The definitive GT5 transmission tuning guide.

[AssassinTuner]

So now answer "why".
If you want to believe 300,000 lbs of force bests 400,000, etc, that's your prerogative.
And yes, that's exactly what you have to believe to believe torque "accelerates faster than horsepower"

Fact: Peak horsepower is never less power than any other number, hence the term "peak power".
Yes, some cars are allowed to rev past their powerband, this is true, but it has no relevance to the fact that horsepower is what makes cars move faster than a snail.
A pound of torque is no different than a lb of lifting force and most humans are stronger than 4 cylinder engines as per "torque".
But we can't push a car 110 mph can we? Because we don't have the horsepower. We can't multiply our torque by 6,000 steps per minute, otherwise we would make incredibly fast runners.

Wow, that was well put, and an incredible example. Just imagine 6000 spm (steps per minute) and the resistance factor, burnt feet from how fast them f-ers would be moving lol. It's pretty late, I'm gonna pass out, good chat fellas.

 

[yanaran]

No offense but you guys are arguing over nothing. You're not contradicting each other, just talking about two different aspects of acceleration.

In any given gear, max acceleration happens at peak torque. (what oppositelock is saying)
At any given speed, max acceleration happens in the gear that produces most horsepower. (what CSL is saying)

 

[CSLACR]

No offense but you guys are arguing over nothing. You're not contradicting each other, just talking about two different aspects of acceleration.

In any given gear, max acceleration happens at peak torque. (what oppositelock is saying)
At any given speed, max acceleration happens in the gear that produces most horsepower. (what CSL is saying)

Well no, because max acceleration doesn't happen at max torque unless the wind resistance/gear length make it so even though there's more power at max power, there's enough less resistance at a lower speed to make quicker acceleration happen.
A car like a Viper with a high cd rating (0.39) and very long gears, and a fantastic powerband team up to very possibly accelerate quicker at lower than max hp, because the amount of hp at 30mph in first gear is still almost as high as redline, at 6300, and about 60mph (I think).
So in combinations I'm sure it could, but if it were the "torque" reading that caused the quicker acceleration, our shift points would be determined solely by the torque curve.

But it's just other factors bearing false witness on a torque curve.

 

[oppositelock]

So now answer "why".

I just explained why.

If you want to believe 300,000 lbs of force bests 400,000, etc, that's your prerogative.

You have no idea what I'm saying.

And yes, that's exactly what you have to believe to believe torque "accelerates faster than horsepower"

No, you really have no idea what I'm saying.

Fact: Peak horsepower is never less power than any other number, hence the term "peak power".
Yes, some cars are allowed to rev past their powerband, this is true, but it has no relevance to the fact that horsepower is what makes cars move faster than a snail.
A pound of torque is no different than a lb of lifting force and most humans are stronger than 4 cylinder engines as per "torque".
But we can't push a car 110 mph can we? Because we don't have the horsepower. We can't multiply our torque by 6,000 steps per minute, otherwise we would make incredibly fast runners.

Edit: nevermind, if you don't get that horsepower IS torque, with amount of times applied already factored in already, you won't.

You keep going on with this stuff like it somehow contradicts me. I said the acceleration plot of a vehicle conforms to the torque curve of the engine, which is what the graph shows even though I guess it's over your head. That's NOT the same thing as saying that horsepower is irrelevant and that flywheel torque is the primary factor in how fast a car goes down the quarter mile. You can either have a 200 hp / 150 lb-ft Honda engine with a 4:1 gear ratio or a 200 hp / 300 lb-ft pushrod V8 with a 2:1 gear ratio, they'll make the same amount of twist at the axle and probably run similar times. So, please, stop trying to teach me stuff I already know and try to sort out what it is that you're arguing about.

 

[CSLACR]

I just explained why.

You have no idea what I'm saying.

No, you really have no idea what I'm saying.




You keep going on with this stuff like it somehow contradicts me. I said the acceleration plot of a vehicle conforms to the torque curve of the engine, which is what the graph shows even though I guess it's over your head. That's NOT the same thing as saying that horsepower is irrelevant and that flywheel torque is the primary factor in how fast a car goes down the quarter mile. You can either have a 200 hp / 150 lb-ft Honda engine with a 4:1 gear ratio or a 200 hp / 300 lb-ft pushrod V8 with a 2:1 gear ratio, they'll make the same amount of twist at the axle and probably run similar times. So, please, stop trying to teach me stuff I already know and try to sort out what it is that you're arguing about.

Well then congratulations, you've "fooled" everyone.

It was you that came in and disagreed, was it not?
What did you disagree with?

Sorry to interject here, but a car does indeed accelerate harder at peak torque. I suggest playing with CarTest. It's an old DOS program but it works well enough.

Wrong. A car does not indeed accelerate harder at peak torque.

 

[grenadeshark]

Well at least there is someone other then me discussing the opposite viewpoint

 

[grenadeshark]

Well no, because max acceleration doesn't happen at max torque unless the wind resistance/gear length make it so even though there's more power at max power, there's enough less resistance at a lower speed to make quicker acceleration happen.
A car like a Viper with a high cd rating (0.39) and very long gears, and a fantastic powerband team up to very possibly accelerate quicker at lower than max hp, because the amount of hp at 30mph in first gear is still almost as high as redline, at 6300, and about 60mph (I think).
So in combinations I'm sure it could, but if it were the "torque" reading that caused the quicker acceleration, our shift points would be determined solely by the torque curve.

But it's just other factors bearing false witness on a torque curve.

Your shift points are dictated by the TQ curve... The HP curve is just a calculation based off the TQ curve. The point you shift as is the point where TQ being sent to the wheels will be less by staying in the current gear then shifting to the next gear. Regardless of all the arguing going on here, the methods being used obviously work.

Moved.

 

[AssassinTuner]

Your shift points are dictated by the TQ curve... The HP curve is just a calculation based off the TQ curve. The point you shift as is the point where TQ being sent to the wheels will be less by staying in the current gear then shifting to the next gear.

We use the hp curve to plot shift points, It's based off the torque curve. Even if you go by the tq curve, you have to calculate the hp. Around we go.

We are going in Circles...

Get over it, is it making ANY impact???

Post up your end results and let's look at that.

Squabbling over BS all theoretical is pointless. Let's see the theories in practice.......

Sooooo if you use tq, use it and show up, man up, post up, or ...... I really don't care. If you want to shift off your peak tq or whatever, swell. How does it relay into your gearbox?!?!?

So many people so willing to hash out concepts and theories and what's right and wrong. Why the Hell is it taking so long for somebody to post up a gear set?!?!?!?

I already put it out, grab a premium, tune it up, post it up, let's look at and compare end results......

Or what's the point of this thread?!?!?

 

[grenadeshark]

We use the hp curve to plot shift points, It's based off the torque curve. Even if you go by the tq curve, you have to calculate the hp. Around we go.

You don't ever have to give me a HP number. I can calculate the shift points of any car based on the TQ curve and RPM.

We are going in Circles...

Get over it, is it making ANY impact???

Post up your end results and let's look at that.

Squabbling over BS all theoretical is pointless. Let's see the theories in practice.......

Sooooo if you use tq, use it and show up, man up, post up, or ...... I really don't care. If you want to shift off your peak tq or whatever, swell. How does it relay into your gearbox?!?!?

So many people so willing to hash out concepts and theories and what's right and wrong. Why the Hell is it taking so long for somebody to post up a gear set?!?!?!?

I already put it out, grab a premium, tune it up, post it up, let's look at and compare end results......

Or what's the point of this thread?!?!?

Here is an example from Carroll Smith on how to pick your shift points. This is not quoted verbatim.

Car X is making these numbers

8200rpm 225.1hp
8400 233.7
8600 236.8
8800 242.3
9000 244.2
9200 248.2
9400 247.0
9600 243.8
9800 223.0

His example to determine shift points goes off of a total horsepower approach. So if the car has a 1000 rpm drop between shifts 4 and 5, where is the best shift point on this engine?

@ 9200 shift point, car makes 1428.2 total horsepower. That is calculated by all the values between 8200 and 9200 added together.

@9400 shift point, car makes 1452.2 total horsepower. A 1.7% improvement

@9600 shift point, car makes 1462.3 total horsepower. A 0.7% improvement

@9800 shift point, car makes 1455.0 total horsepower. A 0.5% decrease

So from interpreting the data, we know that the best shift point given a 1000 rpm drop is @9600 rpms. His data correlates with gearing already as to know the RPM drop is to know the gearing percentages. Had we not known the gearing, we would need to use the gears and multiply them by the tq values created to get an idea of where to shift. Using some generic gear values that hold the same 1000 rpm drop, we can verify his data.

TqxG GR ETq RPM HP
146.9973 1.23 119.51 9800 223.0
159.36022 1.102 144.61 8800 242.3

164.0561 1.23 133.379 9600 243.8
159.3635 1.102 144.613 8600 236.8

What you see here is two different shift points for the same engine. We can see that our gear ratios verify exactly what Carroll Said above. The TQ being sent to the wheels increased by 5.28%. In other words, on this particular engine with this particular gear set, shifting at 9600 nets you a higher gain from 4th to 5th gear then shifting at 9800. But, if we were to change the game up a bit and compare 1st to 2nd gear, we would come up with entirely different results. You would find out that the gearing in first gear overcomes the power drop at 9800 RPMs. In other words, in this car, in 1st and likely 2nd gear, it would be beneficial to shift at 9800. But, in the higher gears, it is beneficial to shift at 9600 RPMs.

 

[AssassinTuner]

Dude, I'm not reading ANY of that, are you seriously going to keep that crap up? Grow up. It's obvious we are going in circles, you might be content going around and around, but I'm tired of it, it's going nowhere fast.


Post up a gearbox you tuned and let's go, time for putting your tuning where your mouth is. Hell, it's just to compare results...

Are you scared? Seems like it...

 

[grenadeshark]

Dude, I'm not reading ANY of that, are you seriously going to keep that crap up? Grow up. It's obvious we are going in circles, you might be content going around and around, but I'm tired of it, it's going nowhere fast.


Post up a gearbox you tuned and let's go, time for putting your tuning where your mouth is. Hell, it's just to compare results...

Are you scared? Seems like it...

Hold on. You have refused to even consider the points made by myself and others throughout this post. I then used real engine figure and values posted by a legendary man (hint: Carroll Smith) and used his data to show that calculating shift points via TQ or HP is very feasible.

You then result to telling me to "grow up" and you call me "scared". Now, which one of us is acting like a kid?

I'll be happy to build a car and compete with your tune. I have no problems with that. I stopped arguing whether your method would work many many posts ago. I was arguing many ideas that have just plum gone over your head.

Once I get some time today, I will build a premium car to certain specs and then tune it.

Like you said before, it needs to have 250 miles on it. I don't feel like circle tracking, so please let me know what premium cars you have with that amount of miles on it.

Also, we need some criteria for comparison. First of all, all specs outside of gearing should be the exact same.

I think how we compare should be based off of.

Acceleration
Top speed
Usability on range of courses

Any other factors you think should be included? I mean, am I tuning this like I would normally tune a car? Generally I leave RPM band for draft in my tunes.

 

[AssassinTuner]

No, I'm tired of arguing in circles about theories, different perspectives & it's going nowhere.

If you use all that Jazz, FINE.. Congratulations for you.

HOW does it translate into GT5? What impact does it have on your gear tuning in GT5?

SHOW us it in practice, I don't care about your explanations taking us back around in circles.

Post up a gear set, or are you just talking out your butt hole?

 

[grenadeshark]

No, I'm tired of arguing in circles about theories, different perspectives & it's going nowhere.

If you use all that Jazz, FINE.. Congratulations for you.

HOW does it translate into GT5? What impact does it have on your gear tuning in GT5?

SHOW us it in practice, I don't care about your explanations taking us back around in circles.

Post up a gear set, or are you just talking out your butt hole?

I literally just asked you for some parameters to do this experiment and you reply back to me asking if I am talking out of my butt hole?

How about you start reading and stop posting a response just because you are trying to get the last word in. Answer my questions, post up your ideas, then we will make this work.

 

[AssassinTuner]

I literally just asked you for some parameters to do this experiment and you reply back to me asking if I am talking out of my butt hole?

How about you start reading and stop posting a response just because you are trying to get the last word in. Answer my questions, post up your ideas, then we will make this work.

Yeah, hit reply, before refresh.

Go on, whenever your ready......

Hold on. You have refused to even consider the points made by myself and others throughout this post. I then used real engine figure and values posted by a legendary man (hint: Carroll Smith) and used his data to show that calculating shift points via TQ or HP is very feasible.

You then result to telling me to "grow up" and you call me "scared". Now, which one of us is acting like a kid?

I'll be happy to build a car and compete with your tune. I have no problems with that. I stopped arguing whether your method would work many many posts ago. I was arguing many ideas that have just plum gone over your head.

If you say so Bro, lol. I just stopped caring about a senseless argument going nowhere. If you think it's over my head, I think what I'm saying is just plum over yours either way it's going nowhere fast.

Once I get some time today, I will build a premium car to certain specs and then tune it.

Like you said before, it needs to have 250 miles on it. I don't feel like circle tracking, so please let me know what premium cars you have with that amount of miles on it.

Also, we need some criteria for comparison. First of all, all specs outside of gearing should be the exact same.

I think how we compare should be based off of.

Acceleration
Top speed
Usability on range of courses

Any other factors you think should be included? I mean, am I tuning this like I would normally tune a car? Generally I leave RPM band for draft in my tunes.

Now we are talking.

Pick one you got, I'll buy it and break it in if I don't have it already.


FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!


It's taken sooooo long To finally gets some action. Sheesh. I asked to compare results how long ago?

Is it not the gears that come of our interestingly varying methods that's most important? The "why" is really not as much so.

 

[grenadeshark]

If you say so Bro, lol. I just stopped caring about a senseless argument going nowhere. If you think it's over my head, I think what I'm saying is just plum over yours either way it's going nowhere fast.



Now we are talking.

Pick one you got, I'll buy it and break it in if I don't have it already.


FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!

91 nsx. I believe I have one that has 250 miles on it. I am about to eat lunch, so I will do the tune after that. Probably 2 hours from now, I'll PM you with mods.

I am not sure how you want to compete here. How are we going to do the testing? We going to race? That comes down to driver. I am interested in seeing how you really want to play this out.

I generally test elapsed times on daytona speedway. Section elapsed times and 1 lap time. It always starts you off the same on that track.

As far as acceleration goes, there is no good way to test that from a dead stop outside of a drag race on a track like monza.

Think about the parameters and get back to me.

 

[AssassinTuner]

91 nsx. I believe I have one that has 250 miles on it. I am about to eat lunch, so I will do the tune after that. Probably 2 hours from now, I'll PM you with mods.

I am not sure how you want to compete here. How are we going to do the testing? We going to race? That comes down to driver. I am interested in seeing how you really want to play this out.

I generally test elapsed times on daytona speedway. Section elapsed times and 1 lap time. It always starts you off the same on that track.

As far as acceleration goes, there is no good way to test that from a dead stop outside of a drag race on a track like monza.

Think about the parameters and get back to me.

Ahhhh we are no longer squabbling.

Nope, that's a 5speed, we need a 6spd, & nothing hyper powered.

I'm interested in comparisons like acceleration, top speed and I guess we can toss ideas about going further with it.

I'm also curious to see how far apart we are

This is all that matters, what we are finally doing now

 

[AssassinTuner]

I have most Beemers. Any Honda, Nissan, Mazda etc. I'm sure you have more cars than I. We should actually do 2 cars. One peaking very high, the other very low . Hmmmm V8 Muscle car

SSR7 I can keep the line of my ghost until the first braking point. The higher the mph I'm at when I get there usually reflects better acceleration from a rolling start and is repeatable.

Keep going around the corner down the track for Top Speed in the tunnel.

Dead stop launch comparisons

Analyze the mph each gear tops off at, analyze the spacing, etc...

And I guess we finish up on a lap of a track.

 

[grenadeshark]

Ahhhh we are no longer squabbling.

Nope, that's a 5speed, we need a 6spd, & nothing hyper powered.

I'm interested in comparisons like acceleration, top speed and I guess we can toss ideas about going further with it.

I'm also curious to see how far apart we are

This is all that matters, what we are finally doing now

You can't tune a 5 speed?

Well, i have about 200 standard cars and about 60 premiums. So I am going to have to buy one and send my bspec driver on an endurance race or something.

 

[AssassinTuner]

You can't tune a 5 speed?

Well, i have about 200 standard cars and about 60 premiums. So I am going to have to buy one and send my bspec driver on an endurance race or something.

No, we are supposed to be comparing my Tools results remember. It's configured for 6spds as 90% of adjustable gearboxes are 6spd, when finished I'll adapt it to 5 and 7 spd gearboxes.

Post some cars you have already ready, I'll see what I have that's the same.

How definitive is something before it's been tested and proven?

 

[grenadeshark]

No, we are supposed to be comparing my Tools results remember. It's configured for 6spds as 90% of adjustable gearboxes are 6spd, when finished I'll adapt it to 5 and 7 spd gearboxes.

Post some cars you have already ready, I'll see what I have that's the same.

How definitive is something before it's been tested and proven?

I've tested my theories extensively and proven to myself and the people who have used them they work. I also plan to incorporate any new information that comes about that I could have possibly missed.

Hence, this is like Snapple. It's made of the best stuff available. When better ingredients become available, so will this guide

Btw, what we really need is a car who's default transmission doesn't do it justice. It will take me some time to find one. Sometimes, even my best gearing isn't all that far from the stock setups.

EDIT: How about the Volvo C30 R-design 09?

If that's ok with you, I'll post up the mods.

 

[AssassinTuner]

I've tested my theories extensively and proven to myself and the people who have used them they work. I also plan to incorporate any new information that comes about that I could have possibly missed.

Hence, this is like Snapple. It's made of the best stuff available. When better ingredients become available, so will this guide

Btw, what we really need is a car who's default transmission doesn't do it justice. It will take me some time to find one. Sometimes, even my best gearing isn't all that far from the stock setups.

That's not very "definitive" at all. Not saying anything is wrong, it's just your opinion (even if shared by a few) that it's "definitively" the best way. Thats like whoever feels their method works best for them, by that logic, that method is "definitive" therefore making any method "definitive"... So my way is "definitive" CSLACR's was is "definitive" and Joe Blow's way is "definitive" we all proved it to ourselvs.

But that's jut semantics and squabbling, forget about it, let's get back to the subject at hand.

Post up anything. List a bunch of your cars you have ready to go, and let's do this already. I'm all set just waiting on an agreed car, the. We can look at an agreed Tune for it (minus gearbox) as you said and I will agree, all else need be the same.

 

[AssassinTuner]

I've tested my theories extensively and proven to myself and the people who have used them they work. I also plan to incorporate any new information that comes about that I could have possibly missed.

Hence, this is like Snapple. It's made of the best stuff available. When better ingredients become available, so will this guide

Btw, what we really need is a car who's default transmission doesn't do it justice. It will take me some time to find one. Sometimes, even my best gearing isn't all that far from the stock setups.

EDIT: How about the Volvo C30 R-design 09?

If that's ok with you, I'll post up the mods.

Cool, we have our car.

Are you all set with a Tune for it? We can use your or anybodies, so long as they are the same we are good.

I just bought mine & I'm breaking it in now.

 

[grenadeshark]

Cool, we have our car.

Are you all set with a Tune for it? We can use your or anybodies, so long as they are the same we are good.

I just bought mine & I'm breaking it in now.

I just picked mine up and I am tuning it as we speak. I can't just plug in numbers like you, so it takes me a good 30 minutes + to get the ratios right. Another benefit to your method. Here are the mods:

Weight Redux 3
Window Redux
Carbon Hood

Engine 1
ECU
Intake
Racing Filter
Exhaust Manifold
Cat
Titanium Exhaust
No turbo

Right now, mine is 1186 kg making 335 hp and 485 pp. I picked this car for its particularly ugly power band.

Mine is making currently 335hp @5700 308ft/lb @4700 . 7700 Redline

 

[AssassinTuner]

Kool, take your time, I'm eager to get started, now that we are making progress we can be thorough about it, steady pace.

Seems like a good choice. Mine is bone stock getting broken in. Is that max hp before fully broken in? We want it a good amount above stock HP. It's no ZR1 so no need to worry about hyper power.

Others with gear tuning methods feel free to toss a gear set up for the car we are using.

 

[grenadeshark]

Kool

Seems like a good choice. Mine is bone stock getting broken in. Is that max hp before fully broken in? We want it a good amount above stock HP. It's no ZR1 so no need to worry about hyper power.

Others with gear tuning methods feel free to toss a gear set up for the car we are using.

Yeah, I am not quite to 250 miles yet.

 

[AssassinTuner]

Yeah, I am not quite to 250 miles yet.

No sweat, get her up there and don't rush your work.

We should get that tranny trick used as well (a third set) to see how it compares.

 

[grenadeshark]

I have a base tune now. I an not happy with it. It's the fastest acceleration possible, but I don't consider the car all that drivable. The early gears are too short. Is your ps3 capable of even coming online?

 

[AssassinTuner]

I just picked mine up and I am tuning it as we speak. I can't just plug in numbers like you, so it takes me a good 30 minutes + to get the ratios right. Another benefit to your method. Here are the mods:

Weight Redux 3
Window Redux
Carbon Hood

Engine 1
ECU
Intake
Racing Filter
Exhaust Manifold
Cat
Titanium Exhaust
No turbo

Right now, mine is 1186 kg making 335 hp and 485 pp. I picked this car for its particularly ugly power band.

Mine is making currently 335hp @5700 308ft/lb @4700 . 7700 Redline

SS tires?

Stock all else but an adjustable gearbox? What's the rest of the parts list? Or is it everything else?

 

[grenadeshark]

SS tires?

Stock all else but an adjustable gearbox? What's the rest of the parts list? Or is it everything else?

Put everything else on that you can. I decided to go ahead and use racing tires because this car just makes too much power down low. Up to you though, I can tune either or. I am working on finishing touches. Trying up a few other options.

I mean like suspension/driveshafts/lsd. etc

 

[AssassinTuner]

Put everything else on that you can. I decided to go ahead and use racing tires because this car just makes too much power down low. Up to you though, I can tune either or. I am working on finishing touches. Trying up a few other options.

I mean like suspension/driveshafts/lsd. etc

With this low power level, let's keep it on SS tires.

Let me know the suspension set up you come up with. Keeping all the same except gears, we should use either a stock diff, or default LSD settings.