Suspension Glitch

[B80]

Your argument is you don't think the ride height is realistic (I agree), but that you're unwilling to simply adjust the restrictor down is indeed stubborn. I use his tunes all the time, I don't like the ride height either, so I dial it down to something more appropriate and adjust the restrictor as needed. I don't typically like the downforce values either, so those also get changed. But that's true of nearly every tune I have gleaned from any tuner here. Ride height and/or rake, downforce applied and the usage of ECU vs. Restrictor (I swear there's some secret code that I simply am not aware of that mandates ECU reduction first and foremost). But when it comes to more specific suspension, LSD or gearing, I'm at the mercy of what tunes are available.

If you want to critique a guy for putting a lot of free work in for the community, that's fine I guess. But to vilify him for others placing him on a pedestal, whether deserved or not, is no fault of his own.

It sounds like your real problem is with PD's methodology for calculating PP, which if you would bother to read anything he says, you would know that he is probably the single, biggest advocate for change in that regard.

Yes, I can recall Praiano mentioning how he doesn;t like the way adjustments count towards pp, rather than just parts. He's trying to make cars perform as good as possible within the games parameters.

As for ECU/Restrictor, iirc, something to do with how restrictor effects torque more...

Do you tend to set ride height at something like original car value, or nearer the default of the customer suspension thats install... which tends to be lower. I'm clueless with tuning tbh, but do like seeing car being lower, more sporty/aggressive (well, or simply realistic) and happy to take hit elsewhere so I can enjoy replays more.

 

[RacingFan1]

In other words, you shouldn't be able to raise your front suspension to Max Height in order to gain 100PP...to stay at a certain PP.

PP are performance points, if the car performs/handles a lot worse due to a bizarre suspension setting, then the car loses PP, simple
And raising front suspension to max height, without changing anything else, is indeed a bizarre thing that usually makes the car handle like crap

 

[Samus]

Buyperformance points, if the car performs/handles a lot worse due to a bizarre suspension setting, then the car loses PP, simple
And raising front suspension to max height, without changing anything else, is indeed a bizarre thing that usually makes the car handle like crap

Which is the whole problem. It doesn't. Cars handle fine.

 

[Live25]

As for ECU/Restrictor, iirc, something to do with how restrictor effects torque more...

Do you tend to set ride height at something like original car value, or nearer the default of the customer suspension thats install... which tends to be lower. I'm clueless with tuning tbh, but do like seeing car being lower, more sporty/aggressive (well, or simply realistic) and happy to take hit elsewhere so I can enjoy replays more.

Hmmm, all I know is that 'on paper' ECU reduction appears to drastically impact performance, whereas the Restrictor just does what it says. I swear I'd tested this, but given the fact that I don't recall, maybe its time to do so again.

I like the ride height in the front to be +5-10 from the minimum with the rear even-+15 from the front. My tendency is to squeeze the best possible values (1/4 time and G forces) within my self-prescribed limitations.

Personally, I have never noticed the ride height values impacting anything else in the suspension settings. It appears to me that each variable operates independently from the others, more PD logic I suppose.

 

[BangsMcCoy]

Hmmm, all I know is that 'on paper' ECU reduction appears to drastically impact performance, whereas the Restrictor just does what it says. I swear I'd tested this, but given the fact that I don't recall, maybe its time to do so again.

I like the ride height in the front to be +5-10 from the minimum with the rear even-+15 from the front. My tendency is to squeeze the best possible values (1/4 time and G forces) within my self-prescribed limitations.

Personally, I have never noticed the ride height values impacting anything else in the suspension settings. It appears to me that each variable operates independently from the others, more PD logic I suppose.

For most cars I’ve compared the use of the 2 I’ve noticed it’s beneficial to use the Power Restrictor instead of the ECU to reduce HP because you maintain more torque and better acceleration specs for the same amount of PP gained by lowering HP. There was one car, I can’t remember which, but it was a Gr.3 or Gr.2 that they both were completely identical results on the spec sheet. I recommend trying each to see which you can squeeze the most power out of per PP.

 

[Trendkiller91]

Thanks @TumeK5 I found the video. Video is from last week's Daily. The vehicles in the first four places are great examples, with the Lancia being the best.

Front ride height is set at max height and rear to max low which brings the PP Index waaaayyyyyy down. Ballast is set to full and placed at best spot to stabilize vehicle. CPU/Power Restricter can then be put back back up for up to +100HP versus if you just set your suspension to the norm Low ride height with a minimal +/- difference.

Does this help anyone see how this is a cheat (and looks like crap)?

Thanks @TumeK5 I found the video. Video is from last week's Daily. The vehicles in the first four places are great examples, with the Lancia being the best.

Front ride height is set at max height and rear to max low which brings the PP Index waaaayyyyyy down. Ballast is set to full and placed at best spot to stabilize vehicle. CPU/Power Restricter can then be put back back up for up to +100HP versus if you just set your suspension to the norm Low ride height with a minimal +/- difference.

Does this help anyone see how this is a cheat (and looks like crap)?

That guy in the red truck was such a douche bag. I bet he gets his ass kicked daily IRL

 

[MARsSPEED1]

saw that Race A (allegedly) will be 500pp RH tuning next week, thought I’d fiddle around to see what is quickest… hopefully they eliminate the suspension or else it’ll be another waste of a race slot. It’s not even worth testing cars at the flat 500pp knowing that any marginal choice can just be squatted down to fit… and any “how a normal car works” tune is half the HP. Cool stuff

You hit the nail on the head! Any tuned daily race or time trial is completely ruined until the glitch is fixed. Nobody will be able to compete unless you use the same glitch. It’s dumb.

Only way to fix this; the racing suspension counts as a certain PP increase, but adjustments do not affect the PP there after. It would be all on the tuner. This is how the Forza system worked, and I can’t remember any problems with it except a transmission glitch. It also made good tuners much more valuable.

I do actually like the power restrictor and CPU though! That idea should stay in place to put vehicles at certain PI’s. As for the ballast, that is just weight vs. horsepower and some handling but nothing near what the raised suspension does.

FYI, the raised suspension affects most cars under 800pp. Try it yourself when you get a chance. Raise the front to max height, rear to max low, calculate the PP difference. I saw up to 80pp difference and was able to add over 100hp in my 700pp cars. Had about a 3 second difference in tracks that were around 2 minute lap times and I am Captain Slow. In PP600, i had almost a 4 second difference!!!

If some of you think this is realistic, please stop sucking on the exhaust pipe. It’s not. I challenge those of you who do disagree to be within 1 second in the top 10 next week on a REAL tune.

 

[Samus]

Only way to fix this

Surely that is to fix the physics so these cars handle as badly as they should do.

 

[Meythia]

Hmmm, all I know is that 'on paper' ECU reduction appears to drastically impact performance, whereas the Restrictor just does what it says. I swear I'd tested this, but given the fact that I don't recall, maybe its time to do so again.

Both changes depend on each car. Sometimes changing ECU provides more beneficial sideeffects, sometimes this is the case for power restrictor.
Just to say the PP system is broken in its core and doesnt work as obvious as it should, there is so much room to fiddle around that even sometimes really strange things happen like
pp 600 ride height 100/100
pp 605 ride height 100/101
pp 595 ride height 101/101
pp 600 ride height 101/102

 

[RacingFan1]

Which is the whole problem. It doesn't. Cars handle fine.

??
Not true...
Usually cars handle really badly if you do that. In most cases they got horrible understeer. Or even if in some case they handle ok, they go quite a bit slower. Try yourself doing laptimes with normal front ride height and then max front ride height (without any other change), see the difference

 

[permaculture]

Surely that is to fix the physics so these cars handle as badly as they should do.

exactly, forget about PP… adding 50 pounds to a 3000 pound car has a bigger impact on its handling than the front being twice as high as the rear. I am not a car scientist but that seems wrong.

 

[Samus]

??
Not true...
Usually cars handle really badly if you do that. In most cases they got horrible understeer. Or even if in some case they handle ok, they go quite a bit slower.

Well clearly that isn't correct is it, or this thread wouldn't exist. People are doing this, adding power with the extra PP and easily beating anyone who isn't doing this to their car.

Every car with the front jacked up and the rear flattened should drive like garbage. Clearly that isn't the case currently or again, this topic wouldn't exist.

FYI, the raised suspension affects most cars under 800pp. Try it yourself when you get a chance. Raise the front to max height, rear to max low, calculate the PP difference. I saw up to 80pp difference and was able to add over 100hp in my 700pp cars. Had about a 3 second difference in tracks that were around 2 minute lap times and I am Captain Slow. In PP600, i had almost a 4 second difference!!!

 

[Veinz]

Tires and tuning settings should not affect PP. It’s a mess because of this.

 

[Live25]

Both changes depend on each car. Sometimes changing ECU provides more beneficial sideeffects, sometimes this is the case for power restrictor.
Just to say the PP system is broken in its core and doesnt work as obvious as it should, there is so much room to fiddle around that even sometimes really strange things happen like
pp 600 ride height 100/100
pp 605 ride height 100/101
pp 595 ride height 101/101
pp 600 ride height 101/102

I have noticed that with downforce and ballast changes as well. A change of just 1 can wildly swing the PP value, but a change of 2 will alter the PP more in line with what you'd expect.

Tires and tuning settings should not affect PP. It’s a mess because of this.

If this is supposed to be a simulator, they absolutely should. It's not that PD applies PP shifts to these adjustments, that is realistic. Unfortunately, it's HOW they apply the PP shifts. Most of the time it appears to be on a constant slope, not a bell curve or even a parabolic arc, both of which are much more accurate representations of reality.

 

[RacingFan1]

Well clearly that isn't correct is it, or this thread wouldn't exist. People are doing this, adding power with the extra PP and easily beating anyone who isn't doing this to their car.

Every car with the front jacked up and the rear flattened should drive like garbage. Clearly that isn't the case currently or again, this topic wouldn't exist.

Well if you are racing in Route X then it is a benefit, but if you race on twisty tracks, I dont think its an advantage to have more power in exchange for worse handling.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

Well clearly that isn't correct is it, or this thread wouldn't exist. People are doing this, adding power with the extra PP and easily beating anyone who isn't doing this to their car.

Every car with the front jacked up and the rear flattened should drive like garbage. Clearly that isn't the case currently or again, this topic wouldn't exist.

Wait.
So does raising the front end and lowering the rear end 'improve' the performance of the car or not?

It seems you can't make your mind up.

 

[Samus]

Well if you are racing in Route X then it is a benefit, but if you race on twisty tracks, I dont think its an advantage to have more power in exchange for worse handling.

Maybe try it yourself or read what people are saying here instead of just guessing. The race is on Laguna Seca, not Route X, and these cars are dominating.

Wait.
So does raising the front end and lowering the rear end 'improve' the performance of the car or not?

It seems you can't make your mind up.

Improve it, no. Not negatively affect it as much as it should? Yes.

People are doing this adjustment, which lowers the PP, then adding that PP back by adding more power or other performance upgrades. Result is a car that is still 700PP or whatever, but now considerably faster than a normal riding, lower power version also at 700PP.

PP going down when people do this is correct, it SHOULD lower your performance. It doesn't, not enough to compensate the extra additions you can make with the extra PP anyway.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

Improve it, no. Not negatively affect it as much as it should? Yes.

So I'll assume you agree the performance of the car does indeed actually decrease, as does the PP.
Which seems perfectly reasonable. Yes?

Your quote:
"The problem here is the physics system, not the PP per se. These cars should handle very badly, but they don't in GT world. PP going down is correct, really. The performance not actually going down as it should is the issue."

By which metric you have concluded that the drop in performance, or lack there of, 'via the physics system' due to those specific suspension adjustments, doesn't even warrant questioning.

 

[RacingFan1]

Maybe try it yourself or read what people are saying here instead of just guessing. The race is on Laguna Seca, not Route X, and these cars are dominating.

Quick 5 lap race without tire wear. With tire wear on, those cars with weird setups would go backwards quickly

 

[Samus]

So I'll assume you agree the performance of the car does indeed actually decrease, as does the PP.
Which seems perfectly reasonable. Yes?

Your quote:
"The problem here is the physics system, not the PP per se. These cars should handle very badly, but they don't in GT world. PP going down is correct, really. The performance not actually going down as it should is the issue."

By which metric you have concluded that the drop in performance, or lack there of, 'via the physics system' due to those specific suspension adjustments, doesn't even warrant questioning.

I have no idea what you're saying. What doesn't warrant questioning?

The performance of the car doesn't fall enough to match the fall in PP, and doesn't handle as badly as it should. That's the simple crux of the issue.

Quick 5 lap race without tire wear. With tire wear on, those cars with weird setups would go backwards quickly

You're guessing again.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

I have no idea what you're saying. What doesn't warrant questioning?

You have no idea what I'm saying?

Raise the front end ride height, lower the rear end ride height, the PP goes down and the car handles like a bag of wet sand.
What exactly is the 'physics' issue with that?

"These cars should handle very badly, but they don't in GT world"
Ummm, yes. They do.

 

[Meythia]

Quick 5 lap race without tire wear. With tire wear on, those cars with weird setups would go backwards quickly

Took a car of around 600 PP pretty much stock on Tokyo WTC 600, time ~27.20
Custom Suspenspion front high rear low, full ballast fron and rear springs on hardest setting -> 570 PP, time ~ 27.40 but it actually was handling better
add power worth of 30 PP, again time ~27.20 but it was nicer to drive.

This will be different for a lot of cars and with even more tinkering around you can make cars faster this way.

This game is bad in regards to its physics when you make borderline stupid things, always has been.

"These cars should handle very badly, but they don't in GT world"

If you stop at just raising the front and not making any other changes, yes, most cars will be bad to drive, but why stop there and not messing around with the setup even more? Because magically the car gets faster without sacrificing handling.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

Took a car of around 600 PP pretty much stock on Tokyo WTC 600, time ~27.20
Custom Suspenspion front high rear low, full ballast fron and rear springs on hardest setting -> 570 PP, time ~ 27.40 but it actually was handling better
add power worth of 30 PP, again time ~27.20 but it was nicer to drive.

This will be different for a lot of cars and with even more tinkering around you can make cars faster this way.

This game is bad in regards to its physics when you make borderline stupid things, always has been.

If you stop at just raising the front and not making any other changes, yes, most cars will be bad to drive, but why stop there and not messing around with the setup even more? Because magically the car gets faster without sacrificing handling.

Why did you put full ballast to the front and set rear springs to hardest?

Edit
I noticed your edit.
That's not my quote. It's by someone else.

 

[Meythia]

Why did you put full ballast to the front and set rear springs to hardest?

I have to assume you know the answer, but if you dont know it: just read what this topic is about, it is already all said there.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

I have to assume you know the answer, but if you dont know it: just read what this topic is about, it is already all said there.

Of course I know the answer.
It's to help negate the suspension adjustments and to help stop the car handling like a bag of wet sand.

Which was my entire counter-point.

 

[Samus]

You have no idea what I'm saying?

Raise the front end ride height, lower the rear end ride height, the PP goes down and the car handles like a bag of wet sand.
What exactly is the 'physics' issue with that?

That it's not true?

FYI, the raised suspension affects most cars under 800pp. Try it yourself when you get a chance. Raise the front to max height, rear to max low, calculate the PP difference. I saw up to 80pp difference and was able to add over 100hp in my 700pp cars. Had about a 3 second difference in tracks that were around 2 minute lap times and I am Captain Slow. In PP600, i had almost a 4 second difference!!!

He went 3-4 seconds a lap faster with the gimped setup and extra power.

"These cars should handle very badly, but they don't in GT world"
Ummm, yes. They do.

Clearly not enough. A car "handling like a bag of wet sand" should still do so if you add a bit more power and tweak some other things. But as per above, it's not the case. People are going much faster in cars with these settings.

Of course I know the answer.
It's to help negate the suspension adjustments and to help stop the car handling like a bag of wet sand.

Which was my entire counter-point.

Which is what? No amount of adjusting other things would negate the messed up ride height in the real world. So again, it's still a physics issue.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

That it's not true?

He went 3-4 seconds a lap faster with the gimped setup and extra power.

Clearly not enough. A car "handling like a bag of wet sand" should still do so if you add a bit more power and tweak some other things. But as per above, it's not the case. People are going much faster in cars with these settings.

You have an issue.

This: ""These cars should handle very badly, but they don't in GT world"" is just flat out wrong.
Deal with it.

 

[MARsSPEED1]

My goodness…

You need to look no further than the Daily a week ago. The top 10 times all used the jacked setup at LAGUNA SECA!!! Those laps were 2 to 3 seconds faster than very skilled players. Please watch below. Only takes two minutes of your time.

 

[FPV MIC]

My goodness…

You need to look no further than the Daily a week ago. The top 10 times all used the jacked setup at LAGUNA SECA!!! Those laps were 2 to 3 seconds faster than very skilled players. Please watch below. Only takes two minutes of your time.

There's certainly some in the top 10 using it but it doesn't look to be all as you claim, and there's not 2 to 3 seconds difference that's for sure. I see @Mistah_MCA was in the top 10, if you don't mind me asking were you using this weird set-up or a more traditional one?

Edit: Whosever video it is actually does a really poor job of pointing out cars that do have the high front ride height as most of the ones he shows don't have it.

 

[MARsSPEED1]

This video was made only a few days in. By the end of the week, it was all Altaza’s with jacked suspension.

I just don’t understand why people want to argue against it? Any single person can go tale one of your 600 or 700 cars, jack the suspension and see how much your PP goes down and how HP you can gain.

Do you see any GR cars running this setup???