T

[GhostZ]

You can get suspension travel and center of mass by physically measuring the effects of body roll on a given set of suspension that you know, from GT5's replay videos.

@Driftmonkey: of course I need your tune first. Did you read my posts?

 

[BLJK Ice]

I'm reading part 1 right now and i can say that these are really helpful but didn't the patch messed up older drift system like the suspension and things like that

And i can't imagine how you can drift with a 240z i mean the power is too low. I love the 240z from Wangan Midnight and the game they should've made the 240z as strong as the 300zx (old one not sure if called 300 zx) the 300zx has 500+hp unfair

 

[DriftEmotion FC]

Guys? this is pointless except for a few things that i can understand like the debating but lets be real. If you dont believe they work, try them out if you dont want to why bash him on his tunes maybe they do work. you know dont knock it till you try it plus even if it dosent we all have our own style and our own way of tuning so when or IF it does not work for you, maybe it will or maybe it wont anyway if it dosent say that seems like a good tune but its not for me thanks, and if it does tell him these are good tunes its as simply as that but i do agree with some of the stuff as in people saying that "you have no proof" but like i said try it, in fact im going to send him a tune tomarrow and see what he can come up with

 

[Drift_Monkey]

Guys? this is pointless except for a few things that i can understand like the debating but lets be real. If you dont believe they work, try them out if you dont want to why bash him on his tunes maybe they do work. you know dont knock it till you try it plus even if it dosent we all have our own style and our own way of tuning so when or IF it does not work for you, maybe it will or maybe it wont anyway if it dosent say that seems like a good tune but its not for me thanks, and if it does tell him these are good tunes its as simply as that but i do agree with some of the stuff as in people saying that "you have no proof" but like i said try it, in fact im going to send him a tune tomarrow and see what he can come up with

Caleb you don't get the point. It may work for some and it may not work for others but the fact of the matter is that the formula is wrong.
Math is either right or wrong.

You can get suspension travel and center of mass by physically measuring the effects of body roll on a given set of suspension that you know, from GT5's replay videos.

So what you just said is that you watch replays and they give you numbers on suspension travel and center of mass? But, you said you don't use trial and error :S

 

[GhostZ]

Measurement is not trial and error.

And the Z has plenty of power. It has 250ish ft/lbs of torque at max, and barely at weight over the rear wheels. It drifts beautifully with the right transmission settings. Think of it this way: It's like having a 500 ft/lb car with a 50/50 weight distribution with 1200kg. Interestingly enough, that's very close to a lot of drift cars, such as the Z34. That is why I picked this car, it is unique, but fast, reliable, and in the proper ratios. It's not identical, but it is definitely not "impossible".

As for people giving me tunes...

I do things judiciously. I'm not going to tune everyone's car for the hell of it.

 

[Megamarcx84]

You can get suspension travel and center of mass by physically measuring the effects of body roll on a given set of suspension that you know, from GT5's replay videos.

1st: I'm not a hater, but definitely am a doubter of this system you've come up with; seems that any success is perception based: a placebo effect if you will. But I am genuinely curious as to how you "physically measure the effects of body roll" in order to determine suspension travel and center of mass, via GT5 replays no less..I mean even if you had archives of chassis information that outline the suspension geometry and centres of mass of a given vehicle in its stock form(which is definitely possible), your formulas would only possibly approximately work with vehicles that are totally unmodified(of course there's driver and fuel weight to consider as well), so for those of us that actually modify the suspension of our vehicle, or engage in weight reduction, even if we were believers of your tuning philosophy, there are too many unknown variables for it to be advantageous in any way.

2nd: The anonymity, the passive aggressive comments about teams actions and/or under utilization of drifting techniques; please do not take this as any judgement on you or your character but this thread smacks of trolly, elitist snobbery, and not the mysterious aloof informant vibe it seems you were going for. Face some facts, there are too many unknown variables for this to be an accurate tuning method, thus making it an opinion. The blessing(and in some ways curse) of this great nation (and somehow by proxy, the internet) is that everyone is entitled to their opinion, especially when it comes to other's opinions...

3rd: this entire thread has made me realize how much I miss LFS' garage tuning. Even with the limited tuning parameters that GT5 offers, a realtime depiction of suspension geometry, as well as a drop function to show the compression and rebound characteristics of said suspension along with real world values would make this game soooo much better, and give your method sooo much more legitimacy.

Here's hoping Kaz gets the memo and comes thru in the next GT5 patch, or gives us something to look forward to in GT6. Cause ill be quite honest, GhostZ, despite the aforementioned criticisms of your method, I think given a few more definite values, you really are on to something good here.

 

[Drift_Monkey]

Measurement is not trial and error.

And the Z has plenty of power. It has 250ish ft/lbs of torque at max, and barely at weight over the rear wheels. It drifts beautifully with the right transmission settings. Think of it this way: It's like having a 500 ft/lb car with a 50/50 weight distribution with 1200kg. Interestingly enough, that's very close to a lot of drift cars, such as the Z34. That is why I picked this car, it is unique, but fast, reliable, and in the proper ratios. It's not identical, but it is definitely not "impossible".

As for people giving me tunes...

I do things judiciously. I'm not going to tune everyone's car for the hell of it.

but it's not measurement if no numbers are shown on screen... it's a guess.

 

[DriftEmotion FC]

I see your point DM lol i cant really say anything else you got me beat but I would like to share tunes you may not be intesested but my way is, i see you tunes and if i like what i see i put that in my head for further development to mine. I like to pick peoples brains

 

[Scaff]

You can get suspension travel and center of mass by physically measuring the effects of body roll on a given set of suspension that you know, from GT5's replay videos.

Ok lets deal with these one at a time.

Suspension travel: By measuring from the GT5 replay you are not going to get anything close to an accurate enough measure to carry out the calculations you are describing without having a significant margin of error. On top of that it only gives you a limited view of the suspension travel and certainly not the full range of travel from full compression to full expansion.

Center of Gravity:I'm sorry but you can not calculate CoG (or mass) from body roll, that's a rather fundamental error, that even a basic understanding of vehicle dynamics shows.

Body roll is a product of load transfer but you can't use the degree of roll to determine load transfer (and therefore reverse engineer the CoG. You could replace the suspension on a car with steel rods and load transfer would still occur, yet you would not see any visible body roll at all. How exactly would you then use that to calculate the CoG?

So how is the CoG calculated?

Let's take a look:

Finding the center of gravity height can be done in several ways, none of which are accomplished very easily and without some work. Presented here is the easiest method. The center of gravity height is calculated by weighing the car when level and then raising the car at least 10 inches at the rear and weighing the front again.

Source - http://www.longacreracing.com/articles/art.asp?ARTID=22

And the values required are:

• WB - Wheelbase (inches)
• TW - Total weight
• FW1 - Front weight LEVEL
• FW2 - Front weight RAISED
• FWc - FW2 - FW1 (change in weights)
• HT - Height raised (inches)
• CLF - Left Front tire circumference
• CRF - Right Front tire circumference
• C - (CLF + CRF) / 2 (average circumference)
• r - Axle Height

Now keep in mind that's one of the easier ways of calculating a car's CoG and I think you will understand why I find it very, very doubtful you are able to calculate it from a GT5 replay.

Measurement is not trial and error.

No its not, but if those measurements are inaccurate and/or from flawed calculations then they are of no more use than trial and error.

And the Z has plenty of power. It has 250ish ft/lbs of torque at max, and barely at weight over the rear wheels. It drifts beautifully with the right transmission settings. Think of it this way: It's like having a 500 ft/lb car with a 50/50 weight distribution with 1200kg. Interestingly enough, that's very close to a lot of drift cars, such as the Z34. That is why I picked this car, it is unique, but fast, reliable, and in the proper ratios. It's not identical, but it is definitely not "impossible".

And how much does it have at teh driver wheels?

I've pointed out that its not 250ish, but you seem to have not bothered to address that (or a number of the other points I queried.

That aside, given you are clearly not going to be able to accurately calculate the CoG with the method you have described (not even remotely) it kind of throws the rest of what you calculate out the window.

 

[funkthehype]

 

[GhostZ]

@Scaff:

Criticism #1: You cannot calculate center of mass perfectly

A perfect understanding of exactly where the Center of Mass is impossible.

However, an approximation given what the game tells us, comparative to the tunes of previous cars, gives a number that a tune should tend toward. To be completely honest, if my approximation of the center of mass was, say, 30% of the total height off from the real value, that translates to a minor adjustment in spring rates. If you adjust the spring rates (but keep them in the same F/R ratio) to be tighter or loser depending on track conditions, by the end that 30% height difference (again, extremely generous error) is negligible.

For comparative tuning (one car in relation to another) the actual value itself is not important at all for comparative tuning, I need to only know the center of mass's relationship to the cornering G forces. As long as I am consistent, If I want to make a car handle like another car, it's about relationships, not perfect values. I need to know that if I change one variable, such as weight, how will it affect handling with everything else staying constant? However, I feel like my approximation for center of mass is not only close enough for my purposes, but probably too much so.

I've explained before, there is not a perfect tune for all scenarios, if you define perfect as "always at the fastest speed and highest angle" because each corner is very different depending on the track and situation. My goal here, as I've stated many times, is to use formulas to tune one car to handle like another car, given their similar statistics. Then, I wish to remove the long and inefficient trial and error phase of tuning so that I can provide quick and easy tunes that show good results on a variety of tracks with more consistency than trial and error. This is very different from what you are accusing me of doing, and it's rather like a witch hunt. I was asked how I do what I do, I responded honestly.

Criticism #2: It is impossible to tell what kind of suspension GT5 uses:

I assume that GT5's race suspension is typical double wishbone coilover suspension, for cars that had IRS stock. The minor idiosyncrasies between that and other forms of IRS are negligible (though would be important if we had a more perfect model to begin with) what I am primarily concerned with is load transfer. Yes, having IRS vs Non IRS makes a difference, but I can compensate for that without using formulas, because I have yet (or there isn't) found a formula for that. It's a low priority in terms of approaching my goal, as there are other areas that would give better results for the same effort of improvement. It is a lost cause, and therefore a very invalid criticism. You can't, within reason, accuse me of not calculating what couldn't be calculated, in this scenario, (and I think you would agree on that) especially if it has minor impact on achieving my goals with this sheet.

And for double wishbone coilover suspension, BTW, camber change is proportional to body roll. As springs get loose, camber rises by the same factor, and vise-versa, to achieve a same contact patch angle at max cornering.

Criticism #3: You can't calculate load transfer with (list of variables).

And yet, each corner is relatively the same as other corners. If we know that load transfer and center of gravity are related, and that is related to body roll, if we use the limited variables to come up with a relation between them for what GT gives us (and you can calculate load transfer from lateral g forces, using total weight, track width and center of gravity height, just like the previous criticisms, those values you give calculates it without G forces, but should arrive at the same amount) I can calculate center of mass height with a neutral body, and since GT gives its body lowering in mm (in fact, none of this would be possible if it didn't give real numbers) then I can simple subtract the amount from the total height. That is the advantage of using G forces to calculate it. Yes, these four values are simple but a very valid formula. The only difficulty is in producing load transfer numbers without knowing what a real car corners with in forces, as lateral G is very complex. Thankfully, we don't have to do that.


Oh, and for the hell of it, sources:
http://www.rowleyrace.com/PDF/Chapter_14_Excerpt.pdf
http://www.neohio-scca.org/comp_clinic/hand_out_reprints/LoadTransfer reduced 2.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weight_transfer#Load_transfer (while it doesn't have a formula, a section gives the variables and explains their relation)
http://www.mnautox.com/forums/showthread.php?15693-Load-Transfer-Calculation
http://www.scribd.com/doc/86188493/3/WEIGHT-MASS-LOAD-AND-LOAD-TRANSFER

My favorite source is the last one, written by a professional race car driver, who worked on both the GT40 program and Ferrari F1 team. Read up.

Criticism #4: 240ZG doesn't have that much torque.

The 240ZG has around that much ft/lbs of torque at full tune, as it should given real life examples of these engines. If you dispute that, go play the game. Just like any car, it can be geared properly to produce a wide range of rear wheel torque numbers. Because I have that torque over a nearly 3000RPM range spectrum, I can run gearing that gives a torque-to-weight (which correlates with grip)-ratio of the rear wheels of 5.5 in 3rd gear, that's nearly 2000 ft/lbs of torque before the wheels (but after final and transmission gears). To achieve that with similar gearing, my Nismo Z tune needs nearly 450 Ft/lbs. The Nismo needs even more, since it has higher diameter tires as well.

You can't really make an argument against the realism either. Rebello Racing Engines produce about the same (maybe a little higher) numbers on their N/A L24/26/28 engines. Turbo L28s have reached upwards of 400-500 HP, and yes, the engine in Wangan Midnight was a twin turbo. Even more interesting is the layout of the engine, which is nearly identical to the RB26DETT. No one complains when that engine gets over 700 HP, yet, it has the same cylinder position, block size, piston size and configuration, which is why I've even seen engines where they Frankenstein an L28 crankcase and block to an RB26 twin-cam head. The difference is the bolt pattern, and the material strength and composition. If anything, these underestimations of the 240Z is almost exactly why I drift with it.

Additional comments:

The distinction is that I am trying to maximize use of the values given by GT, to approach a better drift setting, reduce time in tuning, and make cars immediately more comfortable for my style. This is opposed to simply ignoring that method and doing it by feel. To dismiss this attempt as valid is to dismiss the accuracy of mathematics in the Gran Turismo games. It is impossible to completely model GT5's physics with the information we get, but it is also impossible to ignore the data entirely. So long as it continues to produce results, I will use it. I have tried to alter my formula-given tunes. I have spent hours practicing unusual tunes and cars just so that I can discover things that the formula doesn't express, but needs to (or can't) trust me when I say that I have seen consistent, good results. With that, I am content.

You need to focus on the quality, not the quantity of your criticisms if you want to make a public display.

@Megamarc: I would also like to note that you are correct in saying this tuning method is based on opinion. I have spent lots of time researching and getting as factual of an analysis of this method as possible, and I think it works for me, but I have not (and will not) recommend this for anyone else, and I do not believe that everyone should use it. You could argue that trying to use formulas to tune a car takes the excitement and fun out of the game, and I wholly respect that and would not want to force that on anyone. But so long as people keep asking me reasonable questions, and making reasonable claims, about it, then I will respond reasonably.

I am entertaining this discussion on the basis that it can bring new knowledge or insights to the thread, not to prove myself or my method. Those two goals are similar, but the difference is that if, after I've presented evidence and explained what I am doing on my own, other drifters continue to post in here with repeated criticisms (founded or not) then there is little I can do, or want to do, about it. Put simply, if you are too concerned about 'proving me wrong' or 'cutting down my elitism' to have a legitimate discussion about this method, then stop posting, because its only going to get the thread closed.

 

[SPANK]

Why is this still in drift "teams" & "meets" sub-forum? This has nothing so far to do with either of those?

 

[Scaff]

@Scaff:

Criticism #1: You cannot calculate center of mass perfectly

A perfect understanding of exactly where the Center of Mass is impossible.

However, an approximation given what the game tells us, comparative to the tunes of previous cars, gives a number that a tune should tend toward. To be completely honest, if my approximation of the center of mass was, say, 30% of the total height off from the real value, that translates to a minor adjustment in spring rates. If you adjust the spring rates (but keep them in the same F/R ratio) to be tighter or loser depending on track conditions, by the end that 30% height difference (again, extremely generous error) is negligible.

GT5 does not give you enough information on even an approximation of the CoG, you are guessing at its location (particularlry across three plains).

If you are (and its an assumption) 30% out then you may as well be simply guessing at the basic set-up, or doing it simply by gut feeling for base values, as its going to end up being little different.

For comparative tuning (one car in relation to another) the actual value itself is not important at all for comparative tuning, I need to only know the center of mass's relationship to the cornering G forces. As long as I am consistent, If I want to make a car handle like another car, it's about relationships, not perfect values. I need to know that if I change one variable, such as weight, how will it affect handling with everything else staying constant? However, I feel like my approximation for center of mass is not only close enough for my purposes, but probably too much so.

I've explained before, there is not a perfect tune for all scenarios, if you define perfect as "always at the fastest speed and highest angle" because each corner is very different depending on the track and situation. My goal here, as I've stated many times, is to use formulas to tune one car to handle like another car, given their similar statistics. Then, I wish to remove the long and inefficient trial and error phase of tuning so that I can provide quick and easy tunes that show good results on a variety of tracks with more consistency than trial and error. This is very different from what you are accusing me of doing, and it's rather like a witch hunt. I was asked how I do what I do, I responded honestly.

I'm not questioning the purpose of your approach, I simply wish to discuss how you approach tuning, something that you have been oddly unwilling to discuss in detail.

Criticism #2: It is impossible to tell what kind of suspension GT5 uses:

I assume that GT5's race suspension is typical double wishbone coilover suspension, for cars that had IRS stock. The minor idiosyncrasies between that and other forms of IRS are negligible (though would be important if we had a more perfect model to begin with) what I am primarily concerned with is load transfer. Yes, having IRS vs Non IRS makes a difference, but I can compensate for that without using formulas, because I have yet (or there isn't) found a formula for that. It's a low priority in terms of approaching my goal, as there are other areas that would give better results for the same effort of improvement. It is a lost cause, and therefore a very invalid criticism. You can't, within reason, accuse me of not calculating what couldn't be calculated, in this scenario, (and I think you would agree on that) especially if it has minor impact on achieving my goals with this sheet.

And for double wishbone coilover suspension, BTW, camber change is proportional to body roll. As springs get loose, camber rises by the same factor, and vise-versa, to achieve a same contact patch angle at max cornering.

All of which are assumptions, add in this set of assumptions with the assumptions you have made with regard to CoG and I find it quite strange that you are surprised that people think this possibly smoke and mirrors.

Please keep in mind that you have made some very specific claims as to exactly what values you say your spreadsheet provides you with, yet you are unwilling to share this information.

Are you honestly surprised that other members have doubts about the accuracy of the information you say it provides.

In regard to the part in bold. I'm glad you agree on that as a large amount of what you claim to be able to output can't be calculated with the information you have at hand. You say that differing types of suspension will make little difference to your figures and to be honest I disagree, its going to have a major impact on the roll centre and that will have an effect on a number of the values yo say are being generated.

Criticism #3: You can't calculate load transfer with (list of variables).

And yet, each corner is relatively the same as other corners. If we know that load transfer and center of gravity are related, and that is related to body roll, if we use the limited variables to come up with a relation between them for what GT gives us (and you can calculate load transfer from lateral g forces, using total weight, track width and center of gravity height, just like the previous criticisms, those values you give calculates it without G forces, but should arrive at the same amount)

You have utterly failed to address the key point I raised about this approach.

Load can not be reversed engineered from the degree of body roll, it simply does not work that way, as such I would appreciate it if you actually explain how you calculate it.

I can calculate center of mass height with a neutral body,

Please explain exactly how you manage to achieve this.

and since GT gives its body lowering in mm (in fact, none of this would be possible if it didn't give real numbers) then I can simple subtract the amount from the total height. That is the advantage of using G forces to calculate it. Yes, these four values are simple but a very valid formula. The only difficulty is in producing load transfer numbers without knowing what a real car corners with in forces, as lateral G is very complex. Thankfully, we don't have to do that.

Which assumes you have an accurate height for the CoG.

Oh, and for the hell of it, sources:
http://www.rowleyrace.com/PDF/Chapter_14_Excerpt.pdf
http://www.neohio-scca.org/comp_clinic/hand_out_reprints/LoadTransfer reduced 2.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weight_transfer#Load_transfer (while it doesn't have a formula, a section gives the variables and explains their relation)
http://www.mnautox.com/forums/showthread.php?15693-Load-Transfer-Calculation
http://www.scribd.com/doc/86188493/3/WEIGHT-MASS-LOAD-AND-LOAD-TRANSFER

My favorite source is the last one, written by a professional race car driver, who worked on both the GT40 program and Ferrari F1 team. Read up.

Nice list - I've read they all before

Criticism #4: 240ZG doesn't have that much torque.

You may want to actually check on the point I actually queried, the 240 deos not have that torque figure at the driven wheels, please tell me why and how much it does have.

Then explain how that relates to the point at which the slip percentage ratio shows a loss of grip and how that would then be combined with the slip angle (be sure to include slip angles relationship with lateral loads).

I only ask because you are claiming that your spreadsheet provides you with this information.

Put simply, if you are too concerned about 'proving me wrong' or 'cutting down my elitism' to have a legitimate discussion about this method, then stop posting, because its only going to get the thread closed.

Not about proving you wrong, its about trying to understand how you are calculating these figures when GT5 doesn't actually provide enough information to be able to do that.

You have be very guarded and un-forthcoming when asked, so its no surprise that we are having to dig.

 

[driftmonkey1971]

Im board you lot waffle on to dam much.... This thread should die as its not going anywhere.

 

[Scaff]

Im board you lot waffle on to dam much.... This thread should die as its not going anywhere.

Thank you for your valuable and insightful comment on this topic...



..........oh wait.

 

[massradia1]

Why is it not in the Drifting section? Has nothing to do with teams or meets?

 

[Scaff]

Why is it not in the Drifting section? Has nothing to do with teams or meets?

..........and now it is.

 

[Drift_Monkey]

GhostZ why is it so hard to give us the number you use and how you use it?

 

[Scaff]

So GhostZ I would just like to clarify that you are inputting the following values and getting the following values as an output:

Input Values

• Weight
• Static weight distribution
• Horsepower at peak
• Torque at horsepower peak
• Torque at shifting point
• Torque 1K below shifting point
• Torque 2K below shifting point
• Torque 3K below shifting point
• Spring rates
• Centre of Gravity
• Tyre G-force
• Acceleration
• Braking
• Transmission Ratios

Output Values

• Static weight over each wheel
• Static weight over each wheel, taking into account downforce
• Drop on the suspension when the car is standing still
• Lowering height.
• Load transfer under ideal cornering
• Wheel load under cornering (for each corner)
• Roll angle of the body during ideal cornering
• Load transfer under ideal cornering - (turning while accelerating)
• Wheel load under cornering (for each corner) - (turning while accelerating)
• Roll angle of the body during ideal cornering - (turning while accelerating)
• Load transfer under ideal cornering - (turning while braking)
• Wheel load under cornering (for each corner) - (turning while braking)
• Roll angle of the body during ideal cornering - (turning while braking)
• Suggested camber value
• Revised CoG for all of the above
• If the front end rolls before the rear end does and what the degree of angle is rolls is (for each wheel)
• Ratio of weight on the inside to the outside of the car under cornering
• Dive under braking
• Lift forces employed at the wheels
• Brake bias ratio
• Torque at wheels

I've taken this from your posts but I just wanted to be 100% clear before anything else.

 

[LPTuner]

Kinda weird(and a little scary)posting this after a mod but... I was wondering, who here has actually tried GhostZ's method and/or tune and didn't just judge from what he/she is saying? You don't know if it will work or not if you don't try it. I for one will try it when I get back on GT5 this weekend. It'll be fun using someone elses tune. Never know, I might actually figure out GhostZ's style enough to tandem with him/her.(Sorry Ghost, I don't know your gender atm haha..) And sorry Scaff if this isn't a productive post.

 

[Megamarcx84]

Kinda weird(and a little scary)posting this after a mod but... I was wondering, who here has actually tried GhostZ's method and/or tune and didn't just judge from what he/she is saying? You don't know if it will work or not if you don't try it. I for one will try it when I get back on GT5 this weekend. It'll be fun using someone elses tune. Never know, I might actually figure out GhostZ's style enough to tandem with him/her.(Sorry Ghost, I don't know your gender atm haha..) And sorry Scaff if this isn't a productive post.

I think that would be an exercise in specious(I think that's the term) reasoning..sort of like if I post a schematic of a flute that's designed to keep away tigers, and you base its success( and ultimately your decision to use it yourself) on the fact that there are no tigers nearby, so it must work, without taking into account that there may simply be no tigers in the area.

 

[Scaff]

I think that would be an exercise in specious(I think that's the term) reasoning..sort of like if I post a schematic of a flute that's designed to keep away tigers, and you base its success( and ultimately your decision to use it yourself) on the fact that there are no tigers nearby, so it must work, without taking into account that there may simply be no tigers in the area.

It would be closer to what actually happening if you said you had a schematic of a magic flute but refused to share it with anyone and be very vague about a great many parts of it.

That I am aware of no one has seen this spreadsheet.

 

[Drift_Monkey]

Kinda weird(and a little scary)posting this after a mod but... I was wondering, who here has actually tried GhostZ's method and/or tune and didn't just judge from what he/she is saying? You don't know if it will work or not if you don't try it. I for one will try it when I get back on GT5 this weekend. It'll be fun using someone elses tune. Never know, I might actually figure out GhostZ's style enough to tandem with him/her.(Sorry Ghost, I don't know your gender atm haha..) And sorry Scaff if this isn't a productive post.

If it "works" doesn't mean that his math was correct. Math is either right or wrong.

 

[Megamarcx84]

It would be closer to what actually happening if you said you had a schematic of a magic flute but refused to share it with anyone and be very vague about a great many parts of it.

That I am aware of no one has seen this spreadsheet.

Good point, like if his application for a patent only had personal testimony as proof.

 

[GhostZ]

It would be closer to what actually happening if you said you had a schematic of a magic flute but refused to share it with anyone and be very vague about a great many parts of it.

That I am aware of no one has seen this spreadsheet.

The most accurate analogy would be a man playing flute alone, and being asked about it, and saying that the flute he built plays what he thinks is the most beautiful music. Then, the entire town tries to tear the flute apart, the man trying to keep it to himself, without even coming to a consensus if the music is good or not, which the flutist knows is subjective and doesn't care. that, and they also ruin the place he was playing his flute at too, by taking it so off-topic that it gets moved out of the forum it should and is intended to be in.

I still think the drift community is immature and needs progress, especially in regards to tuning and teams, but this thread as an example of that is somewhat incredible.

 

[Scaff]

The most accurate analogy would be a man playing flute alone, and being asked about it, and saying that the flute he built plays what he thinks is the most beautiful music. Then, the entire town tries to tear the flute apart, the man trying to keep it to himself, without even coming to a consensus if the music is good or not, which the flutist knows is subjective and doesn't care. that, and they also ruin the place he was playing his flute at too, by taking it so off-topic that it gets moved out of the forum it should and is intended to be in.

I still think the drift community is immature and needs progress, especially in regards to tuning and teams, but this thread as an example of that is somewhat incredible.

Given that you started this thread its a lot closer too a man walks into town and tells everyone he van about his ultra flute that is so much better than anyone elses flute. However when asked anything about it comes up with incredible clamours about how its made and what it can do, and refuses to even show it to anyone.

You made the claims, the burden now rests with you to back then up. As such I would like a few answers to the questions raised.

 

[GhostZ]

Given that you started this thread its a lot closer too a man walks into town and tells everyone he van about his ultra flute that is so much better than anyone elses flute. However when asked anything about it comes up with incredible clamours about how its made and what it can do, and refuses to even show it to anyone.

You made the claims, the burden now rests with you to back then up. As such I would like a few answers to the questions raised.

This thread has absolutely nothing to do with my tuning, the spreadsheet, or the car I drift, but I have been answering questions about those since others have begun to ask them. If you would read the first post, that would be obvious what I intended to do, and why it was in the drifting teams section. If you don't understand that, I'm sorry.

 

[mcgloney]

I still think the drift community is immature and needs progress, especially in regards to tuning and teams, but this thread as an example of that is somewhat incredible.

What? Ahha. I don't think the community is immature, they just question people who come up with idea's like yours. Is it wrong to question a point you have made? It's not one rule for you and other for someone else. Progress? There is no need for progress, it's always been like this if you can't handle it then there's the exit button. Everyone sticks to the tuning how it is placed in the game but not to go over the top with these maths and roll things. Yeah might be good in real racing but for a game which people want to have fun with. Maybe a bit to far, i don't no. Now the dig at teams. They are not immature as far as i know so stop with your "beef" with them, they do the things they want to whether they do comps, help people tune or just generally have fun. Past threads you have made, you've always made a dig at the teams.

 

[Scaff]

This thread has absolutely nothing to do with my tuning, the spreadsheet, or the car I drift, but I have been answering questions about those since others have begun to ask them. If you would read the first post, that would be obvious what I intended to do, and why it was in the drifting teams section. If you don't understand that, I'm sorry.

You introduced the spreadsheet to the discussion, not us (how on earth would we have been able to do that), you have made very grand claims for what it is able to do.

To date you have not been able to validate a single one of the claims you have made with regard to it, remember they are your claims and as such the burden of proof lies with yourself.

Now I am getting a little tired of the avoidance on this issue, so if giving you some choices. Either start to back up some of the claims you have made with evidence, withdraw them or continue to ignore valid questions and get your thread locked.

 

[GhostZ]

I mentioned the spreadsheet, but did not promote it. I did not make grand claims, in fact, most of all of my claims are about how well it works for me, not some universal quality to it. The rest are almost common sense in regards to how the game's tuning works. It is not complicated, just useful. If you want real validation, I shall go back in time, record my drifting before this sheet, and then after, to prove to you that it is giving the results I want. Or, you can just take it on faith that I am not lying to you. I'm not sure why I would be using this sheet if it didn't improve my drifting.

In other words, Scaff, almost everything you are posting at this point is complete ********. And I just simply do not have the patient to continue dealing with it. I'm going to ask that you move this topic back to where it is supposed to be, give up this pointless conversation, and stop threatening me for something I have not done. If you have legitimate questions about my tuning method, send me a private message and we can discuss tuning together, or make your own thread about it and get off of this thread.

So for one last time, this is my final word on this subject, to Scaff (as a representative of the staff) and other members:

I tune with formulas taken from legitimate sources and compiled into a single mathematic spreadsheet. I have a method based on credible physics to find values (ones that are easy to find, including the Center of Mass) that tell me what I want, and I have had great success with it. I don't want to share it. If you don't believe it works, deal with it. If you want to learn more about it, I will answer questions you have, link you to sources and explain concepts that went into its design.

If it is so hard for you to believe what I say is true, then either believe it is a lie and keep it to yourself rather than attack me, or ignore me. I don't care.

But at the same time, be a reasonable person. Do not lie about what I typed, do not assume things about it that I do not say, and grow up if you think you have to force me to explain this sheet again. I've already explained it to the point where anyone could make one just on my suggestions. This type of stuff is what makes the drift community immature.

And in response to all of this, Scaff, you found it necessary to threaten to close a thread that has little to do with this conversation, refuse to send me private messages about it and instead continue to derail the topic, and create complete lies about what it does, what I do, and worst of all, blame the problem on me? If you have a problem with my character, take it up personally. You've stopped asking legitimate questions and are now repeating yourself and creating what are for all intents and purposes, complete lies about me.

This goes for everyone here, one last time: I don't care. I don't care if you believe what I am saying is right, I believe it is and it shows results for me. I don't want to give up all of my tuning methods just because it is demanded as a threat.

This is idiotic and immature. If you have any questions about this tuning sheet, send me a private message, because I don't think there's anyone else here who has a legitimate complaint that I haven't addressed as nicely as possible, with a reasonable answer. I will not respond here, and I would like this topic (after four pages of this) to get back to its original purpose.

Now let me get back to my work drifting and observing on GT5.