The Keys to a fast/fun FF! **Huge Update Posts #45 & #48**

  • Thread starter eg6_dude
  • 64 comments
  • 9,261 views
Sorry, accidental post.

On a side note:
Tuning is something I suggest everyone tests on their own.
Not all members of the GTP's tuning community agree entirely with some of the philosophies laid out in post #45.
With that said, I appreciate the efforts made in this thread and positive reputation has been given (even though I do not agree with some of the information published in the interest of guiding less experienced members).

I understand that the settings are not what everybody thinks, but they work, and work good at that and I think that some members still hold GT4 tuning to be close to real life tuning which it isn't. Thank you for the rep! :cheers:

I encourage people to find there own style, but my tuning guidelines are rock solid info about how changes affect the car as i have done a considerable amount of testing on it. These are not hard finished set-ups, just guidelines to help people come to there hard finished set-ups. As stated in post 45, if anybody doesn't agree they can follow those instructions and prove me wrong. Until then, I am just following what I have observed from seriously, 100+ hours of FF testing and time comparisons. :)

peace,
eg6_dude
 
I understand that the settings are not what everybody thinks, but they work, and work good at that and I think that some members still hold GT4 tuning to be close to real life tuning which it isn't. Thank you for the rep! :cheers:

I encourage people to find there own style, but my tuning guidelines are rock solid info about how changes affect the car as i have done a considerable amount of testing on it. These are not hard finished set-ups, just guidelines to help people come to there hard finished set-ups. As stated in post 45, if anybody doesn't agree they can follow those instructions and prove me wrong. Until then, I am just following what I have observed from seriously, 100+ hours of FF testing and time comparisons. :)

peace,
eg6_dude

I get it. 👍
You've done your testing, "these" are your results.
All I was saying was... "These" results don't necessarily match what other people have found.

Further, the original point of contention was the "reversed" settings, which is one spot where you contend GT4 is not accurate of real world settings. What I am saying is that some people have found results to the contrary and inturn have found some similarity to the real world. None the less, I also contend that, real world values aside, the "reversed values" philosophy is contrary to my own experience.

Most importantly, even though we disagree on the spring & dampener values, we both agree it is important to test for yourself and see what works for best for you.[/b]

Btw, I just want to mention... My opinion of the spring-dampener values is not related specifically to the real world. Rather, it is the result of simple experience from gameplay (although I must admit that I've played a good little bit of the game ;) ). :lol: :cheers:
(last thing... Would you care to hear any of my thoughts on how to setup a FF? )

Edit:
What I mean to say is that even in real life there are times when the general formula of "soft front/hard rear" doesn't work best (applied to tuned cars, not just stock).
 
I completly understand what you are saying. I know that my set-up ideals are pretty controversial in comparison to others. However they do work, and I have tested other member set-ups that also worked with close to the same lap times, but with the more generic accepted approach. I would love to see what your FF set-up ideals are, and I would actually love to post them along side mine in the set-up guide. I am not the person to say that my set-ups and ideals are the only fast set-ups and ideals, and I am a firm believer that many different set-ups can provide similar laptimes, but with different handling cars. Every driver prefers a car to handle a certain way and drives differently, so naturally, one set of ideals can not always be the right set of ideals. If you could please put something together about suspension set-ups for FFs, PM it to me, and I will add it to the suspension post that already exsists. The new members should know that there is more then one way to be fast and more then one ideal set-up for one car. Thank you for being so understanding of my opinions and I look foward to seeing your own! I have alot of respect for you Kent!👍 :cheers:

peace,
eg6_dude
 
I think these settings work for you because you know how to use them.

I mean an Agressive setup needs another driving style than a neutral setup, needn't it?

That looks like a reason why Kent disagrees with you on certain points, I think he has "adapted" to other settings.

Atleast that's just what came up in my mind...
 
Well first off, I appreciate the kindly spoken words of eg6_dude. :cheers:
That said, I apologize for my late response. :ouch:
None the less, as my first order of buisness, I point to the Best Motoring Z showdown... A Best Motoring video of a tuned Z shootout.
In that video, the Mine's Z33 and the Esprit Z33 are both reported to have spring rates of 10/8 and 9/8 (front/rear).
This should be a good indicator that "soft/hard" isn't the golden rule for tuning spring rates.

In many cases the spring rates of a car are set to match the car's natural setup and inturn the handling is optimized.
With GT4, one reason the springs may come across as reversed is because the "best handling" may come from the car being properly weighted... When a car's engine is up front the car will usually need to support that engine. Vice-versa for the rear and mid engine cars.

When a car's weight is not properly supported it is difficult to predict how the car will act. Once the values have been changed dramatically, the results may be confusing and mis-leading due to the severity of the settings errors.

Now with that said... I will get to work on writing up a general tuning philosophy for FF cars and then PM it to eg6. :cheers:
 

Attachments

  • Mine's Z33 Spring Rates.JPG
    Mine's Z33 Spring Rates.JPG
    53.6 KB · Views: 18
Back