Tuner Challenge Championship ~ April McLaren MP4
- Thread starter Adrenaline
- 897 comments
- 75,081 views
- 757
- Paris
- BlueShift
Adrenaline, I feel it's getting more random and I don't like it.
Moving with tires cons ON + tranny before knowing the race is not only difficult to read but impossible to know what is the best value : they are moving on averages.
And as for the tranny, that's also dumb, sorry.
No driver would do that in the online mode.
Alrigth, I'll have let's say... Short gearbox. No high. No short. Pick a value, get 5 seconds difference when you choose the track and here it is.
Who cares other settings anyway, +/-2 seconds. Everything is getting destroyed by luck. Do you really think we gonna "work" on these for hours just to see the result broken by a dice toss ?
We, just, need, to, set, the, tranny, plus, initial, after, the, track, is, choosen.
Just a few questions :
- do you think tuners have to know how to set precise LSD to win that competition ?
- do you think tranny is important to win on Le Mans, High speed ring (where I can get -0.8 second with 30 km/h difference - watch the diff between the first and the fifth) or Autumn Ring Mini ?
We don't need to know the track for all the settings, but for tranny/initial, you seem to forget some important details.
The last tune here could have been first who knows. At least #6 would be on Le Mans, and I should be better in Autumn ring mini.
And throw a dice for other circuits.
Moving with tires cons ON + tranny before knowing the race is not only difficult to read but impossible to know what is the best value : they are moving on averages.
And as for the tranny, that's also dumb, sorry.
No driver would do that in the online mode.
Alrigth, I'll have let's say... Short gearbox. No high. No short. Pick a value, get 5 seconds difference when you choose the track and here it is.
Who cares other settings anyway, +/-2 seconds. Everything is getting destroyed by luck. Do you really think we gonna "work" on these for hours just to see the result broken by a dice toss ?
We, just, need, to, set, the, tranny, plus, initial, after, the, track, is, choosen.
Just a few questions :
- do you think tuners have to know how to set precise LSD to win that competition ?
- do you think tranny is important to win on Le Mans, High speed ring (where I can get -0.8 second with 30 km/h difference - watch the diff between the first and the fifth) or Autumn Ring Mini ?
We don't need to know the track for all the settings, but for tranny/initial, you seem to forget some important details.
The last tune here could have been first who knows. At least #6 would be on Le Mans, and I should be better in Autumn ring mini.
And throw a dice for other circuits.
Last edited:
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
BlueShift, if you find gearing to make a 5 second difference ANYWHERE you're doing something very seriously wrong.
The only time I've noticed large-ish gains from gearing was at Tsukuba in an extremely peaky car that only had a 5-speed gearbox, before we were able to adjust individual ratios. Even then the difference was less than half of a second.
And sure, if you're bouncing off the rev limiter at 120mph in a 500hp car at Sarthe you're going to lose masses of time... But I fail completely to understand why you would set gearing like that in anything. My ratios wind up tighter spaced than setting it to "112mph" gives you yet my cars have no problems hitting their absolute theoretical maximum speed.
The only time I've noticed large-ish gains from gearing was at Tsukuba in an extremely peaky car that only had a 5-speed gearbox, before we were able to adjust individual ratios. Even then the difference was less than half of a second.
And sure, if you're bouncing off the rev limiter at 120mph in a 500hp car at Sarthe you're going to lose masses of time... But I fail completely to understand why you would set gearing like that in anything. My ratios wind up tighter spaced than setting it to "112mph" gives you yet my cars have no problems hitting their absolute theoretical maximum speed.
- 1,155
- artic_zap
BlueShift, if you find gearing to make a 5 second difference ANYWHERE you're doing something very seriously wrong.
The only time I've noticed large-ish gains from gearing was at Tsukuba in an extremely peaky car that only had a 5-speed gearbox, before we were able to adjust individual ratios. Even then the difference was less than half of a second.
And sure, if you're bouncing off the rev limiter at 120mph in a 500hp car at Sarthe you're going to lose masses of time... But I fail completely to understand why you would set gearing like that in anything. My ratios wind up tighter spaced than setting it to "112mph" gives you yet my cars have no problems hitting their absolute theoretical maximum speed.
Agree'd. Gear tuning won't matter much if you're good.
- 3,359
- California
- PumpinNumbies
Blueshift, I've yet to disagree with you about your idea. I haven't said no, nor yes, I'm taking it into consideration and that's as far as it's gone for now. I'm unsure why you're getting so defensive to something I haven't even responded to.
- 3,359
- California
- PumpinNumbies
Times updated for the 10th driver, and I have 1 more driver submitting for sure.
- 757
- Paris
- BlueShift
I can have a 0.8 difference on High Speed Ring with a ZZII, gearbox set @ 360 vs a slow 390 one, well under or just sligthly under the minute.
More or less 30km/h difference. It's not "you just don't know how to setup a gearbox", it's more like "you though it was long track and it was not, I was lucky not you".
Now since that car can go up to 360km/h and more, you can setup the gearbox @390km/h on La Sarthe. The 390 box would win (by 5 second, at least, what I said) and not the 360 one.
What do you choose : 360 or 390 then ? So... It's like throwing a dice, where the dice is the track..
1st to 5th have 0.8xx second differences, or 30km/h diff with that ZZII on High speed Ring, making the gearbox not only capital but central to your setup, and it's throwing a dice with this system. this will just end up having a lucky setup and unlucky setup, not the best one.
Assuming you'll have "the best gearbox possible", using gear-by-gear setups with a long one is not really true, it's a heavy track-dependant setting, not as medium as aero or susp. So keep heavily track dependant settings to set when the track is chosen seem to be the more reasonable thing to do, and no late tuners this time.
Since we have no chrono on a 1000m track, how do we do : use GT4 for that ?
I would. I will try to find the same motor at least. Too bad for people who don't own the game.
Also what is the start : running starts or not. That would be something capital to know when you setup a gearbox : do you need fast accel from standing to 100-150 or not ?
I won't take the risk to loose more than a few hours on this event with a system like this : if all my """work""" is spoiled by some lucky gearbox bastard, what is the benefit to fine tune something : what is the special benefit to take some time fine tuning to win 0.01xx/0.02xx on each braking if you throw a dice and win -0.8xx, the only track to have more than 40 curves with 40+ braking phases is Nordschleiffe and it won't be used.
I could only do default setup with a gearbox and count on luck. 360 ? 390 ?
It would make sense if there was some few seconds between the first and the second, not here.
The answer is in your statement : you haven't responded to it, so I started to be sligthly more vocal on that problem. (sorry)
Last edited:
- 757
- Paris
- BlueShift
On HSR you're 0.8 late over people who choosed your gearbox minus 30km/h.
If that happened with this kind of leaderboard spacement, you would compete for the 8th place despite of the qualities of your setup that happened to be 3rd
This is biased by people in front of the 4th place or what ? Statically speaking, Paulie, Rotary and you have an advantage over me to make this random at this point... For the championship, people under the 4th will have to have sligthly better average luck than me to get back in front. So I would have to say "let's make this random" to keep in 4th place, but I want to win, I made some big mistake on the setup #1.
If that happened with this kind of leaderboard spacement, you would compete for the 8th place despite of the qualities of your setup that happened to be 3rd
This is biased by people in front of the 4th place or what ? Statically speaking, Paulie, Rotary and you have an advantage over me to make this random at this point... For the championship, people under the 4th will have to have sligthly better average luck than me to get back in front. So I would have to say "let's make this random" to keep in 4th place, but I want to win, I made some big mistake on the setup #1.
Last edited:
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
No, it's you not knowing how to set up a gearbox.
Let's use that example you just gave... I know you never use first with either of those settings aside from launching the car. Now, what if you took the 2nd-6th gears of the 360km/h gearbox and made them 1st through 5th, with 6th gear set to allow for optimum top speed? That's right, you get a winner for every conceivable track. This may indeed cause issues with launching the vehicle from a stop with AWD and a laggy turbo but this competition is entirely based around flying laps anyway.
No. Just no.
If you set the gearbox the way I do, the difference between any given track will be far smaller than you imply versus gearing set exactly to the needs of a given driver at a given track.
It's not nearly as track-dependent as you think and timing acceleration runs is relatively irrelevant; I set first, then 6th, then the rest with spacing to keep the car in the powerband as well as possible.
In 2WD vehicles, standing start acceleration is rarely left lacking; I set 1st gear to launch the car as efficiently as possible without bogging or spinning the tires excessively.
4WD is somewhat more complicated; 1st usually needs to be quite short on low-power 4WDs to keep it from bogging... This means that the ratios need to be spaced somewhat wider to keep top speed up but then most 4WD vehicles are turbocharged with fairly wide power curves so it's not an issue.
*sigh* It's got nothing to do with luck mate.
There simply won't be "a few seconds" between first and second when everyone is a decent tuner. In fact, you'll rarely improve your average lap by more than 1-2 seconds versus default settings... So for that to happen, everyone but first place would have to be making the car WORSE than default while first place improves it a bit.
- 1,139
- budious
I'm in third with Stock transmission, by your logic [Blueshift] I should be running last or at least in the bottom half of ranks?
In fact, if you pull up the tune spreadsheet, the top 3 tunes are all 30-50mph peak max speed above your transmission speed specification?
In fact, if you pull up the tune spreadsheet, the top 3 tunes are all 30-50mph peak max speed above your transmission speed specification?
Last edited:
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
Not quite; nobody was able to properly adjust gear ratios this round... When restricted to autoset only there's only so much you can do. Lower autoset = closer spacing, lower top speed, higher autoset = wider spacing, higher top speed (to a point obviously). This isn't the case with fully adjustable ratios; we can now have our cake and eat it too.
1st gear only needs to be short enough to let the car accelerate properly from ~25-30mph; the rest can be very closely spaced and still allow for excellent top speed.
Edit: D'oh, just noticed you used the absolute stock trans for the Kia. It wouldn't surprise me to see it being better spaced than an autoset-only transmission.
- 1,139
- budious
I agreed with what you said, I was referring to Blueshift's claim, that I should be automatically penalized for my gearing being too long, edited him to brackets so make it clearer.
Yeah, the factory transmission is what I used. I liked the gear ratios in it without having full customization available.
I kinda disagree with the 1st gear bit you're making, since these are rolling laps the spin up to second gear is kinda irrelevant, time it so second gear starts at the lowest speeds you'll make through cornering so no downshift occurs to 1st, imo. Only useful though if we knew the track ahead of time... but generally applicable and can operate similarly at slower rate of speed when manual shifting; but from view of automatic shifting, time it not to drop to 1st but be in low RPM for 2nd.
Yeah, the factory transmission is what I used. I liked the gear ratios in it without having full customization available.
I kinda disagree with the 1st gear bit you're making, since these are rolling laps the spin up to second gear is kinda irrelevant, time it so second gear starts at the lowest speeds you'll make through cornering so no downshift occurs to 1st, imo. Only useful though if we knew the track ahead of time... but generally applicable and can operate similarly at slower rate of speed when manual shifting; but from view of automatic shifting, time it not to drop to 1st but be in low RPM for 2nd.
Last edited:
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
See, in that case my 1st gear would be roughly equivalent to your 2nd gear, particularly considering they're flying laps, meaning I can run my usual long 1st gear in an AWD without being penalized for lack of launch speed.
This allows me to keep the car in the powerband all of the time down straights while being immune to having the top gear be too short for adequate top speed performance.
- 757
- Paris
- BlueShift
Who forgot the final gear and its effects on the initial of a LSD ?
You can't have what you say without destroying the initial of your LSD.
If you keep 1-5 gear + final from the 360 and go with a 6th recalculated from your 390 gearbox you'll destroy the average value of your initial in 6th.
You're also basically telling that 0-1000m or 0-5000m or whatever the distance runs are independant of the gear spacing by the time you have the same 1st ratio, don't hit the rev and don't go in the 6th. In GT4 that don't work like this. Even the (gear, final) same ratios don't make the exact same time. I know my Impreza RA Spec C, thank you...
I think not and I also think your initial will be useless at high speed.
Last edited:
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
Mmmmkay, you've now completely lost me.
That said, there are ways to get the ratio spreads I refer to with exactly the same final drive as used otherwise.
Though... I have my reasons for running ridiculously low (numerically) final drives in FR and AWD cars.
That said, there are ways to get the ratio spreads I refer to with exactly the same final drive as used otherwise.
Though... I have my reasons for running ridiculously low (numerically) final drives in FR and AWD cars.
- 757
- Paris
- BlueShift
I knew how to do but I forgot... I didn't played with individual gear since GT4. Gah, I will re-discover that, that's not the problem.Mmmmkay, you've now completely lost me.
That said, there are ways to get the ratio spreads I refer to with exactly the same final drive as used otherwise.
The problem is you saying having 2-5 set at speed x is the same accel effect as 2-5 set at speed y, no matter the tracks or their configuration.
If it's not,since the rpm aren't the same, then x is better of y on some track and the opposite on other depending on tigth corner or not (and the starting of a gear amount of torque put at moment t of a curve or at moment t' of a curve).
It stays a matter of luck. x or y, throw a dice ; we have to know exactly when the gears are shifted or else it's a matter of luck, aka put random torque at random moments in random curves on a random track, is it really so hard to understand from where this 0.8 comes from?
You where talking to me about torque and how I ****ed it in my setup, I agree to some point, but torque in curve and torque at braking kept this one not so far as you ! (the baddest thing in my setup was the front decel, not the gearbox)
If you don't consider the powerband you'll loose accel instead of winning an high LSD. Or loose high LSD instead of winning accel, I don't remember the side of this effect. On 4WD I agree, who cares the LSD, it can be set at any values.
You're talking about accel vs grip, engine torque vs LSD's sensitivity. When GT4 came out, I spoke about that with a Renault ingeneer friend of mine, who's work is about gearbox ratio setting and road testing. He said there's no best gearbox.
Funny story with him btw : in 2000 +/-, he made me and my bro the passengers of a very very familial chassis car, I think a Modus, with the "by that time" Clio Sport V6 Phase II prototype engine and gearbox. At traffic ligth turned green we burnt the road and put 100m to some big Mercedes and BMW cars that were making fun of us, three times in a row
In a Modus chassis, "mommy and daddy's car"... Tut, tut ! Growl, growl ! Zoom... "wtf ? a modus ?" lol at their total humiliation And yes, this was strictly forbidden to show the car to us but... Oh **** Modus ! Tut, tut ! Growl, growl, zoom Low or high final also makes ****** braking but I don't remember which one. I think high maybe. So here the 4WD should care.
Thinking a perfect gearbox makes me thinking of people arguing around their favorite color. But if you don't have an object to paint (track) with the appropriate brush (car), we don't even see the color.
Last edited:
- 3,359
- California
- PumpinNumbies
Ok, the results are in boys.
There are 2 'sheets' Sheet 1 has every lap time, and averages per driver in Gold, Silver, Bronze (greenish but w/e)
Sheet 2 has all the leader boards and data compiled easily readable.
Results are final pending any possible errors found in my work.
Congratulations to Rotary Junkie of RKM February's Winner!
Good luck and hope to see you all back for March!
February's Data
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc...jRTR3VGbjUxN1J6UFlVbmc&hl=en&authkey=CP2StbwP
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc...jRTR3VGbjUxN1J6UFlVbmc&hl=en&authkey=CP2StbwP
There are 2 'sheets' Sheet 1 has every lap time, and averages per driver in Gold, Silver, Bronze (greenish but w/e)
Sheet 2 has all the leader boards and data compiled easily readable.
Results are final pending any possible errors found in my work.
Congratulations to Rotary Junkie of RKM February's Winner!
Good luck and hope to see you all back for March!
- 3,359
- California
- PumpinNumbies
- 3,359
- California
- PumpinNumbies
Okay.... I know you all love my changes /grin
Due to a lack of input, I've taken what I can and have tried to create something that may resolve some issues that have been brought to my attention. This is all up for discussion and I welcome any and all thoughts on the matter. For now, until convinced otherwise, we're going to try it out for this month and see how it goes, gauge the feedback and go from there.
Issue #1: Track, Transmission Tuning & the prevention of specific tunes.
In past challenges such as this, drivers were not mandated to a single track. All drivers were allowed to choose a track of their choice to test the cars. This, in theory, will solve a few problems that may have been present previously.
1: Drivers testing on tracks they are unfamiliar with can largely effect the true nature of the tune being tested. Allowing them to choose their favorite track should yield more accurate results, as well as encourage more drivers to join, if they aren't forced to drive tracks they may hate.
2: Tuners can put their mind at ease about fine tuning their transmissions for a certain track. Knowing that an array of tracks will be used, you'll immediately know what types of top speeds you're looking at on average and won't be forced to focus on specific straights, corner entry or exits.
3: Obviously since multiple tracks will be used, it should be rather obvious track specific tunes shouldn't exist, and even if they do, they'll probably suffer for it.
Due to the above, obviously last months 'lap average' system will be out the window... to a point. Each driver will still be required to submit their 3 fastest laps and they will be averaged together, per driver. Then a very simple point system will be used to accumulate progress of each tune.
Assuming 10 tunes submitted, first place receives 10 points, last place 1 point, per driver. The tunes submitted, will directly effect the points awarded, so that 1st always receives the amount of tunes entered, last always receives 1.
Example: Driver 1 has the following order for their track:
1st Rotary Junkie (10)
2nd Paulie (9)
3rd budious (8)
4th Blueshift (7)
Driver 2 has the following order for a different track:
1st Paulie (10)
2nd budious (9)
3rd Rotary Junkie (8)
4th Blueshift (7)
The total points for these 2 drivers submitted times will result in:
1st Paulie (19)
2nd Rotary Junkie (18)
3rd budious (17)
4th Blueshift (14)
The points will continue to accumulate until all drivers have submitted their times, and this is how tunes will be shown 'ranked' in the live leader board.
*Do be aware that the point system does not reflect championship points, that will remain the same as last month. Rank points =/= championship points. 1st place for the month will still receive 30 points, as outlined in the main post 'Point system' section.
This month, the Live Leader Board will be displayed with your actual names, rather than a number. But drivers will not know which tune corresponds to which garage, as the 'tunes' will still be sent anonymously, the same exact way they were displayed last month. Only the leader board will change, so you guys can trash talk all you want =)
This month we're also going to try tuning 2 cars. You have 2 weeks to tune the first car (Nissan XANAVI NISMO Z 06) and then 2 weeks to tune the second car (Honda RAYBRIG NSX 06). From the 1st-14th you tune car 1, from the 15th-28th you tune car 2, while drivers are testing car 1. This will lead to new results coming in every 2 weeks, rather than a single month, and will also allow for more tunes to be produced per month.
This is a trial period, I'm open to any other ideas you all may have, changes, thoughts, feedback etc etc. The above is not final, it's merely a 'feeler' or 'test month' and can still changed based on feedback within the next 2 weeks. Drivers won't touch the cars until the 15th, so we have 14 days to openly discuss the layout.
Please remember, that this month all tunes will be driven in the 'Online Lounge'. Whether or not you tune there, is completely up to you. It's recommended but not required. Cars will be tested with Tire & Fuel consumption OFF, but again tuning with these options ON, may benefit you in the long run. Grip reduction will be set to Real, Aids will remain required off, with the exception of ABS at 1, and the use of Driving Line is permitted.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask. I do apologize for the changes, but I hope you all understand I'm only doing it, to try and provide a Tuner Challenge that you all enjoy participating in. I'm more than willing to see this event adapt as often as it needs to, to serve it's purpose.
Thanks guys,
Adrenaline
Due to a lack of input, I've taken what I can and have tried to create something that may resolve some issues that have been brought to my attention. This is all up for discussion and I welcome any and all thoughts on the matter. For now, until convinced otherwise, we're going to try it out for this month and see how it goes, gauge the feedback and go from there.
Issue #1: Track, Transmission Tuning & the prevention of specific tunes.
In past challenges such as this, drivers were not mandated to a single track. All drivers were allowed to choose a track of their choice to test the cars. This, in theory, will solve a few problems that may have been present previously.
1: Drivers testing on tracks they are unfamiliar with can largely effect the true nature of the tune being tested. Allowing them to choose their favorite track should yield more accurate results, as well as encourage more drivers to join, if they aren't forced to drive tracks they may hate.
2: Tuners can put their mind at ease about fine tuning their transmissions for a certain track. Knowing that an array of tracks will be used, you'll immediately know what types of top speeds you're looking at on average and won't be forced to focus on specific straights, corner entry or exits.
3: Obviously since multiple tracks will be used, it should be rather obvious track specific tunes shouldn't exist, and even if they do, they'll probably suffer for it.
Due to the above, obviously last months 'lap average' system will be out the window... to a point. Each driver will still be required to submit their 3 fastest laps and they will be averaged together, per driver. Then a very simple point system will be used to accumulate progress of each tune.
Assuming 10 tunes submitted, first place receives 10 points, last place 1 point, per driver. The tunes submitted, will directly effect the points awarded, so that 1st always receives the amount of tunes entered, last always receives 1.
Example: Driver 1 has the following order for their track:
1st Rotary Junkie (10)
2nd Paulie (9)
3rd budious (8)
4th Blueshift (7)
Driver 2 has the following order for a different track:
1st Paulie (10)
2nd budious (9)
3rd Rotary Junkie (8)
4th Blueshift (7)
The total points for these 2 drivers submitted times will result in:
1st Paulie (19)
2nd Rotary Junkie (18)
3rd budious (17)
4th Blueshift (14)
The points will continue to accumulate until all drivers have submitted their times, and this is how tunes will be shown 'ranked' in the live leader board.
*Do be aware that the point system does not reflect championship points, that will remain the same as last month. Rank points =/= championship points. 1st place for the month will still receive 30 points, as outlined in the main post 'Point system' section.
This month, the Live Leader Board will be displayed with your actual names, rather than a number. But drivers will not know which tune corresponds to which garage, as the 'tunes' will still be sent anonymously, the same exact way they were displayed last month. Only the leader board will change, so you guys can trash talk all you want =)
This month we're also going to try tuning 2 cars. You have 2 weeks to tune the first car (Nissan XANAVI NISMO Z 06) and then 2 weeks to tune the second car (Honda RAYBRIG NSX 06). From the 1st-14th you tune car 1, from the 15th-28th you tune car 2, while drivers are testing car 1. This will lead to new results coming in every 2 weeks, rather than a single month, and will also allow for more tunes to be produced per month.
This is a trial period, I'm open to any other ideas you all may have, changes, thoughts, feedback etc etc. The above is not final, it's merely a 'feeler' or 'test month' and can still changed based on feedback within the next 2 weeks. Drivers won't touch the cars until the 15th, so we have 14 days to openly discuss the layout.
Please remember, that this month all tunes will be driven in the 'Online Lounge'. Whether or not you tune there, is completely up to you. It's recommended but not required. Cars will be tested with Tire & Fuel consumption OFF, but again tuning with these options ON, may benefit you in the long run. Grip reduction will be set to Real, Aids will remain required off, with the exception of ABS at 1, and the use of Driving Line is permitted.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask. I do apologize for the changes, but I hope you all understand I'm only doing it, to try and provide a Tuner Challenge that you all enjoy participating in. I'm more than willing to see this event adapt as often as it needs to, to serve it's purpose.
Thanks guys,
Adrenaline
- 2,961
- Geneva
- Kimky
- Kimky
That still wont produce good result. Drivers need a track they are familiar with so they can put there best on driving and not on learning brake points etc..
For example I'm not driving much on Trial Mountain and I had lots of trouble with getting the best result out of turn 1-2-3-9-14-15 even if my average laps werent bad I wasnt satisfied with most of them, feels like I could have went faster.
