Tuner Challenge Championship ~ April McLaren MP4

[Rotary Junkie]

Hmmm, okay.

My first 15 laps in the stock form of the car, made me question what all the tuners were talking about when they said it handled pretty well on stock settings. This car is an understeer pig for me, but managed a 3 lap average of 1:28.422

I wasn't one of those saying it handled well stock.

It's insanely mind-numbing to drive. Fast, but numb.

Also, if you don't manage a low 1:27 with mine at least once I'm going to slap you because I know you're right at my pace if not slightly quicker.

 

[Paulie]

Hmmm, okay.

My first 15 laps in the stock form of the car, made me question what all the tuners were talking about when they said it handled pretty well on stock settings. This car is an understeer pig for me, but managed a 3 lap average of 1:28.422

Tune #11: I found the car to still have understeer issues. The rear end seems to have an odd feeling where it doesn't settle down, and at times felt like it negatively effected hard corner entries. I felt the front brake balance was too high as I locked them up far too often hindering entry and because of this, made it hard to salvage the center. Car lacked maneuverability in all aspects of the track and had traction issues on exit. I feel this tune completely neglected any advantages that could have been gained from LSD adjustments and might come back to bite them in the end.

Tune #2: I'm still fighting understeer but the overall stability of the car as well as agility is a definite improvement over stock form, most noticeable through the esses.

Tune #10: Extremely consistent; 14 of my 15 laps were within 1.1 seconds of each other. Still coping with understeer.

Tune #3: First break through on understeer. While still present, it's very much repressed allowing for a much smoother ride through and through. Far easier and more enjoyable to drive than stock form. I also feel the transmission gearing was extremely well matched for this track, as it seems tuned to specifically technical parts of the track that could possibly give this tune a nice edge.

Tune #9: I must admit I was skeptic. Obviously the outcast of the group when looking at the spreadsheet, and yet... still preforms. I've become so accustom to understeer, I have no desire to even continue complaining about it. I dislike this car, period. But... this tune did quite well. My 3 best laps are within a tenth of eachother making for a nice average. Under hard braking on entrance, I'm tearing up the outside front tire.

Gunna have dinner and take a break, then I'll get to the next 6.

Do these tune numbers refer to the spreadsheet, meaning tune #2 is in fact the first tune listed, and tune #11 is the last?

Edit: I'll have to check what my best lap time was, I think it was a 1'26.

 

[Adrenaline]

Do these tune numbers refer to the spreadsheet, meaning tune #2 is in fact the first tune listed, and tune #11 is the last?

Edit: I'll have to check what my best lap time was, I think it was a 1'26.

Correct, there is no tune #1.

I've yet to reach the 26's in any tune... Screw you and your Division 1 skills

I have decided to add a "Live Leaderboard" in the first post of this thread that I will update every time a driver submits their lap times. This way if gives the tuners something to keep an eye on, but they will be listed, again, by their spreadsheet number. So I hope you guys can recognize your own tunes

1 tune left and I'll post the last half of the mini reviews

 

[Adrenaline]

Spartacus: Gods of the Arena + Mac & Cheese + The Office and I'm refreshed and ready to go. Mind numbing is a perfect definition, thanks for that RJ.

Tune #4: Feels quite similar to stock set up, but with more understeer on exit, forcing longer coasting times through the center. Also had issues going over bumps with a single side of the car, most notably the last corner prior to the chicane on Trial Mountain, where I found myself sideways 3 times in the 15 laps.

Tune #8: They're all starting to feel alike. Initially this one felt like it had strong turn in, but with some laps it began to feel like the rest. Lacks the agility and maneuverability I'd prefer to have.

Tune #5: Felt pretty good overall, considering the platform at least. I'm running out of ways to describe tightness.

Tune #7: Worst of all tunes, both in lap times, ride quality, consistency, and any other aspect you can make up. 3 lap average is 2 full seconds slower than the stock settings, what a garbage tune, who ever submitted this should be ashamed of themselves, and they owe me 23 minutes of my life back. On the bright side, it had great turn in, average through the center, tight off and this gearing range, along with tune#3, strategically maximizes the cars ability through sector 1.

Tune #6: Thank god it's finally over! Well, this round... This tune didn't quite have the agility to make left to right movements through ess curves, but did seem to posses the best bite on accel for corner exit, which really helped on the exit of the first tunnel. Exit was average, turn in was lacking a bit, but the center was average as well.

Edit: Leader Board is now Live! Initial post of the thread, and will be updated as more times come in! Hopefully this will help ease the tuners eagerly awaiting =)

 

[budious]

I take it your review for #7 is purely sarcastic, I had to check the leadersboard twice.

 

[Paulie]

I'm a little surprised, I thought the gearing alone would dictate the results for some tunes that did better than I expected, and tune 7 looks so close to tune 6 yet they differ so greatly for you. Are you sure it was the worst tune (#7) because it ranked first place in your testing, and you claim it was 2 seconds slower than stock.

Edit: Never mind I'm with the program now, apparently you loved tune #7. Plus I looked up my current best lap, it's a 1'26.680 with the pedals doing who knows what. Are the top few tunes a close battle?

 

[Adrenaline]

I'm a little surprised, I thought the gearing alone would dictate the results for some tunes that did better than I expected, and tune 7 looks so close to tune 6 yet they differ so greatly for you. Are you sure it was the worst tune (#7) because it ranked first place in your testing, and you claim it was 2 seconds slower than stock.

Edit: Never mind I'm with the program now, apparently you loved tune #7. Plus I looked up my current best lap, it's a 1'26.680 with the pedals doing who knows what. Are the top few tunes a close battle?

Just pickin on someone Although between 3 & 7 I'm not sure which I preferred, because they were so far apart in the tests. I think based on feel alone I liked #3 more and my lap times were more consistent. But I'm pretty positive they'll both be in round 2 so I'll be driving them both again.

I did avoid my normal driving technique on this track, because I wanted to be as consistent and fair as possible. In Sector 2, with my normal driving, I use the e-brake for 3 corners, (especially for cars this tight) but for these tests I restrained from doing so, to avoid any possible issues.

As for the closeness of the top spots... How about .006 separating 1st and 2nd?
Or .450 separating 1st and 6th?
I'd venture to say it's pretty close, but who knows how other drivers will fair.

 

[Paulie]

As for the closeness of the top spots... How about .006 separating 1st and 2nd?
Or .450 separating 1st and 6th?
I'd venture to say it's pretty close, but who knows how other drivers will fair.

Yep that's pretty close. Until the other drivers weigh in and that margin blows out in favour of one or the other.

Edit: This seems oddly appropriate while the tuners watch the results rolling in.

 

[BlueShift]

I keep repeating myself, but without even gearbox, these times mean nothing.

Adrenaline, you know why I'm telling that.

@tuners : what place do you got at the 4x4 event with that car ?

 

[budious]

I keep repeating myself, but without even gearbox, these times mean nothing.

Adrenaline, you know why I'm telling that.

@tuners : what place do you got at the 4x4 event with that car ?

I think that's why his three track idea may work better if the tuners get to know which three ahead of time, then we can find a median for best average performance across the three tracks during our tuning and the setups should be already neutralized. My original spring rates for neutralized on my car are actually a little bit higher than ones I submitted, but the ones I submit here were about a quarter second faster on average for me... I'm not even sure the changes I make tailored towards pad users like myself are necessarily having the same effect for wheel users who still might want the stiffer setup. I'd like to see results after some pad test drivers submit times on tunes tuned by wheel tuners.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

I keep repeating myself, but without even gearbox, these times mean nothing.

Adrenaline, you know why I'm telling that.

@tuners : what place do you got at the 4x4 event with that car ?

They mean plenty.

Although, the results would mean even more if we could set our own ratios a la GT1-5P. Getting gearing (and LSD, and aero, and everything else adjustable) right is critical to a "good tune". I always go for a good all-round gearing setup; I probably went a bit on the short side this time but the car is in no danger of smashing the rev limiter before it gets to the end of all but the absolute longest straights.

I think that's why his three track idea may work better if the tuners get to know which three ahead of time, then we can find a median for best average performance across the three tracks during our tuning and the setups should be already neutralized. My original spring rates for neutralized on my car are actually a little bit higher than ones I submitted, but the ones I submit here were about a quarter second faster on average for me... I'm not even sure the changes I make tailored towards pad users like myself are necessarily having the same effect for wheel users who still might want the stiffer setup. I'd like to see results after some pad test drivers submit times on tunes tuned by wheel tuners.

Or you could've just tested at tracks other than Trial?

I know I did. And always do. Trial is an awesome track for testing but there's a certain level of "burn out" that always occurs there for me when trying to tune there, likely caused by my knowing where I need/want to be on track a bit too well and getting very angry when the car doesn't do exactly what it needs to.

I'm 100% confident in my setup working well at other tracks (confirmed by online testing, both times I've taken it out for our semi-nightly "street legal" runs it's run far quicker than the PWR suggests it should). It's not entirely tire-efficient but it's bloody quick until the fronts sign off... Such is the life of a fast AWD.

 

[BlueShift]

Please...

Let's cut the crap, I'm setup #4, which is really easy to guess when you know my tunes habits (ext<comp, no toe, lsd tuning), got a 250km/h gearbox, which is the shortest and personnaly can only do 1'30.9 on that circuit, trying almost 3x4 hours on it (btw by reading your "low 1'27", I was saying to myself I lost before entering this comp). So I don't know if ppl cut the grass or not but I was assuming a time attack so only legal times and made the tune for that.


Adrenaline could do +0.7 of a 1'27.0 time in first few laps with that tune. I ran around maybe 150 laps around that circuit, never did better than 1'30. I never hit the rev limiter too, if you want to know.


So, my box is just plain ******** for people like him who drives like that.

Is it really difficult to understand I can't drive fast enough to "tune" a gearbox for an ace driver ? I'm a tuner, not an ace driver !


Example #2 :
Let's go on, say, Grand Valley. What setup most people change ? The gearbox.
Why ?

Because it's very track specific and very "driver's knowledge of the track" specific.

Example #3
1st: Tune #7 (0.00) - 162mph / 260kph
2nd: Tune #3 (-.006) - 162mph / 260kph
3rd: Tune #9 (-.223) - 168mph / 270kph
4th: Tune #5 (-.245) - 224mph / 360kph
5th: Tune #8 (-.369) - stock / na
6th: Tune #6 (-.445) - 193mph / 310kph
7th: Tune #2 (-.752) - 193mph / 310kph
8th: Tune #4 (-.788) - 155mph / 250kph
9th: Tune #1 (-1.304) - 193mph / 310kph
10th: Tune #10 (-2.597) - 211mph / 340kph

Now do I say this for me ? Should I be first ?

No, because with a default gearbox you would all see I would be the last setup (my LSD is ****, with 48 hours more it could have been finished in time).
Mister tune#5 would be first : being 4th @ -0.2 with a +100km/h gearbox than the first is a miracle. At least he would be easily be 3rd.

What special skills it takes to know where is the rev limiter on the longest straigth line then ?
Just not a single one if you master the track, and you take +/- 20km/h error if you don't know it.

What special need there is to take into account the torque and the track elevation ? Just none if you see those results.

What special skills it take to correct power on a 4x4 ? Please, we're not driving Group C cars. And individual gears aren't even setupable.

So this thing brings nothing, it's just a flaw in this competition. I would be last if this wasn't there and my ****** setup deserve that.

 

[budious]

I was playing and testing with a DS3 and AT shifting and was hitting the rev limiter with a transmission set at a lower setting, forget which I was testing, want to say 168mph at the end of the tunnel to straight jump to deep bank corner. If you're set at 168mph then the limit is really more like 155mph for the car in this case. Best time I put on my tune with pad and AT was 1:29.6" so I know it's possible to break 1:30".

I found the whole gearbox thing a bit irrelevant other than for shift points for manual drivers; perhaps why it's disabled for individual gear tweaks for now. Torque simply overrides everything else and can spin out longer gear ratios at the same rate as switching up to the next one most of the time, I think the only people who have a wrong configuration in this regard are the folks who set the gearbox too short.

As for testing, I did most of the initial setup at Grand Valley Speedway, currently burnt out on Deep Forest... but in most cases using my tuning process, I can usually identify three spring rate combinations; the lowest does well on most technical tracks, the intermediate does well on tracks with varying corners and long straights like Grand Valley offers, the highest do well on the speed circuits. So all I meant was when I took my Grand Valley tune over to Trial Mountain, all I did was drop it a few more clicks and found a small time bonus, through probably still soft or wrong on the dampers at the moment.

Example #3
1st: Tune #7 (0.00) - 162mph / 260kph
2nd: Tune #3 (-.006) - 162mph / 260kph
3rd: Tune #9 (-.223) - 168mph / 270kph
4th: Tune #5 (-.245) - 224mph / 360kph
5th: Tune #8 (-.369) - stock / na
6th: Tune #6 (-.445) - 193mph / 310kph
7th: Tune #2 (-.752) - 193mph / 310kph
8th: Tune #4 (-.788) - 155mph / 250kph
9th: Tune #1 (-1.304) - 193mph / 310kph
10th: Tune #10 (-2.597) - 211mph / 340kph

Is this an entirely hypothetical example or are you just reading the results on the current leader board wrong? 9th place is currently tune #11... but other than that your numbers match the current standings... tune# = row on spreadsheet, so there is no #1 tune... if I'm reading it right it says your setup #4 (#3?), finished second in Adrenaline's test runs... or am I the one reading it wrong?

Adrenaline, can you add a tune # column to the spreadsheet to help clarify the matter?

 

[Adrenaline]

Adrenaline, can you add a tune # column to the spreadsheet to help clarify the matter?

Blueshift is neither tune #3 or #4 lol.

Initially I had a 'tune number' on the spread sheet, but it appeared too confusing when Line 2 was tune 1, line 10 was tune 9 and so on.

That's why I decided to use the 'line number' to also represent the 'tune number' so that it was aesthetically pleasing as you viewed the spread sheet in a horizontal matter.

As for Blueshift's complaint, I see both sides.
On 1 hand... I don't care how bad of a driver you are, what device you use to get around the track. There's not a single person who can't drive straight down the long straight as fast as they can, and see what top speed they hit before smashing the guard rail. This 15 second test gives you an easy way to see the highest top speed needed for the track, regardless of wheel or controller, as well as driver skill.
On the other hand... When I preform my 'reviews' I always use the same gear box values, to try and keep things as consistent as possible, as I'm more interested in who has the best ability to tune suspensions, not transmissions, mainly because I can easily adjust the tranny myself for any track, whereas I'm not knowledgeable enough to do the same in regards to suspension
On the other, other, hand... You can't act like you didn't have the chance to tune the gears. Everyone had the same oppurtunity to maximize the gearing to the track. I do understand what you're saying when you say 'I can tune the gears for myself, but they might not apply to Adrenaline." This is true, but it's a double edged sword. We have a large array of drivers, and just because I personally felt the 180-190 range best helped my driving speeds means nothing. Anyone who averages slightly slower lap times than me, will find the 170-180 range be the 'sweet spot' for sector 1. Some people don't care about sector 1, some people will find the 155mph to really help their acceleration through the tight turns of sector 2. People faster than me, will find that the 186mph from tune 3 that was perfect for me, kills them in sector 1, because it shifts into 5th on the slight down hill, killing their torque and inducing understeer which ruins the ability to hold the track as you come up to the first tunnel. The gearing 'advantage' only hold true, if the driving styles match. Some could argue that the tune utilizing the 224mph top speed had it's own advantage. Allowing the car to stay in a lower gear through technical sections, had an added benefit of torque multiplication that the other tunes didn't. And... I can also say that the 155mph top speed had an advantage no one else did on the corner at the end of the straight. Since I was tapping out entering the corner, I found my entry speeds to be lower, but in this event, it required less braking, which resulted in the right front tire NOT heating up as much as the other tunes, allowing me more grip through the turn, less likely to slide the fronts and a lot more consistent through that turn. It's all in how you look at it.

 

[BlueShift]

There's not a single person who can't drive straight down the long straight as fast as they can, and see what top speed they hit before smashing the guard rail. This 15 second test gives you an easy way to see the highest top speed needed for the track, regardless of wheel or controller, as well as driver skill.

The reason why I don't hit the rev @250 is that I can't drive fast enough through the corner before the straigth line. This is pure driving skills.

I do understand what you're saying when you say 'I can tune the gears for myself, but they might not apply to Adrenaline." (...) We have a large array of drivers, and just because I personally felt the 180-190 range best helped my driving speeds means nothing.

Oh no, it means, like I said before, this :

If driver A drives super fast, 200km/h gear ratio is low for him.
If driver B drives super slow, 200km/h gear ratio is too high for him.

If setup 1 got 210, driver A will say this is better and driver B will say this is worse.
If setup 2 got 190, driver A will say this is worse and driver B will say this is better.

Both drivers should say the same : gear ratio should stay the same for any setup.

Gearbox mean torque/rpm randomness, in fact. Power randomness mean results that don't reflect the reality.
It induce driving bias and put driver's skill in the equation, not tuner's talent.
So what do you measure : tuners or tuners/driver panel ? Are you looking for the best setup or the setup that is best suited to the panel ?

Is that what we have finally ?
1st: Tune #7 (0.00) - 193mph / 310kph
2nd: Tune #3 (-.006) - 186mph / 300kph
3rd: Tune #9 (-.223) - stock / na
4th: Tune #5 (-.245) - 155mph / 250kph
5th: Tune #8 (-.369) - 162mph / 260kph
6th: Tune #6 (-.445) - 224mph / 360kph
7th: Tune #2 (-.752) - 193mph / 310kph
8th: Tune #4 (-.788) - 162mph / 260kph
9th: Tune #11 (-1.304) - 211mph / 340kph
10th: Tune #10 (-2.597) - 168mph / 270kph

 

[Adrenaline]

The same could be said about LSD, or toque split. Are you implying we should mandate all of those settings as well? Maybe downforce should be 'set' too? Where does 'driver preference' start and 'tuning ability' end?

If the Gear box was completely customizable, would you still like it to remain un-tuned?

 

[BlueShift]

The same could be said about LSD, or toque split. Are you implying we should mandate all of those settings as well? Maybe downforce should be 'set' too? Where does 'driver preference' start and 'tuning ability' end?

If the Gear box was completely customizable, would you still like it to remain un-tuned?

No, because LSD / torque split / aero / whatever else doesn't touch to torque/rpm. It's like driving a 420hp car vs a 440hp car with the same drivers.

For fully custom gearbox, it's not the case, let's see before if they keep the max speed system or not. If they do, I'll say the same. If they don't, I just don't know.

Btw, it should be interesting to have the default setup time in the board...

 

[Paulie]

Being able to tune your gear ratios to the track, chassis and to the power band of the motor is part of being a good tuner, leaving it stock or having a consistent box across the board is mental, why don't we just leave suspension stock as well and make it an LSD competition?

 

[BlueShift]

Being able to tune your gear ratios to the track, chassis and to the power band of the motor is part of being a good tuner, leaving it stock or having a consistent box across the board is mental, why don't we just leave suspension stock as well and make it an LSD competition?

LSD/susp/whatever doesn't touch the torque/rpm.

If I follow your thinking, "we don't have identical powerbands and that's great", why should we tune the same cars then ?

If there's a round 2, will the guys will change their gearbox ? Oh I see you saying "yes". So will they be able to change gearbox dependencies, like LSD then LSD's dependencies like aero ? Then susp ? Here's a fun idea for this : "no more than 5 clicks of change between two rounds".

We should all have tuned our car at (the same) top speed and no changes between tracks.



Another idea, may it be a bad car or not, all tuners should buy and give a car prize to the winner amoung drivers. they give the car names to the organizers and then the winning drivers choose a few cars, then the second etc. What do you think about that ?

Tuners board would be relative times and drivers board would be total times.

 

[budious]

LSD/susp/whatever doesn't touch the torque/rpm.

If I follow your thinking, "we don't have identical powerbands and that's great", why should we tune the same cars then ?

I think it just illustrates why I emphasized all drivers break-in engines. The only equal footing for tuners should be weight, engine power (not how it's manipulated by drivetrain), and tire grade as their tuning mandates; everything else is fair game, imo.

1300KG
500HP
Sport Medium
+ Chassis Reinforcement (for consistency of adaptability for test drivers)
* everything else is fair game...

Secondly, this contest isn't a definitive measure for whose tune is actually the best. One tune may be better suited for wheel drivers, another for pad drivers, or other variables at play. This contest's results are only the statistical cumulation from volunteer drivers with varying degrees of skill and input methods and can be used as a good benchmark for tuning skill, but not necessarily best use case scenario. I'd encourage visitors wandering into the thread late interested in trying tunes from the previous months' winners give all of the top 3 tunes a try and find which works best for them.

 

[Adrenaline]

I think it just illustrates why I emphasized all drivers break-in engines. The only equal footing for tuners should be weight, engine power (not how it's manipulated by drivetrain), and tire grade as their tuning mandates; everything else is fair game, imo.

1300KG
500HP
Sport Medium
+ Chassis Reinforcement (for consistency of adaptability for test drivers)
* everything else is fair game...

Secondly, this contest isn't a definitive measure for whose tune is actually the best. One tune may be better suited for wheel drivers, another for pad drivers, or other variables at play. This contest's results are only the statistical cumulation from volunteer drivers with varying degrees of skill and input methods and can be used as a good benchmark for tuning skill, but not necessarily best use case scenario. I'd encourage visitors wandering into the thread late interested in trying tunes from the previous months' winners give all of the top 3 tunes a try and find which works best for them.

I did my best to keep track of HP gained over break in, and I only saw a 4hp increase. I'm pretty sure I started at 530 even, and know I ended at 534. I did some break in the week prior by using the car online, but not much. In the random order I chose, my top 3 tunes, where 4th, 5th and 9th. So I don't think the power is coming into play. And as mentioned, I asked all drivers to test the tunes in random orders, meaning the 5-10hp boost won't fall to the same tune each time.

All the data will be best presented as my spread sheet skills allow. Shop averages, driver average across all cars, and I also included 'stock' in the spread sheet, but I'm not requiring drivers to submit 3 laps for it, so it's strictly up to them. I came up with a point system for the drivers as well, just for fun, something simple, so we'll see how it all goes.

As for the "winning" tune, it shall only apply to the offline world. Any time I go online, I'll be re-testing the top 6, and how they ranked offline will hold nearly no value to me.

Blueshift, I see your point and I do agree to an extent, But it seems you are in the minority. After the competition, I'd expect any logical driver to apply what they felt the 'best top speed' was and apply it to a few of the other tunes, and may find a new #1 for themselves. The same applies to LSD, torque split. I'm quite curious to see what tune #3 would do with a 50/50 split, or what #7 would do with a 30/70 split. I'm also worried that none of this will matter, because it won't carry over when I put Racing Softs on, because I'll never race this car online with Sport Softs.

In short, no system will ever be perfect. Keep it light hearted and for fun, and we'll all try to enjoy ourselves. And take comfort in the fact, that I am confident you will be moving on to round 2 at which point you can adjust your top speed and leave it all behind you.

 

[budious]

Keep in mind that as engine break-in occurs, oil degradation occurs simultaneously, the first time you change the oil, that 4HP increase you saw becomes 20HP, maybe less, idk.

... I am confident you will be moving on to round 2 at which point you can adjust your top speed and leave it all behind you.

So tuners who advanced are being given the option to retune for the next track? I'm fuzzy on the whole advancement process for this competition now... I thought it was a static entry?

 

[Adrenaline]

Keep in mind that as engine break-in occurs, oil degradation occurs simultaneously, the first time you change the oil, that 4HP increase you saw becomes 20HP, maybe less, idk.



So tuners who advanced are being given the option to retune for the next track? I'm fuzzy on the whole advancement process for this competition now... I thought it was a static entry?

I changed the oil between every other tune. The 4hp I saw, was quite literally 4.

This month, I will be allowing transmission re-tune only. In the following months, I'll have all 3 tracks decided on day 1, and tunes will be locked. That wouldn't be fair this month, as the tracks weren't made known to the tuners, so it was impossible for them to take into account.

 

[budious]

I changed the oil between every other tune. The 4hp I saw, was quite literally 4.

This month, I will be allowing transmission re-tune only. In the following months, I'll have all 3 tracks decided on day 1, and tunes will be locked. That wouldn't be fair this month, as the tracks weren't made known to the tuners, so it was impossible for them to take into account.

May vary by type of engine perhaps then? I've noticed more significant break-in gains on cars with larger engines, try an old american muscle car with a V8.

Guess I was assuming the whole first month was for trial mountain since that was the original plan, if it was for three tracks I might have gone a little more conservative on my suspension and some of the other choices besides transmission gearing. Gearing change is fine by me, I just want a little more clarity in things up front; you may have it straight in your head but you need to do a better job of communicating to the tuners and drivers.

 

[articzap]

May vary by type of engine perhaps then? I've noticed more significant break-in gains on cars with larger engines, try an old american muscle car with a V8.

Guess I was assuming the whole first month was for trial mountain since that was the original plan, if it was for three tracks I might have gone a little more conservative on my suspension and some of the other choices besides transmission gearing. Gearing change is fine by me, I just want a little more clarity in things up front; you may have it straight in your head but you need to do a better job of communicating to the tuners and drivers.

This is more unorganized then the original creator.

 

[Adrenaline]

May vary by type of engine perhaps then? I've noticed more significant break-in gains on cars with larger engines, try an old american muscle car with a V8.

Guess I was assuming the whole first month was for trial mountain since that was the original plan, if it was for three tracks I might have gone a little more conservative on my suspension and some of the other choices besides transmission gearing. Gearing change is fine by me, I just want a little more clarity in things up front; you may have it straight in your head but you need to do a better job of communicating to the tuners and drivers.

You do realize I threw this together in less than 24 hours, right?
It was 2am January 31st when psychotik said, 'I quit, you do it' and it was dumped on me. Bear with me as we work out the kinks.

Edit: Not to mention the "rounds" aspect has been clearly posted and explained since at least the 5th. The only aspect that wasn't clear were which tracks they'd be held on.
That's not even taking into consideration, that pyschotik clearly had the 'rounds' designed and layed out 3 weeks ago. I only attempted to merge his idea with, what I felt to be, a more simplified version.

 

[budious]

Yeah, I have no problem with changes to the format... I'm just saying make them applicable at the start of next month's round and not in the middle of it, or as I'm perceiving them as changes to the format mid-round at the moment.

 

[Adrenaline]

Budweiser Shoot Out!

 

[GT5SER]

As of writing, I have tested 4 of the tunes and will be testing more tonight. I change the oil after each tune and I run the tunes as advertised.

- Jeramy

 

[drivehard]

This is the car I voted for. This is also the track I wanted to run on. A few tunes in and I officially hate them both.