JJSCHMITTY
(Banned)
- 120
- Wisconsin
- JJSCHMITTY
Unrealistic Tuning Options
- Thread starter montez34
- 79 comments
- 6,279 views
- 82
- New York
- EpicHeelToe
What irks me mostly about the tuning system in all the GT series is that the "ECU tune" is treated like any other performance part, i.e. sport exhaust, air filter, etc. ECU tune is less of an actual part, and more like a programing strategy aimed at taking advantage of whatever performance limitations the vehicle is currently capable of. It modifies the modifications, so to speak. For example, if you're running a 2.0L four cylinder with factory parts, adding an ECU tune will give you negligable gains. Perhaps 15 horsepower. Now, run the factory ECU with the same engine and add a 430 CFM turbocharger kit (stage 1) running 7 psi off a manual boost controller and nothing else. Assuming the compression ratio is still ~10:1, the gain should be about 100 HP. Now add an ECU tune and the gain leaps up to 150 HP. That's 50 HP versus 15. That kind of dynamic should be reflected in the tuning section of GT6.
In the real world, if you tune a vehicle, or have tuning done by a professional, you usually first gauge your goals for your car and create a list of modifications to achieve your goals. An auto-x car is set up much differently than a drag car. It's up to the owner to relay this information to the tuning proffesional/ mechanic. After goals are given, the tuner will do his best to create a tune to tailor fit your goals.
What I would really love is a multi-difficulty player interface when it comes to tuning. Set the difficulty to say, Novice. The only option you have is to send your car to a tuning shop and have them set up your car based on your needs.
Intermediate difficulty would allow you to choose your parts and perform your own maintenance.
Advanced dificulty would allow you to actually do the tuning yourself, down to how agressively to set timing, fuel, boost, spring rates, camber angles, etc. I would love to be able to break the car if you push the car too hard. Set the timing too advanced or fuel mixture too lean, and BOOM! goes the engine.
In the real world, if you tune a vehicle, or have tuning done by a professional, you usually first gauge your goals for your car and create a list of modifications to achieve your goals. An auto-x car is set up much differently than a drag car. It's up to the owner to relay this information to the tuning proffesional/ mechanic. After goals are given, the tuner will do his best to create a tune to tailor fit your goals.
What I would really love is a multi-difficulty player interface when it comes to tuning. Set the difficulty to say, Novice. The only option you have is to send your car to a tuning shop and have them set up your car based on your needs.
Intermediate difficulty would allow you to choose your parts and perform your own maintenance.
Advanced dificulty would allow you to actually do the tuning yourself, down to how agressively to set timing, fuel, boost, spring rates, camber angles, etc. I would love to be able to break the car if you push the car too hard. Set the timing too advanced or fuel mixture too lean, and BOOM! goes the engine.
@ EpicHeelToe
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=7717293#post7717293
If we were to implement everything you just said as a simplified concept, adding a ECU upgrade would add +10% per 100 ft/lb of torque, right?
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=7717293#post7717293
If we were to implement everything you just said as a simplified concept, adding a ECU upgrade would add +10% per 100 ft/lb of torque, right?
- 2,143
- The Track
- youngun_great
I agree with this Thread, Tuning is unrealistic in most ways. You can do anything to any car yet this game blocks out most. Even Supercars are getting the Twin Turbo Treatment now a days (Underground racing). Theres much missing and Weight reduction/ Engine Tuning shouldnt be in stages but as seperate classes so Loosing Weight would be Take out seats, strip interior, light weight parts, Carbon Fibre Panels. Engine tuning would be racing cams, manifolds, filters, fuel pumps, remove AC from cars that have it and more. Best way to do it is Simple/ Advanced form, so people can either go in stages or buy like real life.
More variety in turbos/ Superchargers as theres more than 3 stages for sale, plus hybrid turbos and Supercharging + Turbo Charging the same car (on top of the Twin Turbo Gallardo 1200hp thats around these days). Different stages on ECU tunes (1-5), better Suspension sections (adding Arms, Rods, Wishbone imprvements) and not just calling it general names but coilovers and shocks + coils. Even stuff like adding a front and rear Splitter is missing (included in some Prem Bumpers). I felt Need for Speed Shift had a good way to split down the tuning to parts, even Roll cage had its own Drop down menu, and each part acted a different way to each car.
PD need to go to more general Car shows to see whats possible.
More variety in turbos/ Superchargers as theres more than 3 stages for sale, plus hybrid turbos and Supercharging + Turbo Charging the same car (on top of the Twin Turbo Gallardo 1200hp thats around these days). Different stages on ECU tunes (1-5), better Suspension sections (adding Arms, Rods, Wishbone imprvements) and not just calling it general names but coilovers and shocks + coils. Even stuff like adding a front and rear Splitter is missing (included in some Prem Bumpers). I felt Need for Speed Shift had a good way to split down the tuning to parts, even Roll cage had its own Drop down menu, and each part acted a different way to each car.
PD need to go to more general Car shows to see whats possible.
- 82
- New York
- EpicHeelToe
dudejo
Not necessarily. Let me rephrase my example. Let's say you start with an engine that produces 150 hp stock. Tuning the engine management will net a 15 hp increase to 165. This is indeed a 10% increase. Now, take the same engine with a stage 1 turbocharger kit, assuming it already has a reasonably high compression ratio, but run stock the stock ecu map. You can probably get away producing 250 hp without blowing up the motor. Now, add proper engine management and the output increases to 300 hp. That's a 20% increase, which is double what the N/A's gains are. This is due to advanced boost control, enrichening the a/f mixture to allow more boost, etc. I think it would be great if the user have control over the aggressiveness of the tune to try to adjust the driveability so you can produce either a less powerful but more useable flat torque band (good for auto-x and touge), or a laggier, but peakier power curve (good for drag and ovals).
Last edited:
R34EVO9
(Banned)
- 767
- USA.CT
- h3llaflshh
the lack of turbo cams and piston compression ratio is wats killing me. im tired of building cars with the same generic staged setups..
For the ppl that know how to build engines give us an option to build or engines instead of a high mid low turbo .. or just stage 1 2 3 engine. stop being lazy
For the ppl that know how to build engines give us an option to build or engines instead of a high mid low turbo .. or just stage 1 2 3 engine. stop being lazy
I understand it's not as simple as my previous example but I'm basically trying to shoehorn your paragraph into a few sentences. Why? An attempt to adhere to GT's simplified tuning system while still improving upon it.
Although, based on your example, the increase could be 10% Torque per 100 ft/lb if NA, then another 10% if the engine is turbocharged. Although I seriously doubt that a 500 ft/lb NA engine can produce 150% of its factory output with nothing more than ECU tuning...
Street Racer
(Banned)
- 828
- United States
Not to related, but with the premium spec-r sylvia, it already comes with a turbocharger. It says that the engine is an SR20 not a SR20DET. DET's are turbocharged. I noticed this when I was using it stock, and the boost gauge was there. Then I put on the low rpm turbo and the needle on the gauge did not go up too much. So, the premium sylvia actually has a SR20DET? and the stock turbo is like a low-low rpm turbo.
- 82
- New York
- EpicHeelToe
There's actually a flaw in your math trying to derive my formula for hypothetical engine management tuning. You say that a 10% gain is seen for every 100 lb-ft of tq. I stated that the gain from 150 hp would be 165 hp (I used hp, but we can easily substitute with torque). That is indeed a 10% gain, but that's on any given number. If you applied your formula, 10%/100 lb-ft at 150 hp baseline would equal a 15% gain or 172.5 lb-ft. When the numbers get big is where your formula really falls apart. A 500 ft-lb baseline would mean a 150% gain to 750 ft-lb. If you used a simple constant gain of 10% on an N/A setup, the ECU tuning would boost a 500 ft-lb engine to 550 ft-lbs, which looks alot more realistic. If that engine was turbocharged, the output is now 600 lb-ft.
4g63's are beasts. You can throw whatever you want for timing, fuel and boost, and that will hold together like a brick ****house.
I DID say a 150% boost to 750 ft/lb would be ridiculous.
So basically, the way the game already does it isn't too far from the mark. Basically it could be simplified to the following :
If Turbo = installed, then Total Torque * 1.2. Else, then Total Torque * 1.1.
- 82
- New York
- EpicHeelToe
I'll have to try this out in the game. I really don't think a stock R35 GT-R will jump 100 hp with just an ecu tune alone. In real life, it SHOULD, but in-game I don't think it will. I will confirm this as soon as I get back home. I'm sorry,I didn't mean to ridicule you. I just thought you had mistook what I was trying to convey, especially with the whole 10% per 100 ft-lbs formula.
- 82
- New York
- EpicHeelToe
Okay, so I just got my bone stock GT-R in-game and applied ECU Tuning as the sole modification. This would be equal to running a stage 1 reflash. I started out with 429 ft-lbs and ended with 438 after the tune. That's only a gain of 9 ft-lbs!! That's only a 2% gain! I know if I run an "off the shelf" tune on my WRX, my gain for stage 1 (ecu tune on stock car) is 35 ft-lbs. That's only from 175 wtq! A professional tailor built tune would give me more like 50 more! On a GT-R, the gain should be conservatively about 85 ft-lbs. , not 9 ft-lbs. PD is waaay lowballing us.
For a possible formula when implementing exhaust behavior I got this :
Sports Exhaust (as an example)
(Torque * 9/10) * (1 - (Current RPM / Max RPM)) * (1 - 11/9) + 11/9 = Final Torque
What this first does is reduce all torque by 10%. Then, as RPM increases, torque is boosted to a maximum of +22.2_% at maximum RPM.
Higher level exhaust systems would use more dramatic multipliers.
Now the question that remains is how easily this formula could be adapted to GT, since an engine doesn't make the same torque at all RPMs. My guess is that you'd have to compute the torque at all RPMs through that formula then save the results into a different template the simulation engine will use.
Sports Exhaust (as an example)
(Torque * 9/10) * (1 - (Current RPM / Max RPM)) * (1 - 11/9) + 11/9 = Final Torque
What this first does is reduce all torque by 10%. Then, as RPM increases, torque is boosted to a maximum of +22.2_% at maximum RPM.
Higher level exhaust systems would use more dramatic multipliers.
Now the question that remains is how easily this formula could be adapted to GT, since an engine doesn't make the same torque at all RPMs. My guess is that you'd have to compute the torque at all RPMs through that formula then save the results into a different template the simulation engine will use.
- 82
- New York
- EpicHeelToe
dudejo
I'm sure that reducing back pressure will help boost volumetric efficiency. Once VE is changed, that further affects the thermodynamics and power curve. The effect is even more dramatic on forced induction engines. That's a very good formula, but it must also be applied to a VE formula based on the increased CFM the engine is now flowing.
How would this affect the increase curve? Would it be closer to an exponential increase?
- 4,552
- Australia
Agreed - I dare suggest vehicle settings also. My biggest gripe is having active stability enabled on NASCAR races, and it can't be turned off. I think the default should be driver aids all switched to zero. I spent ages on GT4 turning off Traction control on every single vehicle, even all the historic cars, because the TC was so intrusive.
However, when I turned ABS off on several cars, whenever I applied the brakes, the revs dropped as if i had just placed the vehicle in neutral, which was extremely strange. I haven't turned ABS off enough to properly figure it out, but it certainly didn't seem realistic or pleasant.
- 459
- North Carolina
- QuikSlvr223
I want the engine from a Lamborghini Aventador in a Fiat 500F. Now that power/weight ratio would be insane.
- 2,143
- The Track
- youngun_great
Bit idiotic to but a v12 in that, v6 would struggle
Similar threads
