Physics thread

  • Thread starter LVracerGT
  • 1,459 comments
  • 133,967 views
I bought the game three days ago and since then I am driving BMW 1M Coupe at the Nordschleife.

Flugplatz
I went wide in that corner,the left front end rear tires were entirely in the grass(the right tires were on the asphalt) and the car did not move at all(remained completely stable)

Here is the real world(skip ahead to 2:00)



The car slides(in dry)in slow speed corners (Adenauer Forst and Wehrseifen)as if I use handbrake,at the same time understeer in fast corners as Schwedenkreuz and Kesselchen(A long climb up a deep valley. Three fast left hand kinks lead into a fast charge uphill)
Also the car has zero lift off oversteer.



I drove the stock and my setup with all tires.
Logitech Driving Force GT user.



1M stock setup is not based on real car OEM setup, and the OEM setup made by SMS also still not accurate ( both can be found at http://projectcarssetups.eu/#/bycar ) I'm going to update my GT6 1M replica soon :) and I may be able to give you real car OEM data setup if you are interested to adapt it on Pcars ( use UHP tire ) For reference Horst Von Saurma did 8:14.9s at Nordshcleife and 1:14.1s at Hockenheim Ring in 2011 Sport Auto Supertest. I have test car + BMW factory range alignment data too ( detailed in the magazine article ), the 1M weighs 1513kg & 51.5/48.5 full tank of fuel in the test, the Pcars 1M is way heavier. Also need to lower steering ratio, the real 1M has 12.5:1.
 
Any particular reason the rest of us can't share it?

Us ? What's to share ? I am just sending real car data to super_gt, if he can adapt it and make a tune out of it, he is free to share it here.The same way I did it on Pcars forum.


I'm in contact with Jussi right now, from SMS WMD ( who assisted in car setup + OEM style setups ). I have sent some data through NLxarosa, Jussi still have more to discuss with me, and may or may not make changes later on. Casey Ringley has acknowledged the FQ400 ( the final gear ) and Clio Cup inconsistency and may update the car in the next patch if time permits.
 
Us ? What's to share ? I am just sending real car data to super_gt, if he can adapt it and make a tune out of it, he is free to share it here.The same way I did it on Pcars forum.


I'm in contact with Jussi right now, from SMS WMD ( who assisted in car setup + OEM style setups ). I have sent some data through NLxarosa, Jussi still have more to discuss with me, and may or may not make changes later on. Casey Ringley has acknowledged the FQ400 ( the final gear ) and Clio Cup inconsistency and may update the car in the next patch if time permits.
That's cool n'all but is there some reason you can't post the OEM set ups here, you know, so we could all benefit from your knowledge rather than just a select few?
 
Does anyone else think camber isn't working 100% correctly? If you run realistic camber levels, say 2.5 f 1.3 r, you lose a ridiculous amount of straight line speed. So much that the extra grip you gain mid-corner is meaningless because you've already lost that time and more on the straights. I've seen some TT people saying 1.5 f 0.0 r is the fastest on all cars and all tracks. I don't agree 100% with that, but there is something to it. Camber does seem to add grip mid corner, but it also has a weird affect on lift off oversteer in certain conditions. In real life you would never run less camber so you can be faster on the straights yet I've gained .5 seconds a lap by doing just that. I don't think the problem is like gt6 where camber just took away grip but the relationship between rolling resistance/body roll/contact patch seems very wrong. Anyone else have some comments?
 
There was a discussion about this on WMD. Short story: with higher camber you also need to compensate with higher tire pressure because of carcass deformation. I can post more specifics if you want, but I think other WMD members are more knowledgeable on this subject, e.g. @LogiForce
 
There was a discussion about this on WMD. Short story: with higher camber you also need to compensate with higher tire pressure because of carcass deformation. I can post more specifics if you want, but I think other WMD members are more knowledgeable on this subject, e.g. @LogiForce
I would be greatful for more info on the subject.
 
Us ? What's to share ? I am just sending real car data to super_gt, if he can adapt it and make a tune out of it, he is free to share it here.The same way I did it on Pcars forum.
Basically this:
That's cool n'all but is there some reason you can't post the OEM set ups here, you know, so we could all benefit from your knowledge rather than just a select few?

Not the first time you've talked about having correct real car data for some of the cars but for some reason it's shrouded in secrecy. Instead of PM'ing super_gt you could just make the same effort and post it here for anyone that wants it.
 
Here's a quote from Casey (Ringley):

Rolling resistance due to contact patch area alone is smaller than that due to carcass deformation. The test on larger camber angle results in an area of higher deformation at the inside of the tire and that is adding up to greater carcass drag than from a 'flat' pressure distribution.

And from our own @LogiForce

With positive or negative camber you get more pressure on the sidewall (carcass) of the tyre. So you need to compensate that with more tyre pressure to keep the wall from buckling or collapsing (for a lack of better word) under weight and downforce.

Who also made this picture that explains it more simply:

camber differences.png
 
Here's a quote from Casey (Ringley):



And from our own @LogiForce



Who also made this picture that explains it more simply:

View attachment 400789
Thank you, I am curious though if you know of anyone who tested a setup with high pressure and high camber and then matched the straight line speed of a setup with 0 camber. I know it's a hard question to answer, but do you have a ballpark of how much increae in pressure we're talking about for a gt3 car?
 
There are several people more knowledgeable on this topic than myself, but I do know it varies a lot with both car and track. But what you would look for is the difference in laptime between running with (higher tire pressure + higher camber) and (lower tire pressure + lower camber). I am no expert on exact values though...
 
There are several people more knowledgeable on this topic than myself, but I do know it varies a lot with both car and track. But what you would look for is the difference in laptime between running with (higher tire pressure + higher camber) and (lower tire pressure + lower camber). I am no expert on exact values though...
Ok thanks for the info.
 
Ok thanks for the info.

I just did a (very) quick and (very) dirty test on this. I picked the McLaren 12C GT3 @ Bathurst. The test was pretty simple; I drove right out of the pits in free practice and hit the wall at turn two as fast as possible.

Run #1
0.9 camber all around, 1.9 bar all around
158 mph at the wall

Run #2
2.8 camber all around, 2.4 bar all around
156 mph at the wall

Run #3
1.9 camber all around, 2.4 bar all around
156 mph at the wall

Run #4
1.4 camber all around, 2.4 bar all around
158 mph at the wall.

Sources of error: shift points may have differed slightly, impossible to nail the same part of the wall without touching the grass or steering a bunch, used imperial units that aren't as precise.

Generally speaking though, you need a lot more pressure to make up for small gains in static camber. In this game, you just need to run as little static camber as possible. Hopefully the suspension you're running is soft enough to grab that dynamic camber you need to get you in the corners. If you really want the camber without losing speed, you could conclude that you need 0.1 bar added for every 0.1 negative camber you want.
 
I just did a (very) quick and (very) dirty test on this. I picked the McLaren 12C GT3 @ Bathurst. The test was pretty simple; I drove right out of the pits in free practice and hit the wall at turn two as fast as possible.

Run #1
0.9 camber all around, 1.9 bar all around
158 mph at the wall

Run #2
2.8 camber all around, 2.4 bar all around
156 mph at the wall

Run #3
1.9 camber all around, 2.4 bar all around
156 mph at the wall

Run #4
1.4 camber all around, 2.4 bar all around
158 mph at the wall.

Sources of error: shift points may have differed slightly, impossible to nail the same part of the wall without touching the grass or steering a bunch, used imperial units that aren't as precise.

Generally speaking though, you need a lot more pressure to make up for small gains in static camber. In this game, you just need to run as little static camber as possible. Hopefully the suspension you're running is soft enough to grab that dynamic camber you need to get you in the corners. If you really want the camber without losing speed, you could conclude that you need 0.1 bar added for every 0.1 negative camber you want.
Thanks for the numbers. I thought you might need a lot of pressure to compensate and it seems like most of the time less camber is the better option.
 
There are several people more knowledgeable on this topic than myself, but I do know it varies a lot with both car and track. But what you would look for is the difference in laptime between running with (higher tire pressure + higher camber) and (lower tire pressure + lower camber). I am no expert on exact values though...

I am kinda talking in general here...

It's not as straight forward with a modern F1 tyre as used with the Formula A though. Modern F1 tyres are a hybrid between a bias ply and radial tyre. The reason why F1 this year used a lot of negative camber is because of the camber thrust effect.

Camber thrust is also used in motorcycles. It's the effect that makes you able to corner at high speeds with little steering input by just leaning into the corner.

So to get more out of the car and the camber thrust effect of those hybrid tyres you have to look at the way a car's tyres roll into camber and depict the right camber angle from that. This should technically improve your cornering speed, as the car will be more responsive.
Really you might be looking at a more independent suspension setup (weaker anti-roll bar), with probably a change in spring rate to compensate. Possibly a higher spring rate as excessive roll is not good, which would come from freeing up the suspension (weaker anti-roll bar).


In any case... changing (and if all goes well, enhancing) the performance of a car isn't as easy as just changing the wheel alignment. Tyres have a sweet spot and you want to be in that sweet spot for as long as possible with all 4 tyres during an entire round, with if possible an even wear pattern.

Anyhow... good luck with the setups you guys wish to make. :)
 
Thanks for the numbers. I thought you might need a lot of pressure to compensate and it seems like most of the time less camber is the better option.
That's not the conclusion I'd draw. Gains in camber through cornering could easily more than offset any loss of top speed, which in turn may be offset by a small increase in tire pressure. As with real car tuning there are a number of variables that come into play to determine the fastest setup for a particular car/track/tire/weather combination.
 
That's not the conclusion I'd draw. Gains in camber through cornering could easily more than offset any loss of top speed, which in turn may be offset by a small increase in tire pressure. As with real car tuning there are a number of variables that come into play to determine the fastest setup for a particular car/track/tire/weather combination.
I'm still testing a lot with camber and it's hard to have cut and dry conclusions because of all the variables that affect camber. I tend to have softer setups, so I try a little more camber and it does help hug the apex in high speed corners but I'm finding the loss in straight line speed to be very frustrating. I haven't tried really high pressures to see if it offsets it, but I also feel the really high pressure is taking away more contact patch than it's worth.

Do you run a good amount of camber on GT3 cars?
 
OK here is my BMW 1M Coupe tune

Please do not kill me for the zero camber :D

This is not the tune that @Ridox2JZGTE send me.
Here is what he send me:

These should be used with street tires - UHP in Pcars, for baseline setup testing. Using slick will need a tweaks to support the lateral loads and tire pressure changes.


Tire Pressure: Front 2.2, Rear 2.1

F 2.2 R 2.1 is stock 1M for street on 18 inch wheel

For 19 inch wheel : F 2.3 R 2.2 street

You can adapt the M3 E92 specs ( Competition Pack )

F 2.4 R 2.5 ( street )

F 2.8 R 3.0 ( above 100mph / high speed track )

I would advise to try 2.3 / 2.2 first and increase it slowly.

Car & Driver BMW 1M Michelin Test Track Tire Pressure

F 2.3 R 2.4 ( 33 Psi / 35 Psi )



Brake Pressure: 90%
Brake Balance: 70%
Steering Ratio: 12.5:1 ( similar to E92 M3 )

Spring Rate: Front 26 Rear 88 ( 1M OEM Rate )

Sway Bar: Front 34, Rear 19.6 or 20
For sway bar, I used E92 M3 OEM sway bar rate, both E82 1M and E92 M3 uses very similar anti roll bar ( diameter and appearance )


Bump Stop: Front/Rear 25mm
Slow Bump: Front 4600, Rear 5000
Slow Rebound: Front 11000, Rear 14500
Leave these alone for now.


Differential: Accel 30%, Decel 10%, Preload 45N-M

GKN ViscoDrive, just rough estimate, try and see if it works.



Alignment Options :

Eibach 1M Test Car
Caster: +7.1
Camber: Front -0.5, Rear -1.8
Toe: Front +0.3, Rear +0.3

Sport Auto 1M Super Test ( 1M BMW Courtesy Press Car ) Track : Hockenheim and Nordschleife

Caster: +6.90
Camber: Front -1.5, Rear -1.3
Toe: Front +0.5, Rear +0.3

Car was driven by Horst Von Saurma, 8:14.9 lap at Nordschleife and 1:14.1 at HockenheimRing.

reference online article :

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/s...f-3891517.html

1M weights 1513kg with full tank when tested, 51.5%/48.5% distribution


Settings Range According to BMW OEM Specs:

Front Axle:
Caster from 6.9 up to 7.9, Toe from 0.03 up to 0.30 and camber from -0.90 up to -1.75

Rear Axle:
Toe from 0.03 up to 0.30 and camber from -1.50 up to -2.00

Most 1M has 6.9-7.1 caster from factory, some has 7.3 caster. Higher caster, the better the turn in.

Real 1M benefits from zero toe on front wheel, better response for turn in entry. Set the spring rate, and alignment first ( try both Eibach and Sport Auto alignment ), lower both front toe in to zero and see if it improves. Then raise caster slowly to max 7.9. Find the sweet spot that you like.

The real 1M can run up to 3.0 camber front with close to zero toe and good tire wear. Toe out eats up tire.

+ toe is toe in, - toe is toe out.




For LSD, real 1M has GKN Visco Drive ( speed sensing viscous coupling LSD ) - Also electronically variable - not possible in Pcars, I suggest to start with 30% on accel, and 10% on decel, with 45Nm preload. The GKN has been said to have high preload on the M cars, often can be felt from low speed driving at parking lot, the resistance and the noise
smile.png



1M 6-speed ( Pcars is correct )

1st: 4.110:1
2nd: 2.315:1
3rd: 1.542:1
4th: 1.179:1
5th: 1.000:1
6th: 0.846:1
Final Drive: 3.154:1



These are just starting values, try to use the springs, ARB + alignment, tire pressure, and steering ratio
 
Last edited:
I went wide in that corner,the left front end rear tires were entirely in the grass(the right tires were on the asphalt) and the car did not move at all(remained completely stable).
I do feel that grip is not enough affected when touching grass, on moest tracks...
I have been looking for a slider or button to control that (like the GT settings) but could not find one...
 
One change in the setup:Brake Mapping is decreased to 7 (the stock is 8)and now the car has lift off oversteer in Schwedenkreuz just like in the real world.
So just one small change and the car behaves close to what it should? I find that amazing:cheers:
 
I'm still testing a lot with camber and it's hard to have cut and dry conclusions because of all the variables that affect camber.

I'm personally finding that the less travel you have, the most static camber you are able to use. Generally speaking, the stiffer and lower the car is, the less travel you have. It's not really any faster than a soft, low camber setup for me though.
 
I'm personally finding that the less travel you have, the most static camber you are able to use. Generally speaking, the stiffer and lower the car is, the less travel you have. It's not really any faster than a soft, low camber setup for me though.
Unless I'm forgetting something it seems a bit odd that you can run more camber with less roll. Since that's why we have camber to begin with.
 
I'm really trying to wrap my head around this. Wish one of you guys could hold a online practice session with a few of us and talk us through setting up a car and then let us drive to feel what we're doing. A class if you will. But in the mean time you guys keep rapping and I will read with the hope of gaining some useful knowledge. I truly want to understand setting up a car. Thanks guys :gtpflag: 👍
 
Last edited:
Back