Tire Testing - Strange, but interesting results...

  • Thread starter calan_svc
  • 261 comments
  • 59,331 views
Sorry...:-D I didn't know about google docs and I will probably get open office later to view all these wonderful GT related spreadsheets you speak of!!! (Where or what they are I don't know but Im sure they are good!!) :lol:

Thanks for putting it up on here for me anyway. Got me piece of paper ready!!!

Just out of curiosity.......what other wonderful GT related spreadsheets are there avaiable?? :-)
 
Once again I must say great work & thanks all those who've contributed to this thread, it's gotta be the best one on GT Planet imo! I struggled for a long time & still am to a degree, with GT5's physics model, finding that most cars had way too much grip & no real character. I've since found out by myself that having the right car on the right tyres goes someway to helping with this issue. Now that you guys are creating a database of what cars (when stock) should be on what tyres, I'm sure I'm gonna find a few more that are realistic & fun to drive.


Many thanks!


👍
 
Sorry...:-D I didn't know about google docs and I will probably get open office later to view all these wonderful GT related spreadsheets you speak of!!! (Where or what they are I don't know but Im sure they are good!!) :lol:

Thanks for putting it up on here for me anyway. Got me piece of paper ready!!!

Just out of curiosity.......what other wonderful GT related spreadsheets are there avaiable?? :-)

Oh I don't really remember any specifics, but the author of this thread has a matchmaking service, for cars. That is, you put in a car's power and weight and it picks good matches from its garage, to which you add your own cars. Good for getting the most out of A-Spec races. It can be found here. :)
I've seen other excel docs linked to, but I can't remember what they were or if they are any use - there are other such tools for GT4, too, which is useful since 70-80% of the cars are from GT4 anyway.

To be honest, I'd been ignoring them since I'd forgotten about google docs... :dunce:

How much longer last the soft tyres compared to the hard?

It depends on how you drive. Some people are complaining that there is no difference between soft and hard (racing slicks, anyway) whilst others claim there is a difference. Harder compound tyres are more likely to slide, and if they're constantly sliding, they're not going to last long.
As for the other tyre types, I've only really noticed a difference in the time it takes to warm them up (and in some cases, the difficulty in keeping them warm), but Sports tyres wear significantly faster than Comforts, in my experience.
 
I'm really not understanding how people claim there is no difference in longevity between the various racing tires. Racing hards last significantly longer than mediums, much longer than softs. If you're sliding everywhere, the apparent differences between tire longevity will be scewed, but there is an absolute tradeoff between H, M and S.

Nick
 
thanks for the tips calan_svc, i'll try those recommended tyres out ASAP. Ive been tring to get my head around the inconsistent feel of some cars so i love the fact you have offered up this option (im all about stock spec racing) so if you or anyone else can recomend a brake balance setting, that would be tops!

Thanks again kind sir!
 
My biggest gripe is with the tire wear in this game. So far, racing hards, mediums, and softs all last the same amount of laps for me.

Its strange that I can only go the same amount of laps that racing softs can do, in racing hards.

But good job on your testing.👍

I manage to make hards / mediums last a whole lot less. I get wheel spin out of corners, in the corners, etc. that wear them down. And I'm definitely not going to take the fun out of the game by slowing down as much as seems needed to make them last ... the same amount of time softs last with faster laps :P
 
Thanks for your effort mate. I'll definitely be using these when I test lap some of these cars. Like unv412 I like to drive these cars as the came from the factory (or game as it be) so its a great help to know which tyres should be on which cars. I add another voice to the I want a brake balance recommend too.

I dont have the patience to conduct this testing but sincerely thank you guys that run these kinds of things for the benefit of the GTP community :)

P.S Just a tip (more of a request actually) that as you work out what tyres suit what cars can you edit your 1st post and have your doc show up there for reference. Again many thanks.
 
great thread,

i dont know what to say really, i so like to beleive that GT5 is as accurate as a game can be but the facts just dont support it. my brother has a 2002 STI, he takes it on track days pretty regularly and says that the sti in the game handles WAY better than it does IRL.

it would be interesting to do a list of 0-62 times to compare them to real life as well.
 
It would be interesting to do a list of 0-62 times to compare them to real life as well.


Exellent idea! It would also be a good idea to see how fast they lap certain tracks in real life & see if the tyre choice (using this princilpe) affects the outcome for the better.

Here's some skidpad numbers I found (dunno how many of the cars are in GT5), incase anyones interested:

http://www-cs-students.stanford.edu/~kpfleger/auto/handling.html

http://www.modified.com/tech/0805_sccp_benchracing/index.html
 
Last edited:
I almost always reduce the weight of cars but very rarely increase the BHP. Would less weight lead me to be putting on grippier tyres or less grippier tyres to maintain a natural feel?

I already almost never put on Slicks unless its a proper race car just wondered how much weight would have an impact on PD-Physics Lite. I feel some testing coming on...

I'm already considering a second account for a "drive it stock or don't drive it at all" playthrough :/
 
I almost always reduce the weight of cars but very rarely increase the BHP. Would less weight lead me to be putting on grippier tyres or less grippier tyres to maintain a natural feel?

Once you change the weight, it's really a matter of how much grip you want at that point, since in essence you are creating a different car (compared to stock). So you can put on whatever tires you feel you need.

The point of this testing is to equip the stock cars with the appropriate tire. Weight should not change; but HP won't make much difference. So a car that has been modded power-wise should still be valid, but a weight change would invalidate the tire recommendation.

With that said, I really doubt if the static weight plays much (if any) role on grip in GT5; otherwise a Mini wouldn't pull the same lateral g number on a given tire as a ZR-1...but it does. I'm doing a new set of tests tonight that should shed some more info though.
 
I've uploaded a spreadsheet with the recommended tires to Google Docs:

GT5 Stock Tire Recommendations

Note that all race cars are given arbitrary g numbers of 1.30 which equates to RH tires; which race tire you choose should be a matter of wear rate, although in GT5 that is a bit misleading. (I'm sure I haven't got all the race cars marked; I just did a quick once-over). Skidpad values shown in orange are best guesses, based on similar cars that may be a different year or trim level.

I'll be updating this sheet as I get more data, and this info will also be incorporated into the next version of the matchmaker spreadsheet.
 
Last edited:
My biggest gripe is with the tire wear in this game. So far, racing hards, mediums, and softs all last the same amount of laps for me.

Its strange that I can only go the same amount of laps that racing softs can do, in racing hards.

But good job on your testing.👍

to me that makes sense because with a soft tire youll stick better, so you won't slide and tear the tire, where as with a hard, you'll lose grip and slide, destorying tires.
 
to me that makes sense because with a soft tire youll stick better, so you won't slide and tear the tire, where as with a hard, you'll lose grip and slide, destorying tires.

IRL, you would normally push soft tires harder due to the extra grip, which has a way of equalizing the wear and tear they would see compared to harder tires. Given that, soft tires usually wear out pretty quickly due to the less durable rubber compound.

For people that have tested the wear rate of GT5's tires, I would be interested to know if you were purposely running the same lap times, or if you were naturally pushing harder on the softer tires.
 
Thanks for this thread calan_svc, it's really helped me in my struggle to come to terms with GT5's new physics & I must say after trying your tyre choice strategy out the other night I had the best nights racing since Prologue.

I used to organise a race event called the Saturday Night Stock Car Series on GT Drivers, started in Nov 2009 & ran it weekly for most weeks until GT5 came out. Last Saturday I ran it in GT5 with 5 race buddies using my fav car the 111R '04, chosen from the Recommended cars to level the playing field. The 2 skidpad numbers I managed to find for it were 1.03 & 1.08, after testing the Sport Mediums on The Top Gear Test Track I manage to pull about 1.05/1.06 which is in the middle of that estimate.

Guess what? The tyres felt more appropriate for the car & it's behaviour was more predicatable, even though I've never driven a stock Elise in the real world it did feel somehow more realistic. I know this formular of yours is not an exact science, but it sure goes someway to helping people choose a tyre with a more realistic level of grip for many cars.

I'd love to see a database with all premium stock cars (excluding race cars) & the right tyres for them.


👍


PS: Thanks for the Google Doc, I've not got Excell. Keep up the good work!
 
Last edited:
VBR
Thanks for this thread calan_svc, it's really helped me in my struggle to come to terms with GT5's new physics & I must say after trying your tyre choice strategy out the other night I had the best nights racing since Prologue.

I used to organise a race event called the Saturday Night Stock Car Series on GT Drivers, started in Nov 2009 & ran it weekly for most weeks until GT5 came out. Last Saturday I ran it in GT5 with 5 race buddies using my fav car the 111R '04, chosen from the Recommended cars to level the playing field. The 2 skidpad numbers I managed to find for it were 1.03 & 1.08, after testing the Sport Mediums on The Top Gear Test Track I manage to pull about 1.05/1.06 which is in the middle of that estimate.

Guess what? The tyres felt more appropriate for the car & it's behaviour was more predicatable, even though I've never driven a stock Elise in the real world it did feel somehow more realistic. I know this formular of yours is not an exact science, but it sure goes someway to helping people choose a tyre with a more realistic level of grip for many cars.

I'd love to see a database with all premium stock cars (excluding race cars) & the right tyres for them.


👍


PS: Thanks for the Google Doc, I've not got Excell. Keep up the good work!

Thanks for the feedback!

1.05 sounds about right for the Elise 111r. I've seen similar numbers, so I'll make that value "official" for it. :)
 
It's worth remembering that identical speed, treadwear, and traction ratings by no means indicate the performance of a tire.

For one, these ratings (aside from speed) are set by the manufacturer, and don't actually correspond to any real formulas or statistics, nor are they held to any standards by any outside agency. The company can basically put whatever they want on a tire, and even in the best scenarios, the numbers only have any real meaning in relation to other tires made by the same company.

Secondly, the majority of tires on the market are designed for economy, and they get the majority of the ratings. Performance tires are a niche product, and, basically, all of them end up falling into the ZR and AA ratings. It's completely plausible that two tires from different companies, but with the same ratings, could have such a difference in actual performance.

For example, the Dunlop Direzza DZ101, the Hankook Ventus RS-3, and the Falken Azenis RT-615K share a W speed rating and a AA traction rating. However, the performance is vastly separated between these tires, with the Direzzas performing quite disappointingly, and fitting into a "sport compact" type of tire, the Hankooks being a very high-performance street tire, similar to what's equipped on exotic cars from the factory, and the Azenis are barely separated from a real race tire, not much more than a slick with some grooves cut into it.
 
Do note, though, that the Azenis doesn't really pull lateral G's much different from Neovas, which are still street-legal non-R-comps... but they are fantastically fast tires compared to everything else on the road!

-

Very interesting thread. meant to post a long while back, but I've been out and busy.

Just a few things to note:

A MINI on "Sports Hard" should be able to pull a very good lateral G number. As with most road cars, the ZR1 included, over 1g should be possible with top-line performance tires. The stock tires of the MINI Cooper are pretty good, but a notch or two below the best street tires out there. I've seen just over 1 lateral g on compacts given the proper tire. The only limit would be the suspension setting and whether it washes out into understeer before the rear tires have reached their grip limit.

Tire profile doesn't really matter in lateral Gs. Not in a game that doesn't model sidewall deformation. With sidewall deformation, it will affect transitory behavior, but a 65-series or 70-series racing slick will still have the same lateral grip as a low profile one. (see F1 tires) This is why you can buy track tires with tall sidewalls for specific applications. (A clubmate on another forum uses 13" wheels shod in Hoosiers on a car that takes 16" wheels as standard!)

Width versus profile will affet heat build-up and dissipation, though.

---

I've driven an Enduro playing around with RS and RH. Driving the RS gently, you can match RH laptimes "at a push" while still not suffering tire wear as bad as you get on RH. Driving the RH gently seems to give you the same lifespan as driving the RS gently, but with laptimes much, much longer.
 
Last edited:
It's worth remembering that identical speed, treadwear, and traction ratings by no means indicate the performance of a tire.

For one, these ratings (aside from speed) are set by the manufacturer, and don't actually correspond to any real formulas or statistics, nor are they held to any standards by any outside agency. The company can basically put whatever they want on a tire, and even in the best scenarios, the numbers only have any real meaning in relation to other tires made by the same company.

Secondly, the majority of tires on the market are designed for economy, and they get the majority of the ratings. Performance tires are a niche product, and, basically, all of them end up falling into the ZR and AA ratings. It's completely plausible that two tires from different companies, but with the same ratings, could have such a difference in actual performance.

For example, the Dunlop Direzza DZ101, the Hankook Ventus RS-3, and the Falken Azenis RT-615K share a W speed rating and a AA traction rating. However, the performance is vastly separated between these tires, with the Direzzas performing quite disappointingly, and fitting into a "sport compact" type of tire, the Hankooks being a very high-performance street tire, similar to what's equipped on exotic cars from the factory, and the Azenis are barely separated from a real race tire, not much more than a slick with some grooves cut into it.

Good point, but this was brought up back on page 2 somewhere I think. :)

But...since GT5's tires don't really represent anything from IRL, it ends up not mattering too much.
 
Calan, how come the Camero SS 2010 shows up as CS tyres in the Google doc, when you said CM tyres were best in your first post?
 
VBR
Calan, how come the Camero SS 2010 shows up as CS tyres in the Google doc, when you said CM tyres were best in your first post?

After reading a couple more reviews on that car, I raised it's skidpad number slightly. I found the original test at .87 (which seems low to me), and then a couple at .92 a week or so later; so I split the difference. :)

Regardless of the actual number, it should be within the range of CS tires.

Also, the final scale I came up with is slightly different than what I had originally...although it didn't change by much.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for clearing that up, I noticed for the 111R there were slightly different numbers from multiple sources. We raced the Camero SS 2010 last Saturday with CM tyres on & it was a blast, I'll have to try it with CS's on to see if there's much difference.


👍


PS: Just found a few more Skidpad numbers: http://www.insideline.com/mazda/mazdaspeed-mazda3/2007/2006-sport-compact-comparison-test.html & http://www.modified.com/news/0708_sccp_lateral_g_skidpad_testing/vehicle_specs.html pages 3 to 9.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the links VBR. I updated a few more cars today, including the 3000gt's and a few others.
I've driven an Enduro playing around with RS and RH. Driving the RS gently, you can match RH laptimes "at a push" while still not suffering tire wear as bad as you get on RH. Driving the RH gently seems to give you the same lifespan as driving the RS gently, but with laptimes much, much longer.

So if I'm reading that correctly Niky, you're saying that RH tires actually wear faster than the softs? If so, that goes completely against what should happen IRL.
 
More cars updated, including a lot of the Mazda's.

**********

Here's something scary... the IRL stock McClaren F1 pulled a .86g on the skidpad back in '94, and was known to be more of a "comfortable" road car rather than a pure handling machine. With that in mind, slap some CM tires on it and take it around a track a few times. HOLY CRAP! :D
 
Thanks for the links VBR. I updated a few more cars today, including the 3000gt's and a few others.


So if I'm reading that correctly Niky, you're saying that RH tires actually wear faster than the softs? If so, that goes completely against what should happen IRL.

That's been my experience too, because you end up sliding around on them more. I assume that they have the same basic wear rate, but with hards there's the tendency to destroy them by sliding through turns and spinning them up getting the power down. With softs it's much harder to drive in a way that's damaging to the tyres.
 
True. If you drive the RHs gently around a race track, you can make them last longer, but they slide so much more that to drive them at a "push" simply shreds them in the same amount of time that driving RSs at a "push" does. And unless you drive them at a "push", you lose much more time on track than you lose in the extra time spent in the pits.

PD didn't apply enough extra wear penalty to the RSs to counter the extra grip.

Whatever the McLaren F1 came on in its time would still be considered Sports Hard in GT5. At most, Comfort Softs if you feel that the lateral grip is too high.
 
Something occurs to me.

If PD didn't model the different widths of tyres for say, a Mini and a Corvette, what's to say they modelled the different widths of tyres on the front and rear of a Yellowbird? Or any other car with tyres of different widths front and rear? This would presumably affect quite a lot of MR and RR cars who tend to have this setup, as well as a lot of muscle cars. And the JGTC Silvia, which has wider tyres on the FRONT (go figure).

I'd love to be able to test this theory, but I'm struggling to think of a way to test the front and rear tyres of a car separately.

Until someone can figure out a way to test it, the assumption is probably that they haven't bothered to model it. Any method of modelling a staggered setup that would show results, would automatically show results between the Mini and Corvette as well.

I smell something fishy here. If this is as I suspect it means that the behaviour of some cars is fundamentally flawed.
 
Back