Transmission Tuning -- top speed vs final ratio

[dr_slump]

Same top speed. I understood and proved it and RJ's Therory in GT5 wrong.

---

These 2 gear sets have the exact same everything except gears and fd values. One calculated with the lowest availible fd value, the other the highest. I even use the same top speed tuner setting.

Everything is the same (I confirm that GT5 does not use fd to adjust RR) there is absolutly no difference.


PLEASE show me a gear set you can get with a 3.000 FD value, ill show you it recalculated with a 6.000 and it will perform the same, top speed and all...

I say again, people need to look before they leap. Some things just may be placebo.

.......try this: (Sorry for the bad quality, my cam has a problem with the TV)

Speeds in km/h

I say again, people need to look before they leap. Some things just may be placebo.

Ohh, I totally agree! 👍

 

[praiano63]

I don't unerstand very well this mechanicals details but first i was tuning all my gears boxes with a low FD thinking it was making the gears clother one to the other. After some test ,i can't see any diference ,so now i let the stock FD on all my tunes, i just take care of the repartition of hte gears ,from a long 1st to a short 6th for example, to explore the better way where the power is.
The only advantage of a low FD is that you have more clics (setting points) to fine tune your gears. But i never needed such precision.
It's simple and it work for my cars.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

PLEASE show me a gear set you can get with a 3.000 FD value, ill show you it recalculated with a 6.000 and it will perform the same, top speed and all...

Please show me proof that they will perform the same rather than just blowing smoke.

Also, for obvious reasons, if the car hits the rev limiter w/ final at 6.000 and xyz gearset it'll hit the rev limiter at the same speed w/ final at 3.000 and equal overall ratios.

 

[dr_slump]

Please show me proof that they will perform the same rather than just blowing smoke.

Also, for obvious reasons, if the car hits the rev limiter w/ final at 6.000 and xyz gearset it'll hit the rev limiter at the same speed w/ final at 3.000 and equal overall ratios.

I gave him an exercise (2 posts above). I'm sure he won't be able to do the same speeds with a high FD like 6.000

 

[Starfirebird]

This thread has just become very interesting.

 

[chuyler1]

I think we are on track now. This is the discussion I was looking for.

 

[AssassinTuner]

I can calculate the gears that work exactly the same. That disproves the "Theory" of RJs

If Dr YOU are saying this is a trick to get the availible values for the gears because of the in game sliders limitations. That's a different story.

I allready prooved the theory wrong RJ. The proof is in the puddin. Anybody can input those 2 gear sets and see them do the same thing. I already seen it but people can use the gear sets and see for themselvs...

I'm only saying they work the same if geared the same, disproving RJs theory.

The limitations of the sliders avalible values is a different story.

Also the ratios are not directly indicitive of the gear size, but the number of teeth on the gear.

What?!?!

A 3 to 1 ratio can be

30 teeth to 10 teeth

Or even

90 teeth to 30 teeth

 

[Rotary Junkie]

I can calculate the gears that work exactly the same. That disproves the "Theory" of RJs

nope.avi

It's not the physical overall ratio which is the improvement in my "theory". It is that the same overall ratio w/ lower FD will produce better results.

I allready prooved the theory wrong RJ. The proof is in the puddin. Anybody can input those 2 gear sets and see them do the same thing. I already seen it but people can use the gear sets and see for themselvs...

I'm only saying they work the same if geared the same, disproving RJs theory.

Except your not disproving it as my theory hinges on the fact that they don't work the same when geared the same. The ratios will start and end at the same speed but acceleration is better with the numerically lower final drive.

Also the ratios are not directly indicitive of the gear size, but the number of teeth on the gear.

What?!?!

A 3 to 1 ratio can be

30 teeth to 10 teeth

Or even

90 teeth to 30 teeth

What does this have to do with anything ever? Think we all know how gears work.

Edit: I should add that FWD, MR, and RR cars do not display the same, if any benefits, and AWDs show the greatest gain.

 

[Adrenaline]

I just applied the gear sets in a mini test at Top Gear Test Track and I can say that was a difference. They overall point at which they reach the same speed might be the same, but the acceleration through each individual gear does show differences in direct ghost comparison.

Test pattern:
Offline Practice Mode
Top Gear Test Track
Once the practice starts, take the first to corners, but stop before the timing line.
Put the car in reverse and continue until the back bumper of your car touches the wall/barrier.
Launch anyway you please and accelerate across the start/finish line, and all the way down the straight until you reach the first corner.
Complete a full lap of the course, while keeping the lap legal, as to create a 'Ghost'.
Once you create your ghost, by crossing the line, with a green lap, exit, make any gear adjustments you want and repeat the launch and acceleration test.
You'll have a direct side by side comparison of your current set up (your actual car) and the previous set up (your ghost).

I won't be claiming the above to be true or false, until I finish my testing, so this is just a method others can use to do their own tests if they like.

 

[AssassinTuner]

nope.avi

It's not the physical overall ratio which is the improvement in my "theory". It is that the same overall ratio w/ lower FD will produce better results.

I proved this wrong with the 2 posted gear sets. They do everything the same including accelerate, ill do it on a RWD car when I get home if you like. I've already tested and its the same.

Except your not disproving it as my theory hinges on the fact that they don't work the same when geared the same. The ratios will start and end at the same speed but acceleration is better with the numerically lower final drive.

That's exactly why my 2 gear sets DISPROVES your theory. Use the 2 sets and see for yourself (oh yeah)

What does this have to do with anything ever? Think we all know how gears work.

Sinse it appears people think a bigger number neccesaraly means a bigger gear.

 

[AssassinTuner]

I just applied the gear sets in a mini test at Top Gear Test Track and I can say that was a difference. They overall point at which they reach the same speed might be the same, but the acceleration through each individual gear does show differences in direct ghost comparison.

Test pattern:
Offline Practice Mode
Top Gear Test Track
Once the practice starts, take the first to corners, but stop before the timing line.
Put the car in reverse and continue until the back bumper of your car touches the wall/barrier.
Launch anyway you please and accelerate across the start/finish line, and all the way down the straight until you reach the first corner.
Complete a full lap of the course, while keeping the lap legal, as to create a 'Ghost'.
Once you create your ghost, by crossing the line, with a green lap, exit, make any gear adjustments you want and repeat the launch and acceleration test.
You'll have a direct side by side comparison of your current set up (your actual car) and the previous set up (your ghost).

I won't be claiming the above to be true or false, until I finish my testing, so this is just a method others can use to do their own tests if they like.

This while I'm verry sceptical about is interesting.

Anybody care to confirm? I've tested and found 0 difference. I do think this test is interesting, I didn't run mine the same way but I will.

I can prove it with some math at home, but ill let AD make his case and see who jumps on before I do.

 

[Adrenaline]

If we want others to chime in, we need to offer an easy way to create the 2 gearing methods for any car.

I obtained this, by using the following:
The Highest/Lowest Finals need to be exactly half or double, based on perception.

Set #1
1) Rest to default
2) Final to lowest numerically
3) Every gear to highest numerically
Took a cell phone pic.

Set #2
1) Reset to default
2) Final Gear to highest numerically
3) Top Speed up one click, then down 1 click, (The same top speed)
4) Set each individual gear, to be exactly 1 half of the above set.

But I'm sure there's a more scientific way to do it, if someone would be so kind, as to share.

 

[esoxhntr]

in order to make sure you are comparing apples to apples

multiple gear ratio * fd for each gear and make sure they are the same between the low fd/high fd sets.

 

[AssassinTuner]

If we want others to chime in, we need to offer an easy way to create the 2 gearing methods for any car.

I obtained this, by using the following:
The Highest/Lowest Finals need to be exactly half or double, based on perception.

Set #1
1) Rest to default
2) Final to lowest numerically
3) Every gear to highest numerically
Took a cell phone pic.

Set #2
1) Reset to default
2) Final Gear to highest numerically
3) Top Speed up one click, then down 1 click, (The same top speed)
4) Set each individual gear, to be exactly 1 half of the above set.

But I'm sure there's a more scientific way to do it, if someone would be so kind, as to share.

Umm that is an odd approach.

Its as simple as this.

Reset the gears then use the default as our baseline.

Then do the math for the final ratio

EXAMPLE
I'm not at home so this is just an example of how to do the math for the test.

If first grear is for example 3.500 and the FD is 4.100

Our result is 3.5 x 4.1 = 14.35

We then devide 14.35 by the new fd (for example 3.000 as our min fd value) and we get our new first gear. Do the same for each gear, then repeat using the max fd value.

14.35 / 3 = 4.783

14.35 / 6 = 2.392

For a 3.000 fd our first gear would be 4.783 & for a 6.000 fd it would be 2.392 in our imaginary example.

IMPORTANT when you set the new fd readjust the top speed tuner ( 1 click left, one click right, back to where you started but with them readjusted to the new fd.

However this has already been done and the posted gear sets can be used.

Edit

Apples to apples right there in the gear sets I already posted, do the math.

The main issue with Adrenalins test (not the only issue) off the top of my head is tire temp.

A good cooldown would resolve this though, just would need to be repeated after a restart on every run.

 

[CSLACR]

Final drive in any vehicle using a driveshaft which goes to the differential is the ratio @ said differential.

The driveshaft is, in these cases (FR save Corvette etc which have a rear-mounted transaxle and a torque tube that spins @ engine RPM instead of transmission output RPM, FAWD, MAWD, RAWD) spinning at the same speed as the transmission output shaft but faster than the axle shafts and wheels. A numerically higher final drive will result in a higher driveshaft speed at a given wheel speed (as well as higher engine/trans speeds).

As for a set of 3.73s or 4.10s "increasing acceleration"... Well, yes and no. The shorter diff gear will help if there is enough traction to take advantage of the added wheel torque in 1st gear but it won't help acceleration any past that... And depending on the speed range it may add an extra shift. Most factory transmissions are also somewhat poorly spaced between 1st and 2nd gear (large drop), so a shorter diff ratio will get the car higher into 2nd "sooner" and keep the engine closer to its "happy place" for a longer duration down track.

Now, since a transmission regear is expensive and time consuming (particularly in comparison to a ring & pinion swap) you won't see people in the real world running a set of 2.73s and a 3.48 first gear instead of a "normal" T56 and 3.42s. There's also another reason in the real world to avoid high transmission multiplication in a normal manual transmission... Case stress. More multiplication in a manual transmission will exert more outward force on the transmission's gears for a given input torque... Too much of that and suddenly you've split the case.

Nom nom nom, enough off topic. Chuyler, my point of view on it is to run the absolute tallest (numerically low) final drive as you can and compensate with numerically higher transmission ratios. It definitely helps acceleration in-game (and would in the real world if it were remotely practical) and is how all the cool kids in the drag rooms do it. And how my RX-7 cracked into the 8.0 1/4 mile range in GT4.

I don't think I said anything to dispute any of this... If that was the impression given.

Something I forgot to add last night, having longer (larger) individual gears means a need for a larger transmission casing.

I still believe IRL it's pretty much 6 and 1/2 dozen.


In any case, AssasinTuner is saying exactly what I've been saying as per GT5 play.
I've done all the tricks, and already tested all of it, I guess I could try it yet again in GT5, but I certainly don't expect a verifiable difference.

 

[Adrenaline]

*Math*

The main issue with Adrenalins test (not the only issue) off the top of my head is tire temp.

A good cooldown would resolve this though, just would need to be repeated after a restart on every run.

I was trying to give them a way to avoid any math, that strays from the simple *2 or /2. But yes, the mathematical way works, but it defeats the request of simple. Either way, doesn't matter, it's why I asked for alternatives.

As for the tire temp, you're going to have to explain that further. The way I set it up, as well as explained it, the tire temp is the exact same in every test. The car is on the track the exact same amount of time and distance in every test. Pull up, stop, reverse and go. 15 seconds tops. Sure, be careful not to do any donuts in the 20 feet of road we're using as the staging area.

So I think you misunderstood how to do the test, if you could explain where you got lost, let me know, so I can prevent others from making the same mistake.

 

[dr_slump]

I can calculate the gears that work exactly the same. That disproves the "Theory" of RJs

I allready prooved the theory wrong RJ. The proof is in the puddin. Anybody can input those 2 gear sets and see them do the same thing. I already seen it but people can use the gear sets and see for themselvs...

Every child could calculate the gears. It's merely a simple multiplication. But that's not important. Important is that you can't set these gears lengths with a higher FD.

If Dr YOU are saying this is a trick to get the availible values for the gears because of the in game sliders limitations. That's a different story.

It's not a trick. It only needs to adjust the Final Gear.

I proved this wrong with the 2 posted gear sets. They do everything the same including accelerate, ill do it on a RWD car when I get home if you like. I've already tested and its the same.

You're correct with what you said, but you don't understand what RJ (and I) means. His point is not to set the same gears with a lower Final Gear. He meant that you can set the gears closer with a lower Final Gear and that would increase acceleration.

 

[AssassinTuner]

I don't think I said anything to dispute any of this... If that was the impression given.

Something I forgot to add last night, having longer (larger) individual gears means a need for a larger transmission casing.

I still believe IRL it's pretty much 6 and 1/2 dozen.

In any case, AssasinTuner is saying exactly what I've been saying as per GT5 play.
I've done all the tricks, and already tested all of it, I guess I could try it yet again in GT5, but I certainly don't expect a verifiable difference.

I've tested it too, haven't seen anything to show it different. I'm waiting though.

Dr YOU are on a different subject. Sorry but open a thread about avalible values etc. I'm speaking about the difference between 2.000 gear x 5.000 FD & 5.000 gear x 2.000 FD being non existant, they are the same. RJ thinks a 2.000 FD x 5.000 gear would be the faster of the 2. I hate to say it, but read up & keep up.

Adrenalin, unfortunatly we don't have the 1/4 run like GT4 so mirroring launches is not as easy, but like I said the tire issue is resolved with a cool down, what's your problem? Annother issue is track imperfections, it will be hard to line up on the EXACT same spot, any difference could impact the result.

 

[AssassinTuner]

Please show me proof that they will perform the same rather than just blowing smoke.

Here, I had No_OB make a calc for you. It will prove it for every car in GT5.....

No smoke blowing, just disproving your Theory.

Here is a easy calculator to do it all for you.

Just reset to default and use the default values in the selectable fields.

Then in the game adjust the FD to your min and max, reset the top speed tuner (1 click left, one click right back to the original position)

You wont have to enter the individual gears, they will already be there as the default for the TS Tuner slash FD.

EXACTLY the same, every time....

 

[CSLACR]

Here, I had No_OB make a calc for you. It will prove it for every car in GT5.....

No smoke blowing, just disproving your Theory.

Here is a easy calculator to do it all for you.

Just reset to default and use the default values in the selectable fields.

Then in the game adjust the FD to your min and max, reset the top speed tuner (1 click left, one click right back to the original position)

You wont have to enter the individual gears, they will already be there as the default for the TS Tuner slash FD.

EXACTLY the same, every time....

Well I think we all know with the default "top speed" setting on different final drives the individual gears lengths will always be the same.
RJ is saying the identical gearing based off a low final drive results in quicker acceleration the the identical gearing with a high final drive ratio.

He's saying 4x3 and 3x4 have identical speeds reached in each gear, (which is un-deniable) and therefore "appear" the same, but you will actually go faster with the lower final drive, despite the actual speeds in every gear being the same.

 

[AssassinTuner]

Well I think we all know with the default "top speed" setting on different final drives the individual gears lengths will always be the same.
RJ is saying the identical gearing based off a low final drive results in quicker acceleration the the identical gearing with a high final drive ratio.

He's saying 4x3 and 3x4 have identical speeds reached in each gear, (which is un-deniable) and therefore "appear" the same, but you will actually go faster with the lower final drive, despite the actual speeds in every gear being the same.

I say they won't, and prove it. Try the calc it will use the ratios and only alter the gear based off FD. Using default values as a base is just easier, it will spit out gears calculated off the final ratio and produce the same performance with both min and max FD.

Its definitive Proof, simple as that.

This

Performs EXACTLY the same as this

Case Closed...

Umm are you still unsure? Run the calc see the results and do your best to prove it wrong...

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Well I think we all know with the default "top speed" setting on different final drives the individual gears lengths will always be the same.
RJ is saying the identical gearing based off a low final drive results in quicker acceleration the the identical gearing with a high final drive ratio.

He's saying 4x3 and 3x4 have identical speeds reached in each gear, (which is un-deniable) and therefore "appear" the same, but you will actually go faster with the lower final drive, despite the actual speeds in every gear being the same.

I'm saying you'll accelerate faster. Not "go faster", though as long as you're not hitting the rev limiter at the top of top gear it should be slightly faster.

I say they won't, and prove it. Try the calc it will use the ratios and only alter the gear based off FD. Using default values as a base is just easier, it will spit out gears calculated off the final ratio and produce the same performance with both min and max FD.

Its definitive Proof, simple as that.

Make a vidja "proving" there's no difference in acceleration time. Try a stock Impreza of whatever generation with an FC gearbox and nothing else. Try default ratios, then same overall ratios as default at minimum final. Test using automatic, standing grid start in some race where the car's outclassed enough to not rear-end stuff.

 

[AssassinTuner]

I'm saying you'll accelerate faster. Not "go faster", though as long as you're not hitting the rev limiter at the top of top gear it should be slightly faster.

Make a vidja "proving" there's no difference in acceleration time. Try a stock Impreza of whatever generation with an FC gearbox and nothing else. Try default ratios, then same overall ratios as default at minimum final. Test using automatic, standing grid start in some race where the car's outclassed enough to not rear-end stuff.

I don't have to provide any MORE proof, my calc will prove it already with 1000 GT5 cars. Anybody can try it and see for themselvs, they don't have to take my word for it.

This

Performs exactly like this.

You keep asking me to prove what I say. I have. Its time for you to show some proof its different from what I've proven it to be.

 

[-raVer-]

And how does this perform?

1st 4.278
2nd 2.675
3rd 1.935
4th 1.529
5th 1.260
6th 1.044
Fin 4.500


raVer

 

[AssassinTuner]

And how does this perform?

1st 4.278
2nd 2.675
3rd 1.935
4th 1.529
5th 1.260
6th 1.044
Fin 4.500

raVer

Compared to what?

 

[-raVer-]

Compared to what?

Compared to your settings on the civic.


raVer

 

[AssassinTuner]

Compared to your settings on the civic.

raVer

Use the calc and see

 

[-raVer-]

Use the calc and see

Uhmmmm....

PS 3 + Calc = doesn´t work?


raVer

 

[CSLACR]

I say they won't, and prove it. Try the calc it will use the ratios and only alter the gear based off FD. Using default values as a base is just easier, it will spit out gears calculated off the final ratio and produce the same performance with both min and max FD.

Its definitive Proof, simple as that.

This


Performs EXACTLY the same as this


Case Closed...

Umm are you still unsure? Run the calc see the results and do your best to prove it wrong...

I didn't say one out performs the other.
The thing I said was un-deniable was what you are saying about the gear ratios being the same total. But nobody has argued that.


The question at hand is whether one accelerates more quickly than the other, despite having the same totals.

He's saying 2.000 (final) times 4.000 will accelerate quicker than 4.000 (final) times 2.000.

That is the current debate.

I personally think they perform the same in GT5.

 

[AssassinTuner]

I didn't say one out performs the other.
The thing I said was un-deniable was what you are saying about the gear ratios being the same total. But nobody has argued that.

The question at hand is whether one accelerates more quickly than the other, despite having the same totals.

He's saying 2.000 (final) times 4.000 will accelerate quicker than 4.000 (final) times 2.000.

That is the current debate.

I personally think they perform the same in GT5.

I know what he is saying. Fully. I am proving it wrong. Accelerating faster is out performing. One goes faster then the other to the same top speed. I get it, it's just completely wrong.


Okay since you can't do the calculations Raver I'll do it for you.

Your gears

Min FD

Max FD

All of them perform the same exactly.