF. I'm thinking it's a weight balance system, in which PD values the weight more than that of the suspension settings. Raise the front and drop the rear, shift weight rearwards, over-steer. Raise the rear and drop the front, weight goes forward, under-steer. Still wrong overall from common effects in principle, but some sense in the theory at least.
As for spring rates I'm still baffled on what they were thinking there.
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
An Elise is also extremely short wheelbase next to an RX-7 or Viper... Hell, even the Evora (which has horrifying stock weight balance) is pretty short in relation to track width. 2005 Mustang is nicely nose-heavy (65/35) but I don't think it hits 50/50 even with max ballast and full weight reduction...
- 10,456
- United States
- WrecklessAbandon
So you think it's related to the wheelbase, or are you just pointing out wheelbase hasn't been deducted yet?
No idea what you're saying about the Mustang.
- 7,711
- Indiana-USA
- OwensRacing
CSLACR
A weight distribution favoring one end and short wheel base means the COG has a stronger lever.
I think COG or CG is relative with your recent findings. Also impressed to see you two working this out and going the right direction. Hats off gentlemen.
- 10,456
- United States
- WrecklessAbandon
A weight distribution favoring one end and short wheel base means the COG has a stronger lever.
Also impressed to see you two working this out and going the right direction. Hats off gentlemen.
Right, but the weight distribution theory I mentioned above is also COG based.
If wheelbase does have a play in this in GT5, it would simply make the difference most noticeable on short wheelbase cars.
For example: A FWD running 65/35, is going to shift a lot more weight rearward than a 40/60 balance rear engine car running high front/low rear ride height. Of course on the 40/60 car than the extreme should play the opposite, with raising the rear shifting more weight forward than it would on the FWD.
Honestly I expect it's far more basic than that, a simple equation of some kind, if not random on different cars. PD likes to do different things randomly from one car to the next.
- 7,711
- Indiana-USA
- OwensRacing
A force has to act upon the lever for anything to happen.
Static weights are one thing. When motion gets involved then CG and it's different levers. Which are relative to its position in x,y,&z and the force being applied.
Honestly As a kid when I raced R/C's. I tried to apply all forces I could imagine happening during the race. Did so to see the reaction of the suspension on my cars. Mimic what was seen on track. This is something that seems silly but to us geeks it's like brain candy. LoL
Static weights are one thing. When motion gets involved then CG and it's different levers. Which are relative to its position in x,y,&z and the force being applied.
Honestly As a kid when I raced R/C's. I tried to apply all forces I could imagine happening during the race. Did so to see the reaction of the suspension on my cars. Mimic what was seen on track. This is something that seems silly but to us geeks it's like brain candy. LoL
- 10,456
- United States
- WrecklessAbandon
I don't understand the point.A force has to act upon the lever for anything to happen.
Static weights are one thing. When motion gets involved then CG and it's different levers. Which are relative to its position in x,y,&z and the force being applied.
Honestly As a kid when I raced R/C's. I tried to apply all forces I could imagine happening during the race. Did so to see the reaction of the suspension on my cars. Mimic what was seen on track. This is something that seems silly but to us geeks it's like brain candy. LoL
How does this apply to what I'm saying?
Best I can figure is you're saying ride height should have a greater effect on the Elise, and/or on cars that aren't 50/50, or have a short wheelbase. I agree, but it's still raising the front to make the rear slide more, which is very uncommon, and generally needs extenuating circumstances to even happen in real life.
We could talk for weeks about what could or might happen with one of these goofball setups in real life, but the one thing that should be one of the least likely to happen in real life, is what I see all of the time.
It's the exact opposite of what generally happens, given no extenuating circumstances that would alter the results.
- 7,711
- Indiana-USA
- OwensRacing
Was talking cars with weight distribution that of not 50/50 and the wheel base relevance to CG.
While I don't have an understanding of why raising the front end up higher then rear on a FWD makes it drive like a car with lower Front and raised rear. I honestly would bet that the ride heights are switched.
The rest, just can't tell well enough from adjusting them is they are switched. The ride height seems cut and dry when you use the switch on FWD.
While I don't have an understanding of why raising the front end up higher then rear on a FWD makes it drive like a car with lower Front and raised rear. I honestly would bet that the ride heights are switched.
The rest, just can't tell well enough from adjusting them is they are switched. The ride height seems cut and dry when you use the switch on FWD.
nomis3613
Premium
- 831
Sorry if this has been covered in the pages that I missed, but nose-up has a much smaller effect these days. Back in July 2011, 10mm of nose-up made all the difference to an offline Ferrari F40 tune. Today, I can't feel a difference for any amount of rake in this car.
So I tried the Elise 111R online like you did. Without ballast, nose-up had negligible effect. Using front ballast to get 50/50 distribution, suddenly nose-up was back to its old trick of increasing oversteer. Then repeating this test offline: very minor effect, much less than online.
Lastly, the Volvo got a run online. With full rear ballast and downforce, there was some nose-up oversteer (but much less than in the past, and it was more like the rear end abruptly kicking out at times rather than a general increase in agility).
So, like you say, nose-up is definitely much less effective offline these days. And related to ballast. And I wonder whether it now has more effect for rear-heavy cars than front-heavy.
Very interesting. I just did some similar tests, starting with the Volvo C30R (stock 65/35 weight dist). Nose-up made no difference offline, even when I used 200kg of rear ballast (to get to 55/45) and added max rear downforce.
So I tried the Elise 111R online like you did. Without ballast, nose-up had negligible effect. Using front ballast to get 50/50 distribution, suddenly nose-up was back to its old trick of increasing oversteer. Then repeating this test offline: very minor effect, much less than online.
Lastly, the Volvo got a run online. With full rear ballast and downforce, there was some nose-up oversteer (but much less than in the past, and it was more like the rear end abruptly kicking out at times rather than a general increase in agility).
So, like you say, nose-up is definitely much less effective offline these days. And related to ballast. And I wonder whether it now has more effect for rear-heavy cars than front-heavy.
- 10,456
- United States
- WrecklessAbandon
I tested all those cars offline.
Since that was written, I've continued to try it on quite a few cars, and I've come to the following conclusions:
1. It always does something, though it may be very little, especially offline.
2. It's different amounts for different cars, drive train and weight balance seem totally unrelated to whether it has a strong or weak effect.
3. (And this isn't new) It's much stronger online than offline.
Oh, and you can usually use a 🤬 ton of rear toe instead of ride height/spring rate shenanigans if you desire. Seems to handle the same, but feels nicer for certain. Unfortunately still a bit slower though.
Since that was written, I've continued to try it on quite a few cars, and I've come to the following conclusions:
1. It always does something, though it may be very little, especially offline.
2. It's different amounts for different cars, drive train and weight balance seem totally unrelated to whether it has a strong or weak effect.
3. (And this isn't new) It's much stronger online than offline.
Oh, and you can usually use a 🤬 ton of rear toe instead of ride height/spring rate shenanigans if you desire. Seems to handle the same, but feels nicer for certain. Unfortunately still a bit slower though.
- 472
- France
- poumpoumk
Hi guys !
I'm just starting to tune my cars in GT5. Like you I've found that the height adjustement was strange ! I'm currently tuning an MR (Clio V6) and with a nose up config the car has more oversteer when I enter in the corner and when I get out of the corner ! Of course I was hoping something different !
Do you really think that it's a bug or perhaps we're missing something and in some cases it's logical to have oversteer with a nose up config ? I'm a little confused here
The 2.08 update was supposed to correct something about the height. Did you notice something about that ? I began tuning after the 2.08 so I don't know how it was before...
PS : I only play online
I'm just starting to tune my cars in GT5. Like you I've found that the height adjustement was strange ! I'm currently tuning an MR (Clio V6) and with a nose up config the car has more oversteer when I enter in the corner and when I get out of the corner ! Of course I was hoping something different !
Do you really think that it's a bug or perhaps we're missing something and in some cases it's logical to have oversteer with a nose up config ? I'm a little confused here
The 2.08 update was supposed to correct something about the height. Did you notice something about that ? I began tuning after the 2.08 so I don't know how it was before...
PS : I only play online
- 799
- Skuh
Hi guys !
I'm just starting to tune my cars in GT5. Like you I've found that the height adjustement was strange ! I'm currently tuning an MR (Clio V6) and with a nose up config the car has more oversteer when I enter in the corner and when I get out of the corner ! Of course I was hoping something different !
Do you really think that it's a bug or perhaps we're missing something and in some cases it's logical to have oversteer with a nose up config ? I'm a little confused here
The 2.08 update was supposed to correct something about the height. Did you notice something about that ? I began tuning after the 2.08 so I don't know how it was before...
PS : I only play online
Depending on your other settings, it is possible to get oversteer from a nose up car.
Rear bias towards the springs, dampers and roll bars all induce oversteer and it can be induced with the toe and camber options too.
- 1,403
- mooresville, NC
- FRT_LEGACY97
- 4,803
- Dearborn, MI
- MotorCtyHamilton
Izzyracer97
Really wish Pd had programmed it so that we could change just one corner at a time. Unless I missed the options to change wedge or cross weights or camber on one wheel or toe on just one side of the rear, etc?
Similar threads
