Suspension Backwards?

[JackWilson]

The settings have got to be backwards.
look at these two times:
Tsukuba Circuit
450 PP
1:02.334 - Honda Civic Type R (EP) '04
1:03.170 - Honda Civic Type R (EK) '97

The first car I tested was the (EK) '97. I must've spent close to 35 laps tuning and finally managed the 1:03.170, I thought the car handled good and I was happy with the car.

Then quickly changed to another civic but with backward settings. Ride Height was F-16 R-25. After 3 laps I got 1:02.334.

How does lowering the rear and more grip to the front tyres??

Someone please tell me because I cant work it out.

 

[MrGrado]

you switched only ride height?

 

[Motor City Hami]

The settings have got to be backwards.
look at these two times:
Tsukuba Circuit
450 PP
1:02.334 - Honda Civic Type R (EP) '04
1:03.170 - Honda Civic Type R (EK) '97

The first car I tested was the (EK) '97. I must've spent close to 35 laps tuning and finally managed the 1:03.170, I thought the car handled good and I was happy with the car.

Then quickly changed to another civic but with backward settings. Ride Height was F-16 R-25. After 3 laps I got 1:02.334.

How does lowering the rear and more grip to the front tyres??

Someone please tell me because I cant work it out.

I would be more inclined to believe in the validity of your test had you taken the same car with all other things being equal in the tune and applied the reverse ride height thinking.

 

[GTP_CargoRatt]

I would be more inclined to believe in the validity of your test had you taken the same car with all other things being equal in the tune and applied the reverse ride height thinking.

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[JackWilson]

Just switching the ride height though would mess up everything, the dampers and spring rates would need to be changed also.

I will give it a shot though.
(just switching ride height)

 

[MrGrado]

Oh I wasn't suggesting to do that. I will make the assumption that you had higher spring rate on the front of the car to start with and then after switching the front settings with the rear you got faster lap times.

For whatever reason many people here think that FF cars should have higher spring rates at the front and when they get faster lap times with high rear spring rate they say that suspension settings are backwards.

A long time ago, I remember someone posting about a real FF racecar he had: he was running extremely high rear spring rate (different forums than here), so FF cars with stiff rear suspension is not backwards at all.

Also in another thread on a similar topic someone was using a lightweight RR car for testing backwards spring rate theories. He had damper settings of 1 or 2. In my experience with cars like that, they will have unusual handling with such light dampers. I use damper values at 3 or 4 as a minimum, even with light cars.

I think if you don't use bad tuning examples or make wrong assumptions you won't come to wrong conclusions.

Edit: there are some cars that I find hard to tune and I'm not sure about ride height. Also the occasional car might be buggy. I know that Mazda Carol 360 seems to have it's weight distribution around the wrong way, for example. At the end of the day, GT5 cars are just numbers in a spreadsheet.

 

[Motor City Hami]

A long time ago, I remember someone posting about a real FF racecar he had: he was running extremely high rear spring rate ..

I raced a Honda Civic on Road Course SCCA and we had 350lb front springs and 450 to 550lb rear springs. Heavier dampers in the rear. Monster huge swaybar in the rear 19MM vs. 13MM front. Ran lower tire pressures up front too. Carbotech (carbon metallic) brakes up front and stock factory rear. 1.5MM toe out at the front and 3MM out in the rear.

With FF cars, it's all about getting the rear to lose grip and rotate.

 

[Adroitt]

I have read what has been posted about tunning from within the fourms.

With the latest patch being able to store more than one tune has helped to comepare settings and the way the car handles.

Myself I use trail mountain as my starter test track. I drive the car stock get the feel then use two settings from my fav tuners and my baseline settings.

Within my tuning process last or close to last item I set is ride height. As Hami states LSD changes how a car feels. For some cars lower front and higher front works for some not.

Gamers are left to make their own conclusions based on game play. If GT5 were a real driving sim devs would support the tunning community with tools for tunning.

 

[phil_75]

I must be a GT5 god according to most on here as all I ever do is reduce ride height on every car that allows it, if it understeers I'll soften the front anti-roll bar!

I win loads online and was in the Intercontinental GT500 Championship on here as the only DS3 user and had wins and multiple podium places!

So I do everything "wrong" and still win a lot???

I think people take tuning too far, just practice the circuit and it will be worth far more than concentrating on tuning!

 

[CyKosis1973]

I must be a GT5 god according to most on here as all I ever do is reduce ride height on every car that allows it, if it understeers I'll soften the front anti-roll bar!

I win loads online and was in the Intercontinental GT500 Championship on here as the only DS3 user and had wins and multiple podium places!

So I do everything "wrong" and still win a lot???

I think people take tuning too far, just practice the circuit and it will be worth far more than concentrating on tuning!

I may have been impressed, but for the last sentence. Just because a good driver can drive a bad car well, doesn't mean he should...

{Cy}

 

[DaDog]

nm here , didn't make any sence

 

[Motor City Hami]

I think people take tuning too far, just practice the circuit and it will be worth far more than concentrating on tuning!

Nice of you to come into the tuning forum and tell a group of people who can take a stock car and make it 3 to4 seconds a lap faster in around 15 min that tuning is over rated in the game.

You're right. It's your superior driving skills.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Nice of you to come into the tuning forum and tell a group of people who can take a stock car and make it 3 to4 seconds a lap faster in around 15 min that tuning is over rated in the game.

You're right. It's your superior driving skills.

This.

At the point I'm at, I can spend 8 hours practicing a car/track combo and pick up at most a second and a half.

Or I can spend 30 minutes and pick up two seconds by making the car do what I want it to. Which is the better time investment?

 

[GTP_CargoRatt]

Take it from Hami and Rotary, they definately know their stuff. If thats your race strategy, your not going to win very many races against the more competitive drivers.

 

[Highlandor]

This.

At the point I'm at, I can spend 8 hours practicing a car/track combo and pick up at most a second and a half.

Or I can spend 30 minutes and pick up two seconds by making the car do what I want it to. Which is the better time investment?

8 hrs...

i) 30-60 mins learning track
ii) 6hrs watching old skool epsiodes of Scooby Doo whilst eating donuts and / or cookies
iii) 30-60 minutes of setting up

Time gained - all lost through depleted power to weight ratio of all those donuts - but they sure did taste gooooooood.

👍

 

[betrob]

8 hrs...

i) 30-60 mins learning track
ii) 6hrs watching old skool epsiodes of Scooby Doo whilst eating donuts and / or cookiesiii) 30-60 minutes of setting up

Time gained - all lost through depleted power to weight ratio of all those donuts - but they sure did taste gooooooood.

👍

 

[Adrenaline]

all I ever do is reduce ride height on every car that allows it...

That's where I stopped reading...

 

[Energizerrr]

My (locked thread).

 

[JackWilson]

For those that believe in no 'backwards settings' what do you say to this?

I just tried a quick test online with the RX-7 TC, tyre/fuel wear on, grip real, and had the tyre load indicator shown.

Equal Ride height: 0--0
The white circle didnt grow very big.

High Rear Height: 0--20
The rear white circles on the indicator were as big as they could be, right on the edge of the dark grey circle. This shows that the rear tyres are carrying the most load. The rear tyres had good grip on corner exit and I only spun the car if I went full throttle on the exit.

High Front Height: 20--0
The white circles on the rear tyre indicators were not as big as with the higher ride height, but they were bigger than equal ride height. In the corners I had to be really careful with my throttle control or the car would easily spin, mid-corner and exit.

So my opinion is that something is wrong. Having a higher rear should take load off of the rear tyres, but it appears to do the opposite.

 

[Johnnypenso]

For those that believe in no 'backwards settings' what do you say to this?

I just tried a quick test online with the RX-7 TC, tyre/fuel wear on, grip real, and had the tyre load indicator shown.

Equal Ride height: 0--0
The white circle didnt grow very big.

High Rear Height: 0--20
The rear white circles on the indicator were as big as they could be, right on the edge of the dark grey circle. This shows that the rear tyres are carrying the most load. The rear tyres had good grip on corner exit and I only spun the car if I went full throttle on the exit.

High Front Height: 20--0
The white circles on the rear tyre indicators were not as big as with the higher ride height, but they were bigger than equal ride height. In the corners I had to be really careful with my throttle control or the car would easily spin, mid-corner and exit.

So my opinion is that something is wrong. Having a higher rear should take load off of the rear tyres, but it appears to do the opposite.

Did a similar test when the suspension loading indicators first came out with similar, puzzling results.

Also, downloaded the replay of the current leader in the Schulze Time Trial and then snapped a shot of it on the straight and the front is obviously boosted by an inch or two. Theoretically it should have some understeer as a result, but seeing as how it's the fastest time in the world so far, I'd say it's probably helping him get around the corners.

Can someone explain how this can be, if the suspension settings are not messed up in some way? Notice I don't say "backwards" just messed up? And if the above is true concerning tire load, how can this also be true? Since when does changing the ride height less than an inch (20mm) have such a dramatic effect on tire load? The white circles should barely move and if anything, raising the front should put load on the back, not vice versa.

 

[CSLACR]

For those that believe in no 'backwards settings' what do you say to this?

I just tried a quick test online with the RX-7 TC, tyre/fuel wear on, grip real, and had the tyre load indicator shown.

Equal Ride height: 0--0
The white circle didnt grow very big.

High Rear Height: 0--20
The rear white circles on the indicator were as big as they could be, right on the edge of the dark grey circle. This shows that the rear tyres are carrying the most load. The rear tyres had good grip on corner exit and I only spun the car if I went full throttle on the exit.

High Front Height: 20--0
The white circles on the rear tyre indicators were not as big as with the higher ride height, but they were bigger than equal ride height. In the corners I had to be really careful with my throttle control or the car would easily spin, mid-corner and exit.

So my opinion is that something is wrong. Having a higher rear should take load off of the rear tyres, but it appears to do the opposite.

You know the answer.

Did a similar test when the suspension loading indicators first came out with similar, puzzling results.

Also, downloaded the replay of the current leader in the Schulze Time Trial and then snapped a shot of it on the straight and the front is obviously boosted by an inch or two. Theoretically it should have some understeer as a result, but seeing as how it's the fastest time in the world so far, I'd say it's probably helping him get around the corners.

Can someone explain how this can be, if the suspension settings are not messed up in some way? Notice I don't say "backwards" just messed up? And if the above is true concerning tire load, how can this also be true? Since when does changing the ride height less than an inch (20mm) have such a dramatic effect on tire load? The white circles should barely move and if anything, raising the front should put load on the back, not vice versa.

My settings in my session were like this -
Max - Min
Max - Min
Max - Min
Max - Min
Max - Min

2.0/0.5
0.00/-0.10

It is because the ride height is backwards. The reason the circles change so much is probably because it's a min-max scale, so the difference between the biggest circle and the smallest circle doesn't mean any set parameters, just that one is the most weight you can put on a tire, the other is the minimum. (for the settings available to you)

That's how most of GT5 works. It's why we have no actual ride height, spring rates of "15" among other silly 15 year old tuning concepts PD's been to lazy to change.
Quite frankly, they just don't give a damn about it. Seems obvious to me.

 

[MrGrado]

For those that believe in no 'backwards settings' what do you say to this?

I just tried a quick test online with the RX-7 TC, tyre/fuel wear on, grip real, and had the tyre load indicator shown.

Equal Ride height: 0--0
The white circle didnt grow very big.

High Rear Height: 0--20
The rear white circles on the indicator were as big as they could be, right on the edge of the dark grey circle. This shows that the rear tyres are carrying the most load. The rear tyres had good grip on corner exit and I only spun the car if I went full throttle on the exit.

High Front Height: 20--0
The white circles on the rear tyre indicators were not as big as with the higher ride height, but they were bigger than equal ride height. In the corners I had to be really careful with my throttle control or the car would easily spin, mid-corner and exit.

So my opinion is that something is wrong. Having a higher rear should take load off of the rear tyres, but it appears to do the opposite.

I can't test with that car because I don't have it but I tested a 500PP Tamora on sports hard tyres at Autumn Ring and my conclusion is the opposite to yours. I didn't use tyre load indicators and I used DS3 controller.

My setup was:
0 / 0
6.0 / 6.0
4 / 4
4 / 4
3 / 3
-1.5 /-1.5
0.00 / 0.00

10 / 20 / 10 (LSD)

I tested with that setup, then with front raised 25mm, rear raised 25mm, front and rear raised 25mm.

With the rear raised the car was loose, it was just generally squiggly and harder to drive everywhere. (more oversteer)

With front and rear raised it seemed to be low on grip and a little unpredictable to drive.

With the front raised the car was stable and understeering and faster. I would try to get to the apex of corners and I would have to coast mid corner far more.

After this I lowered the rear 10mm and raised the front more. I got understeer far worse but no more increase in lap speed. I would have to coast mid corner a huge amount and I would still miss most apexes.

 

[CSLACR]

I can't test with that car because I don't have it but I tested a 500PP Tamora on sports hard tyres at Autumn Ring and my conclusion is the opposite to yours. I didn't use tyre load indicators and I used DS3 controller.

My setup was:
0 / 0
6.0 / 6.0
4 / 4
4 / 4
3 / 3
-1.5 /-1.5
0.00 / 0.00

10 / 20 / 10 (LSD)

I tested with that setup, then with front raised 25mm, rear raised 25mm, front and rear raised 25mm.

With the rear raised the car was loose, it was just generally squiggly and harder to drive everywhere. (more oversteer)

With front and rear raised it seemed to be low on grip and a little unpredictable to drive.

With the front raised the car was stable and understeering and faster. I would try to get to the apex of corners and I would have to coast mid corner far more.

After this I lowered the rear 10mm and raised the front more. I got understeer far worse but no more increase in lap speed. I would have to coast mid corner a huge amount and I would still miss most apexes.

Ironic, the entire thing actually. Because every bit of it is exactly the opposite of what I get from the same things.

But the bold part most of all, because max ride height is now what I use for every single race I run. Minimum ride height can turn the same laps, but is twice as hard to control, because there's no acceleration grip whatsoever comparably.
Also every single player I've had try it has agreed.

But essentially you're disagreeing with that guy mentioned above by Jack, who has the fastest time in the world at the moment. I wouldn't, jus sayin.

 

[praiano63]

Let's be clear.

In the real life, this situation generate understeer. A few minutes later after this pic was taken, this car was not able to turn and fall down into the river. Almost everybody was eaten by the crocodiles.
In the game, the car will continue his way turning with a lot of oversteer, but the passengers would be ejected in the river the same way. Just the driver and the passenger in the cab would escape from the crocodiles.

In this other situation and in the real life, the pope's car show a high rear because the pope is privilegiate and lightweight (even eating a lot of good food) and always stand alone in the back of his car. He don't want nobody there, even with a transport ticket. Everybody know that the pope have problems with oversteer, it's notorious.
If GT5 had a pope mobil , it would understeer like a heaven. That's the definitive evidence that in GT5 ride height is BACKWARDS.

My conclusion is that it's important to be less privilegiate or less poor, like this we will live in a world more equal and full of happy people with very well balanced cars.


Sorry for my bad English, hope everybody understand now.

 

[CSLACR]

Let's be clear.

In the real life, this situation generate understeer. A few minutes later after this pic was taken, this car was not able to turn and fall down into the river. Almost everybody was eaten by the crocodiles.
In the game, the car will continue his way turning with a lot of oversteer, but the passengers would be ejected in the river the same way. Just the driver and the passenger in the cab would escape from the crocodiles.

In this other situation and in the real life, the pope's car show a high rear because the pope is privilegiate and lightweight (even eating a lot of good food) and always stand alone in the back of his car. He don't want nobody there, even with a transport ticket. Everybody know that the pope have problems with oversteer, it's notorious.
If GT5 had a pope mobil , it would understeer like a heaven. That's the definitive evidence that in GT5 ride height is BACKWARDS.

My conclusion is that it's important to be less privilegiate or less poor, like this we will live in a world more equal and full of happy people with very well balanced cars.


Sorry for my bad English, hope everybody understand now.

Best post I've ever seen, EVER.
Lifetime Achievement Award to you good sir! 👍

That pope-mobile is friggin hilarious too, is that real?

 

[CyKosis1973]

Best post I've ever seen, EVER.
Lifetime Achievement Award to you good sir! 👍

I concur ... most highly.

Almost everybody was eaten by the crocodiles.

My conclusion is that it's important to be less privilegiate or less poor, like this we will live in a world more equal and full of happy people with very well balanced cars.

You're a funny and insightful chap, keep it up Sir...

{Cy}

 

[JackWilson]

Let's be clear.

In the real life, this situation generate understeer. A few minutes later after this pic was taken, this car was not able to turn and fall down into the river. Almost everybody was eaten by the crocodiles.
In the game, the car will continue his way turning with a lot of oversteer, but the passengers would be ejected in the river the same way. Just the driver and the passenger in the cab would escape from the crocodiles.

HAHA Best pic ever!!

I can't test with that car because I don't have it but I tested a 500PP Tamora on sports hard tyres at Autumn Ring and my conclusion is the opposite to yours. I didn't use tyre load indicators and I used DS3 controller.

I tested with that setup, then with front raised 25mm, rear raised 25mm, front and rear raised 25mm.

With the rear raised the car was loose, it was just generally squiggly and harder to drive everywhere. (more oversteer)

With front and rear raised it seemed to be low on grip and a little unpredictable to drive.

With the front raised the car was stable and understeering and faster. I would try to get to the apex of corners and I would have to coast mid corner far more.

After this I lowered the rear 10mm and raised the front more. I got understeer far worse but no more increase in lap speed. I would have to coast mid corner a huge amount and I would still miss most apexes.

I dont know how you've came up with these results but I'm pretty sure that you've misjudged them.
The part I've put in bold there is the complete opposite too, try with the tire load indicator on aswell, its clear to see that the tires have more load and you can feel they have more grip through the corners.

With the rear raised the car was loose, it was just generally squiggly and harder to drive everywhere. (more oversteer)

I know the Tamora (stock) is an oversteery car, maybe if you tried on higher grade tyres?

I told a few racers I race with online about the ride height issue and at first when I told them ''Try high front and low rear'' they thought I was crazy. Now they all use that on their FF cars to promote oversteer. One guy was tuning an RX-8, I told him to try lowering the rear slighty, and straight away half-way through the lap he said that there was more oversteer. These people all you wheels too. And he managed to post a quicker lap.

MrGrado, I got another little test for you, this time try it with the tire load indicator on. And if you can do the test online aswell. (In your lobby if you can). I will join you too if I have to, but you cant deny that the settings are not backwards.

I havent checked this but I know I dont need too, but have a look at the fasted time on the GT-R Time Trial, I think you'll find that the setup the driver is using has a higher front than rear. How would that setup be the #1 time in the world?

I think some people are that dedicated to this game that they just cant face the truth that PD made a mistake, If this hasnt 'Converted you' then I dont know what can. I've tried my best now and have done the tests and written them, I havent lied or made anything up it is all the truth.

I hope everyone can agree that the settings are backwards now.

Maybe PD ninja edited these physics in the new 2.02 update???

Gonna check but I doubt it.

Anyway, Merry Christmas Everybody

 

[MrGrado]

Noticeably, all four of the top holden teams cars ran very low ride height in the rear in a bid to get best possible grip from suspension and aero packages.

Here

If real race teams sometimes run low rear ride heights, then there is nothing backwards about doing it in a game.

But yeah, I can try some more testing with a wheel and with the tyre load indicators on.

 

[JackWilson]

Noticeably, all four of the top holden teams cars ran very low ride height in the rear in a bid to get best possible grip from suspension and aero packages. So low in fact that Both Todd Kelly and his brother, current champion Rick, were exhibiting smoke from the right rears as the car loaded up on left-hand corners. At eastern Creek, that’s just about 85% of the track. Turns out though, that Rick Kelly’s smoke wasn’t entirely rubber, as discovered by one of the FPR Falcons. Mark Winterbottom complained that the track was slippery in a few places and the smoke from car #1 just happened to be almost constant by half way through. Was it oil? Well, turns out that it was, but we didn’t find out until Monday just before Race 2

They made the rear lower to adds more grip, that is correct as the rear tyres would have more load, therefore pushing them into the ground. But in GT5 putting the rear lower does not add more grip and doesnt add more load pushing them into the ground. In GT5 you get the smoke from the tires due to excessive wheel spin, not from too much load on the tires. As they found out just before race #2 above, the smoke was not from the tires but from oil left on the track.

Does that not prove it now??

 

[MrGrado]

But in GT5 putting the rear lower does not add more grip and doesnt add more load pushing them into the ground.

You can't get worlds top time with less grip

Does that not prove it now??

no.


I did my tests again with the same car but with sports soft tyres. This time I increased spring rate, dampers etc a little and I would raise the front/rear by 30 or 35 mm.

I noticed that when the rear was raised the rear would grip better when accelerating hard out of slow speed turns, when the front was raised the rear wouldn't grip so good.

In mid speed and high speed corners the car would understeer badly with the front raised. With the rear raised the car would still seem to understeer a little, which is strange, but the rear would kick out into oversteer seemingly at random, and I would have to apply opposite lock, or I would have to wind out heaps of steering lock as the car would exhibit a slight tendency towards oversteering. This oversteering activity did not happen at all in mid and high speed bends when the front was raised.

I could not promote large amounts of oversteer at all in my tests with changes to ride height with this car.