Tuning Garage Links & FITT Physics Discussions

[ace004]

Go to know about those curbing differences. This thread should be stickied.

 

[Motor City Hami]

Could this be from trail braking and not from the paint? I noticed a bit of extra turn in right at the end of trail braking. Have you tried this test without trail braking?

 

[praiano63]

Could this be from trail braking and not from the paint? I noticed a bit of extra turn in right at the end of trail braking. Have you tried this test without trail braking?

No Hami, it's not trail braking, it does it under accel post apex too. The white paint let the car inline normaly or no paint at all on certain tracks.....

 

[Motor City Hami]

So exactly opposite of real world. Now if they got more slippery in rain, that would be correct.

 

[fpaldrich]

Finally doing some suspension testing tonight. Purchased the Racing Soft, Racing Hard and Fully Customizable suspensions to compare the settings with stock. I found the comparison interesting and quite disappointing. I was really hoping that PD had developed two basic tune suspensions for the non tuner. See comparison below of two cars that I have been playing with.

The results are fairly similar for each of these two cars. Ride height was different on the Boss, but I honestly think it is a typo (rear should read 130 not 103. if you look at the car in photo mode and it does not look like this car is slammed in the rear. Anyway, in the chart above, you can see that changing to different suspension options does not change the camber settings. Either camber does not matter within tuning in the game or PD doesn't want these selections to out-perform the fully customizable kit. Also, damper settings all remain at one until, oddly, they change to threes on the full customization kit.

The other things that I noticed is that ride height dropped, but same for each kit. And, spring rates went up with soft, up again with hard, then back to stock with the full kit.

I plan to hit the track tonight and test each of these for lap times, just as the game spit them out. Then I will start to break down each setting.

Hi,

Before I post my thoughts, thanks for all the hard work you tuners put in, it is great to read and learn from you all.

Hami you highlighted the suspension differences above, I saw something interesting when I tested a GTR GT3 Base Model - It has a "standard" suspension that may not be changed (similar to the racing soft and racing hard sets) and a fully custom set. The only visible difference being the dampers and roll bars (Std all 1, fully custom 2's & 3's). However the fully custom setup feels completely different, even if using exactly the same numbers. So on the GTR GT3 I feel there is no correlation between the numbers between the "locked" ones (standard susp) and open ones (fully custom susp). This your experience as well?

May I please make a suggestion for this thread? As an example there are a few posts on flat floors, maybe combine all findings in one "summary" post and link to the first page? Further findings on, for example, flat floors can be added by editing the "summary" post.

Kind Regards

EDIT: I'm not sure if this is the place to ask but what tracks do you experts normally use to get a "base line" setup going?

 

[praiano63]

Hello people, one more strange thing that i want to share with you all.

First to answer to the question of fpaldrich "what tracks use to get a "base line" setup going?"
Everybody have his favorite track, mine is Suzuka first + some others to finish the test. The most important is to know perfectly the track and to be able to repeat a lap in the same half second on it to valid or not a setting, always with the help of the ghost when you can use it ,offline of course.

Now the strange setting i had to do for my MR2 limited 97 stop spinning , loosing grip , very tail happy when stock setting.

All the other settings are normals, i didn't use ballast this time, but i had to raise the rear of the car passing the everest mount.
Ride height = front 80 rear 150 . ???????????? !!!

It drive like a dream now, but where is the real life physics in this thing. ????

Backward ?? or not Backward ??? That is the question.

This pope would have like to drive my MR2

Those peoples would hate my MR2 ....

 

[Grandi]

All the other settings are normals, i didn't use ballast this time, but i had to raise the rear of the car passing the everest mount.
Ride height = front 80 rear 150 . ???????????? !!!

It drive like a dream now, but where is the real life physics in this thing. ????

Backward ?? or not Backward ??? That is the question.

Indeed, this problem still exists (as noted in an earlier post).

 

[Motor City Hami]

Is ride height backward or was ride height just too low. I had a similar problem with the front washing out on the Mustang Boss 302. Raised the front ride height then it handled awesome. Again on the NSX '91, rear was washing out so raised rear ride height and found more grip. There seems to be a "too low" point to ride height and it doesn't always seem to be the same on both front/rear.

 

[iainoflo85]

Is ride height backward or was ride height just too low. I had a similar problem with the front washing out on the Mustang Boss 302. Raised the front ride height then it handled awesome. Again on the NSX '91, rear was washing out so raised rear ride height and found more grip. There seems to be a "too low" point to ride height and it doesn't always seem to be the same on both front/rear.

Found that too on the GT86 "Racing" '13. I had set my ride height low, but not that low, drove for a bit as usual, then added the flat floors. After adding the flat floors I couldn't turn to save my life, and the car just felt really weird. I raised the ride height, not realising this was the issue and it returned to normal.

 

[Motor City Hami]

The LSD seems to work the same as in GT5, with one difference. I am noticing that I am using higher LSD decel. I think I also noticed this in Praiano's tunes? Praiano, are you using more LSD decel in GT6 or did you start doing that at the end of GT5?

Also, LSD is no longer the super tune. It has a strong affect, but it cannot completely cure a car's issues alone. The other tune setting that I am noticing making a large difference is ride height. In GT5 it didn't matter much. I drove slammed tunes that were just as fast as higher tunes. In GT6 though, ride height seems to matter quite a bit. I am finding most of my lap time decreases in LSD and ride height settings. Every other setting just seems a bit vanilla - not much effect.

 

[XDesperado67]

Dirty Air?
May just be my poor driving but seems like PD may have overdone the turbulence around cars traveling at speed.
Can have a very planted and easily drivable car suddenly become completely unstable and nearly undrivable when another car gets close. Pulling out of draft to make a pass can have the car suddenly fishtailing wildly, while having a car come up behind you by drafting can make your car suddenly go very "light".
Wondering if it's just me and my lack of skills or if others have noticed simular effects.

 

[esoxhntr]

I have noticed using much more LSD Decel as well Hami. In GT5 many of my tunes had Decel set at 5, I'd have set it at 0 if we were able to...not the case in GT6. In some cases it is higher than Accel.

Praianos finding about the red & white curbs is also something I've noticed. I hadn't put it together until he mentioned it though.

 

[Tazz69]

Yea ride height is backwards from real life and what it says in the game. Lower rear than front loosens a car up. Higher rear than front will tighten a car up. This sucks but this is how the game is!!!!!!!!

 

[praiano63]

Is ride height backward or was ride height just too low. I had a similar problem with the front washing out on the Mustang Boss 302. Raised the front ride height then it handled awesome. Again on the NSX '91, rear was washing out so raised rear ride height and found more grip. There seems to be a "too low" point to ride height and it doesn't always seem to be the same on both front/rear.

No Hami, there was still room for the suspensions working good, i on the way too with my Ferrari GTO and i'm sure the 111R will need some few more rear ride height. MR in general.

The LSD seems to work the same as in GT5, with one difference. I am noticing that I am using higher LSD decel. I think I also noticed this in Praiano's tunes? Praiano, are you using more LSD decel in GT6 or did you start doing that at the end of GT5?

Also, LSD is no longer the super tune. It has a strong affect, but it cannot completely cure a car's issues alone. The other tune setting that I am noticing making a large difference is ride height. In GT5 it didn't matter much. I drove slammed tunes that were just as fast as higher tunes. In GT6 though, ride height seems to matter quite a bit. I am finding most of my lap time decreases in LSD and ride height settings. Every other setting just seems a bit vanilla - not much effect.

I use more LSD accel since a few months. Like my M5 for the shootout. I like safe cars , first i was using a lot of dampers extensions to limit weight transfer. Now,i try to let the car play more with his balance over the springs and dampers.
Higher LSD decell help a car that move freely to not upset changing direction. I also use higher ARB than before for the same reason. In GT6 now ,all this suspension travel increase a lot, need to tight some cars more and more. Some others are almost perfect and don't need almost anything .
Need to play a lot more to catch this all.

><(((((°>°°°°°

 

[nowayback]

How do you know a car is "washing out" ?

 

[Motor City Hami]

How do you know a car is "washing out" ?

That end of the car slides then yellow tires and then red tires.

 

[DigitalBaka]

I tell ya, the one feature of GT5 I never thought I would miss and rarely used is the one I would really like to have back: the speed tests. Been trying to do gather some metrics on ride height but there's just no quick way to do it.

 

[ace004]

So has anyone did any camber testing to find the average optimum angle? It's hard to tell where these tires fall off without having decent data telemetry. I've had a car or two seem to become slower as I added camber. I thought it was weird since the camber was balanced front to back and at a low value. I raised it from 0 degrees to around 1-1.5. I must be missing something here.

 

[praiano63]

So has anyone did any camber testing to find the average optimum angle? It's hard to tell where these tires fall off without having decent data telemetry. I've had a car or two seem to become slower as I added camber. I thought it was weird since the camber was balanced front to back and at a low value. I raised it from 0 degrees to around 1-1.5. I must be missing something here.

I let it very close to 0, more camber increase the sharp high noise... So i put it back again most of the time. Don't know if the noise afraid me or if it stay worth, if yes ,the diff is minimum.

 

[ace004]

I let it very close to 0, more camber increase the sharp high noise... So i put it back again most of the time. Don't know if the noise afraid me or if it stay worth, if yes ,the diff is minimum.

Yeah I'm finding out the majority of my tunes have very little camber. Which I find quite odd. Thanks for the reply

 

[jtqmopar]

[quote="fpaldrich, post: 9090957, member: 218382"The only visible difference being the dampers and roll bars (Std all 1, fully custom 2's & 3's). However the fully custom setup feels completely different, even if using exactly the same numbers. So on the GTR GT3 I feel there is no correlation between the numbers between the "locked" ones (standard susp) and open ones (fully custom susp). This your experience as well?[/quote]

I don't think F:1/ R:1 are settings inline with the custom suspension because not every single car will use the same setting for shocks. Especially when you consider that you were using a race car, which pretuned would have higher numbers (say 5/4 ext, 5/4 comp)

Also, if you look, some cars have 0/0/0 for stock differential settings.

 

[jtqmopar]

The LSD seems to work the same as in GT5, with one difference. I am noticing that I am using higher LSD decel. I think I also noticed this in Praiano's tunes? Praiano, are you using more LSD decel in GT6 or did you start doing that at the end of GT5?

Also, LSD is no longer the super tune. It has a strong affect, but it cannot completely cure a car's issues alone. The other tune setting that I am noticing making a large difference is ride height. In GT5 it didn't matter much. I drove slammed tunes that were just as fast as higher tunes. In GT6 though, ride height seems to matter quite a bit. I am finding most of my lap time decreases in LSD and ride height settings. Every other setting just seems a bit vanilla - not much effect.

LSD: I'm finding that the high initial settings I used on my GT5 Vipers is working on a wider range of cars this time around
Ride Height: I don't think I've lowered many cars further than the game has. Most of the time I have had to raise ride height by a massive 5-10 inches (don't know why my ride height is in inches)

 

[Motor City Hami]

I did some testing at Willow Springs on the skid pad with the '89 MX5 Miata. Nothing i did to camber from 0.0 up to 3.5 made any difference in the speed that I could hold around the skid pad. The only difference was the color of the tires. 0.0 showed a bit of yellow. Above 3.5 showed yellow to red. At 2.2 front, the car was easier to drive on the line around the skid pad, but still only able to hit the exact same speed. Rear camber made absolutely zero difference until I got up to 4.0 and above. At these high rear settings, I could get the inside rear tire to turn red. Speed around the skid pad? Same old 47 mph. Tried the same test at Motegi oval and speed was the same at all settings. Just color of tires changed.

Kind of setting camber between 1.5 to 2.5 front and 1.0 to 2.0 rear until I can do more testing.

 

[brianwong]

I did some testing at Willow Springs on the skid pad with the '89 MX5 Miata. Nothing i did to camber from 0.0 up to 3.5 made any difference in the speed that I could hold around the skid pad. The only difference was the color of the tires. 0.0 showed a bit of yellow. Above 3.5 showed yellow to red. At 2.2 front, the car was easier to drive on the line around the skid pad, but still only able to hit the exact same speed. Rear camber made absolutely zero difference until I got up to 4.0 and above. At these high rear settings, I could get the inside rear tire to turn red. Speed around the skid pad? Same old 47 mph. Tried the same test at Motegi oval and speed was the same at all settings. Just color of tires changed.

Kind of setting camber between 1.5 to 2.5 front and 1.0 to 2.0 rear until I can do more testing.

Have you tried this testing with any other cars?

EDIT: The work you're doing is still great though.

 

[Motor City Hami]

Have you tried this testing with any other cars?

Not yet, but plan to do so. Would like to take some really nasty handling cars there. I think PD is in love with the Miata, so it can do no wrong in the game.

 

[DigitalBaka]

GT350R?

 

[DigitalBaka]

Extracting a conversation from the FITT main thread to here:

The more you build the cars and de-tune them the cars going to take a great hit when using the power limiter. The norm of detuning while keeping high torque is no longer there. I’ve added every part to the Boss 302 for extra power and removing weight along with the flat floor. I’ve found the more the car is built and detuned the harder for the car to truly preform. Every time I lowered the PP number the slower the car became, even with the high torque number. Without having all the street cars is hard to tell how much each group is losing. From the math I’ve worked without having all the cars, drivers could lose 10 points to detuning which could lose up to five seconds off pending on lap time, track, driver and how well balanced the set is.

From what I’ve found so far no matter what class car you’re running or building the higher the horse power and how the power limiter is used the greater the hit on the car. Overly building the cars and detuning them the same way as in GT5 is no longer going to work. The cars are even more unbalanced than before. Running in lobbies with race cars had mad that very clear from the numbers I seen, 600PP for GT3, 570 for GT500 and 560 for DTM. From the testing of the racing cars it clearly show no one as of now will be able to get the ALL the race cars to run with each other just to accommodate the need. I'm not sure how the street cars will fair thought.

From the math I’ve worked without having all the cars, drivers could lose 10 points to detuning which could lose up to five seconds off pending on lap time, track, driver and how well balanced the set is.

There is no way that statement can be true. In GT5 for example, 10PP was about a half second at Deep Forest or about 0.60% of a lap time. The only track you'd lose even close to 5 seconds on would be the Nurb and even then, 10PP was closer to 3 or 4 seconds. If you have some testing evidence to show these lap time changes are dramatically different in GT6 you should throw it up here so we can repeat the testing to verify it.

Where's your evidence to show that 10pp is half a second at deep forest - for what? Every car in the game with all variables - tyre, power, setups, tuning, driver, driving style etc....???? Or one car, one drivetrain, online / offline - what?

I said "some testing evidence" not "every car in the game".

In the meantime there is plenty of evidence here:

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/thre...chleife-pp-board-car-tune-submissions.260349/

to suggest that on the Nurb the difference in lap times with 50PP + 1 tire compound is generally around 30-40 seconds. Some specific examples:

07:14.845 - MAZDA RX-7 SPIRIT R TYPE A (FD) '02- 500PP/SM (Praiano)
07:49.829 - Mazda RX-7 Spirit R, Type A (FD) 02 - 450PP/SH (Johnnypenso)

07:20.210 - SCION FR-S '12- 500PP/SM (Praiano)
07:57.394 - Toyota 86 GT '12 - 450PP/SH (MrGrado)

07:15.447 - LOTUS 111R '04 - 500PP/SM (Praiano)
07:45.635 - LOTUS 111R '04 - 450PP/SH (Praiano)

07:18.415 - HONDA HSC '03- 500PP/SM (Praiano)
06:50.350 - HONDA HSC '03 - 550PP/SS (Praiano)

06:50.668 - LOTUS EVORA '09- 550PP/SS (Praiano)
07:17.902 - LOTUS EVORA '09- 500PP/SM (Praiano)

I have many more examples of my own testing at much shorter tracks but my results concur with the examples above and it's crystal clear. I can provide some if you want but the above should be convincing enough to anyone with an open mind that the general trend is that 10PP will not make a 5 second difference on any track, especially with the same tire compound at least in GT5. Maybe that's changed in GT6. Zuel can easily show this by showing us the testing that he's done to back up his claim.

Sorry, don't mean to be argumentative, you said "....10PP was about a half second at Deep Forest..", I simply asked for your evidence to support this, but you're quoting Nurb results?

I'm really not sure why you're comparing GT6 to GT5 but anyway. The track I've been testing at is Brands Hatch the full course the street car I've been using the most there to is the 240SX '96 and it feel like a real 240SX I kid you not. I built my track car that I ran a lot a Summit Point, so I know how the car should feel. Here is the build and times to follow, the only alterations that were done was lower the power limiter buy 10% ever time.

Car
Nissan 240SX (511PP)
402hp 396ft-lb 2.78kg-hp (100%)
Stage 1 engine
Sport Computer
Semi-Racing Exhaust
Isometric Exhaust Manifold
Catalytic Converter:Sport
Intake
Mid RPM Turbo
Stage 1 weight
Carbon Hood Light weight window

Track and Time
Brand Hatch

1:36.613 (100% power)
1:37.655 (90% power)
1:37.930 (80% power)
1:38.568 (70% power)

As you can see the lower the % got the lower the times got. I really don't see the OLD GT5 solid group numbers are going to work in GT6.

Makes perfect sense if you understand the relationship between torque, horsepower and power curves. Excessive limiting vs removing parts also made cars in GT5 slower so I am not sure why some are surprised?

First of all @esoxhntr, my testing will not reflect any pass results from GT5 due to the findings within the last few weeks. And more to the point of KW, Yokohama having involvement along with the new aerodynamic algorithm. From that point all of my testing besides the PP system went out the window. In GT5 when some of us built the cars up and de-tuned out of class or to a lower class the car still preformed or out performed that class some cars in that class. Even when a car built to class, with a better power curve that overly built and de-tuned car still out preformed even though it was de-tuned and the power curve was out of norm.

The test you quoted was to see if the NORM GT5 tuning method still works and I found that it doesn't. Even though the cars have all that torque and low hp the car is slower, in GT5 the cars still stayed at speed or feel behind slightly, not up to 5 seconds as it done it GT6.

Carry on...

 

[Zuel]

I noticed that the 1.02 update made a change to the tires. They're hold heat more than before, when the tries are pushed. Before after a lap or two they would cool down just a little, not anymore. Once my tires got into the yellow danger zone they stayed there for 8 laps until I slowed to a caution pace. Once they cooled I started to push a a little and by the 7 lap they're back in the yellow again. I'm got to make changes in the toe angle to see if that helps. If it does, I'm going digging for some old setup sheet from when I used Tein shocks on my 240. If they work correctly I'll be swinging in asphalt.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Zuel -

From the math I’ve worked without having all the cars, drivers could lose 10 points to detuning which could lose up to five seconds off pending on lap time, track, driver and how well balanced the set is.

Me -

There is no way that statement can be true. In GT5 for example, 10PP was about a half second at Deep Forest or about 0.60% of a lap time. The only track you'd lose even close to 5 seconds on would be the Nurb and even then, 10PP was closer to 3 or 4 seconds. If you have some testing evidence to show these lap time changes are dramatically different in GT6 you should throw it up here so we can repeat the testing to verify it

.

Zuel -

1:36.613 (100% power)
1:37.655 (90% power)
1:37.930 (80% power)
1:38.568 (70% power)

-10% power limiter = -1.042 seconds
-20% power limiter = -1.317 seconds
-30% power limiter = -1.955 seconds

1.955/96.613 = 2.02% with 30 points of power limiter
2.02%/3 = 0.67%

My rough estimate was 0.60% for 10PP
Zuels actual results was 0.67% for 10% power limiter.

Either way, you won't get a 5 second lap time difference on any track but the longest version of the Nurb in the slowest cars. Also either way, it still doesn't establish whether or not excessive power limiter use affects performance until you compare it to the same car tuned specifically for a lower PP level vs. one detuned.

 

[Zuel]

I didn't bother to run on the ring due to the number a variables that can be encountered. I didn't want any faults arising, the car was set to a neutral set allowing it to run free without any kinks. I understand why you ran the test at the ring but I believe you'll get better numbers on a shorter track @Johnnypenso, running on the ring to test because of all the variables is fine but it wouldn't give a true number of time just for the reason of all the variables. Plus comparing time to GT5 is pointless due to the major changes to the title, three being KW, Yokohama and the aerodynamic algorithm, and not to forget track temp along with atmosphere changes that Kaz clearly stated that will be in GT6.

I do have question. Are you flipping the transmission? Because that also make a big difference, I don't bother with flipping the transmission. It's a EASY way out of tuning it to me.