Wing Type A,B,C (rear) - any downforce difference in game?

[Lambob]

would Type C offer more downforce than Type A, due to sequencial lettering? Type A has the slanted wing, so theoretically should cause more downforce.

Type B and C look the same except for the edges (finishing)

thoughts?

 

[xNEVER-ONEx]

I think they all allow up to +20 downforce.

 

[freedomweasel]

I think the wings may give different amounts of downforce on different cars, but the wings all give the same value on any given car.

In other words, buy any one car and all the wing options give the same effect just different looks. If you buy a different car you may get more or less downforce than the first.
I think the differences only extend to race modded/race cars though.

 

[xNEVER-ONEx]

I think the wings may give different amounts of downforce on different cars, but the wings all give the same value on any given car.

In other words, buy any one car and all the wing options give the same effect just different looks. If you buy a different car you may get more or less downforce than the first.
I think the differences only extend to race modded/race cars though.

I am pretty sure that the wings add 20 downforce points to the car. So if you have a car already with adjustable downforce and you add the wings (Speed 12 is a ex), it will add 20 to what the car already has.

 

[freedomweasel]

I am pretty sure that the wings add 20 downforce points to the car. So if you have a car already with adjustable downforce and you add the wings (Speed 12 is a ex), it will add 20 to what the car already has.

I'm not sure I've encountered many (if any) road cars with adjustable downforce stock. That might be the case though. I do know that after you RM a car you have access to a wider range of downforce than just adding a wing to the same car.
Also, front aero is rarely functional which is a bummer.

 

[Sum1s2pid]

Adding aero parts Front, Rear, and Extension are purely aesthetic. Downforce is only added when you purchase a wing. The difference between GT Auto's wings A, B, and C are aesthetic. Wing A doesn't give you more downforce than B, or less than C.

Their effect depends on the car. It mostly adds to the total rear adjustable downforce, and rarely adds any front downforce. It's a crap-shoot.

Most cars will have a fixed value of front downforce (ex: +0 front on a Gallardo, +20 front on a McLaren F1).

All cars have a varying value of adjustable rear downforce, with some values being higher than others (ex: +20 rear on a Gallardo, +65 rear on a McLaren F1).

Some cars that have adjustable front and rear downforce as a standard option, only see an increase in rear downforce (ex: R390 Road Car before adding wing: 15~35 front, 30~60 rear and after:15~35 front, 35~80 rear).

 

[freedomweasel]

Adding aero parts Front, Rear, and Extension are purely aesthetic. Downforce is only added when you purchase a wing. The difference between GT Auto's wings A, B, and C are aesthetic. Wing A doesn't give you more downforce than B, or less than C.

Their effect depends on the car. It mostly adds to the total rear adjustable downforce, and rarely adds any front downforce. It's a crap-shoot.

Most cars will have a fixed value of front downforce (ex: +0 front on a Gallardo, +20 front on a McLaren F1).

All cars have a varying value of adjustable rear downforce, with some values being higher than others (ex: +20 rear on a Gallardo, +65 rear on a McLaren F1).

Some cars that have adjustable front and rear downforce as a standard option, only see an increase in rear downforce (ex: R390 Road Car before adding wing: 15~35 front, 30~60 rear and after:15~35 front, 35~80 rear).

Do any cars get adjustable front downforce from the aero? I really miss this from forza.

 

[TouringBubble]

Adding aero parts Front, Rear, and Extension are purely aesthetic. Downforce is only added when you purchase a wing.

Has this been tested? I would think adding front canards (extension in GT5) would add a fixed amount of front DF just like in real life.

I may have to test this tonight. I have a few stock premuims that I could test.

 

[Sum1s2pid]

Do any cars get adjustable front downforce from the aero? I really miss this from forza.

Of the cars I've checked, no... and I've checked a lot of cars. If you get any front downforce at all, it's typically a fixed value.

I find it curious how purchasing a GT Auto wing for a '91 Civic SiR-II EG in GT4 allows adjustable +0~30 front and +0~30 rear, but +0 front (fixed) and +5~20 rear in GT5. I realize that they're different games, but come on.

Has this been tested? I would think adding front canards (extension in GT5) would add a fixed amount of front DF just like in real life.

I may have to test this tonight. I have a few stock premuims that I could test.

Yes, you would think that. I know I did. Out of curiosity, I checked a lot of cars. A lot. GT-Rs to Californias to Elises to Murcielagos. Unless there's some freak car out there that will prove otherwise, Front, Rear, and Extension pieces are purely aesthetic.

Premiums can have buyable adjustable front downforce.

 

[kafiend]

Premiums can have buyable adjustable front downforce.

 

[freedomweasel]

Premiums can have buyable adjustable front downforce.

"adjustable front aero parts available for purchase" would be a better way to say that.

Can you name some cars that have this option? Of all the cars I've tried I can't recall any with adjustable front aero other than race cars.

 

[TouringBubble]

Yes, you would think that. I know I did. Out of curiosity, I checked a lot of cars. A lot. GT-Rs to Californias to Elises to Murcielagos. Unless there's some freak car out there that will prove otherwise, Front, Rear, and Extension pieces are purely aesthetic.

I know they aren't adjustable, and maybe the numbers in the adjustment window don't change, but has it been tested if they actually change how the car performs? Lap times and top speeds? That's what I'd like to look in to.

We are having a discussion about the advantages of aero parts in my league forum becasue the Lotuses are running away from the pack easily. The only reasons would be that they have more grip from wider tires or that the aero parts that are available are giving an advantage.

 

[Sum1s2pid]

I know they aren't adjustable, and maybe the numbers in the adjustment window don't change, but has it been tested if they actually change how the car performs? Lap times and top speeds? That's what I'd like to look in to.

We are having a discussion about the advantages of aero parts in my league forum becasue the Lotuses are running away from the pack easily. The only reasons would be that they have more grip from wider tires or that the aero parts that are available are giving an advantage.

Tests would be muddled, as the lowest rear downforce you can get with a wing on, say an Elise, is +5. That alone affects the handling. Since +0 fixed front downforce should add no benefit, well.

In a race of equally powered cars of mixed make, an Elise will run away from everything but another Elise. They're quite a bit lighter than most everything this side of a Fireblade or GSX-R/4. Being an MR helps immensely. It reflects in their acceleration, later braking, higher cornering speeds, and higher top speed when compared to a Civic or Miata.

From messing around with them on and offline, all a GT Auto wing does to an Elise is help reign in its tendency to lose its rear on most medium-to-high speed corners.

Since a lot of the Elise drivers I've gone up against online have been skilled, it could be that they're running away from the pack because they're just plain good. Good driver + Elise = Win.

 

[TouringBubble]

Our series runs a specific HP and weight. All cars are close in that regard. I run a Garaiya (MR) that's exactly the specs of the race series (246hp/800kg) and the Lotus are a few kg heavier (806 I think). EVERY Lotus runs away from everyone else. It's not just skill. They can goof very badly and still stay ahead. The best driver in the series, who uses a Lotus, has driven some other cars we use and is slower.

I wanted to do the test without the rear wing ... just the front, rear and extension. So, if you are correct, lap times should be very close and top speed should be identical. doesn't seem to muddled as long as my driving is fairly consistent.

 

[kafiend]

Premiums can have buyable adjustable front downforce.

Not at ps3 so take my comment as probably in error.

 

[Sum1s2pid]

Our series runs a specific HP and weight. All cars are close in that regard. I run a Garaiya (MR) that's exactly the specs of the race series (246hp/800kg) and the Lotus are a few kg heavier (806 I think). EVERY Lotus runs away from everyone else. It's not just skill. They can goof very badly and still stay ahead. The best driver in the series, who uses a Lotus, has driven some other cars we use and is slower.

I wanted to do the test without the rear wing ... just the front, rear and extension. So, if you are correct, lap times should be very close and top speed should be identical. doesn't seem to muddled as long as my driving is fairly consistent.

Curious.

Well, I checked torque numbers, and they're close enough to make any differences trivial (Garaiya had a tiny bit more in what I checked). If it's not better optimized suspension, LSD, or transmission adjustments in the Elises, then I have no idea.

It shouldn't be aero, though, as both cars have +0 front fixed and +5~20 rear. Since the cars are more or less equal on paper, try identical set-ups. I'm interested in your findings.

Good luck!

👍

 

[BlacqueJacques]

I base my choice on looks (shape, thinness and colour); I hope there is no difference in downforce capability between versions

 

[TouringBubble]

I tested the front/rear/extension mods just a bit ago and they do nothing for handling. Neither do wheels. Sum nailed it.

I tested with an R32 GTR ... top speed on Mulsanne was 165 with no mods and all mods (not the rear wing). Lap times at Tsukuba were within .1 sec. 1:05.1 (without) and 1:05.2 (with).

 

[Denilson]

Curious.

Well, I checked torque numbers, and they're close enough to make any differences trivial (Garaiya had a tiny bit more in what I checked). If it's not better optimized suspension, LSD, or transmission adjustments in the Elises, then I have no idea.

It shouldn't be aero, though, as both cars have +0 front fixed and +5~20 rear. Since the cars are more or less equal on paper, try identical set-ups. I'm interested in your findings.

Good luck!

👍

Torque numbers? What kind of conclusion would you come up with looking at the tourque numbers alone?

 

[Sum1s2pid]

Torque numbers? What kind of conclusion would you come up with looking at the tourque numbers alone?

All things equal (weight, horsepower, gearing, a driver's ability, etc.) -- as in a racing league with set restrictions -- the car with more torque should consistently put its nose ahead of the other off the line.

 

[Denilson]

All things equal (weight, horsepower, gearing, a driver's ability, etc.) -- as in a racing league with set restrictions -- the car with more torque should consistently put its nose ahead of the other off the line.

ok.. So if engine A produces 500 Nm (torque) and engine B produces 250 Nm (torque).. Engine A "should consistently put its nose ahead of the other off the line."... why?

If engine A produced 500 Nm @ 3000 rpm's, and engine B pruduced 250 Nm @ 6000 rpm's, how would that look like when they come "off the line"?

 

[Sum1s2pid]

ok.. So if engine A produces 500 Nm (torque) and engine B produces 250 Nm (torque).. Engine A "should consistently put its nose ahead of the other off the line."... why?

If engine A produced 500 Nm @ 3000 rpm's, and engine B pruduced 250 Nm @ 6000 rpm's, how would that look like when they come "off the line"?

Assuming they have the same horsepower, Engine A should get off the line consistently quicker than Engine B.

I'll copy and paste a few things from people who can word it better than I ever could, because I'm... well, I'm not that smart:

"Torque is a form of energy, rotational energy. Rotational energy ultimately turns the wheels on the road. The larger the torque the easier wheels turn against resistance."

"In literal terms it's how hard a car can push on the pavement. The higher the torque, the faster the acceleration."

"Torque is the force that helps the vehicle start moving from a stop."

👍

If someone can explain it more in depth, that would be great.

 

[Denilson]

Assuming they have the same horsepower, Engine A should get off the line consistently quicker than Engine B.

I'll copy and paste a few things from people who can word it better than I ever could, because I'm... well, I'm not that smart:

"Torque is a form of energy, rotational energy. Rotational energy ultimately turns the wheels on the road. The larger the torque the easier wheels turn against resistance."

"In literal terms it's how hard a car can push on the pavement. The higher the torque, the faster the acceleration."

"Torque is the force that helps the vehicle start moving from a stop."

👍

If someone can explain it more in depth, that would be great.

That's so wrong..

Here's one example..

When you are about to ride your bike, if you start at the highest gear, you will not get anywhere, no matter the amount of torque you are producing aginst the pedals.. It's the torque combined with rews that gives ju power, power is needed... So if you could give rews to that pedal you are pushing down on with X amount of tourqe, you would move..

Rews * torque = power, power moves the wheels = moves the car...

Engine A produces 500 hp
Engine B produces 250 hp
Which car is the fastes one?

Engine C produces 500 Nm
Engine D produces 250 Nm
Which car is the fastest one?

Also as a side note to take things to it's peak.
An F1 engine in the mid 90's produced 850 hp from a 3 liter engine. Why? Because it was made to run at high rpm's.. The torque produced in the engine was about the same as your average roadcar, about 300-350 Nm..

On the other end, you got the dump truck, producing enourmus tourqe. Around 2500 Nm. Why? Because a dump truck needs a reliable engine for heavy loads, therefore they come with with low rpm engines. To make an low rpm'ed engine produce high hp's in low rpm's you need that high amount of torque.

It would in theory not be any problems for the F1 engine to pull the same load as the dump truck.. (yes, it could actually use it's poor 300-350 Nm to do that )

Ofc there is practical problems with an engine that needs a rebuild after every pull..

My point is that there is no way to decide if a car is faster than the other just looking at the torque numbers at one given rpm, you need to know the whole scale to be able to do that kind of conclusion... By looking at the HP number, you don't.

HP (power) says much more about the performance for an engine than any tourqe number.

My god, this is OT.. Sorry mods, just gets carried away when i discuss interesting subjects.. 👍

 

[Sum1s2pid]

*snip*

It was a bit off-topic, but still an informative read, thanks. 👍

But, it doesn't help to explain why a competitor's Elise was pulling away from TouringBubble's Garaiya, when both cars are restricted to run equally, in terms of horsepower and weight (246hp/800kg).

On paper, the Garaiya and Elise are practically identical. There's no reason for the Elise being the stronger car. I looked at torque only after checking the same cars in my garage for other clues. He and I are at a loss to explain it.

Any light you can shed on the issue would be greatly appreciated. 👍

 

[Rzeractor]

in simple terms
power makes you go faster [given optimal gearing]

torque will help on a track with alot of elevation changes.
You can substitute a lack of torque with a shorter diff ratio because its a torque multiplier

you cannot substitute a lack of power, you need to shift more which will cause you to fall behind

 

[Denilson]

Exactly, the gearing is important to make the engine work in it's powerband (where the most amout of power (HP) is produced)..

A gearing that make the engine work in it's powerband where the max torque number is produces does not help that car to perform at it's best. But a gearing making the engine stay in it's powerband where the most amout of power (HP) is produced however will help the car to perform at it's best.

Yes, torque could help on a track with a lot of elevation changes, because an engine with a high amount of torque in the most cases (as long as the cars are similar)can pull more on each gear. So with that said, you don't need to shift as much, but it still does'nt indicate that the car is actually faster.. If you lose to much rpm's on a low torque/high rew engine, simply downshift to make the engine work in it's optimal (where the power (HP) is produced) rpm range.

Back on topic:

Why does the elise outrun the garayia when the engines produces the same HP and the cars weight are similar?

1: Gearing.
2: Cw value (don't know the english term. It's about airflow around the body).
3: Since the cars are both MR's, I'd rule out any difference in loss of power thru the driveline*. *gearbox, propellershaft, diff, wheels (don't know the english term) But it could be a reason.
4: Tyre size.
5: Weight distribution.
6: Unsprung weight (1 kg saved on the unsprung weight equals to around 4 kg of weight, so if the rims are 1 kg lighter, it would in practice meen that the actual weightdifference is (1kg*4*4) 16 kg, even dough the cars specs are identical..)

One big issue with GT5 is that most of these things I listed abowe does not show. Is it even modeled in the physics? It probably is, because if it was'nt, the cars would be equal given that the gearing is optimal for both engines. But who knows?

"Torque multiplyer"? Well, it does'nt matter how many times the torque is multiplied, it will still be in direct relation to the POWER going thru the propellershaft, diff and on to the wheels. (What comes out from the engine on to the propellershaft is always rews*torque=POWER)

"you need to shift more which will cause you to fall behind": Mm, that's a practical issue. And I think that it's a to small detail to calculate with, or explain why these two cars are different in pace despite the equal numbers.

I'm sorry for bad english, I feel that my poor english skills are letting me down at the moment not beeing able to explain everything as good as I would like to

 

[TouringBubble]

wow ... thats a lot of OT discussion.

The difference has to come down to 2 things ... tuning differences, tire differences or different aero calculations for premium cars.

Since the fast guy in the Lots tuned and drove the Garaiya and was slower, there has to be something inherently better about the Elise ... something we can't control. I plan to just buy an Elise and test it myself ... use the same setup from the Garaiya and see what I can run.