Suspension Dampening Cheatgrid

[budious]

I posted this in another thread earlier but I have been testing it more since then and am positive this works as is. Might be of some use to those needing to tune their suspension, you only need adjust your spring rate, anti-roll bars, and ride height once, then when you goto a different track depending on the surface conditions, change the dampers to any combination totaling 10.

For example, a FR on Deep Forest. Try Damper Extension 7 F / 3 R and Damper Compression 3 F / 7 R for a mix of front surface bump dampening and strong acceleration on the back end.

If you goto a course with a relatively smooth surface like Grand Valley Speedway or Laguna Seca, then you can set both ends up like the rear end on the example above, Damper Extensions 3 F / 3 R and Damper Compression 7 F / 7 R.

I have been messing with the whole inverted damper thing today. There are certain benefits to that setup but the track surface has to be entirely smooth and predictable, not a lot of bumps to soak up, which when used sets impressive lap times on Grand Valley or Laguna Seca. However, try the same setup on Deep Forest and you find it doesn't work there about 20 seconds into the first lap.

I kind of had to make me an inverted chart to help get my head around the idea. The number in parenthesis (-) being the inverse as how many people think it should be or assume it is. The ones not in parenthesis how you set it in menu.

(-)-Rebound--------------------Bound----
-------------------------------------------- fast end of the spectrum
(1)-------10------------------------1------
(2)--------9------------------------2------
(3)--------8------------------------3------
(4)--------7------------------------4------
(5)--------6------------------------5------
(6)--------5------------------------6------
(7)--------4------------------------7------
(8)--------3------------------------8------
(9)--------2------------------------9------
(10)-------1-----------------------10-----
-------------------------------------------- slow end of the spectrum

Like so if for example, I tune my springs on Deep Forest using a neutral and standard bound equals rebound setup, then I could easily invert the setup by going -1 rebound and +1 bound and generally the result was stable, I could up that another level by another increment in opposite directions and the pair would usually be stable (assuming you're trying a smooth track like Grand Valley).

Basically, this rule of thumb kind of fit most of the time I tried it. I just take my setup as is for Deep Forest with say DE 5/5 and DC 5/5 and find DE 4/4 and DC 6/6 was a usable combination and the ride was more often than not balanced. Then if I wanted to try another increment, DE 3/3 and DC 7/7 would normally be stable as well. DE 2/2 and DC 8/8 also worked sometimes, DE 1/1 and DC 9/9 usually didn't, but sometimes DE 2/2 and DC 9/9 worked out. Much was dependent on spring rate in ratio increments or adjustments to anti-roll bars if DE 2/2 and DC 8/8 didn't work, it might work at the next spring rate tweak. Getting them to add up somewhere around 10, I know it sounds silly, seems to work - as a quick rule of thumb on my tunes.

Basically each increment either moves both towards the slow spectrum end or the fast spectrum end depending on how you want it to respond.

The other rule of thumb, "bound should be one setting below rebound" now also makes sense here since it one notch above the corresponding rebound (-) in the spectrum. So in theory now, bound 4/4 and rebound 6/6 can work for a lumpy track and bound 6/6 and rebound 4/4 works for a smooth track, etc.

Just to let you know how well this works, I just ran a 1:13.005" lap followed by a 1:13.006" on Deep Forest using a rebound of 10/10 and a bound of 2/2 on my Camaro Z/28 RM '69, it's like driving a stick of butter now... which actually adds up to 12, so bad example. DE 8/8 and DC 2/2, much better... now I want some stiffness back on my rear wheels for better acceleration but handling at the front, so DE 8/6 and DC 2/4... this makes tuning so stupid easy, can't believe I didn't see it until now.

 

[Scottster]

Budious, would you mind pointing me in the direction that proves the extension is backwards in GT5? (ie) 1=Stiffest, 10= loosest.

 

[budious]

If it wasn't backwards then I wouldn't be seeing any positive results from the inverted grid. Like I mentioned in the OP, not every combination works every time, and it's heavily dependent on you already having set your car's suspension spring rates to be at least 98% accurate (or thereabout) for the weight and proper distribution of that weight. If the spring rates are right, then you can go down the grid at different intervals and plug them into your damper settings in suspension and run trials and see gains on the circuits that are roughest or smoothest.

If the car's springs are too soft and you set rebound to a low number, then you will see the weight transfers very slowly, it almost rocks back and forth on the track and is very unstable. If those same springs are properly set than they offset the rebound damper just enough to match the weight transfer speed that can be put on the corresponding bound damper setting on the same line or from a line above, so the bound is always faster or even in transfer momentum, doesn't work too well if bound is lower on the spectrum. In other words, keep the combined value at 10 or 11. Rebound 2 would pair with either Bound 8 or 9; Rebound 3 would not pair with Bound 9, the combined value of 12 being an indicator it's wrong, as is having bound to compress more slowly than it would spring back but that might make for a good stunt car.

Also, since many folks run springs too hard and slammed, it's probably more difficult to distinguish between the high bound setting since suspension travel is limited anyways - time for max ride height tune testing on minimum springs!

 

[Scottster]

If you dont mind, do this little test for me. Take one of your rock solid set-ups for Indy.

On one set of hot laps, change nothing but set the front extension to "10". Then, on another set of hot laps, set the extension to "1". Then report your findings for each scenario.

 

[powell145]

I think it's backward also, I did a lot of testing last night on my setups. I asked the same question:

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=177348

I think your chart is right, it sure bothers me looking at the tuning screen; just doesn't look right. 1 = full stiff rebound while 10 = full stiff compression..... wth 👎

 

[BlueShift]

You can't do like that because you always cross at 5/5 : you're basically saying any set up @ 8/8 8/8 is wrong.

I was doing that in GT4 and I was demonstrated it was not good, esp on oversteering cars. Try a full hp JGTC NSX with no aids, or a full hp NSX with no aids for the demo.

You need to consider ratios more than totals of 10 : front/rear ratio for brake/accel, ext/comp ratio in slow curves and cross ratios that works in fast curves and compare these ratio to the unit.

I'm sure comp > ext on front trains but now for rear trains after talking about that with rotary, I'm not sure.

* flies off to test drive some stuff*

 

[budious]

I'll revise that chart a little bit, I have found test cases for supporting each, but each can't be true? If I was to assume Rebound(+) is the the uninverted setup and one used by the game, then using R(+)2 with B 2 on the front end works very similarly to R(-)8 with B 3; however using R(+)2 with B 2 seems to work better when the suspensions are set independently, I'm thinking the R(-) positive results come into play when the rear suspension is set to be complementary to the front. I'm more confused now then I started the thread...

Edit: Another little tweak, R+/B+ as the values are set in the game's suspension menu. R(-) is a representative view of the inverse behavior. See my next reply for why R+(-) theory may reconcile the opposing views on R/B.

R+-----R+(-)----------------------B+----
-------------------------------------------- fast end of the suspension movement spectrum; for technical tracks with rough surfaces
10-------(1)------------------------1------
9--------(2)------------------------2------
8--------(3)------------------------3------
7--------(4)------------------------4------
6--------(5)------------------------5------
5--------(6)------------------------6------
4--------(7)------------------------7------
3--------(8)------------------------8------
2--------(9)------------------------9------
1--------(10)----------------------10-----
-------------------------------------------- slow end of the suspension movement spectrum; for fast circuits with smooth surfaces

 

[Scottster]

Have you had time to do my little test?

 

[Scottster]

You can't do like that because you always cross at 5/5 [/I]

Surely, you weren't talking to me.

 

[budious]

Have you had time to do my little test?

I haven't yet, but I already figured under both theories usually the extremes don't work anyways. 1/10, 10/1 10/10 1/1... but I will try a reproducible test with a data sets when I find the time and perfect the theory I'm looking for.

As for as reconciliation between the two competing theories, I'm perhaps finding the following condition to also be true:

R+(-): A fast bound paired with a slow rebound allows suspension compaction over a series of undulating crests or successive bumps or surface imperfections.
For an example on front suspension tracking on a rough course, pair the corresponding R(-) [2 clicks off slowest] theory with the opposing B [2 clicks off fastest] value so the values in game once again are R(+) equal to B(+). In this scenario, R+(-) makes some sense and is measurable to a degree of success. Take you favorite currently tuned ride to deep forest and try R(+) (setting in game) and pair it equally with a B(+) setting on the front suspension and find which combo tracks better for you. 2/2 3/3 4/4 will probably be best depending on your ride height and spring rate.

Since most of my tunes are ride height neutral at 0 F / 0 R these examples may work better for my test car than testers with a slam tune, try a car with tuned suspension on neutral ride height for this test.

 

[budious]

Modified again to help with the following examples I'm about to give below the chart:

Prerequisites

You need to find the optimal spring rates for the car that you want to test these settings on. To maximize benefits from an active suspension, tune it at neutral ride height.

• Spring rates optimized for combined weight and weight distribution of car at neutral ride height while dampers were in a neutral state. Rebound 4/4; Bound 4/4 or 5/5; 5/5 preferable.
• Anti-roll bars optimized once the above condition was met, then continue on below:

R+-----R+(-)---------------------B(+)----
-------------------------------------------- fast end of the suspension movement spectrum; for technical tracks with rough surfaces
10-------(1)------------------------1------|---five clicks above---
9--------(2)------------------------2------|---four clicks above---
8--------(3)------------------------3------|---three clicks above--
7--------(4)------------------------4------|---two clicks above---
6--------(5)------------------------5------|---one click above----
-------------------------------------------- demarcation of counter balance center
5--------(6)------------------------6------|----one click below----
4--------(7)------------------------7------|----two clicks below---
3--------(8)------------------------8------|----three clicks below---
2--------(9)------------------------9------|----four clicks below----
1--------(10)----------------------10------|---five clicks below----
-------------------------------------------- slow end of the suspension movement spectrum; for fast circuits with smooth surfaces

Preliminary Findings - The Six Rules of Suspension Dampening

Assuming R+ or R+(-) is constant and B+ is variable, than the following conditional statements can be measured. Assuming the tested condition (for as B+:R+(-) conditions are concerned) has been set for both dampers front and rear. Assuming you have properly tuned the spring rate and anti-roll bars at a neutral ride height (0/0; typically you may -5/-5 to +5/+5 for fine spring rate tuning) to realize maximum potentials of the following:

Due to the lack of track variety in GT5 it may be hard to measure the benefits of each condition, but each probably has a real world application on a test driving track.

1. if B+ > R+ than...
   • suspension compression is slower than extension rate, absorbing the least surface imperfections resulting in less grip but offering more speed
   • weight transfer occurs more quickly under this condition in comparison to the B+ <= R+ conditions, yet more slowly in comparison to the B+:R+(-) conditions; weight transfer is balanced by relative rate to compression on the opposing end; higher B+ places the weight transfer onto the wheel more quickly
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 7/7; Damper Compression (B+) 8/8
2. if B+ = R+ than...
   • suspension compression and extension rates are similarly matched so track surface is absorbed across minimal imperfections and a potential median for speed is reached
   • weight transfer occurs at a consistent rate from front to rear though at a delayed rate in comparison to the B+ > R+ condition and all of the B+:R+(-) conditions; weight transfer only faster than the B+ < R+ condition
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 7/7; Damper Compression (B+) 7/7
3. if B+ < R+ than...
   • suspension compression is faster than extension rate, absorbing the most surface imperfections to improve grip but sacrificing speed
   • weight transfer occurs most slowly under this condition compared to all others, but is partially counter balanced by lower B+ on the opposing end triggering a return weight shift sooner
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 7/7; Damper Compression (B+) 6/6
4. if B+ > R+(-) than...
   • suspension compression is slower than extension rate, absorbing the least surface imperfections resulting in less grip but offering more speed
   • weight transfer occurs most quickly under this condition than for all other conditions; but balanced in relative rate to compression on the opposing end with a higher B+; fastest weight transfer of the B+:R+(-) conditions
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 3/3; Damper Compression (B+) 9/9
5. if B+ = R+(-) than...
   • suspension compression and extension rates are similarly matched so track surface is absorbed across minimal imperfections and a potential median for speed and control is reached
   • weight transfer occurs more quickly under this condition than for the B+ < R+(-) condition and B+:R+ conditions; but balanced in relative rate to compression on the opposing end; equilibrium is achieved
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 3/3; Damper Compression (B+) 8/8
6. if B+ < R+(-) than...
   • suspension compression is faster than extension rate, absorbing the most surface imperfections resulting in more grip and control at the expense of speed
   • weight transfer occurs less quickly under this condition than for the B+ >= R+(-) conditions; but balanced in relative rate to compression on the opposing end, a lower B+ triggering an earlier weight shift
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 3/3; Damper Compression (B+) 7/7

Example damper configurations should be read as:
R+
----------------------------------------------
--3--two clicks above counter balance---
--8--two clicks below counter balance---
----------------------------------------------
B+
----------------------------------------------
--3--two clicks above counter balance---
--8--two clicks below counter balance---
----------------------------------------------
R+ = R+(-) it is on the same line of the grid it appears. R+ is the setting applied in game.
----------------------------------------------

In essence, utilizing R+(-) theory is maximizing suspension performance by reaching equilibrium at 0; a combination of X clicks above counter balance line for R+, with X clicks below counter balance for B+.

R+(-) so far seems to work well for smoother circuits.
R+(+) is a counter theory for R+(-) but no, it's not the same as R+ in theory... though the numbers will be the same as R+ when applied.

Wrap-up:
"R-positive," or R+ is the way the numbers are represented for rebound on the game's suspension menu. Traditional application of R+ may result in well handling vehicles that could gain a little from a R+(-) or R+(+) conversion. There are probably applications and scenarios where R+ may still be preferred. R+ values on the grid represent the settings as they occur in the game, starting at 1 and descending to 10, because this is the spectrum of suspension movement speed from fastest to slowest.

"R-positive inverted," or R+(-) is the way the numbers are inverted on the grid to find their opposing value of equilibrium by finding a matching pair on the same line. R+(-) should be paired with B+ on the same line, ie. R+(-) 3 and B+ 8 are both two clicks below the counter balance line. R+(-) is the same as R+ in this sense of the notation, it's just the order in which it appears below or above the counter balance line. So the R+(-) number on the corresponding row as the B+ value is the R+ value to be used. R+(-) are shown in parenthesis on the grid - (3) is equivalent to a R+ value of 3 on far left column, but it will appear at it's correct orientation as an opposing counter balance force.

Special Rule for Technical Courses

• if B+ = R+ than...
  • results in a highly active suspension system the closer it is set to minimum extremes
  • suspension compression and extension rates are similarly matched so track surface is absorbed across maximum variations in track surface and a potential median for speed and control is reached; optimized approach that fairs particularly well for use with front suspension setups on technically challenging courses (ie. Deep Forest Raceway, Trial Mountain, Nurburgring)
  • weight transfer occurs more quickly under this condition than for any of the alternative conditions
  • can result in snap oversteer if set to the extreme (ie. R+ 1, B+ 1) or possibly lower depending on setup; adverse effects typically minimized by using a standard B+ = R+ theory to tune the rear at values closer to counter balance center

Applications for Theories

R+ for use with general purpose setups, ideally close to the counter balance center in the range of R+/B+ setting or handling may become erratic. This can provide stable lap times that are below peak optimization across a wide variety of courses. May be combined with R+(+) on the front suspension for optimal wheel tracking.

R+(-) for high speed racing where the circuits are considerably smooth and do not present too many inconsistencies in surface variation when making a lap. Use two values closer to the counter balance center within the R+/B+ range when on a high-speed circuit with more bumps than others, more extreme values may work for the smoothest of the circuits. This setup type appears to be dependent upon the front and rear suspension being given the same values front to back for best performance and handling.

R+(+) for technical courses can provide plusher suspension with greater wheel tracking through corners and small surface imperfections. Tested applications for theory include softening the front suspension on a FR vehicle for better wheel tracking at lower values, while using higher values at the rear drive wheels for a good mix of acceleration. Above a value of 5 on the R+(+) theory grid you start to cross the threshold into standard R+ theory. A mix of R+(+) on the front and R+ on the rear may be optimal.

Edit: helps if I get the direction of the chart right... *sigh*

 

[killerjimbag]

Modified again to help with the following examples I'm about to give below the chart:

Prerequisites

You need to find the optimal spring rates for the car that you want to test these settings on. To maximize benefits from an active suspension, tune it at neutral ride height.

• Spring rates optimized for combined weight and weight distribution of car at neutral ride height while dampers were in a neutral state. Rebound 4/4; Bound 4/4 or 5/5; 5/5 preferable.
• Anti-roll bars optimized once the above condition was met, then continue on below:

R+-----R+(-)---------------------B(+)----
-------------------------------------------- fast end of the suspension movement spectrum; for technical tracks with rough surfaces
1-------(10)------------------------1------|---five clicks above---
2--------(9)------------------------2------|---four clicks above---
3--------(8)------------------------3------|---three clicks above--
4--------(7)------------------------4------|---two clicks above---
5--------(6)------------------------5------|---one click above----
-------------------------------------------- demarcation of counter balance center
6--------(5)------------------------6------|----one click below----
7--------(4)------------------------7------|----two clicks below---
8--------(3)------------------------8------|----three clicks below---
9--------(2)------------------------9------|----four clicks below----
10-------(1)-----------------------10------|---five clicks below----
-------------------------------------------- slow end of the suspension movement spectrum; for fast circuits with smooth surfaces

Preliminary Findings - The Six Rules of Suspension Dampening

Assuming R+ or R+(-) is constant and B+ is variable, than the following conditional statements can be measured. Assuming the tested condition (for as B+:R+(-) conditions are concerned) has been set for both dampers front and rear. Assuming you have properly tuned the spring rate and anti-roll bars at a neutral ride height (0/0; typically you may -5/-5 to +5/+5 for fine spring rate tuning) to realize maximum potentials of the following:

Due to the lack of track variety in GT5 it may be hard to measure the benefits of each condition, but each probably has a real world application on a test driving track.

1. if B+ > R+ than...
   • suspension compression is slower than extension rate, absorbing the least surface imperfections resulting in less grip but offering more speed
   • weight transfer occurs more quickly under this condition in comparison to the B+ <= R+ conditions, yet more slowly in comparison to the B+:R+(-) conditions; weight transfer is balanced by relative rate to compression on the opposing end; higher B+ places the weight transfer onto the wheel more quickly
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 7/7; Damper Compression (B+) 8/8
2. if B+ = R+ than...
   • suspension compression and extension rates are similarly matched so track surface is absorbed across minimal imperfections and a potential median for speed is reached
   • weight transfer occurs at a consistent rate from front to rear though at a delayed rate in comparison to the B+ > R+ condition and all of the B+:R+(-) conditions; weight transfer only faster than the B+ < R+ condition
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 7/7; Damper Compression (B+) 7/7
3. if B+ < R+ than...
   • suspension compression is faster than extension rate, absorbing the most surface imperfections to improve grip but sacrificing speed
   • weight transfer occurs most slowly under this condition compared to all others, but is partially counter balanced by lower B+ on the opposing end triggering a return weight shift sooner
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 7/7; Damper Compression (B+) 6/6
4. if B+ > R+(-) than...
   • suspension compression is slower than extension rate, absorbing the least surface imperfections resulting in less grip but offering more speed
   • weight transfer occurs most quickly under this condition than for all other conditions; but balanced in relative rate to compression on the opposing end with a higher B+; fastest weight transfer of the B+:R+(-) conditions
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 3/3; Damper Compression (B+) 9/9
5. if B+ = R+(-) than...
   • suspension compression and extension rates are similarly matched so track surface is absorbed across minimal imperfections and a potential median for speed and control is reached
   • weight transfer occurs more quickly under this condition than for the B+ < R+(-) condition and B+:R+ conditions; but balanced in relative rate to compression on the opposing end; equilibrium is achieved
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 3/3; Damper Compression (B+) 8/8
6. if B+ < R+(-) than...
   • suspension compression is faster than extension rate, absorbing the most surface imperfections resulting in more grip and control at the expense of speed
   • weight transfer occurs less quickly under this condition than for the B+ >= R+(-) conditions; but balanced in relative rate to compression on the opposing end, a lower B+ triggering an earlier weight shift
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 3/3; Damper Compression (B+) 7/7

Example damper configurations should be read as:
R+
----------------------------------------------
--3--two clicks above counter balance---
--8--two clicks below counter balance---
----------------------------------------------
B+
----------------------------------------------
--3--two clicks above counter balance---
--8--two clicks below counter balance---
----------------------------------------------
R+ = R+(-) it is on the same line of the grid it appears. R+ is the setting applied in game.
----------------------------------------------

In essence, utilizing R+(-) theory is maximizing suspension performance by reaching equilibrium at 0; a combination of X clicks above counter balance line for R+, with X clicks below counter balance for B+.

R+(-) so far seems to work well for smoother circuits.
R+(+) is a counter theory for R+(-) but no, it's not the same as R+ in theory... though the numbers will be the same as R+ when applied.

Wrap-up:
"R-positive," or R+ is the way the numbers are represented for rebound on the game's suspension menu. Traditional application of R+ may result in well handling vehicles that could gain a little from a R+(-) or R+(+) conversion. There are probably applications and scenarios where R+ may still be preferred. R+ values on the grid represent the settings as they occur in the game, starting at 1 and descending to 10, because this is the spectrum of suspension movement speed from fastest to slowest.

"R-positive inverted," or R+(-) is the way the numbers are inverted on the grid to find their opposing value of equilibrium by finding a matching pair on the same line. R+(-) should be paired with B+ on the same line, ie. R+(-) 3 and B+ 8 are both two clicks below the counter balance line. R+(-) is the same as R+ in this sense of the notation, it's just the order in which it appears below or above the counter balance line. So the R+(-) number on the corresponding row as the B+ value is the R+ value to be used. R+(-) are shown in parenthesis on the grid - (3) is equivalent to a R+ value of 3 on far left column, but it will appear at it's correct orientation as an opposing counter balance force.

"R-positive re-inverted," or R+(+) is the way the numbers are aligned from a top down perspective of maximizing the entire suspension movement range... so basically the line of counter balance is moved to above R+/B+ values of 1... so everything below becomes a representation of if R+(+)=B+ than suspension will be most active at minimum values, and become less active as they are raised in equilibrium. R+(+) and B+ both set to 1 will produce the most reactive suspension setup with the softest compression and the strongest extension. Setting both values to 2 will reduce the effect by a factor. It's essentially an alternative perspective on how to perceive the function of the normal R+=B+ and how it can be a good setup in these particular test cases where an active suspension is strongly desired.

R+(+) modified grid to demonstrate and provide theory rules for active suspension setups for the technical courses.

R+-----R+(+)---------------------B(+)----
-------------------------------------------- fast end of the suspension movement spectrum; for technical tracks with rough surfaces
1--------(1)------------------------1------ ideal range
2--------(2)------------------------2------ ideal range
3--------(3)------------------------3------ ideal range
4--------(4)------------------------4------ ideal range
5--------(5)------------------------5------ threshold range
-------------------------------------------- estimated threshold for performance gain from R+(+) theory... switch to R+ or R+(-)
6--------(6)------------------------6------- threshold range
7--------(7)------------------------7------- outside of ideal range
8--------(8)------------------------8------- outside of ideal range
9--------(9)------------------------9------- outside of ideal range
10------(10)-----------------------10------ outside of ideal range
-------------------------------------------- slow end of the suspension movement spectrum; for fast circuits with smooth surfaces

Applications for Theories

R+ for use with general purpose setups, ideally close to the counter balance center in the range of R+/B+ setting or handling may become erratic. This can provide stable lap times that are below peak optimization across a wide variety of courses. May be combined with R+(+) on the front suspension for optimal wheel tracking.

R+(-) for high speed racing where the circuits are considerably smooth and do not present too many inconsistencies in surface variation when making a lap. Use two values closer to the counter balance center within the R+/B+ range when on a high-speed circuit with more bumps than others, more extreme values may work for the smoothest of the circuits. This setup type appears to be dependent upon the front and rear suspension being given the same values front to back for best performance and handling.

R+(+) for technical courses can provide plusher suspension with greater wheel tracking through corners and small surface imperfections. Tested applications for theory include softening the front suspension on a FR vehicle for better wheel tracking at lower values, while using higher values at the rear drive wheels for a good mix of acceleration. Above a value of 5 on the R+(+) theory grid you start to cross the threshold into standard R+ theory. A mix of R+(+) on the front and R+ on the rear may be optimal.

Budious physics/math were not my specialty in College but it does take me a second to look at this and scratch my head,its been well over 25 years ago.You might just be on to something and I will try some of these out tonight.Nascar seems to be the easiest to tune so I will try this at Daytona right now.

 

[killerjimbag]

Modified again to help with the following examples I'm about to give below the chart:

Prerequisites

You need to find the optimal spring rates for the car that you want to test these settings on. To maximize benefits from an active suspension, tune it at neutral ride height.

• Spring rates optimized for combined weight and weight distribution of car at neutral ride height while dampers were in a neutral state. Rebound 4/4; Bound 4/4 or 5/5; 5/5 preferable.
• Anti-roll bars optimized once the above condition was met, then continue on below:

R+-----R+(-)---------------------B(+)----
-------------------------------------------- fast end of the suspension movement spectrum; for technical tracks with rough surfaces
1-------(10)------------------------1------|---five clicks above---
2--------(9)------------------------2------|---four clicks above---
3--------(8)------------------------3------|---three clicks above--
4--------(7)------------------------4------|---two clicks above---
5--------(6)------------------------5------|---one click above----
-------------------------------------------- demarcation of counter balance center
6--------(5)------------------------6------|----one click below----
7--------(4)------------------------7------|----two clicks below---
8--------(3)------------------------8------|----three clicks below---
9--------(2)------------------------9------|----four clicks below----
10-------(1)-----------------------10------|---five clicks below----
-------------------------------------------- slow end of the suspension movement spectrum; for fast circuits with smooth surfaces

Preliminary Findings - The Six Rules of Suspension Dampening

Assuming R+ or R+(-) is constant and B+ is variable, than the following conditional statements can be measured. Assuming the tested condition (for as B+:R+(-) conditions are concerned) has been set for both dampers front and rear. Assuming you have properly tuned the spring rate and anti-roll bars at a neutral ride height (0/0; typically you may -5/-5 to +5/+5 for fine spring rate tuning) to realize maximum potentials of the following:

Due to the lack of track variety in GT5 it may be hard to measure the benefits of each condition, but each probably has a real world application on a test driving track.

1. if B+ > R+ than...
   • suspension compression is slower than extension rate, absorbing the least surface imperfections resulting in less grip but offering more speed
   • weight transfer occurs more quickly under this condition in comparison to the B+ <= R+ conditions, yet more slowly in comparison to the B+:R+(-) conditions; weight transfer is balanced by relative rate to compression on the opposing end; higher B+ places the weight transfer onto the wheel more quickly
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 7/7; Damper Compression (B+) 8/8
2. if B+ = R+ than...
   • suspension compression and extension rates are similarly matched so track surface is absorbed across minimal imperfections and a potential median for speed is reached
   • weight transfer occurs at a consistent rate from front to rear though at a delayed rate in comparison to the B+ > R+ condition and all of the B+:R+(-) conditions; weight transfer only faster than the B+ < R+ condition
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 7/7; Damper Compression (B+) 7/7
3. if B+ < R+ than...
   • suspension compression is faster than extension rate, absorbing the most surface imperfections to improve grip but sacrificing speed
   • weight transfer occurs most slowly under this condition compared to all others, but is partially counter balanced by lower B+ on the opposing end triggering a return weight shift sooner
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 7/7; Damper Compression (B+) 6/6
4. if B+ > R+(-) than...
   • suspension compression is slower than extension rate, absorbing the least surface imperfections resulting in less grip but offering more speed
   • weight transfer occurs most quickly under this condition than for all other conditions; but balanced in relative rate to compression on the opposing end with a higher B+; fastest weight transfer of the B+:R+(-) conditions
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 3/3; Damper Compression (B+) 9/9
5. if B+ = R+(-) than...
   • suspension compression and extension rates are similarly matched so track surface is absorbed across minimal imperfections and a potential median for speed and control is reached
   • weight transfer occurs more quickly under this condition than for the B+ < R+(-) condition and B+:R+ conditions; but balanced in relative rate to compression on the opposing end; equilibrium is achieved
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 3/3; Damper Compression (B+) 8/8
6. if B+ < R+(-) than...
   • suspension compression is faster than extension rate, absorbing the most surface imperfections resulting in more grip and control at the expense of speed
   • weight transfer occurs less quickly under this condition than for the B+ >= R+(-) conditions; but balanced in relative rate to compression on the opposing end, a lower B+ triggering an earlier weight shift
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 3/3; Damper Compression (B+) 7/7

Example damper configurations should be read as:
R+
----------------------------------------------
--3--two clicks above counter balance---
--8--two clicks below counter balance---
----------------------------------------------
B+
----------------------------------------------
--3--two clicks above counter balance---
--8--two clicks below counter balance---
----------------------------------------------
R+ = R+(-) it is on the same line of the grid it appears. R+ is the setting applied in game.
----------------------------------------------

In essence, utilizing R+(-) theory is maximizing suspension performance by reaching equilibrium at 0; a combination of X clicks above counter balance line for R+, with X clicks below counter balance for B+.

R+(-) so far seems to work well for smoother circuits.
R+(+) is a counter theory for R+(-) but no, it's not the same as R+ in theory... though the numbers will be the same as R+ when applied.

Wrap-up:
"R-positive," or R+ is the way the numbers are represented for rebound on the game's suspension menu. Traditional application of R+ may result in well handling vehicles that could gain a little from a R+(-) or R+(+) conversion. There are probably applications and scenarios where R+ may still be preferred. R+ values on the grid represent the settings as they occur in the game, starting at 1 and descending to 10, because this is the spectrum of suspension movement speed from fastest to slowest.

"R-positive inverted," or R+(-) is the way the numbers are inverted on the grid to find their opposing value of equilibrium by finding a matching pair on the same line. R+(-) should be paired with B+ on the same line, ie. R+(-) 3 and B+ 8 are both two clicks below the counter balance line. R+(-) is the same as R+ in this sense of the notation, it's just the order in which it appears below or above the counter balance line. So the R+(-) number on the corresponding row as the B+ value is the R+ value to be used. R+(-) are shown in parenthesis on the grid - (3) is equivalent to a R+ value of 3 on far left column, but it will appear at it's correct orientation as an opposing counter balance force.

"R-positive re-inverted," or R+(+) is the way the numbers are aligned from a top down perspective of maximizing the entire suspension movement range... so basically the line of counter balance is moved to above R+/B+ values of 1... so everything below becomes a representation of if R+(+)=B+ than suspension will be most active at minimum values, and become less active as they are raised in equilibrium. R+(+) and B+ both set to 1 will produce the most reactive suspension setup with the softest compression and the strongest extension. Setting both values to 2 will reduce the effect by a factor. It's essentially an alternative perspective on how to perceive the function of the normal R+=B+ and how it can be a good setup in these particular test cases where an active suspension is strongly desired.

R+(+) modified grid to demonstrate and provide theory rules for active suspension setups for the technical courses.

R+-----R+(+)---------------------B(+)----
-------------------------------------------- fast end of the suspension movement spectrum; for technical tracks with rough surfaces
1--------(1)------------------------1------ ideal range
2--------(2)------------------------2------ ideal range
3--------(3)------------------------3------ ideal range
4--------(4)------------------------4------ ideal range
5--------(5)------------------------5------ threshold range
-------------------------------------------- estimated threshold for performance gain from R+(+) theory... switch to R+ or R+(-)
6--------(6)------------------------6------- threshold range
7--------(7)------------------------7------- outside of ideal range
8--------(8)------------------------8------- outside of ideal range
9--------(9)------------------------9------- outside of ideal range
10------(10)-----------------------10------ outside of ideal range
-------------------------------------------- slow end of the suspension movement spectrum; for fast circuits with smooth surfaces

Special Rule for Technical Courses

• if B+ = R+(+) than...
  • suspension compression and extension rates are similarly matched so track surface is absorbed across maximum variations in track surface and a potential median for speed and control is reached; optimized approach that fairs particularly well for use with front suspension setups on technically challenging courses (ie. Deep Forest Raceway, Trial Mountain, Nurburgring)
  • weight transfer occurs more quickly under this condition than for any of the alternative conditions
  • can result in snap oversteer if set to the extreme (ie. R+ 1, B+ 1) or possibly lower depending on setup; adverse effects typically minimized by using a standard B+ = R+ theory to tune the rear at values closer to counter balance center

Applications for Theories

R+ for use with general purpose setups, ideally close to the counter balance center in the range of R+/B+ setting or handling may become erratic. This can provide stable lap times that are below peak optimization across a wide variety of courses. May be combined with R+(+) on the front suspension for optimal wheel tracking.

R+(-) for high speed racing where the circuits are considerably smooth and do not present too many inconsistencies in surface variation when making a lap. Use two values closer to the counter balance center within the R+/B+ range when on a high-speed circuit with more bumps than others, more extreme values may work for the smoothest of the circuits. This setup type appears to be dependent upon the front and rear suspension being given the same values front to back for best performance and handling.

R+(+) for technical courses can provide plusher suspension with greater wheel tracking through corners and small surface imperfections. Tested applications for theory include softening the front suspension on a FR vehicle for better wheel tracking at lower values, while using higher values at the rear drive wheels for a good mix of acceleration. Above a value of 5 on the R+(+) theory grid you start to cross the threshold into standard R+ theory. A mix of R+(+) on the front and R+ on the rear may be optimal.

Just a quick question what do you do with the camber toe to compensate for the dampers?

 

[itstheDRE4M]

You need to simplify this. Honestly.. I don't know where to start when I look at it.

 

[nasanu]

you need to simplify this. Honestly.. I don't know where to start when i look at it.

+100000

 

[budious]

LOL... yeah my point exactly, I can't simplify it. In fact other than the variables still work I still can't decide which way to place the R+ as ascending or R+ as descending on the grid. Perhaps I need to look at it in B- perspective.

The model seems to work because both theories seem to work across scenarios, so how can both work simultaneously is the better question.

Test car A with Rebound 1/1 and Bound 10/10
compared to
Test car A with Rebound 10/10 and Bound 10/10

I still can't distinguish a clear difference in the rate of body rock under deceleration and acceleration, which helps lead me to the alternative explanation for why this all makes no sense and both work.

It's modeled nothing like real rebound or bound dampening in the physics engine, I think the programmers took a short cut by perhaps giving you a variable rate dampening system across the full travel of the spring.

The other explanation could be that possibly bound controls the lower half of a bi-directional dampening variable, and rebound controls the upper half of a bi-directional dampening variable, so the more the suspension compresses, passing the 50% threshold it may begin to compress slower. I'll work with the assumption both bound and rebound are slower at higher numbers, so if you set bound -1 from rebound, the bottom half the travel is slightly less sensitive than the upper half of the travel...

That might also explain why height adjustable suspension only has one dampening setting, you don't get a variable rate adjustment...

All of it is rather theory... I just find some of it works, like the counter balance center line whether or not there is any determination to the true polarity of the damper extensions, or if it's an alternative system like the one above.

 

[budious]

I think there is something to the variable rate spring dampening theory and I may have partially validated it as well.

Since most of my previous results centered around a combined value of 10-11 as the optimal combination, I started my search there for with an absurd extreme of Damper Extension 1 F / 1 R and Damper Compression 10 F / 10 R and noticed decent lap times...

Then I continued to bump Rebound up, ran it 2/2 - better lap times, bump it again to 3/3 - better lap times, bump it to 4/4 - significant decrease... adjusted Bound down to 9/9 - improved lap times on par with DE 3/3 and DC 10/10. A combined value of 13 appears to be my threshold dampening value, let's test the inverse.

Flipped the settings so Rebound is 9/9 and Bound is 4/4 - lap times close to on par with Rebound 4/4 and Bound 9/9... but handling is just slightly different.

Theorized to an extent, if it is variable for length of the suspension movement, than a softer bound setting affects the tire contact patch more while a harder bound keeps the lower half of the spring firmer on the tire contact area. The rebound setting adjusts how firm the upper half of the spring compresses, setting it lower seems to allow more body roll while having it higher allows less. So under this new theory, you can adjust your car's body roll to tire contact patch ratio so long as you keep the combined value under the threshold of making the entire suspension travel too stiff...

Damper Rebound = Upper 50% Spring Damper (Bi-Directional) ???
Damper Bound = Lower 50% Spring Damper (Bi-Directional) ???

Measure any combination to find your threshold for a performance drop off then measure all combinations below that threshold but as close it as possible... how noticeable are the differences?

 

[oppositelock]

I definitely have to give you an A+++ with a gold star for effort, but to be totally honest I think you're waaaayyyyy over-analyzing this. In all my experimentation with dampers I've never seen anything to suggest that extension is inverted. Once, I was testing a setup with soft springs, soft (low numbers) compression and hard (high numbers) extension on the Nordschelife. In the replay I could visibly see the tires being "sucked up" into the wheel well and staying there when going over the curbs. Running high rebound values in general seems to result in noticeably more controlled body motion in my experience. Now, it's possible your system might work to some degree (haven't tried it yet), but I don't think it will be because of the reasons you think it does.

 

[BlacqueJacques]

Why stock settings races online are lots of fun - no math involved

Besides that, I try settings and if they work well enough, I'm done experimenting.

It's a game, not my occupation, or vocation; fun, not work

 

[GT5SER]

I've tried the total 10 and I have found that it works. Now, the question is. . . How do I find optimal spring rate?

- Jeramy

 

[powell145]

I definitely have to give you an A+++ with a gold star for effort, but to be totally honest I think you're waaaayyyyy over-analyzing this. In all my experimentation with dampers I've never seen anything to suggest that extension is inverted. Once, I was testing a setup with soft springs, soft (low numbers) compression and hard (high numbers) extension on the Nordschelife. In the replay I could visibly see the tires being "sucked up" into the wheel well and staying there when going over the curbs. Running high rebound values in general seems to result in noticeably more controlled body motion in my experience. Now, it's possible your system might work to some degree (haven't tried it yet), but I don't think it will be because of the reasons you think it does.

Well, I for one agree the settings for rebound are inverted.

Car handling shows this. Why is it in transistions, a lower rebound in the rear will cause a looser rear end - on every car I've tried so far (STi, 300ZX, Camaro Z28).

These cars pushes like crazy; and I have tried to compensate by maxing rebound; but it never seemed to help. Then, behold, tried lowering rebound for these cars to 2 or 3 setting and look at that - a looser rear end during transitions.

That equates to stiffer rebound in my book - even if body roll doesn't seem to match.

Can we all agree - something isn't right?????

 

[efoss28]

Softer rebound would allow for more weight transfer (ie a car that turns in better) Sounds like the settings are working like they should

 

[Scottster]

Well, I for one agree the settings for rebound are inverted.

Car handling shows this. Why is it in transistions, a lower rebound in the rear will cause a looser rear end - on every car I've tried so far (STi, 300ZX, Camaro Z28).

These cars pushes like crazy; and I have tried to compensate by maxing rebound; but it never seemed to help. Then, behold, tried lowering rebound for these cars to 2 or 3 setting and look at that - a looser rear end during transitions.

This statement gives validity to those whom believe the extension rates are not inverted.

A car that is loose coming out (corner exit oversteer) generally has too soft a setting on rear extension.

 

[Dands]

Modified again to help with the following examples I'm about to give below the chart:

Prerequisites

You need to find the optimal spring rates for the car that you want to test these settings on. To maximize benefits from an active suspension, tune it at neutral ride height.

• Spring rates optimized for combined weight and weight distribution of car at neutral ride height while dampers were in a neutral state. Rebound 4/4; Bound 4/4 or 5/5; 5/5 preferable.
• Anti-roll bars optimized once the above condition was met, then continue on below:

R+-----R+(-)---------------------B(+)----
-------------------------------------------- fast end of the suspension movement spectrum; for technical tracks with rough surfaces
10-------(1)------------------------1------|---five clicks above---
9--------(2)------------------------2------|---four clicks above---
8--------(3)------------------------3------|---three clicks above--
7--------(4)------------------------4------|---two clicks above---
6--------(5)------------------------5------|---one click above----
-------------------------------------------- demarcation of counter balance center
5--------(6)------------------------6------|----one click below----
4--------(7)------------------------7------|----two clicks below---
3--------(8)------------------------8------|----three clicks below---
2--------(9)------------------------9------|----four clicks below----
1--------(10)----------------------10------|---five clicks below----
-------------------------------------------- slow end of the suspension movement spectrum; for fast circuits with smooth surfaces

Preliminary Findings - The Six Rules of Suspension Dampening

Assuming R+ or R+(-) is constant and B+ is variable, than the following conditional statements can be measured. Assuming the tested condition (for as B+:R+(-) conditions are concerned) has been set for both dampers front and rear. Assuming you have properly tuned the spring rate and anti-roll bars at a neutral ride height (0/0; typically you may -5/-5 to +5/+5 for fine spring rate tuning) to realize maximum potentials of the following:

Due to the lack of track variety in GT5 it may be hard to measure the benefits of each condition, but each probably has a real world application on a test driving track.

1. if B+ > R+ than...
   • suspension compression is slower than extension rate, absorbing the least surface imperfections resulting in less grip but offering more speed
   • weight transfer occurs more quickly under this condition in comparison to the B+ <= R+ conditions, yet more slowly in comparison to the B+:R+(-) conditions; weight transfer is balanced by relative rate to compression on the opposing end; higher B+ places the weight transfer onto the wheel more quickly
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 7/7; Damper Compression (B+) 8/8
2. if B+ = R+ than...
   • suspension compression and extension rates are similarly matched so track surface is absorbed across minimal imperfections and a potential median for speed is reached
   • weight transfer occurs at a consistent rate from front to rear though at a delayed rate in comparison to the B+ > R+ condition and all of the B+:R+(-) conditions; weight transfer only faster than the B+ < R+ condition
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 7/7; Damper Compression (B+) 7/7
3. if B+ < R+ than...
   • suspension compression is faster than extension rate, absorbing the most surface imperfections to improve grip but sacrificing speed
   • weight transfer occurs most slowly under this condition compared to all others, but is partially counter balanced by lower B+ on the opposing end triggering a return weight shift sooner
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 7/7; Damper Compression (B+) 6/6
4. if B+ > R+(-) than...
   • suspension compression is slower than extension rate, absorbing the least surface imperfections resulting in less grip but offering more speed
   • weight transfer occurs most quickly under this condition than for all other conditions; but balanced in relative rate to compression on the opposing end with a higher B+; fastest weight transfer of the B+:R+(-) conditions
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 3/3; Damper Compression (B+) 9/9
5. if B+ = R+(-) than...
   • suspension compression and extension rates are similarly matched so track surface is absorbed across minimal imperfections and a potential median for speed and control is reached
   • weight transfer occurs more quickly under this condition than for the B+ < R+(-) condition and B+:R+ conditions; but balanced in relative rate to compression on the opposing end; equilibrium is achieved
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 3/3; Damper Compression (B+) 8/8
6. if B+ < R+(-) than...
   • suspension compression is faster than extension rate, absorbing the most surface imperfections resulting in more grip and control at the expense of speed
   • weight transfer occurs less quickly under this condition than for the B+ >= R+(-) conditions; but balanced in relative rate to compression on the opposing end, a lower B+ triggering an earlier weight shift
   • example: Damper Extension (R+) 3/3; Damper Compression (B+) 7/7

Example damper configurations should be read as:
R+
----------------------------------------------
--3--two clicks above counter balance---
--8--two clicks below counter balance---
----------------------------------------------
B+
----------------------------------------------
--3--two clicks above counter balance---
--8--two clicks below counter balance---
----------------------------------------------
R+ = R+(-) it is on the same line of the grid it appears. R+ is the setting applied in game.
----------------------------------------------

In essence, utilizing R+(-) theory is maximizing suspension performance by reaching equilibrium at 0; a combination of X clicks above counter balance line for R+, with X clicks below counter balance for B+.

R+(-) so far seems to work well for smoother circuits.
R+(+) is a counter theory for R+(-) but no, it's not the same as R+ in theory... though the numbers will be the same as R+ when applied.

Wrap-up:
"R-positive," or R+ is the way the numbers are represented for rebound on the game's suspension menu. Traditional application of R+ may result in well handling vehicles that could gain a little from a R+(-) or R+(+) conversion. There are probably applications and scenarios where R+ may still be preferred. R+ values on the grid represent the settings as they occur in the game, starting at 1 and descending to 10, because this is the spectrum of suspension movement speed from fastest to slowest.

"R-positive inverted," or R+(-) is the way the numbers are inverted on the grid to find their opposing value of equilibrium by finding a matching pair on the same line. R+(-) should be paired with B+ on the same line, ie. R+(-) 3 and B+ 8 are both two clicks below the counter balance line. R+(-) is the same as R+ in this sense of the notation, it's just the order in which it appears below or above the counter balance line. So the R+(-) number on the corresponding row as the B+ value is the R+ value to be used. R+(-) are shown in parenthesis on the grid - (3) is equivalent to a R+ value of 3 on far left column, but it will appear at it's correct orientation as an opposing counter balance force.

Special Rule for Technical Courses

• if B+ = R+ than...
  • results in a highly active suspension system the closer it is set to minimum extremes
  • suspension compression and extension rates are similarly matched so track surface is absorbed across maximum variations in track surface and a potential median for speed and control is reached; optimized approach that fairs particularly well for use with front suspension setups on technically challenging courses (ie. Deep Forest Raceway, Trial Mountain, Nurburgring)
  • weight transfer occurs more quickly under this condition than for any of the alternative conditions
  • can result in snap oversteer if set to the extreme (ie. R+ 1, B+ 1) or possibly lower depending on setup; adverse effects typically minimized by using a standard B+ = R+ theory to tune the rear at values closer to counter balance center

Applications for Theories

R+ for use with general purpose setups, ideally close to the counter balance center in the range of R+/B+ setting or handling may become erratic. This can provide stable lap times that are below peak optimization across a wide variety of courses. May be combined with R+(+) on the front suspension for optimal wheel tracking.

R+(-) for high speed racing where the circuits are considerably smooth and do not present too many inconsistencies in surface variation when making a lap. Use two values closer to the counter balance center within the R+/B+ range when on a high-speed circuit with more bumps than others, more extreme values may work for the smoothest of the circuits. This setup type appears to be dependent upon the front and rear suspension being given the same values front to back for best performance and handling.

R+(+) for technical courses can provide plusher suspension with greater wheel tracking through corners and small surface imperfections. Tested applications for theory include softening the front suspension on a FR vehicle for better wheel tracking at lower values, while using higher values at the rear drive wheels for a good mix of acceleration. Above a value of 5 on the R+(+) theory grid you start to cross the threshold into standard R+ theory. A mix of R+(+) on the front and R+ on the rear may be optimal.

Edit: helps if I get the direction of the chart right... *sigh*

AWESOME EFFORT!!! Much appreciated Budious.

 

[powell145]

This statement gives validity to those whom believe the extension rates are not inverted.

A car that is loose coming out (corner exit oversteer) generally has too soft a setting on rear extension.

I was speaking of corner entry oversteer, which would indicate greater weight transfer from the rear - equates to stiffer rear rebound when that is the only adjustment I made.

 

[Scottster]

I was speaking of corner entry oversteer, which would indicate greater weight transfer from the rear - equates to stiffer rear rebound when that is the only adjustment I made.

Corner entry Oversteer means, Rear shocks are too soft in rebound/extension. The looser the extension, the faster the weight transfers from that shock.

 

[powell145]

Corner entry Oversteer means, Rear shocks are too soft in rebound/extension. The looser the extension, the faster the weight transfers from that shock.

Confused, I could be wrong but want to understand where. Here is what I thought I knew.

Rear rebound acts similar to a rear sway; stiffer rear rebound, the more rear roll resistance.

With stiffer rebound:
You turn in - the firmer the extension resistance the more the inside rear resists this extension during turn-in and this weight is transfered to the outside front; improving front grip on transition.

This is the same theory that applies to a stiffer rear sway.

 

[Scottster]

I am gonna send you a PM, I dont want to hijack Budious' thread.

 

[budious]

This is as simplified as I can make the whole statement, I will explain after 2:59 PST in more detail... still working on that STi tune

Would it blow your mind to learn damper extension is fastest at 1 and slowest at 10 but not for the reasons people think? Basically, bound and rebound are being treated as two bi-directional dampers strapped on top of one another, both are at their lowest setting (thus fastest compression, and extension) when set to 1; both are at their lowest setting (thus slowest compression, and extension) when set to 10. Neither setting is uni-directional! Stacking an extension setting of 6 with a compression setting of 6 is the equivalent of a single damper (bi-directional) stack set to 12 out of a possible range from 2-20! Thus, the higher the lower you set the extension the faster you wheels will bound and rebound, or you can set the bound to lowest setting with a maximum extension and get nearly the same result. Test it for yourself, it's nuts.

Basically, the whole long post that looks so professional isn't completely accurate. What is accurate about it is that the test conditions for both inverted and standard damper extension proved true in some cases. How can both prove true, because the condition being tested for simply doesn't exist. Other factors were at play to produce positive results under both theories, the above paragraph summaries it nicely, but my previous chart can be adapted to the combined damper theory and it makes sense. IE., if you car's maximum combined damper benefit threshold is 13, then any damper combination with a total over 13 has a negative performance impact on your car, this is part of what validates inverse rebound dampening theory for all the wrong reasons. This happens because lowering the setting reduces your all over combined damper count, softening the overall compression, and quickening the overall extension of the spring again.

What PD has failed to do is provide you with real rebound and bound settings, what they have implemented is something that when values are put in for both variables can produce a noticeable effect on ride quality to fool you into thinking there is a complex damper system at work, it's all a lie! Shame on you Kaz, Real Driving Simulator my ass! What you have in effect in only a variable rate damper that can have independent dampening settings that effect both directions of travel, the effects of each has a stacked effect, so really what you should be looking at in the suspension setting menu would be a single damper setting variable for front and back with a range of 2-20!

 

[Z1-AV69]

@budious: The effects of a stiffer rebound than compression are quite present in the game. Making rebound 1 tick stiffer than compression will give you understeer on the brake and oversteer on throttle, as I would expect. So I think those two settings do what they say.