Understanding the GTP consensus on how Camber is Broken

[Ronald6]

Ahhhh. I needed this thread. I read Jacks posts and laughed and laughed and laughed. It's like listening to someone argue there was no Holocaust.
Thanks for all the hard work you've put into this Jack. 👍

 

[Xiamoto]

Again, in GT5, I could have shown you picture after picture of cars with extremely high front ends cornering faster and going faster in a straight line. It's illogical but it happened. Pics mean nothing when it comes to GT physics.

Check this out, in 1999 NASCAR ran high fronts and low rears during Daytona Qualifying to go faster in the corners and on the straights.

 

[Jack Napier]

OK, here comes a blurb from "Team Viejo", the oldest replica racer on GT6. (that would be me)
Long ago and far away, in Mustangworld, I decided to make my 96 SVT Cobra into a race/rally/track car, and barely managed to keep it street legal. After spending around 25,000 USDollars on suspension alone, the car began to handle so well, that Porches and Vipers and other hot cars would be staring in their rearview mirrors at the very close front end of my Mustang, in the corners!!!. (Had a Cobra R hood too!)
Basically, the stock suspension was thrown away and rebuilt from the ground up. Gee, this sounds familiar to us GT guys doesn't it? The front end was converted into true Macpherson strut suspension with coil-over Konis, adjustable ride height, with guess what, Caster/camber plates, that allowed adjustment of both caster and camber. The strut towers were impressively braced across the car and rearward to the firewall. The engine mounts were replaced with a tubular cradle unit that locked everything together and the steering ram was remounted with aluminum bushings for solid steering. Needless to say the moncoque frame was extensively beefed up, all the way out to the door sills with diagonal bracing. This became a stiff car. I got clued in to all this stuff while having Steve Saleen drive my stock Cobra around Seattle Intl Raceway. FOR FIVE LAPS!! I told him to "Go for it, the engine is Bulletproof" and did he ever!?!? I thought we were inside of a beached whale, the guy is a maniac!!! And the car was ridiculous!
Having access to camber was very beneficial in open track work and adding 2.5 degrees (negative) was optimal for smoking the Porches and Vipers. I was running Firestone SZ-50's which were actually built in the Bridgestone factory in Japan. These were equivalent to our Sport Soft tires with a speed limit of 160 mph.

The other thing that I loved doing was the Silver State Classic Series of rallies in Nevada. This is where they block off about 100 miles of PUBLIC ROAD and run the race/rally for about 8 hours. In the main event, the road was a series of straights, linked by corners that could be taken flat out to about 180 mph. Some of the straights were close to 14 miles long!! Shades of Route X! For this event, all that camber would not be required, so I would back off the camber to -0.5 degrees and swing the caster(the top of the struts) back to 9 degrees which is Mercedes country!! This made the car super stable at speed and still alowed decent cornering. Mercedes run a lot of caster because they are made to run well over 100 mph on the German Autobahns. They are not twitchy at speed and neither was my Mustang.

Just in case anybody cares, the rear suspension of my Mustang was also changed with coil-overs overtop of Koni circle track dampers, adjustable ride height of course, and a torque arm from the differential pumpkin to a cross member midships and a panhard bar to anchor the axle laterally made the ass end like a rock when you pushed the back of the car across the axle! Suddenly a Mustang that would not spin out was born!!

I guess the point of this epistle is to emphasise the function and importance of both caster and camber in tuning a race car. It would be my dream that PD could impliment both of these tuning aids in GT-6 as per real life cars.
For me the fun thing about GT-6 is being able to tune without spending a bazillion real dollars and not getting very dirty and greasy at the same time. Oh, and being able to tune in hours instead of months.

Thank you for your attention, Mustangxr

I'm right with you Brother.

If only we could just adjust caster, this wouldn't even be an issue.

Damn PD forcing us to "work around" fixed caster angles...

Thank you for taking the time to post in my thread, best post in here by far, would of been nice to see/hear it in action.

 

[killerjimbag]

You can't adjust caster as I pointed out before.So I guess an apology to all the other people would maybe be OK . Then you can close up the post.

 

[Jack Napier]

It's actually pretty simple & since it's clear so many think I'm wrong clueless blah blah, I kept very obscure for a reason, this is to see if the big GTP tuners would have the following answer... Not one came through, it's a shame.

Cats about to jump out.

How I use camber and a demo car for proof...

Riding neg camber on the inside front tire helps with cars that oversteer crazy. Like the Ruf YB and X-Bow

many use ballast to cure this and they are adding mass wheel angle tuning will fix

Riding pos cam on the inside through the corner will help cars that understeer a lot and help control under/over balance


So

Pos camb on inside to help cars with understeer

&

Neg camb on the inside to help cars with oversteer.

Proof? Grab a Ruf YB add 5 degrees front and 1.5 in the rear


Want proof?!?!?!?

This is not a tune just a camber demo

Buy a RuF YB

Get Sport Soft Tires

Add the adj suspension

Leave ride height stock

Spring rate stock

Damps
4/4
5/5

ARB to weight
4/6
Brakes to weight
4/6 (run ABS at zero)

Camb and toe zero/zero/zero/zero

Get light all light weight parts oil and break in n all that.

Stock diff, stock gear box I'm talking STD parts all around Baby...

Should be 540PP

485hp
428tq
1064kg

Default settings.

Hit the track, notice the cars front end just doesn't want to hold in the corner just a pita to drive...

Usually ballast to the rescue adding mass for no good reason..

Instead adjust the wheel angles to

Camb
6.0/1.5
Toe
0.35/0.65


I have just demonstrated using neg camber on the front to have my inside front tire ride neg camber in the corner instead of positive as with zero camb setting... This is to help with the cars oversteer...

You can also try

Camb
0.0/0.0
Toe
0.35/0.65

Zero camber It will not be cured of the oversteer it will just oversteer at a slower pace, making longer slides.

Adding the crazy camber to a Ruf Yellowbird changed it from an oversteer nightmare, to understeer yawner... And I could run the brakes tuned to weight even..... Surprise the rear ain't on fire, notice that...

As you can see this reduces oversteer in the front and the rear is still composed holding on well with its -1.5 camb and 4/6 brakes

The reduced oversteer now makes the car much easier to drive.

That is not a Tune, just demonstrating how using camber in the front can help with oversteer. I kept the car very much out of whack and used exaggerated camber up front to illustrate my point.... IF you know how to use camber in the front it's a great tuning tool..

The YB is a beast love it love it love it...

Ketchup for those Feet?

 

[Ronald6]

RUF Yellowbird = reductio ad absurdum.
How about a car that isn't absurd. You know, so the test results will actually be worthwhile.

 

[Johnnypenso]

It's actually pretty simple & since it's clear so many think I'm wrong clueless blah blah, I kept very obscure for a reason, this is to see if the big GTP tuners would have the following answer... Not one came through, it's a shame.

Cats about to jump out.

How I use camber and a demo car for proof...

Riding neg camber on the inside front tire helps with cars that oversteer crazy. Like the Ruf YB and X-Bow

many use ballast to cure this and they are adding mass wheel angle tuning will fix

Riding pos cam on the inside through the corner will help cars that understeer a lot and help control under/over balance


So

Pos camb on inside to help cars with understeer

&

Neg camb on the inside to help cars with oversteer.

Proof? Grab a Ruf YB add 5 degrees front and 1.5 in the rear


Want proof?!?!?!?

This is not a tune just a camber demo

Buy a RuF YB

Get Sport Soft Tires

Add the adj suspension

Leave ride height stock

Spring rate stock

Damps
4/4
5/5

ARB to weight
4/6
Brakes to weight
4/6 (run ABS at zero)

Camb and toe zero/zero/zero/zero

Get light all light weight parts oil and break in n all that.

Stock diff, stock gear box I'm talking STD parts all around Baby...

Should be 540PP

485hp
428tq
1064kg

Default settings.

Hit the track, notice the cars front end just doesn't want to hold in the corner just a pita to drive...

Usually ballast to the rescue adding mass for no good reason..

Instead adjust the wheel angles to

Camb
6.0/1.5
Toe
0.35/0.65


I have just demonstrated using neg camber on the front to have my inside front tire ride neg camber in the corner instead of positive as with zero camb setting... This is to help with the cars oversteer...

You can also try

Camb
0.0/0.0
Toe
0.35/0.65

Zero camber It will not be cured of the oversteer it will just oversteer at a slower pace, making longer slides.

Adding the crazy camber to a Ruf Yellowbird changed it from an oversteer nightmare, to understeer yawner... And I could run the brakes tuned to weight even..... Surprise the rear ain't on fire, notice that...

As you can see this reduces oversteer in the front and the rear is still composed holding on well with its -1.5 camb and 4/6 brakes

The reduced oversteer now makes the car much easier to drive.

That is not a Tune, just demonstrating how using camber in the front can help with oversteer. I kept the car very much out of whack and used exaggerated camber up front to illustrate my point.... IF you know how to use camber in the front it's a great tuning tool..

The YB is a beast love it love it love it...

Ketchup for those Feet?

Incorrect again Jack sorry. I've driven and tuned the Yellowbird extensively it's one of my favourite cars and I can tell you exactly what you've done which is two things.

1. By adding huge camber to the front, much more than the rear, you've taken grip away from the front, causing the car to be a little more balanced away from oversteer. A little less grip overall, but you've balanced the car away from the understeer so it feels better to you.

2. You've added massive amounts of positive toe. As all tuners know, adding lots of positive toe moves a car towards stability or away from oversteer, moreso on the rear which is where you've added most of it. This is by far the greatest influence on the added stability you say you achieved with your tune. This is also what you did with the Shelby you posted a few days ago, added a large amount of rear toe to stabilize the car and confused it's influence on the car with the changes you made in camber.

You are confused as to the influence of the large positive toe you added, an amount of toe that would make most neutral cars in the game handle like a boat. It's overwhelming everything else on the car at that point. It's the toe that stabilized your car, and the large camber on the front took away some of the front bite which took away some of the oversteer.

In other words, what you did and what you say happened as a result, fits perfectly with the theory that adding camber takes away grip.

 

[PsuPepperoni]

Riding pos cam on the inside through the corner will help cars that understeer a lot and help control under/over balance...

...Adding the crazy camber to a Ruf Yellowbird changed it from an oversteer nightmare, to understeer yawner...

So you tested positive camber in GT6? Have you also tested with different caster angles and wheel widths?

Did you know that setting your power limiter to 50% will also reduce oversteer and make the car easier to drive? (Just in case you need an alternative to -5.0 front camber.)

 

[DJay Silver]

Where's Kazunori Yamauchi when you need him?

 

[demonchilde]

If your going to try to prove anything with camber, your going to need to keep your front and back toe to zero for the test to not be biased.

Think about it.

Also, you need to pretty much set everything else to a neutral setting.
Like all 5's in dampers and maybe 3/3 arb. Leave height and springs stock.
Set LSD to like 12/12/12, or something, maybe adjust the braking if the car is awful, to like 12/12/20.
Don't touch anything else.
I advise using an FR or MR car, so these neutral settings don't make it impossible to drive.
Pick something cheap, like 50k to buy, because if you see something your going to want to come back here and have others remake it for proof. No one will believe anything unless they see it with their own eyes, lol.
Do lots of laps with it, get used to it, good or bad.
Then make your camber changes, retest, and check results. Don't take video, just test.

Know what your going to find?
It does do something, and it's very slight. But it shouldn't be. Any changes should be HUGE, but they aren't. It just makes it a tiny bit better handling, or a tiny bit worse handling.
Camber effects the car in GT6. If that's your point, we already know that. Camber doesn't work the way it should, or has in the past. The word broken is an awful word for it, it's not broken, it just doesn't work right. Broken usually means ineffective.

 

[killerjimbag]

The big tuners haven't responded to this because they post their tunes for everyone to critique. Your theory is for one car that is basically an animal to tune for anyone. Show your tunes as the big tuners do or your 15 minutes are just about up. Read your thread again, take your bird to Panorama/Bathurst and try it out. Good luck.

 

[ace004]

Jack why dont you post a tune for a car that is naturally balanced in the game. Try a honda s2000 or mazda rx7 or rx8. Also t4y maybe a couple of different tires like SS or RH. That way there isn't complaining about picking a crappy car or bad driving and you could better show off your secret camber tuning methods.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

It seems Jack ignored my post on the other camber thread :

I'll repost it again :


Hi @Jack Napier, I see you are a no assist tuner/driver like me, I'm interested to see how you would work an even more effective camber setup on one of my latest replica :

SUBARU BRZ S TEIN SRC ( Super Racing Circuit ) Test Car Replica

Tuned to replicate BRZ TEIN SRC Test Car ( works on GT86 and FRS )
Comfort Soft​

View attachment 109716​

CAR : Subaru BRZ S '12 ( also works on Toyota 86 GT '12 and Scion FR-S '12 )
Tire : Comfort Soft

Specs
Horsepower: 202 HP at 6600 RPM
Torque: 163.3 ft-lb at 6500 RPM
Power Limiter at : 93.2%
Weight: 1230 kg
Ballast : 0 kg
Ballast Position : 0
Weight Distribution : 53 / 47 as stock
Performance Points: 411


GT AUTO
Oil change
Wheels : Standard Size - ENKEI RPF1
Car Paint : White



Tuning Parts Installed :
Sports Exhaust
Racing Brakes Kit
Fully Customizable Suspension



Suspension - TEIN Super Racing Circuit Coilover ( Mid Rate )
Front, Rear

Ride Height: 110 120
Spring Rate: 10.00 12.00
Dampers (Compression): 6 6
Dampers (Extension): 5 5
Anti-Roll Bars: 1 1
Camber Angle: 0.3 0.2
Toe Angle: -0.13 0.17

Brake Balance:
6/6 ( personal BB) or for ABS 0 wheel : 3/3, for ABS 1 - feel free to use your preferred brake balance.


Recommended setting for DS3 user :

Steering sensitivity at +1 or +2, all aids off, except ABS 1 ( if not comfortable with ABS 0 ) with 6/6 brake balance as starting point.



Notes :
This is one EPIC REPLICA

So, the TEIN Engineer visited US soil to showcase their latest Super Racing Circuit Coilover Kit for the famous trio ( FR-S, 86 GT and BRZ S ) Their main car for the demo/test was Subaru BRZ S, the car was stock except for the prototype exhaust, stickier extreme performance summer street tire ( Ventus R-S3 - Comfort Soft in GT6 ) wrapping ENKEI RPF1 17 inch wheel, AP Racing Big Brake Kit and the TEIN SRC Coilover Kit.

The TEIN Super Racing Circuit Coilover is able to handle a range of spring rate :
Front : 8kg/mm-12kg/mm
Rear : 10kg/mm-14kg/mm
The Demo/Test car replica above had medium rate - front 10k and rear 12k spring rates and track damper settings as the real test car have.

Here are some suggested damper settings after extensive tuning and testing that will surely enhanced the experience with TEIN SRC Coilover :

GT6 Damper Recommended Setup for TEIN SRC replica ( adapted from real life setup )
Front / Rear

Track ( Neutral ) - used on the replica above
Compression :6 6
Extension : 5 5

Track ( Loose )
Compression :6 4
Extension : 5 4

Track ( Tight )
Compression :5 6
Extension : 5 5

Performance Winding Road
Compression :4 4
Extension : 4 4

Comfort / Daily Drive
Compression :3 2
Extension : 2 1

When tested at Willow Springs IRL ( not a pro driver ), the car was considerably faster than using stock suspension + factory tires ( same everything else ).

Streets of Willow Springs
1:29.xx stock suspension + tires
1:25.xx Ventus R-S3 + Tein SRC ( GT6 replica target time -Comfort Soft )

Willow Springs International ( Big Willow )
1:38.xx stock suspension
1:36.xx Ventus R-S3 + Tein SRC ( GT6 replica target time -Comfort Soft)

The replica above is able to post similar lap time or even faster in the hand of better driver. Tested in GT6 at both Willow Springs Big and Streets.

My impression : The TEIN SRC gives the BRZ/FR-S/86 GT a great feeling overall, exceptional handling and grip with understeer or oversteer that can be initiated almost at will by the driver.

View attachment 109719​

Please read the tune + notes thoroughly
The lap times are attainable without any aids ( no brake assist ), I easily did low 1:25 at Streets of Willow with 1:24 possible, and the Big Willow is even easier to achieve. I would like to know if you can increase the camber more than the replica above and still gives better grip + lap time - aim for as much as throttle input on the corners of both Willow Springs track without oversteer/losing time ( last corner of Streets of Willow and the 2nd corner of Big Willow for example ), and please don't change anything else. Look forward to hear from you

 

[BlueShift]

Proof? Grab a Ruf YB
(...)
ARB to weight
4/6
Brakes to weight
4/6 (run ABS at zero)

Gaz weigth

Camb and toe zero/zero/zero/zero

(...)

Camb
6.0/1.5
Toe
0.35/0.65

(...)

Camb
0.0/0.0
Toe
0.35/0.65

Funny how you avoided/forgot commenting how superior to you is

Camb
6.0/1.5
Toe
0/0

Compared to 0 all around.

6.0/1.5 in front camber to increase front grip, good luck with that. I hope you have fun in apex with the tests. You will maybe have some more "corner entry slice" but your speeds in apex will be terrible.

I tried that so I can speak about camber. You can speak about camber in relation to susp/toe, and that's a maybe. But I can't clearly speak about accel and braking and you can't.
0.35/0.65 in toe + massive camber, by saying it improve stab, what are doing, racing or skying ?

Also, just a precision, why are you speaking about positive camber ? There's no settable positive camber in the game. Camber doesn't measure to the road when the car moves, it measures to the stopped car.
It's like you were talking about gaz tank capacity changing irl after 100km driving, only Einstein would say that but it involved you moving
We understand what you are saying with effort, but make some efforts to be clear to and use the proper terms. You're talking about angles, don't switch referential in the middle of a sentence or nobdy would understand what you say (OP is full of this).

Also about your attitude : you're the one avoiding all the comments. We are replying to you with exemples you don't even try to reproduce wheras some of us tried what you told or allready tried. Everyone medium tuner to advanced tuner tried the yellowbird. It's a GT classic tuning Everest, like the GT40 is.

Noticed how many YB have been posted ? So few. We are all waiting the camber to be "fixed".

Your laptimes is your problem not ours. If you think you've got a secret weapon, that's fine. But give chrono to beat on simple track like daytona ????
Or you are waiting for 1.05 maybe ???

I don't understand.

 

[Boone]

Your making the HUGE assumption they are not However this goes against the theory "wheels go where they are supposed to but do not do what they should""

I am of the impression without understanding camber, how it works, or how to tune it to the corners, it will be IMPOSSIBLE for you to test or tune something you misunderstand...

You guys cant even say HOW its broken and your tuning theories on it are more about Caster than Camber.. Even though Caster Angle called ""CASTER""" it applies a varying measureable amount of camber angle in the corner changing with the steering input.. You all seem to not fully understand the relationship between Caster and Camber... This is a HUGE part of the GTP consensus problem...

Literally, hit the road(track), Jack. Test your theories. Side by side. You claim expertise; PROVE IT. Videos or it didn't happen, too.

 

[PhillGuy]

This is all irrelevant. In the long run tests, lap times and feel should determine setup. Theory is little help.

How did the car feel when all these tests were done. Which setup gave the best lap time and/or the best feel for the car.

Are there any lap time to go with the tests. This show give a great insight on how the car is real performing.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

I've got BlackBird ( 700HP CTR Yellowbird with minimum weight ) on comfort soft in the works along with 2 other version of BlackBird ( Wangan Midnight ), I don't think this car is really as bad as in GT5, I will have to use some camber, it's a replica after all

 

[Voodoovaj]

Three camber threads...

As stated in the other threads, for the benefit of those not following all of them, all finding are consistent with positive camber rather than negative camber. The value in the UI is stated as a positive value, so it's quite likely that only the code governing the visual mesh is translating that value correct (into a negative value).

The more I read on positive camber, the more it sounds like that is precisely what is occurring in the game. This is also an easy bug to miss, since everything would check out as working properly when the coders look at it.

 

[Jack Napier]

Thats a heep of speculation


I call that's twisting facts to support your conclusion....

 

[esoxhntr]

 

[Voodoovaj]

Thats a heep of speculation


I call that's twisting facts to support your conclusion....

Actually, it's called using the facts to reach the speculation.

FACT - Your suggested setting to the Yellow Bird (yes I tried it) leads to a more reactive front, but less adhesive front and rear. That is completely consistent with positive camber. Not at all consistent with negative camber. (BTW, I love the Yellow Bird and the BTR. My favourites for sure and mine are awesome handing cars )

FACT - EVERYONE ELSE has found that camber reduces grip regardless of car, body roll, weight, spring settings, damper settings, roll bars settings, or any other setting or combinations.

FACT - Every element of the tuning menu is listed as positive amounts. Toe, being the one element that has both positive and negative. Negative toe is clearly stated as a negative value (ex -0.1).

FACT - Although the intention is for camber to be negative (as indicated in the heading title in the UI for camber). The numbers shown are in fact positive. There is no "-" before the number as there is with the negative values of toe.

FACT - The UI is flawed. It clearly indicates that the ride height value is INCHES, when we all know that cannot possibly be the case and it is more likely indicating millimeters.

FACT - KW suspension is proudly displayed in the suspension menu (if you purchase through the GT Auto area). KW's simulations can deal with positive and negative camber. It would then require that the values entered be either positive or negative. I do not know how much of their technology (if any) is in the system. However, if there is any, it would assume positive values are indeed positive.

Based on these facts, I believe that the physics is using the value from the suspension settings without multiplying the value by -1 in order to obtain negative camber.

I also made video games for 20 years and I've seen stuff like this happen plenty.

 

[FussyFez]

Actually, it's called using the facts to reach the speculation.

FACT - Your suggested setting to the Yellow Bird (yes I tried it) leads to a more reactive front, but less adhesive front and rear. That is completely consistent with positive camber. Not at all consistent with negative camber. (BTW, I love the Yellow Bird and the BTR. My favourites for sure and mine are awesome handing cars )

FACT - EVERYONE ELSE has found that camber reduces grip regardless of car, body roll, weight, spring settings, damper settings, roll bars settings, or any other setting or combinations.

FACT - Every element of the tuning menu is listed as positive amounts. Toe, being the one element that has both positive and negative. Negative toe is clearly stated as a negative value (ex -0.1).

FACT - Although the intention is for camber to be negative (as indicated in the heading title in the UI for camber). The numbers shown are in fact positive. There is no "-" before the number as there is with the negative values of toe.

FACT - The UI is flawed. It clearly indicates that the ride height value is INCHES, when we all know that cannot possibly be the case and it is more likely indicating millimeters.

FACT - KW suspension is proudly displayed in the suspension menu. KW's simulations can deal with positive and negative camber. It would then require that the values entered be either positive or negative. I do not know how much of their technology (if any) is in the system. However, if there is any, it would assume positive values are indeed positive.

Based on these facts, I believe that the physics is using the value from the suspension settings without multiplying the value by -1 in order to obtain negative camber.

I also made video games for 20 years and I've seen stuff like this happen plenty.

I can agree with this, except that I have had lap time gains with tiny camber values (0.1-0.3) and what felt like more ultimate grip.

But the fact the values are so small suggests the 10x theory to be true.

I do not know enough about positive camber, and how it can influence handling characteristics, to summarise that what the setting screen is telling us is actually true (we are adding positive camber!).

 

[Voodoovaj]

I can agree with this, except that I have had lap time gains with tiny camber values (0.1-0.3) and what felt like more ultimate grip.

But the fact the values are so small suggests the 10x theory to be true.

I do not know enough about positive camber, and how it can influence handling characteristics, to summarise that what the setting screen is telling us is actually true (we are adding positive camber!).

Yes, you can see lap time gains. Positive camber in the rear will help with rotation. Positive camber in the front will make the vehicle more reactive. I've found the same gains with it which made me believe that it was working. However, the more I looked at it, I found that it was easier to be on a line but I wasn't gaining grip.

The reason I don't support the 1/10 idea is that a value "10" would then have to be -100 degrees of camber and that would make the cars completely undrivable. Testers would have caught that one easily. -90 degrees of camber would make the wheels face the sky. The cars would be incapable of movement.

 

[FussyFez]

Yes, you can see lap time gains. Positive camber in the rear will help with rotation. Positive camber in the front will make the vehicle more reactive. I've found the same gains with it which made me believe that it was working. However, the more I looked at it, I found that it was easier to be on a line but I wasn't gaining grip.

The reason I don't support the 1/10 idea is that a value "10" would then have to be -100 degrees of camber and that would make the cars completely undrivable. Testers would have caught that one easily. -90 degrees of camber would make the wheels face the sky. the cars would be incapable of movement.

Excellent shout.

I have not tested anything past 3.0

 

[Jack Napier]

Results of mine are clear

Laguna GT350 500pp SH
1:39.9 low rear camber 0.3

1:38 after raising up rear camber to 2.2

no assist.

So if your crying for lap time results try reading my post before because that's been posted already. Also others have been posting improved times using camber in the other thread..

Why is it those times get ignored or even better, some half understood fact twisting trying to explain it away as less grip must be causing the improvement..

This whole debate has been a joke as far as GTP asking for everything served on a platter while they just post BS or stuff somebody else wrote on a web page and they copy past it as if it's there words.. Do you even realize most of the crap you guys post to prove your point doesn't prove your point at all and most time while it is relative to the subject ITS OFTEN NOT relative to the point being made or refuted...

You can point fingers at me in every post to do this do that prove this prove that but it don't matter to me. There are readers here interesting in the facts about camber in GT, not your suspicions, opinions, or half understood clips you post, while some are quick to pat each other on the back for the great info they copy off somebody who does have a clue... In the end who am I debating, you ? The guy you copy off of, OR an I arguing your interpretation if somebody else explaining something about tuning??? Go get the guy writing the stuff you guys copy, Im sure he and I could have a real convo on tuning....

It's in your hands but are you capable is the question...

You have a demo car to see for yourself obviously blueshift is clueless having not driven the thing evident in his post... It's a DEMO CAR lmfao..

However I apparently gave the front end more control with less grip lmfao vs it swinging uncontrollably with the camber reset to zero, how does that work @ Blueshift?!?!?!? Wait wait, it must be the less grip in the front gives added steering control right???



Ohh you guys really miss the target completely.... 3 wheeling lmfao

I've not seen to many race cars tuned to lift the front tire in every corner... Seriously? Think that is helping it's cornering ability in that corner?

As MCH even said he had to compromise his camb setting (although he mixed up the detail, he tuned the inside, not out ) so he could clip the curb at apex without sacrificing speed on exit. Got him the win. Example of some tracks need a little compromise as all the corners are not the same or a particular corner has character...

What your looking at is an example of tuning to the track as a whole vs just one corner. At certain point along the track it's a compromise. Kinda lame to post 3 wheeling pics like that though, shows a half understanding of what you've been reading in your Goggle quest to twist facts to support your conclusions.

You guys should work for the Show "Ancient Aliens" that shows all about twisting facts to support conclusions...

 

[PsuPepperoni]

Results of mine are clear

Laguna GT350 500pp SH
1:39.9 low rear camber 0.3

1:38 after raising up rear camber to 2.2

no assist.

Was camber the only thing you changed?

 

[Johnnypenso]

Results of mine are clear

Laguna GT350 500pp SH
1:39.9 low rear camber 0.3

1:38 after raising up rear camber to 2.2

no assist.

So if your crying for lap time results try reading my post before because that's been posted already. Also others have been posting improved times using camber in the other thread..

Why is it those times get ignored or even better, some half understood fact twisting trying to explain it away as less grip must be causing the improvement..

This whole debate has been a joke as far as GTP asking for everything served on a platter while they just post BS or stuff somebody else wrote on a web page and they copy past it as if it's there words.. Do you even realize most of the crap you guys post to prove your point doesn't prove your point at all and most time while it is relative to the subject ITS OFTEN NOT relative to the point being made or refuted...

You can point fingers at me in every post to do this do that prove this prove that but it don't matter to me. There are readers here interesting in the facts about camber in GT, not your suspicions, opinions, or half understood clips you post, while some are quick to pat each other on the back for the great info they copy off somebody who does have a clue... In the end who am I debating, you ? The guy you copy off of, OR an I arguing your interpretation if somebody else explaining something about tuning??? Go get the guy writing the stuff you guys copy, Im sure he and I could have a real convo on tuning....

It's in your hands but are you capable is the question...

You have a demo car to see for yourself obviously blueshift is clueless having not driven the thing evident in his post... It's a DEMO CAR lmfao..

However I apparently gave the front end more control with less grip lmfao vs it swinging uncontrollably with the camber reset to zero, how does that work @ Blueshift?!?!?!? Wait wait, it must be the less grip in the front gives added steering control right???



Ohh you guys really miss the target completely.... 3 wheeling lmfao

I've not seen to many race cars tuned to lift the front tire in every corner... Seriously? Think that is helping it's cornering ability in that corner?

As MCH even said he had to compromise his camb setting (although he mixed up the detail, he tuned the inside, not out ) so he could clip the curb at apex without sacrificing speed on exit. Got him the win. Example of some tracks need a little compromise as all the corners are not the same or a particular corner has character...

What your looking at is an example of tuning to the track as a whole vs just one corner. At certain point along the track it's a compromise. Kinda lame to post 3 wheeling pics like that though, shows a half understanding of what you've been reading in your Goggle quest to twist facts to support your conclusions.

You guys should work for the Show "Ancient Aliens" that shows all about twisting facts to support conclusions...

Why?

A. You promised video. Let's see the video of your 1:38 laps and make sure we can see the HUD so we can verify your top speed and cornering speeds. Make sure and post the tune in it's entirety too.

B. One result, without video evidence mind you, is anecdotal and doesn't prove or disprove anything. Dozens of others have submitted just as valid anecdotal evidence that camber doesn't work, why would your 1 data point of evidence carry more weight than the voices of dozens of other GTP'ers?

C. Why are we dealing with difficult to tune and drive cars? How about picking cars that are a little more neutral where it'll be much easier to notice small changes in grip and with which even average drivers can run consistent laps?

 

[PsuPepperoni]

I just ran a 1:38.2 at Laguna in a GT350 with stock suspension at 496PP

 

[SIRIUSMUSTASH]

lollllllllllllllllllll

 

[Jack Napier]

Think it's been made clear 1 guy beating his own time, or another beating his means very little to the debate. Actually nothing really at all.. Driver factor I don't drive Laguna often I much prefer Brands Hatch or Silverstone

If you want to do your "speed through a corner test" let's see some stuff at Silverstone on SS so easier for anybody to replicate, it's the replicating that is key

What am I supposed to show?? I don't see anything from you guys except a bunch of stuff copied off other people from various websites... And you say it's broke with BS reasons why.....

Joker laughs