Suspension Backwards?

[ut2johnston]

yeah your right my bad wrong location for post. However the only issue with suspension being backwards was in the ride height the cars all seem to run better at a higher ride height for example the Nascar's will go much faster and smoother at Positive 15 than at 0 or less

 

[nomis3613]

Well it really depends what the discussion is. If it's "which is fastest" we already know. It's proven in time trails constantly. As a fact, not a theory

That may be true is WRS land, where you all have The Stig's powers. But over here in tuner-land, there hasn't been any detailed study on questions like maybe non-backwards tunes are more n00b-friendly? maybe a non-backwards tune feels nicer to the majority? (I'm not suggesting either of these are true, just raising some questions)

Somebody running slower lap times has no ground to say his setup is faster, he'd have to be an idiot to believe that. Whatever setup holds the fastest lap times is the fastest setup.

Duuuuuude, the stopwatch sometimes lies! What about a great driver dragging more speed out of an average tune than an average driver with a great tune? Or the user-friendliness/edginess of a tune for a driver to be able to extract its full potential?

People can say nothing's backwards, and they can say some things are backwards, those details are the only things that have room to be discussed.

Yeah, I'm tinkering with ideas that will also allow analysis of different "types" of backwards.

In my opinion, in real life, people don't raise the rear end of a properly functioning car...

Agreed. But there are RL theories about rake changes, we can compare these with GT5 observations and comment on whether they seem to be backwards or not. Also, we can compare with previous Gran Turismo games. And backwards isn't just ride height, there are opinions ranging from nothing to everything in the suspension screen- lets put them in a shootout and see.

On a flat, smooth paved road, with a properly functioning car the has absolutely no handling issues or quirks, Will raising the rear end 2 inches increase under-steer in real life?
Amazingly, nobody is answering that. I wonder why...

Allow me to throw in my 2 cents: it won't. I haven't seen any good proof of the "bottoming out" theory either (even now that we have the tyre load indicators), but that doesn't mean the whole backwards issue is Case Closed.

It's not that I'm against testing it or having a "shootout" over it, it's that there's absolutely no reason to. We already have every single answer.

Fair enough. But the shootout uncovers a secret of tuning which unlocks 0.5s per lap, you must promise not to use it!

 

[CSLACR]

That may be true is WRS land, where you all have The Stig's powers. But over here in tuner-land, there hasn't been any detailed study on questions like maybe non-backwards tunes are more n00b-friendly? maybe a non-backwards tune feels nicer to the majority? (I'm not suggesting either of these are true, just raising some questions)

I'm talking about speed where you quoted here, "feel" is irrelevant.
If you can't run faster with a different tune, you have no grounds to say your tune is faster.

You act like it's just me, it's all of the fastest drivers.

Duuuuuude, the stopwatch sometimes lies! What about a great driver dragging more speed out of an average tune than an average driver with a great tune? Or the user-friendliness/edginess of a tune for a driver to be able to extract its full potential?

Duude, with the overwhelming evidence that reverse setups are the fastest, you absolutely MUST find someone that can run a faster time with a different setup. Go find them, I'll be waiting.
IF you can find someone that runs the fastest laps in the world in with a different setup, you have ground to stand on.

How can we have a shootout testing the two types if you don't believe the lap times? It's one or the other, and you already said a shootout is a good idea, which means you believe the lap times do NOT lie.
Like I said, you already know the answer. The fastest guys in the world test different setups and they all end up running this setup or as close as they need to for optimal handling.
Yeah, let's do it again so the tuning forum gets it.

Do you remember my first shootout? Back before I even discussed this on the tuning forum?
And I took RJ's tune and added more of this reverse setup that "hasn't been proven" and immediately ran 1:59 flat with it, almost a full second faster then with his tune? Don't you find it ironic? Or did everyone forget that?

Like I said, I've already done the testing, a lot of guys in the WRS have too, and clearly mr No1 in the world right now has also, and yet some guys (that are slower) still say "they're all wrong"? It's a joke really.
Never in my life have I seen people not as good at something tell people better then them at it that they're doing it all wrong.

Yeah, I'm tinkering with ideas that will also allow analysis of different "types" of backwards.

But you don't believe in lap times, they lie, remember?

Agreed. But there are RL theories about rake changes, we can compare these with GT5 observations and comment on whether they seem to be backwards or not. Also, we can compare with previous Gran Turismo games. And backwards isn't just ride height, there are opinions ranging from nothing to everything in the suspension screen- lets put them in a shootout and see.

You don't believe in lap times, remember?
It's already been tested and found out, the "tuning forum" is really going to publicly be the last to find out?
Sounds embarrassing if you ask me.

Allow me to throw in my 2 cents: it won't. I haven't seen any good proof of the "bottoming out" theory either (even now that we have the tyre load indicators), but that doesn't mean the whole backwards issue is Case Closed.

That's still not the point. The point is, exactly as even you've done to some degree, people keep trying to find ways to prove the person wrong, rather then actually acknowledge the situation. It's typical "internet arguing".
I say most women like salt, you say "some don't"! Gothca! aha... It doesn't have anything to do with the point. I guess more accurate would be to say it's actually saying exactly the same thing, but the "clever quipper" doesn't realize it somehow.

Fair enough. But the shootout uncovers a secret of tuning which unlocks 0.5s per lap, you must promise not to use it!

I've tested it.
I've done people a favor by showing them the fastest way to tune their cars, and I've learned it from other fast drivers, apparently people don't like the results that we've found.

If you disagree with the lap times already put forth, you'll disagree with the lap times coming from a shootout.
That's why this isn't "solved" already. People deny the evidence in front of them now, why would they accept it after more evidence is presented, that hasn't been the case so far has it?

So I have zero incentive for this shootout, but you guys will need a very fast driver, I recommend Johnny and Praiano if he's willing, they're the two fastest I can think of you'll get.
I can't, everyone will say I'm biased, Yanaran can't, everyone will say he's biased. Praiano already said it's backwards, he'll get called biased too.
You see the pattern here? Everyone that disagrees results don't count.

Thanks but no thanks, I've no need for a shootout where I can't win because people are being fanboys and can't accept GT5 is totally 🤬 in the tuning department.
I'm not saying this to anyone in particular, just anyone that can't accept all the lap times they've already been presented.

 

[nomis3613]

Peace. (response to your post sent as visitor message, I didn't want to hijack the thread any more)

you guys will need a very fast driver, I recommend Johnny and Praiano if he's willing, they're the two fastest I can think of you'll get.

Thanks for the suggestions, Johnny and Praiano would be great testers. It will also be useful to have slower drivers, too, because I am interested to see how drivers of different skill levels handle "normal" and "backwards" tunes.

I won't be crying "biased" for any of the testers, regardless of how their results compare with their own beliefs.

 

[Lone Wolf 0648]

The settings YOU need for YOUR car to drive like YOU want it too are DIFFERENT than what other people run. Its best to make your own tune. If you don't know what the parts do then...

Ride height: how high the car sits off the ground (lower is usuallybetter but the car needs room to move)

Springs: the main part of thesusspension (the heavier the car the stiffer the springsBUT you don't need rock hard, you will bounce off all the bumps)


Dampers: these are only to keep the car from bouncing too much (don't make these too hard or you will. bounce off all the little bumps)

Anti roll bars: these keep your car from leaning too far in the corner (the car should be able to lean a little but not too far)

Camber: this angles the tire top in, bottom out. (Use some camber it will give you loads more grip but remamber, too little camber, nothing changes. Too much camber and you burn off your tires way too fast)

Toe angle: angles the tire front and back, in or out (negitive gives you better cornering while positice makes the car better in a strait line, also too little doesn't work, too much can burn tires)

Also remember the LSD in drivetrain can also change how the car turns, sometimes more than the susspension itself.

 

[CSLACR]

Peace. (response to your post sent as visitor message, I didn't want to hijack the thread any more)


Thanks for the suggestions, Johnny and Praiano would be great testers. It will also be useful to have slower drivers, too, because I am interested to see how drivers of different skill levels handle "normal" and "backwards" tunes.

I won't be crying "biased" for any of the testers, regardless of how their results compare with their own beliefs.

The point is it doesn't make any sense.

If you disagree with the lap times already put forth, why would you agree with the lap times coming from a shootout? What's the difference?
You do realize tunes from this forum get tried and used already in the WRS right?

 

[praiano63]

Thanks for the invitation but i can't be a test pilot fot this "backward" test. I'm convicted that the ride height is bacward in the game and i don't even want to discuss about it. It's a fact. You know what ? i'm backward myself , my mother was like this, even her mother my gran mother was backward , she had lived across 2 world wars in Europe and learn moon walk with Michael Jackson's gran gran father in 1918 at the end of the first world war.
Now you can understand why i'm so radically ,genetically backward.

But if somebody not convicted is ready to make a quick test, here is one. This is my last fresh tune of a "renault clio 2L" ,try it around Tsukuba for example with my ride height fr25 rear -15 and after do the same with fr -15 rear 25.
Or lets try something else, somebody not backward make a faster Clio 2L tune 460PP sport soft using equal ride height or - negative front and + positive rear.
Fair?

After this ,let's talk again about ride height again.

PS:And please leave Mrs Lovato in peace , i don't want her to loose this wonderfull smile.👍

 

[nomis3613]

i'm backward myself , my mother was like this, even her mother my gran mother was backward , she had lived across 2 world wars in Europe and learn moon walk with Michael Jackson's gran gran father in 1918 at the end of the first world war.

 

[CSLACR]

Thanks for the invitation but i can't be a test pilot fot this "backward" test. I'm convicted that the ride height is bacward in the game and i don't even want to discuss about it. It's a fact. You know what ? i'm backward myself , my mother was like this, even her mother my gran mother was backward , she had lived across 2 world wars in Europe and learn moon walk with Michael Jackson's gran gran father in 1918 at the end of the first world war.
Now you can understand why i'm so radically ,genetically backward.

But if somebody not convicted is ready to make a quick test, here is one. This is my last fresh tune of a "renault clio 2L" ,try it around Tsukuba for example with my ride height fr25 rear -15 and after do the same with fr -15 rear 25.
Or lets try something else, somebody not backward make a faster Clio 2L tune 460PP sport soft using equal ride height or - negative front and + positive rear.
Fair?

After this ,let's talk again about ride height again.

PS:And please leave Mrs Lovato in peace , i don't want her to loose this wonderfull smile.👍

She could never lose her smile with funny posts like this.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Actually, if someone could send me that Clio, I'll give it a go. Don't have one handy but I think I know why bassackwards ride height "works" around corners...

I'll never know why exactly it's faster on long straights (don't argue with it, it just is, has been since GT4) but a few things I've recently read and tested may well put a nail in the coffin of this... Or if I fail, it'll keep going with no change. BFW.

 

[praiano63]

Actually, if someone could send me that Clio, I'll give it a go. Don't have one handy but I think I know why bassackwards ride height "works" around corners...

I'll never know why exactly it's faster on long straights (don't argue with it, it just is, has been since GT4) but a few things I've recently read and tested may well put a nail in the coffin of this... Or if I fail, it'll keep going with no change. BFW.

Hello my friend professor. I can't send you this clio because the owner send it to me , i duplicate it , so i'll be able to send it back to him tomorrow, and take back my clone after tomorrow only. But, if somebody else can send it to you , you will have a good surprise and for sure you'll make your tune for it, because it's one of the best FF car i ever driven in the game. Very good. 460pp was the request, but it'll fight against the top 450pp FF and other non FF for sure.

Have a good night.

 

[CSLACR]

Actually, if someone could send me that Clio, I'll give it a go. Don't have one handy but I think I know why bassackwards ride height "works" around corners...

I'll never know why exactly it's faster on long straights (don't argue with it, it just is, has been since GT4) but a few things I've recently read and tested may well put a nail in the coffin of this... Or if I fail, it'll keep going with no change. BFW.

Well theoretically, a low front with a high rear would first minimize air underneath the car (low front) while a high rear would keep it from building pressure by allowing it to easily escape.
Of course that would mean the function of ride height in GT5 is exactly backwards.

Just a possible thought for what someone at PD was thinking, obviously real world speed cars like the Veyron, etc do not employ this technique of a jacked rear.

 

[praiano63]

Well theoretically, a low front with a high rear would first minimize air underneath the car (low front) while a high rear would keep it from building pressure by allowing it to easily escape.
Of course that would mean the function of ride height in GT5 is exactly backwards.

Just a possible thought for what someone at PD was thinking, obviously real world speed cars like the Veyron, etc do not employ this technique of a jacked rear.

I remember a tune in GT4 on test track???that was the name? , i think it was a minolta tune, with front ride eight at max and rear minimum, max camber , that was taking of like a plain and going more than 450 kmh if remember.... crazy stuff. The sensation was a plain taking off and the replay was the same.... flying. Wasn't backward.

 

[CSLACR]

I remember a tune in GT4 on test track???that was the name? , i think it was a minolta tune, with front ride eight at max and rear minimum, max camber , that was taking of like a plain and going more than 450 kmh if remember.... crazy stuff. The sensation was a plain taking off and the replay was the same.... flying. Wasn't backward.

Well with a jacked up front end like that a car shouldn't have a higher top speed though, the force of the lift would be incredible and would greatly limit the top speed.
The lifting into the air bit is accurate though, you could flip the car over like a CLK GTR in real life. And that was just from not enough down force on the front.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Well with a jacked up front end like that a car shouldn't have a higher top speed though, the force of the lift would be incredible and would greatly limit the top speed.
The lifting into the air bit is accurate though, you could flip the car over like a CLK GTR in real life. And that was just from not enough down force on the front.

Yep, the entire deal then was that there was a glitch (dating back to GT3) where when the front tires in an AWD or RWD car came off the ground due to downforce being that much stronger on the rear they'd suddenly start to accelerate MUCH quicker.

This seems to still be the case in GT5, though actually getting the tires off the ground takes a lot more than it once did... And like in GT4, it works without any downforce as well, just to a much smaller extent.

 

[CSLACR]

Yep, the entire deal then was that there was a glitch (dating back to GT3) where when the front tires in an AWD or RWD car came off the ground due to downforce being that much stronger on the rear they'd suddenly start to accelerate MUCH quicker.

This seems to still be the case in GT5, though actually getting the tires off the ground takes a lot more than it once did... And like in GT4, it works without any downforce as well, just to a much smaller extent.

Not sure if you're familiar, but actually there was a Dodge Copperhead concept wheelie tune for GT1 in which the front wheels lifted and the car took off like a screaming bandit as well.

I'm not 100% sure it was the same glitch, but this is one of the reasons I say I'm not sure PD has updated the tuning since...ever.
I do remember setting that Copperhead to max aero rear, minimum front, and max camber on the back, it all sounds very familiar.

A quick dig has a wheelie tune for the 180SX drag car (remember having drag cars? ) set up very similar in GT2 also.
http://www.gamewinners.com/playstation/GranTurismo2.htm

They really haven't updated tuning in 15 years have they?

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Front camber to maximum actually.

And... You're right. Same game, different tires and looks.

Yet it's still good.

 

[Corpsey]

I've been wondering where that extra understeer came from -.-

I hope this gets fixed for GT6.... what I don't get is that for a digital game you'd think they'd be able to create some value that shows the car as having a higher rear and actually acting like it too.

 

[Maccer_42]

Evan though what i'm about to say has probably been said many times here I feel like putting my 2 cents in.

Ride height is backwards for both online and offline tunes.
Higher you go = more grip,
Lower you go = less grip.

Now the rest of the suspension is where it gets confusing to me.

I assume that say an FR car with a weight balance of 55Front / 45Rear and you want to car to be balanced and handle well you would have the front springs and dampers with a stiffer setting than the rear right? Please correct me if i'm wrong. Well that kind of setup works fine for offline, but when you bring that setup to online it will handle like a pig! (at least from my experiance)

But if you swap the values over from front to rear,
EG: your orginal offline springs were 12.5Front - 9.0Rear
Then you swap over for online so it would be 9.0Front - 12.5Rear

Do this for all settings on the left side of suspension sheet and the car will now handle much better and closer to the way it does offline (at least in my experiance).

Now my question is. Is suspension backwards in the sence where the front settings will effect the rear, and the rear will effect the front. Or is it backwards in the sence where a higher number acts as a softer setting, and a lower number acts as a stiffer setting?

 

[Corpsey]

Higher you go = more grip,
Lower you go = less grip.

Isn't this the way it has always been though? It's backwards in the sense that front applies to rear and rear applies to front.

Not sure about the stiff front suspension.. I'd have to test it out. What kind of anti roll bars strengths are you using?

 

[nomis3613]

Ride height is backwards for both online and offline tunes.
Higher you go = more grip

Actually, for RWD traction it is realistic. Because traction increases with ride height.

...and you want to car to be balanced and handle well you would have the front springs and dampers with a stiffer setting than the rear right?

It could depend on motion ratios, tyre width, etc. I think it is safer to look at relative changes (eg "stiffening front increases understeer") than the actual numbers.

Well that kind of setup works fine for offline, but when you bring that setup to online it will handle like a pig! (at least from my experiance)

It is possible that it is backwards only offline or online (ie not both), in my book offline/online are completely different games.

Now my question is. Is suspension backwards in the sence where the front settings will effect the rear, and the rear will effect the front. Or is it backwards in the sence where a higher number acts as a softer setting, and a lower number acts as a stiffer setting?

Good luck getting any consensus on this answer! (proof of this is the 9 pages on this thread, and the 30 pages here!)

 

[Motor City Hami]

Evan though what i'm about to say has probably been said many times here I feel like putting my 2 cents in.

Ride height is backwards for both online and offline tunes.
Higher you go = more grip,
Lower you go = less grip.

I'm still not ready to call this a given fact in GT5. This works on some cars and not on others, so how can it be "the rule?" Can someone explain to me how ride height backwards is such a given when most of the top cars in the current Japanese Tuning Competition aren't using this thoery? A few are, but most aren't. Look at Roj's cars. They are all ride height slammed low. So he likes cars with less grip? I think someone even said that his NSX is the fastest car he's driven?

 

[Johnnypenso]

I downloaded the fastest time in the German Deep Forest Time Trial the other day and the leading Audi had at least 50 cm higher ride height in the front and the back was so slammed it looked like the rear tires should be smoking from rubbing the wheel well. At the time, fastest time in the world. Tough to explain that one away...💡

I think what a lot of guys get hung up on is realizing that raising the front end is just a tool like any other. It's not always necessary, in fact of the 100 or so cars I race with online and win consistently with, perhaps 10 have higher ride height in front because all the rest are well balanced without having to do that. Just because something works, doesn't mean more of it is better. The goal with tuning, for me anyway, is to achieve maximum grip and turning ability, under the umbrella of balance. I tune away from imbalance first and foremost and raising the front, or raising the rear for that matter, often imbalances the car and makes it unstable. However, in cars that are inherently unstable to begin with, either with huge under or oversteer, raising one end or the other, helps to stabilize the car. Fortunately most cars in the game don't need that online and I do very little offline tuning so I can't say about that, although I know it's a different beast.

 

[Z1-AV69]

I downloaded the fastest time in the German Deep Forest Time Trial the other day and the leading Audi had at least 50 cm higher ride height in the front and the back was so slammed it looked like the rear tires should be smoking from rubbing the wheel well. At the time, fastest time in the world. Tough to explain that one away...💡

On 4WD cars I often end with higher front end too. 4WD need the best front traction while rear traction is not an issue at all. So you can explain this one easily if you accept that in GT5 higher ride height = more traction.

Edit: Does the leading car have a rear wing? If so, that's another factor in favor of nose-up. Since GT5 does only allow for adjustable rear wing for streetcars, you always need something to balance added rear downforce. Nose-up with max front grip helps here. Once aero comes into play, there is the added issue of downforce pulling the car forward if the front is much higher than the rear. This is just an exploit of an modeling shortcut in GT5. Once downforce comes into play and the more downforce the stronger, nose up is usually quicker and especially faster on the straights and with better acceleration at high speeds.

It is possible that it is backwards only offline or online (ie not both), in my book offline/online are completely different games.

I don't think they are completely different. I think online there is just either generally less grip or at least the grip is less consistent. From my experience the difference between online and offline is especially striking if a tune heavily relies on a certain grip level at only one axis. A tune that suits a lot of different tracks and a lot of different tyres will mostly work both online and offline while a highly specialized tune will rarely work. And it's definitely possible to make tunes that work really well both online and offline.

 

[CSLACR]

I'm still not ready to call this a given fact in GT5. This works on some cars and not on others, so how can it be "the rule?" Can someone explain to me how ride height backwards is such a given when most of the top cars in the current Japanese Tuning Competition aren't using this thoery? A few are, but most aren't. Look at Roj's cars. They are all ride height slammed low. So he likes cars with less grip? I think someone even said that his NSX is the fastest car he's driven?

What works in shootouts and what works in time trials are usually not the same thing.
For starters, TT tunes are always edgier, because shootouts have been tailored to the casual driver, and favor reliability and stability over pure speed.

It seems at least half of tuners anymore enter hoping to get drivers choice, or something along those lines, and with the varying degree of drivers doing the test driving, you can only make a car tuned so fast before it gets brought down by being too hard to drive for the testers.

 

[trackripper123]

This is bizarre. I was tuning my GT by Citroen Concept and this thread started to worry me, so I banged in two extreme ride height settings, and couldn't really tell the difference :/
Jacked up front, slammed rear felt like it turned more, but the tyre diagram showed front wheels turning red and losing grip.
Jacked up rear, slammed front, felt the car push slightly on corner exit, but I was doubtful over the difference, I expected there to be a fairly distinguishable change, but there wasn't.

 

[Johnnypenso]

This is bizarre. I was tuning my GT by Citroen Concept and this thread started to worry me, so I banged in two extreme ride height settings, and couldn't really tell the difference :/
Jacked up front, slammed rear felt like it turned more, but the tyre diagram showed front wheels turning red and losing grip.
Jacked up rear, slammed front, felt the car push slightly on corner exit, but I was doubtful over the difference, I expected there to be a fairly distinguishable change, but there wasn't.

This doesn't surprise me. One of the basic rules of GT5 is there are very few universal truths Some stuff works on some cars and doesn't work on others. The ride height portion of tuning is just another tool in the box to try, that may or may not help you depending on the car/track/tire/offline/online/pp combination. As I said, I do use it on some cars but don't find it necessary on most because most cars are pretty balanced by their very design and extreme settings of grip at one end or the other make consistent, repeatable laps difficult, and that is almost always my goal, even when running a TT. I've had cars where I raised the front just a point or two and it helped tremendously. Other cars I try +5, +10,+20 and it seems to make no difference. Experiment and find what works for you.

So consider it just another tool in the tuning box, use it if it works for you or if you feel you need that little extra boost of grip at one end or the other. And like anything else, extreme settings often produces extreme results, so keep that in mind.

 

[Highlandor]

Evan though what i'm about to say has probably been said many times here I feel like putting my 2 cents in.

Ride height is backwards for both online and offline tunes.
Higher you go = more grip,
Lower you go = less grip.

Not always, lower your car on a bumpy track, bottom out and bye bye - you're going backwards into the barrier because you just lost grip.

BUT - to a certain extent - yes, having a ride height at default can work very well on SOME RWD cars, even on super smooth tracks with no bumps, comparad to a car being "slammed" - but this is affected by the rest of the setup....so it's not conclusive.

You could have a setup that's tuned for total oversteer, raise your car all the way up and still spin.

Even the worst handling cars in the game can be tamed (online) within reason without having to run "crazy" setups. A little wild or extreme, yes, but no car (within reason) needs say max front / min rear to be usable, or even good, in an online race.

Now the rest of the suspension is where it gets confusing to me.

I assume that say an FR car with a weight balance of 55Front / 45Rear and you want to car to be balanced and handle well you would have the front springs and dampers with a stiffer setting than the rear right? Please correct me if i'm wrong. Well that kind of setup works fine for offline, but when you bring that setup to online it will handle like a pig! (at least from my experiance)

Er..........no, completely wrong. Base the springs on where the weight is works 100% of the time ASLONG as you have your roll bars reverse strength to the springs, for example:

Fr springs are at 66% "strength", so fr roll bar should be at 33%. Rear spring at 75% strength, so your rear roll bar should start at 25% strength.

You then "tweak" roll bars from there +1 or -1 ((depending on whether you experience oversteer or understeer) , then tweak rest of setup, if still not working go back and tweak roll bars +1 or -1 again, then that should be it.

That will give you a balanced and stable setup for online racing. May not be the fastest, but it's stable, driveable and works with everything from road cars on comforts to Le Mans cars on super sticky slicks.

This works with every type of car in the game too, FWD / 4WD / RWD / MR..

I downloaded the fastest time in the German Deep Forest Time Trial the other day and the leading Audi had at least 50 cm higher ride height in the front and the back was so slammed it looked like the rear tires should be smoking from rubbing the wheel well. At the time, fastest time in the world. Tough to explain that one away...💡

A friend did some inter-forum events with some of the "fastest" time trialling guys from a certain european website.

He was shocked at just how "desperate" they were not too loose - something that's an unwritten "no no" in inter forum events. You should always respect your opponent, not drive like a complete w***** to stop someone faster from overtaking you.

Anyone who shows that level of desperation in a "friendly" inter forum race night is not going to worry about using whatever means necessary in a time triall??

These time trials usually use low grip tyres, so the max front - min rear means the car will turn alot more off throttle / brake, ultimately giving a better lap time. As shown in previous threads on this subject, this "cheat" setup will be very hard to beat.

Why say "cheat" - regardless of whether ride height is reverse or not, how many "track" cars do you see either online of in real life that have EITHER end of the car jacked up, purposely, for better performance - very few.

Yes, a small amount of difference in ride height is often used and is often beneficial, but not to the extent of one end being maxed and the other being minimum is fundamentally necessary.

It just so happens that in certain situations in GT5 this helps to obtain the best time, BUT only beause this is a video game with screwed up (compared to real life) physics. You won't see guys on PC sims doing this.

You can control even the most troublesome cars with some variation of ride height, but max / min is simply not necessary to make a car feel good - it's only necessary to gain advantage over the others who don't / or are not prepared to use it.

It's like an overpowered gun in Battlefield or MW, not everyone will use it as it's seen as a "cheat gun". Or in Fifa or Pro evo where Messi or Ronaldo used to be pretty much untouchable and someone can use them to dribble round each player in your entire team 5 times before walking the ball into the net.

Does everyone do that - no. Even though it's available to all, only some choose to.

Same with GT5.....you don't need it, but unfortunately it's "there" and as such, some will exploit it. If guys are willing to destroy their websites reputation by driving like utter as*****, you really think they're not going to use this in a time trial that let's them use it??

 

[Maccer_42]

Maccer_42 View Post
Now the rest of the suspension is where it gets confusing to me.

I assume that say an FR car with a weight balance of 55Front / 45Rear and you want to car to be balanced and handle well you would have the front springs and dampers with a stiffer setting than the rear right? Please correct me if i'm wrong. Well that kind of setup works fine for offline, but when you bring that setup to online it will handle like a pig! (at least from my experiance)

Er..........no, completely wrong. Base the springs on where the weight is works 100% of the time ASLONG as you have your roll bars reverse strength to the springs, for example:

Fr springs are at 66% "strength", so fr roll bar should be at 33%. Rear spring at 75% strength, so your rear roll bar should start at 25% strength.

You then "tweak" roll bars from there +1 or -1 ((depending on whether you experience oversteer or understeer) , then tweak rest of setup, if still not working go back and tweak roll bars +1 or -1 again, then that should be it.

That will give you a balanced and stable setup for online racing. May not be the fastest, but it's stable, driveable and works with everything from road cars on comforts to Le Mans cars on super sticky slicks.

This works with every type of car in the game too, FWD / 4WD / RWD / MR..

Ah I see, I know very little about real world tuning and how a car should be setup for track use in general. I've tryed tuning cars folling guids on here but they give opposite results from what they should, but all the sticked guides in the tuning sub forum link to GT4 tuning guides so maybe thats why?

I just always asumed that a car should have stiffer springs where most of the weight is. I know that the weight balance of a car changes when you accelerate and turn so you need to setup the springs / dampers / anti roll bars to compensate for the different weight balance when the car is motion.

It just made sence in my simple head that there should be stiffer settings where most of the weight is.

 

[Johnnypenso]

A friend did some inter-forum events with some of the "fastest" time trialling guys from a certain european website.

He was shocked at just how "desperate" they were not too loose - something that's an unwritten "no no" in inter forum events. You should always respect your opponent, not drive like a complete w***** to stop someone faster from overtaking you.

Anyone who shows that level of desperation in a "friendly" inter forum race night is not going to worry about using whatever means necessary in a time triall??

These time trials usually use low grip tyres, so the max front - min rear means the car will turn alot more off throttle / brake, ultimately giving a better lap time. As shown in previous threads on this subject, this "cheat" setup will be very hard to beat.

Why say "cheat" - regardless of whether ride height is reverse or not, how many "track" cars do you see either online of in real life that have EITHER end of the car jacked up, purposely, for better performance - very few.

Yes, a small amount of difference in ride height is often used and is often beneficial, but not to the extent of one end being maxed and the other being minimum is fundamentally necessary.

It just so happens that in certain situations in GT5 this helps to obtain the best time, BUT only beause this is a video game with screwed up (compared to real life) physics. You won't see guys on PC sims doing this.

You can control even the most troublesome cars with some variation of ride height, but max / min is simply not necessary to make a car feel good - it's only necessary to gain advantage over the others who don't / or are not prepared to use it.

It's like an overpowered gun in Battlefield or MW, not everyone will use it as it's seen as a "cheat gun". Or in Fifa or Pro evo where Messi or Ronaldo used to be pretty much untouchable and someone can use them to dribble round each player in your entire team 5 times before walking the ball into the net.

Does everyone do that - no. Even though it's available to all, only some choose to.

Same with GT5.....you don't need it, but unfortunately it's "there" and as such, some will exploit it. If guys are willing to destroy their websites reputation by driving like utter as*****, you really think they're not going to use this in a time trial that let's them use it??

I don't consider it a "cheat" just another tuning option. If it works I'll use it, if it doesn't I won't, same as anything else. If it makes a car looks silly then blame PD, and the onus should be on them to "fix" it, if it somehow comprimises the integrity of the game.