PURE | GT4 Cup: Season 3 | Season End
- Thread starter Adam41
- 1,478 comments
- 59,002 views
- 4,853
- Buffalo, NY
- PURE_DrWatson
Seeing as you want the cars to be equal, do we still want the ballast system? Answer yes/no.
I say No.
With the amount of aliens in the field and variable cars it's going to throw a monkey wrench into the fun. It works ok when you're slowing down one car that keeps winning; but when you've got 3-5 drivers in different cars that are going to be competitive at the front I don't think it works as well.
(if it was just you and us mortals I'd be all for filling your car with bricks to give us hope)
- 2,977
- England
- WilliamsJIM_Adam
Final Race Results: Nurburgring GP/D (pre-season)
DIVISION 1
GTP_Aderrrm --.--- (1:32.069)
GTP_timeattack +03.245 (1:31.405)
tony1311 +03.978 (1:31.725)
outlaw4rc +15.134 (1:32.610)
GTP_cicua +18.269 (1:32.218)
NEPALII +18.468 (1:32.041)
GTP_Welsh-Bain +32.572 (1:32.844)
GTP_Biffy +37.486 (1:32.992)
Paginas DNF
DIVISION 2
greenarcotics --.--- (1:33.522)
R1600Turbo +09.049 (1:33.201)
TnJF +11.284 (1:33.279)
Minion07 +17.834 (1:32.984)
GTP_CSL +18.026 (1:33.464)
GTP_Litchi +36.806 (1:33.025)
MULE_9242 +49.115 (1:34.077)
PepsiMaxCrew +55.432 (1:35.127)
The-Reality-ca +2:55.231 (1:37.586)
Jay_1086 DNF
Congrats to all podium finishers and green for winning D2.
New specs will be up in an hour or so.
DIVISION 1
GTP_Aderrrm --.--- (1:32.069)
GTP_timeattack +03.245 (1:31.405)
tony1311 +03.978 (1:31.725)
outlaw4rc +15.134 (1:32.610)
GTP_cicua +18.269 (1:32.218)
NEPALII +18.468 (1:32.041)
GTP_Welsh-Bain +32.572 (1:32.844)
GTP_Biffy +37.486 (1:32.992)
Paginas DNF
DIVISION 2
greenarcotics --.--- (1:33.522)
R1600Turbo +09.049 (1:33.201)
TnJF +11.284 (1:33.279)
Minion07 +17.834 (1:32.984)
GTP_CSL +18.026 (1:33.464)
GTP_Litchi +36.806 (1:33.025)
MULE_9242 +49.115 (1:34.077)
PepsiMaxCrew +55.432 (1:35.127)
The-Reality-ca +2:55.231 (1:37.586)
Jay_1086 DNF
Congrats to all podium finishers and green for winning D2.
New specs will be up in an hour or so.
Last edited:
- 2,977
- England
- WilliamsJIM_Adam
No Nep lol. And no phil I never do. Only some people use it.
Okay new specs have been posted. Check carefully for changes to your car.
Maserati = less weight, less power.
370Z = less weight, less power.
Evora = more weight, more power.
Camaro = more weight, more power.
Vantage = slightly less weight, slightly less power.
Corvette = slightly less power.
M3 = no changes.
Speeds down GP/D home straight in mph:
370Z = 143
Maserati = 143
Corvette = 142
Vantage = 142
M3 = 142
Camaro = 140
Evora = 140
Will do some tyre wear testing at Rome tomorrow and Tuesday. Final (hopefully) specs will be up Tuesday night, ready so that people can start qualifying.
Please help me out with these specs. Test them out, give feedback. Even if it's only a few laps with each. There can be no excuses come 18:00 GMT on Saturday after Rome saying your car was too slow. The cars are equal for me, they might not be for you. That's not to say the specs will change, but they will if a bunch of drivers agree on a specific change.
👍
Okay new specs have been posted. Check carefully for changes to your car.
Maserati = less weight, less power.
370Z = less weight, less power.
Evora = more weight, more power.
Camaro = more weight, more power.
Vantage = slightly less weight, slightly less power.
Corvette = slightly less power.
M3 = no changes.
Speeds down GP/D home straight in mph:
370Z = 143
Maserati = 143
Corvette = 142
Vantage = 142
M3 = 142
Camaro = 140
Evora = 140
Will do some tyre wear testing at Rome tomorrow and Tuesday. Final (hopefully) specs will be up Tuesday night, ready so that people can start qualifying.
Please help me out with these specs. Test them out, give feedback. Even if it's only a few laps with each. There can be no excuses come 18:00 GMT on Saturday after Rome saying your car was too slow. The cars are equal for me, they might not be for you. That's not to say the specs will change, but they will if a bunch of drivers agree on a specific change.
👍
Last edited:
- 10,456
- United States
- WrecklessAbandon
- 2,977
- England
- WilliamsJIM_Adam
o.O Do you realise the Evora was at 340 bhp before the changes? It now has 10 more bhp at 350. And all information is in the OP.
1st: 30 2nd: 20 3rd: 10 4th: -10 5th and lower: -20
Maximum of x kg. x can be 90 or 120.
That's what it would look like if we carried on with ballast. Any more opinions on whether we should use ballast?
The Outlaw
Premium
- 3,042
- Bay Area, California
- GTP_timeattack
The changes look good Adam 👍 I'll do some testing of a few cars on 2-3 diverse tracks later, then give my opinion also. Maybe it would be better to have you, Tony and myself assigned a few different cars on 1 track (we each do a vastly different track) to share the workload? It would also be nice if people could post their tunes for the various cars to make things easier (and to extract the true potential out of the car quicker). Also, I think it will be just as important to monitor tire wear/top speed, while having a solid tune when doing this testing. If we just go on 1 lap pace alone, we'll still end up with results that can paint a pretty inaccurate picture as to how the tires/lap times will react during a 40 minute race.
Personally, I wanted to see the cars levelled out further just to improve the quality of racing for all, and make sure everyone was playing on an equal enough playing field. With the previous specs, the straightline disadvantage on some cars (the Camaro & Evora) was just too great to allow them to race properly, and this aspect probably would have been that much worse on the true "power tracks". Before I felt like I was racing without DRS (the F1 drag reduction system), with minimal potential to overtake, while being a total sitting duck once a car was in my draft. I do think my car had a slight outright pace advantage in the race at Nurb GP/D, but this was never going to be realized given the consistency of Tony and Adam, and the fact that my pace advantage was probably on 2-3 tenths at best (at least early in the stint)...which was not going to be enough to be able to break the draft early in the race.
Regarding ballast - When I originally signed up I meant to mention something about this. I do think 120kg is way too much for these cars, especially since the disparity in times between the top 8 or so drivers probably isn't all that great (at least in comparison to the GT500 car).
Personally, I rather not run ballast simply because it is just another variable to sort and tune around every week...and the stronger the driver, the more time wasted having to tune to stay competitive
Not only that, but the playing field has been levelled based on how the cars perform without ballast....I'd hate to see one of the cars (especially you, Tony, or myself) have say a unforseen 3-4 tenths advantage once the the ballast is loaded on, because the cars might react quite differently to "x" amount of ballast. But tbh, I really don't have any problem running it for the sake of improving the racing, but neither do I think we need anymore than a 60-80kg limit at the max.
That said, I still vote for no ballast, simply because I already have enough competition to face (with Adam & Tony) and implementing ballast would only give me more work to do in the area of tuning (which I hate, and feel is totally counter intuitive as to why I play this game to begin with). Additionally, we don't really know how the ballast will affect the cars.
Personally, I wanted to see the cars levelled out further just to improve the quality of racing for all, and make sure everyone was playing on an equal enough playing field. With the previous specs, the straightline disadvantage on some cars (the Camaro & Evora) was just too great to allow them to race properly, and this aspect probably would have been that much worse on the true "power tracks". Before I felt like I was racing without DRS (the F1 drag reduction system), with minimal potential to overtake, while being a total sitting duck once a car was in my draft. I do think my car had a slight outright pace advantage in the race at Nurb GP/D, but this was never going to be realized given the consistency of Tony and Adam, and the fact that my pace advantage was probably on 2-3 tenths at best (at least early in the stint)...which was not going to be enough to be able to break the draft early in the race.
Regarding ballast - When I originally signed up I meant to mention something about this. I do think 120kg is way too much for these cars, especially since the disparity in times between the top 8 or so drivers probably isn't all that great (at least in comparison to the GT500 car).
Personally, I rather not run ballast simply because it is just another variable to sort and tune around every week...and the stronger the driver, the more time wasted having to tune to stay competitive
Not only that, but the playing field has been levelled based on how the cars perform without ballast....I'd hate to see one of the cars (especially you, Tony, or myself) have say a unforseen 3-4 tenths advantage once the the ballast is loaded on, because the cars might react quite differently to "x" amount of ballast. But tbh, I really don't have any problem running it for the sake of improving the racing, but neither do I think we need anymore than a 60-80kg limit at the max. That said, I still vote for no ballast, simply because I already have enough competition to face (with Adam & Tony) and implementing ballast would only give me more work to do in the area of tuning (which I hate, and feel is totally counter intuitive as to why I play this game to begin with). Additionally, we don't really know how the ballast will affect the cars.
Last edited:
- 6,279
- Washington State
- OutlawQuadrant
I'm saying no on ballast simply because I've had it every season, and it's a pain in adjusting for it. Besides, doesn't seem to stop all you aliens anyways, so why bother? 
Already have the Vette, Evora, and M3 in my garage. Need to break in another Z without the chassis rigidity. May do tests tomorrow.
Already have the Vette, Evora, and M3 in my garage. Need to break in another Z without the chassis rigidity. May do tests tomorrow.
- 738
- GTP_Welsh-Bain
I vote NO to ballast. If I do get a good result somewhere, I'd like to think it was on my own personal performance.
Thanks for the extra work on the Spec's Adam. I'll try to do some testing and give you some feedback.
Thanks for the extra work on the Spec's Adam. I'll try to do some testing and give you some feedback.
- 2,977
- England
- WilliamsJIM_Adam
Ballast's gone. +1 to authencity. +1 to not knowing how the cars will react. +1 to a lot of aliens. +1 to PURE racing. 
Now to focus on the specs.
They are solid ideas. Now that most of the significant changes have been made, I was going to use the Suzuka straight to test the straight line speed, and continue to do the whole first sector to test the handling of each car. I agree about the tunes, the more tunes the better and easier the testing will become.
Now to focus on the specs.
They are solid ideas. Now that most of the significant changes have been made, I was going to use the Suzuka straight to test the straight line speed, and continue to do the whole first sector to test the handling of each car. I agree about the tunes, the more tunes the better and easier the testing will become.
Last edited:
I really couldn't say for ballast. I do understand why people, especially the faster guys, don't want it as it is pretty much punishment for a good race, but it is also a bit disheartening for people if there is no ballast as it pretty much means that for the whole season a win, or with this group of racers, a podium, will always be out of reach. I don't know really. And on the topic of specs, I don't mind there being differences in the cars, in fact I prefer it, just as long as no one car has more of an advantage throughout the season than another. I have confidence in your specs Aderrrm, I'm happy to race under them, just a little curious is all
Practice room up: CLOSED
Practice room up: CLOSED
Last edited:
- 2,977
- England
- WilliamsJIM_Adam
I really couldn't say for ballast. I do understand why people, especially the faster guys, don't want it as it is pretty much punishment for a good race, but it is also a bit disheartening for people if there is no ballast as it pretty much means that for the whole season a win, or with this group of racers, a podium, will always be out of reach. I don't know really. And on the topic of specs, I don't mind there being differences in the cars, in fact I prefer it, just as long as no one car has more of an advantage throughout the season than another. I have confidence in your specs Aderrrm, I'm happy to race under them, just a little curious is all
Practice room up: 1472-6118-3701-4254-5694
Well I think the opportunity will rise for that group of people who might not be in reach of a podium from having slightly changes in the characteristics of the cars. Again, ballast effects cars differently. 40kg will affect the 1249 kg 370Z more than it will the 1579 kg Camaro. And thanks lol.
I can't practice now, about to watch Top Gear ^^.
- 9,741
- Las Vegas UTC-8
- Wardez
- Wardez
I also vote for no ballast, at any limit. I completely agree with Brock's diagnosis. But I'd still like to think of a different approach to slightly handicaping drivers, but it's gotta be the hardest thing to pin down and execute well.
Edit: and when I'm talking about making a new system I mean for future series or seasons, not this one.
Edit: and when I'm talking about making a new system I mean for future series or seasons, not this one.
Last edited:
- 738
- GTP_Welsh-Bain
When I bought the Evora earlier to set it up to spec', I nearly missed adding the Sports ECU upgrade. Maybe this is what you're missing?
I think I have the following ready for testing:
Maserati
Corvette
Evora
370Z
Camaro
M3
I don't have the DLC for the Aston, but hopefully I can provide some helpful opinions on the rest
