Weight Reduction vs. Power

[ALB123]

I would imagine by now someone has done a study to see what improves laptimes more, for a fixed PP level, decreasing vehicle weight or increasing overall vehicle power.

In case anyone doesn't understand what I mean by that, let me explain. Let's say you have a vehicle at 450PP and you're trying to increase to 500PP to compete in a 500PP Class Race. Are you better off dropping the vehicle weight as much as you can, which will probably bump your vehicle up to 470PP or so, and THEN add in the remaining PP in Power parts, or would you stick with the default vehicle weight and spend all 50PP in Power add-ons?

Like most things in life, I'm sure there isn't a definitive answer that proves 100% of the time you should go one way versus the other, but I would also bet that someone has concluded with exhaustive testing that one way is more often more productive than the other.

I hope anyone providing a response can explain how they know for sure which is the better way to go rather than just guessing. I honestly don't know which is the better way to go and I'm obviously too lazy to conduct an extensive study myself.

Thoughts?

 

[David Bailey]

The weight I've found is disproportionate depending on the vehicle. I've always thought it was something along the lines 10hp=100kg.
But the age/aero play a part E.g. 500pp Shelby cobra 1000Kg/337hp. '02 Dodge Viper 1455Kg/307hp.
The Dodge is giving away nearly half a ton. Hope this helps.
As it would be exhaustive to do a comprehensive study too many variables, Engine placement/drivetrain/ballast placement etc...

 

[Downhill Dino]

Personally, I have always opted for being as light as possible with power coming second. A lower weight helps out so much more than more power. It allows far better agility which comes in handy.

You'd need, in the case of going from 450 to 500, horsepower levels that would put you in the 520-530 range to match the available weight reduction.

 

[ALB123]

As it would be exhaustive to do a comprehensive study too many variables, Engine placement/drivetrain/ballast placement etc...

Yes, it would definitely be exhausting to attempt such a comparison, however, I know how dedicated some GTP members are and it wouldn't surprise me to find a few members who have possibly done this exact study with 20, 30 or even 100 cars. Take @SuzukaStar, for example, he has run thousands of laps on Suzuka and documented the lap times of hundreds of different cars - going so far as to record and release the videos on his YouTube channel. Very dedicated indeed!

Personally, I have always opted for being as light as possible with power coming second. A lower weight helps out so much more than more power. It allows far better agility which comes in handy.

For the most part, I too have mainly opted for lighter vehicle weight when I could versus adding strictly Power upgrades. It is a lot easier for me to handle a lighter car on the race track than a heavier car. Now that my skills have improved, I am much better at adjusting my driving to keep heavier cars on the racetrack. Still, I prefer lighter if given the choice.

 

[MidFieldMaven]

"You can't make up for light weight. You can add power or take off weight. Taking off weight's a little better." - Jay Leno

 

[starcarper]

I've found certain cars have "sweet spots" where a balance of power weight suits better. It's really quite funny how dropping say 20kg and increasing power will make you quite a bit slower in a TT.

I think like most weight is the most important but sometimes power is the key.

It is very track dependant.

That didn't help you at all did it?

 

[ALB123]

I've found certain cars have "sweet spots" where a balance of power weight suits better. It's really quite funny how dropping say 20kg and increasing power will make you quite a bit slower in a TT.

I think like most weight is the most important but sometimes power is the key.

It is very track dependant.

That didn't help you at all did it?

Haha! Well, when I created this post, I expected a lot of "it depends" answers. I agree, on a track like Special Stage Route X, power would probably be king as you're dealing with miles and miles of straight driving. Now, I know that's an extreme example, but I'm sure there are probably other courses in GT6 where extra power would be better for certain cars than dropping the weight to achieve the same PP level.

So far, I think most people responding believe that dropping weight is more advantageous more often than not. Having said that, I've experienced the same thing you have in certain situations.

 

[Ice0l8ed]

You get more, or maybe better advantages by dropping weight. Braking, tire wear, cornering, and acceleration. My theory has always been "I'll make up for it in the corners". Granted on certain tracks that doesn't always work (sarthe for example)

 

[Ettick]

Cars seem to gain more PP when power is added than when weight is taken off. That's just based off my experience. I'd say that unless it's a track where you need a good top speed, you're better off reducing weight.

 

[stuff1138]

The ultimate goal when tuning a car's suspension is to eliminate unwanted weight transfer and to better control the weight transfer you can't eliminate completely. Therefore you want to have the least amount of weight to begin with allowing for less momentum. As @Ice0l8ed mentioned dropping weight greatly improves the car's agility.

Power will increase the top speed and can overpower heavy cars and make them quick in a straight line but as soon as you try to stop or corner hard the momentum of the car is too much and you have a hard time controlling it.

 

[Polsixe]

I've found certain cars have "sweet spots" where a balance of power weight suits better. It's really quite funny how dropping say 20kg and increasing power will make you quite a bit slower in a TT.

I think like most weight is the most important but sometimes power is the key.

It is very track dependant.

That didn't help you at all did it?

Cars like the MX-5 Miata can have a wide range of power and mass at the 400pp level. Min weight doesn't seem to have the grunt needed to pull out of hairpins or Max speed on straights, Max weight and then braking and cornering suffer. A bit of weight off seems a good way to go, a stage 3 with some re-ballast.

 

[BloodHunterVX]

I reduce the weight and adjust the suspension/brakes/lsd first. I know adjusting the setup doesn't affect pp, but it makes the car easier to drive even without a spoiler, if it doesn't handle well with lower hp, it will get much worse with higher hp, it's easier to adjust for higher hp when it handles good with lower hp so I do engine parts last usually. Aero parts may also affect the pp.

 

[Sick Cylinder]

It depends on the track - for fast tracks you want high power so sometimes add ballast and power. For handling circuits lightness is more important. I sometimes find it's better to pick a car with high PP and drop power / add weight to get down to a PP limit than tune a car up and increase its PP to the limit.

 

[Harsk100]

Well, the less weight your car has, the faster your car will be.

 

[NT_03]

It depends.

If you're racing on a track with many straightaways (SSR7, RX) Better go for power.
If you're racing on a track with many turns (Nürburgring Family, Cote D'Azur) Better go for lighter weight.

 

[Lewis_Hamilton_]

The power to weight ratio sweet spot in the PP system is at 900kg.

 

[Sick Cylinder]

The power to weight ratio sweet spot in the PP system is at 900kg.

Are you sure? With GT5 I remember reading in a guide by Motor City Hami that it was in the range 1100 - 1200kg. I have no idea what it is in GT6 and haven't seen any evidence for what it is, but you may very well be right.

 

[TorqueWrench]

Are you sure? With GT5 I remember reading in a guide by Motor City Hami that it was in the range 1100 - 1200kg. I have no idea what it is in GT6 and haven't seen any evidence for what it is, but you may very well be right.

900kg is not a "power to weight sweet" spot. Its a weight, so if anything its a vehicle weight sweet spot, but that depends on the vehicle. Many won't reach 900kg and many are well below 900kg. I couldn't imagine adding weight to the F1 or F3, or even a Bug. So 900kg is meaningless.

What you can find is YOUR vehicle weight sweet spot. And vehicles at that spec will feel best to you, not nessesarily to everybody. Often those looking for a weight sweet spot, find power and tire "sweet spots" they feel most comfortable on.

To answer the OP it depends on tires, power, weight and driver among other things as to power vs weight. For the most part weight will win, except when weight reduction cost too much stability for the tires at that spec. I've had a stage 3 be too much while stage 2 is perfect, when a good stable weight is found I move up power from there

 

[Jbaffoh]

Well, the less weight your car has, the faster your car will be.

A lighter car will accelerate quicker than a heavier version of the same car, but it's top speed will not be faster.

 

[Lewis_Hamilton_]

Are you sure? With GT5 I remember reading in a guide by Motor City Hami that it was in the range 1100 - 1200kg. I have no idea what it is in GT6 and haven't seen any evidence for what it is, but you may very well be right.

900kg is not a "power to weight sweet" spot.

Statistically in the Weight to BHP ratio in the tuning sheet, it is. Pick a vehicle that weighs 900Kg, view the P/W ratio and PP on the left hand side, and then play with the ballast and power of the vehicle within a set PP limit. With the weight below or above 900kg, you will not be able to match the P/W ratio at the same PP.

I'm not saying it's going to be the fastest possible setting for your vehicle (although often it can be), but it is the maximum you can extract from the PP system.

 

[lbpomg95]

I'd figure by the fact that most TT Seasonal leaderboards are dominated by featherweight toasters that weight is the way to go.

I do remember one seasonal for the H.E.M G37 - I had ballast of about 150kg to begin with. Couldn't get gold. Got rid of ballast and immediately blitzed the gold time by over a second.

It should be noted though that this was on Streets of willow, a track not much bigger than a wellington boot.

 

[stuff1138]

Something to add. The lighter your car, the faster it stops and the easier it is to keep it stable under braking. Again it's all about weight transfer. If there's less weight to transfer the more stable your car will be and the quicker it will be over all.

 

[Dave_87]

Sometimes a bit more weight can give better high speed stability though. Weight also gives better accelerative traction and occasionally better braking traction through weight transfer.

Its all relevant to the track your racing on. That's why in the top left corner you can choose between three saved settings.

Another thing id like to add from a recent experience. I was messing around making some amateur style rally cars. I had a Mini Cooper (a real one, not a BMW) and a Vauxhall Corsa. They where both 375pp but the mini had just under 100bhp and about 730kg ( I don't remember the exact figures), the Corsa was 140bhp and 950kg. The parts fitted to the car where the same, such as Race soft suspension, custom LSD etc, so the only different was in weight and engine performance. The Corsa was always much much faster in ever circumstance, on circuits with steep inclines or smooth tighter circuits, it was always the same. I've ended up adding ballast weight to the mini but increasing power to 106bhp, whereas the Corsa has had a lot of Ballast weight added but no power, leaving it with nearly 1100kg's and 355PP and even then the Corsa still has the edge in most situations. That tells me that power and torque are worth more than low weight but also that its also just as relevant to each car. What may work on one, probably wont work on another.

 

[ALB123]

@Dave_87 Yup, I think you made an excellent point with your example of the Mini Cooper vs. Vauxhall Corsa. I wonder if those insanely lightweight cars have a more pronounced effect than average weight cars. I would be willing to bet they do. What I mean is, I'll bet that the difference in 100hp to 110hp is much greater than the difference in 350hp to 360hp. Of course we know the former is a 10% increase difference compared to the latter which shows not even a 5% increase in horsepower.

When I created this thread I thought it would provide for some interesting discussion and I wasn't wrong. I appreciate all of the input you've all provided.

 

[GBO Possum]

It depends on the track - for fast tracks you want high power so sometimes add ballast and power. For handling circuits lightness is more important. I sometimes find it's better to pick a car with high PP and drop power / add weight to get down to a PP limit than tune a car up and increase its PP to the limit.

I have an experience which supports the bolded text above. A detuned Lambo Aventador served me well in the current 4WD Seasonal. IIRC, I dropped the power to something like 55%, and it was a sweet ride compared to many other choices I have tried.

Totally unscientifically, I assumed that the innate good handling, brakes and aerodynamics of the Aventador were working for me. I also have a gut feel that taking an existing nicely balanced car and raising the power might be a good way of creating trouble, whereas reducing the power is more likely to make it easier to drive smoothly.

Which is a roundabout way of saying that in my relatively unskilled hands, taking a high PP car and lowering the PP by reducing power is potentially a good strategy, whereas this may not work so well for more skilled drivers.

 

[VBR]

Power to weight ratio is more important than either, & that will differ from car to car. The Lotus Elise 111R is best at 450PP when you add maximum ballast & then maximum power.


👍

 

[GolimLongshanks]

Sometimes a bit more weight can give better high speed stability though. Weight also gives better accelerative traction and occasionally better braking traction through weight transfer.

Its all relevant to the track your racing on. That's why in the top left corner you can choose between three saved settings.

Another thing id like to add from a recent experience. I was messing around making some amateur style rally cars. I had a Mini Cooper (a real one, not a BMW) and a Vauxhall Corsa. They where both 375pp but the mini had just under 100bhp and about 730kg ( I don't remember the exact figures), the Corsa was 140bhp and 950kg. The parts fitted to the car where the same, such as Race soft suspension, custom LSD etc, so the only different was in weight and engine performance. The Corsa was always much much faster in ever circumstance, on circuits with steep inclines or smooth tighter circuits, it was always the same. I've ended up adding ballast weight to the mini but increasing power to 106bhp, whereas the Corsa has had a lot of Ballast weight added but no power, leaving it with nearly 1100kg's and 355PP and even then the Corsa still has the edge in most situations. That tells me that power and torque are worth more than low weight but also that its also just as relevant to each car. What may work on one, probably wont work on another.

That might well be down to differences in the power/torque maps of those particular cars.

I'm not disputing that there are a lot of factors to consider whether to raise performance or lower weight or even to do a bit of both. Sometimes you've just got to try stuff!

 

[light driver]

This might be a little irrelevant, but....OK in GT5 there were absolutely no doubt: POWER over weight, especilally on Nordschleife...I recall my friend and I (mostly him) winning tonnes of races with big, heavy Mercedes AMG. We/he (he tought me the trick) would buy all weight reduction, then add 200 kilos which is the max You can throw on, and then move this weight "50 aft". We (mostly him) were almost unbeatable on Nordschleife with those heavy cars...The same with US cars. A US car with a weight distribution 49-51 was a winner. Having said that, I gotta admid that we always used SRF in our rooms...Sometimes when i raced some seasonals or some online rooms without my friend, I turned SRF off, and suddenly those "200 kilos 50 aft" Mercedes or US cars became disasterous to drive. Then I would keep the weight, but move it further to the front, to a 54-46 or so.... So it was SRF more than anything else that made those "50 aft" heavies winners....

But in GT6 I think my experience is a little confusing. With the new, much more difficult, driving physics, it seems that "heavy power" is a complete looser. But again; it might be beneficial with "heavy babies" IF You use SRF.

It`s just that it`s other cars that are winners in GT6, and this confuses me. AMG Mercedes E55 is funny enough the slowest car I have tried on Nordschleife so far, whereas it was VERY fast in GT5....Confusing....It shows us that Gran Turismo cannot be a "real driving simulator" as the cars behave completely differently from GT5 to GT6, and winners become loosers...

Today I will still buy all weight reduction, but only throw a little weight back on afterwards, and move it backwards...I`m tyalking about FR cars here. With MR I will buy max weight reduction, and add nothing, or just a tiny bit back...Oh and sometimes, if it is a car I respect a lot, I will try to keep the weight close to default...

And as someone mentioned, at very high pp (from about 580pp and up) low weight seems to be the best...

Just a few thoughts...meeeh...

 

[Chrunch Houston]

The power to weight ratio sweet spot in the PP system is at 900kg.

That is what I thought too. I was gathering information to post here about it for a few cars. All of these cars are tuned to 425pp.

It was true for the Nissan EXA CANOPY, and the Mitsubishi COLT 1.5 Sport, but then I tried to check the Peugeot 106 S16, and it was not true for that car.

I didn't try to find out the 106's sweet spot though. It's time to start my lobby.

 

[tejr]

Depends on the track. The higher speed tracks benefit more from higher power. The faster you go, the less weight becomes the issue and its air resistance that you need to overcome.

But for tracks like tsukuba you need something light and nimble and can counteract the low power with clever gearing.