Don't ask for reviews if you can't take the criticism.... Did you even try what I mentioned? What's the point in a setup as loose in the rear as it is if every time you jump on the brakes it darts off into a wall. Occasionally you'll get lucky and it may turn the direction you want it to but the setup is far from consistent.
While on the subject of the camber. You're not utilizing all of that camber with the spring setup that you have. The car is way to tight to even scuff the outsides of the tires.
I played around with it a little more and found if you straighten the tow out in the rear and bump the abs up to 2 the car is alot easier to manage on the brakes. Then take a little bit of ARB away from the front to make it turn the way it did and you have practically the same setup that can not only brake in a straight line but even turn while doing it. It's still loose enough that you can use the brakes or throttle to help steer the car.
BTW don't even think about taking the setup to a track with a few bumps. The slightest bump at speed will send it into a wall. With a few tweaks I think you have the start to a very nice setup for a smooth track.
Funny guy.
I practically built the thing at the Ring; if that's not a rough track, what exactly is? I personally have absolutely zero problems getting it to stay planted at the rear under braking.
In fact, I just went back and tested a few different settings from start to T1 at the Ring... First was your previous set of tweaks (brakes, diff, camber), then my brakes, diff, and rear camber setup, then my front camber. Your set got ~40.250, stage 2 got ~40.150, my original setup got a 40.062. The settings you gave were okayish and very easy to drive but understeered slightly at high speeds, didn't tuck back in off throttle the way I prefer, nor did they allow as much rotation under braking. The halfway settings were better at low speeds than my original setup but maintained the understeer at high speed of yours. Downforce DOES affect the needed camber angles (increases the available grip, increases forces on tire, increases need for camber) and this should not be ignored.
Sorry if you think I can't take criticism... I can and I appreciate it, just not when it's a bash on my methods on a vehicle I
know doesn't behave the way stated.
This is a message for the tuners who run this showtread, i believe the hardest car to tune is the zonda r 09. It's just so powerful. I've spent actual hours tuning it in very tiny increments and it's pretty good now if i drive at my best i can beat nurber in gt all stars. But its hard... Can you tune one in the future? I will gladly share my tune info with all of you if you agree. Next post will contain tune info.
If someone is willing to send me one, sure. Got a few others that take priority as it is though.
EDIT:
I just took Rotary's Atenza tune out for a spin...
wow.
A FWD sedan on sport tires has no business being this fast, or handling this neutrally. As a side note, I did use the '07 new from the dealer instead of hunting for an '03 on the used lot, but the tune works nearly perfect on it as well - with one little tweak. I'm assuming it's because of the extra 50kg or so of the newer model, but I had to back off on the front springs - to 11.5 - because the car felt a bit too jouncy up front over bumpy sections of track. Aside from that, wow... just wow. Great work, two thumbs up.
I actually have a dedicated tune for the '07, I may release it eventually. The '01 Concept version ought to take the '03's settings more accurately than the '07 (as the concept is the correct chassis) and you win it from silver A-License.
But yeah, regarding it being excessively fast... I took it online a while back and got more than a few people to ragequit after they changed the tire limits multiple times to allow them more grip... And still lost on the corners.