RIDOX Replica Garage Fan Club - Suspended

[OdeFinn]

Just building the car now 👍

For ballast. moving the 64kg from -45 to -46 changes WD from 54:46 to 55:45 So that says to me 64 kg at -45 is around 54.95:45.05. for 54:46 would have ballast position -24 as position -23 gives 53:47 on screen

I don't use the - / + as indicator, I simply move each click, when it shifted -24 to -23 and the distribution changed to 53, that's the 53.00% spot.

My point is simple, when rounding up you have to decide which side is leading number what is used to round up.
On @Thorin Cain example he's using positive side as lead number. You're using negative side.

Thinking what test will give 100% answer to this question..

..am i thinking backwards now.. Meditation break.

I want some car what has 50.0/50.0 on game.. Argh..

 

[danbojte]

I'd say @Thorin Cain has a logical theory. ^

 

[danbojte]

My point is simple, when rounding up you have to decide which side is leading number what is used to round up.
On @Thorin Cain example he's using positive side as lead number. You're using negative side.

Thinking what test will give 100% answer to this question..

..am i thinking backwards now.. Meditation break.

This is also true. 👍

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

I simply look the range as a ruler that increase in number ( percentage ) as you move forward, the forward is negative in this case ( left )

 

[OdeFinn]

@danbojte you see, I'm just trying to solve which end is .00 or is .00 on middle and numbers are just rounded.

Edit: tested with probably real 50/50 car, VW GTI supersport vision gt, added 200kg on 0 position, maintains 50/50, there is room to move +/-3 to maintain same 50/50 but fourth click either negative or positive and it changes distro. IF car is real 50/50 this means game rounds percentages and on middle of clicks there is .00 value.

 

[danbojte]

@danbojte you see, I'm just trying to solve which end is .00 or is .00 on middle and numbers are just rounded.

Yes, it's very tricky...

@Ridox2JZGTE
In my vision there isn't increase and decrease percentage. I see it like 0 position is the absolute middle of the car. And -50 and +50 could be replaced with Front and Rear extremities.

 

[OdeFinn]

In my vision there isn't increase and decrease percentage. I see it like 0 position is the absolute middle of the car. And -50 and +50 could be replaced with Front and Rear extremities.

I believe at those -/+ scale numbers just represent exact place where ballast is added, 0= center of car, 25= approx rear axle (not exact, but understand) etc.
If you have car with accurate 54/46 weight balance, you could add million kilos to point -4 and it stays same.

Following is probably nothing in our case, PD might have or not included this: To make it even harder to think/understand if you add ballast on car, toward front, on place after front tires it should multiply weight effect on percentages, because it's not anymore only pressing front down, but it's swinging rear up. Don't know is any of this included on GT6.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

I think I got more confused I may have over thinking it when I tested the GT86, the original position may be right after all. Give me some time to ponder. If position at -1, it would be shifting from 53 to 52 right ? -45 is 54.00%, -23 is 53.00%, -1 is 52.00% or -46 is 55.00%, -24 is 54.00%, -2 is 53.00%, Mmmmm

I believe at those -/+ scale numbers just represent exact place where ballast is added, 0= center of car, 25= approx rear axle (not exact, but understand) etc.
If you have car with accurate 54/46 weight balance, you could add million kilos to point -4 and it stays same.

I think adding more on same spot will alter the distribution, I have seen it happened before on heavy car stock with full weight reduction, if I remember correctly. The number of click for each percentage definitely lessen with more weight added.

 

[OdeFinn]

I think adding more on same spot will alter the distribution, I have seen it happened before on heavy car stock with full weight reduction, if I remember correctly.

You'll see why I bring this up.. We/you/all need to test this. It's important when doing replica

 

[OdeFinn]

I think I got more confused I may have over thinking it when I tested the GT86, the original position may be right after all. Give me some time to ponder. If position at -1, it would be shifting from 53 to 52 right ? -45 is 54.00%, -23 is 53.00%, -1 is 52.00% or -46 is 55.00%, -24 is 54.00%, -2 is 53.00%, Mmmmm



I think adding more on same spot will alter the distribution, I have seen it happened before on heavy car stock with full weight reduction, if I remember correctly. The number of click for each percentage definitely lessen with more weight added.

If stock has 54/46, you install all weight reduces and it jumps somewhere, I'll bet at adding same amount of weight on -4 will bring it back to stock balance 54/46.

Tested just with BTR, 41/59 stock changes after weight reduces to 42/58, then installing back missing 135kg on position +9 it comes back 41/59.. But this is not any sure answer to overall question, might give some clue, nothing else.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

You'll see why I bring this up.. We/you/all need to test this. It's important when doing replica

I have built more than a hundred cars, usually I go look at per car basis, when I want to reach certain distribution, I have to get low enough weight with reduction, then add ballast to reach the target.

Now for example, if the target is 55.5% front, and the car at 0 is 53%, I would count towards the front in clicks, when it shifted to 54%, that's 54.00%, and keep counting/moving forward/left/negative until it shifted to 55% ( 55.00% ) , then I counted how many clicks to 56 ( moving forward again ), and find the middle spot This works so far for all drivetrain ( MR, RR, FF, AWD, FR )

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

If stock has 54/46, you install all weight reduces and it jumps somewhere, I'll bet at adding same amount of weight on -4 will bring it back to stock balance 54/46.

How do we know stock 54/46 is exactly 54.00/46.00 ?

 

[OdeFinn]

We don't, you don't I don't know is value 0 when it changes on left end of clicks or on right end, or is it on middle.

My hunch is middle, vision cars probably are just .0 targeted cars, that's why tested on VW, it supports my middle thought.

BMW vision is behaving exactly as VW, +/-3 between 0 position. Supports theory.

Same thing on other VW vision too.

VIZIV supports theory too, it has one click bigger scale, probably because longer distance between front and rear wheels. +/-4 around 0 position.

Concept XR-PHEV vision same as VIZIV, supports theory.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

I will have to test the GT86 again, I may have made mistake moving the position to -45, will need more laps at Tsukuba I have over 20000km there already, closing to 100000km now total distance

I think I need lots of coffee now, my mind is wandering around with so many stuff, my last few posts may be just some old man rambling nonsense

 

[OdeFinn]

I will have to test the GT86 again, I may have made mistake moving the position to -45, will need more laps at Tsukuba I have over 20000km there already, closing to 100000km now total distance

I think I need lots of coffee now, my mind is wandering around with so many stuff, my last few posts may be just some old man rambling nonsense

No worries, don't take this as anyway offence or anything like it, just hunting for perfectionism.

 

[Thorin Cain]

I think I got more confused I may have over thinking it when I tested the GT86, the original position may be right after all. Give me some time to ponder. If position at -1, it would be shifting from 53 to 52 right ? -45 is 54.00%, -23 is 53.00%, -1 is 52.00% or -46 is 55.00%, -24 is 54.00%, -2 is 53.00%, Mmmmm



I think adding more on same spot will alter the distribution, I have seen it happened before on heavy car stock with full weight reduction, if I remember correctly.

Yes, adding more weight in the same position will change the WD. If there is more weight added to either end of the car regardless of the position there is still more weight at that end of the car, so if you add enough to that position eventually it will change the distribution in that direction on-screen.
I don't have a working example to show but lets say the car starts 50:50 and weighs 1000 kg. adding 100kg ballast right at the front means that the car now weighs 1100kg, of which 600kg is forward of centre and 500kg is rear of centre. Meaning the WD has gone from 50:50 to approx 54.5:45.5.
If you add another 100kg to the front, the car will now have 700kg front of centre and still only 500kg rear of centre. This will change from 54.5:45.5 to 63:37 approx.

These numbers for WD are not exact as the wheelbase/length of the car will also dictate how much % changes, but I'm just using it as a quick example

I have built more than a hundred cars, usually I go look at per car basis, when I want to reach certain distribution, I have to get low enough weight with reduction, then add ballast to reach the target.

Now for example, if the target is 55.5% front, and the car at 0 is 53%, I would count towards the front in clicks, when it shifted to 54%, that's 54.00%, and keep counting/moving forward/left/negative until it shifted to 55% ( 55.00% ) , then I counted how many clicks to 56 ( moving forward again ), and find the middle spot This works so far for all drivetrain ( MR, RR, FF, AWD, FR )

This is what @OdeFinn and I are saying 👍 If 53 goes to 54 then this is 54.00% then if 54 turns to 55 this is 55.00% That's how I've been working with WD on EAG cars too, based on your method I've seen you talk about and found used in your replicas

On this car 53 changes to 54 at position -24 and then changes to 55 at position -46. So using your logic, position -24 is 54.00% and position -46 is 55.00%

@OdeFinn does have a point though. Mathematically figures are rounded up or down based on the relations with 0.5
So it is logical that when 53 changes to 54 this is closer to 53.55% than to 54% and that 54.00 would be the middle value that gives the 54% answer in the box up top. Again this is something that PD could have done a better job explaining, or simply not had to if they gave us decimals in the WD box I'm happy enough using the moment of change from 50 to 51 as meaning it's now 51 though, just makes things easier to work with

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

No worries, don't take this as anyway offence or anything like it, just hunting for perfectionism.

Yes, adding more weight in the same position will change the WD. If there is more weight added to either end of the car regardless of the position there is still more weight at that end of the car, so if you add enough to that position eventually it will change the distribution in that direction on-screen.
I don't have a working example to show but lets say the car starts 50:50 and weighs 1000 kg. adding 100kg ballast right at the front means that the car now weighs 1100kg, of which 600kg is forward of centre and 500kg is rear of centre. Meaning the WD has gone from 50:50 to approx 54.5:45.5.
If you add another 100kg to the front, the car will now have 700kg front of centre and still only 500kg rear of centre. This will change from 54.5:45.5 to 63:37 approx.

These numbers for WD are not exact as the wheelbase/length of the car will also dictate how much % changes, but I'm just using it as a quick example
This is what @OdeFinn and I are saying 👍 If 53 goes to 54 then this is 54.00% then if 54 turns to 55 this is 55.00% That's how I've been working with WD on EAG cars too, based on your method I've seen you talk about and found used in your replicas

On this car 53 changes to 54 at position -24 and then changes to 55 at position -46. So using your logic, position -24 is 54.00% and position -46 is 55.00%

@OdeFinn does have a point though. Mathematically figures are rounded up or down based on the relations with 0.5
So it is logical that when 53 changes to 54 this is closer to 53.55% than to 54% and that 54.00 would be the middle value that gives the 54% answer in the box up top. Again this is something that PD could have done a better job explaining, or simply not had to if they gave us decimals in the WD box I'm happy enough using the moment of change from 50 to 51 as meaning it's now 51 though, just makes things easier to work with

The original position for GT86 was correct after all, I may have made a fool of myself and counting backwards when testing the car 👍 Just remembered what I used when testing the E52 Z8

 

[Thorin Cain]

The original position for GT86 was correct after all, I may have made a fool of myself and counting backwards when testing the car 👍 Just remembered what I used when testing the E52 Z8

No worries mate, these things happen to us all 👍

 

[OdeFinn]

We don't, you don't I don't know is value 0 when it changes on left end of clicks or on right end, or is it on middle.

My hunch is middle, vision cars probably are just .0 targeted cars, that's why tested on VW, it supports my middle thought.

BMW vision is behaving exactly as VW, +/-3 between 0 position. Supports theory.

Same thing on other VW vision too.

VIZIV supports theory too, it has one click bigger scale, probably because longer distance between front and rear wheels. +/-4 around 0 position.

Concept XR-PHEV vision same as VIZIV, supports theory

I believe these cars are accurate 50.00/50.00 cars and if those are, then .00 point is middle point of clicks between number changes on weight distribution.

 

[OdeFinn]

Looking last few pages and smiling, lot of text, good conversation.

 

[danbojte]

I believe at those -/+ scale numbers just represent exact place where ballast is added, 0= center of car, 25= approx rear axle (not exact, but understand) etc.

Yes, this is exactly what I've said. 👍

I see it like 0 position is the absolute middle of the car. And -50 and +50 could be replaced with Front and Rear extremities.

 

[OdeFinn]

S2000 might be fun someday..

 

[Thorin Cain]

S2000 might be fun someday..

In my eyes S2000 is fun everyday I know what you mean though 👍

 

[danbojte]

@OdeFinn
The ballast for the base and original tune will stay at position -24. If you have the time, please check the position for the ballast carriers. I appreciate.

 

[OdeFinn]

@OdeFinn
The ballast for the base and original tune will stay at position -24. If you have the time, please check the position for the ballast carriers. I appreciate.

So still taking edge balance, my guess, supported by vision cars that means 53.5/46.5 balance (+/-0.1%), -35 would be close to 54.0/46.0, coz of click toward front probably 54.05/45.95%.

First position is place where that right end change if "0" ballast(64kg) has -24, later inside brackets is my opinion where it should be to maintain close to 54.0/46.0 weight distribution.

+80kg -13 (imo -18 middle plus one front, scale 10 clicks)
+40kg -16 (imo -24 middle plus one front, scale 14 clicks)
+20kg -19 (imo -28 middle, scale 17 clicks)
+0kg -24 (original 64kg) (imo -35 middle plus one front, scale 22 clicks)

 

[OdeFinn]

That -13 on 80kg ballast makes car balance bit stupid, understeer because of weight too rear, I'm trusting all other settings to be good represents of real world and when ballast is used on my "imo" points car behaves like I would think them originate decided to go, no team tune cars so rear heavy at front jumps, or so front heavy at rear jumps, those are things what happens when using switching points on ballast position, but when using clicks scale middle point car is extremely well balanced, as it would and should be on real world.

 

[danbojte]

So still taking edge balance, my guess, supported by vision cars that means 53.5/46.5 balance (+/-0.1%), -35 would be close to 54.0/46.0, coz of click toward front probably 54.05/45.95%.

First position is place where that right end change if "0" ballast(64kg) has -24, later inside brackets is my opinion where it should be to maintain close to 54.0/46.0 weight distribution.

+80kg -13 (imo -18 middle plus one front, scale 10 clicks)
+40kg -16 (imo -24 middle plus one front, scale 14 clicks)
+20kg -19 (imo -28 middle, scale 17 clicks)
+0kg -24 (original 64kg) (imo -35 middle plus one front, scale 22 clicks)

That -13 on 80kg ballast makes car balance bit stupid, understeer because of weight too rear, I'm trusting all other settings to be good represents of real world and when ballast is used on my "imo" points car behaves like I would think them originate decided to go, no team tune cars so rear heavy at front jumps, or so front heavy at rear jumps, those are things what happens when using switching points on ballast position, but when using clicks scale middle point car is extremely well balanced, as it would and should be on real world.

Thank you very much, my friend. 👍
I understand very well what you're saying with the middle point. This is how I also figured the ballast position always from the beginning of my Gran Turismo experience. 👍

I'd like to wait and see if @Ridox2JZGTE got the idea and if that's OK for him, before establishing the final settings.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

I have no problem with the position that @OdeFinn wanted, as long as it's to keep original replica balance It's not like it will make the car any faster

 

[danbojte]

Event, Ballast, others updated.

Stay Tuned!

 

[OdeFinn]

I have no problem with the position that @OdeFinn wanted, as long as it's to keep original replica balance It's not like it will make the car any faster

It makes all cars behave similar, other way and more ballast means more unwanted behaviour. Middle point and all cars are having similar balance on driving.