::::: World Super GT Championship | Round 1 | Qualifying in Session! :::::

[competizione]

i think that we schall use the rule so all gt300 cars have 300 hp and minimum weigth of 1100 kgs because i think in gt300 that is what make the cars most even

 

[Denilson]

Well: PP system sucks as bad as in GT5P.

The GT500 cars are close enough without any PP/ballast add ons.

Masi_23: NO, you should not test the cars with default settings. Some cars are ok with it, but to many are not.

Tune the setup until you feel that that car got a neutral behaivior. Then you can test the cars. It's not 100% acurate, but it's much more accurate than testing with default settings.

As it looks for now, I'd say that we should not bother with the PP system at all (for GT500's, since that's my "area").
1: Running with even PP-points is making gap between cars bigger, not smaller.
2: Running with even HP/weight is making gap between cars bigger, not smaller.
3: The cars are already pretty much equal. This is with tests in mind, and also the fact that the diversity of the grid (GT500) is good. Almost all cars are in. (some cars need a tune to be competitive: Lexus, Yellowhat Supra and possibly the Clarion Advan GT-R)

 

[CaptainFalcon89]

PP for the NSX was 668 when I tried earlier today on softs.

 

[Sail IC]

Nice Summary !!!!!

I agree with all your points.

The only risk we will have is with the cheater as you now can add lets say just 5-10HP. But I know of ways of catching these, and I suggest the penalty would be, exclusion from the whole championship.

Well: PP system sucks as bad as in GT5P.

The GT500 cars are close enough without any PP/ballast add ons.

Masi_23: NO, you should not test the cars with default settings. Some cars are ok with it, but to many are not.

Tune the setup until you feel that that car got a neutral behaivior. Then you can test the cars. It's not 100% acurate, but it's much more accurate than testing with default settings.

As it looks for now, I'd say that we should not bother with the PP system at all (for GT500's, since that's my "area").
1: Running with even PP-points is making gap between cars bigger, not smaller.
2: Running with even HP/weight is making gap between cars bigger, not smaller.
3: The cars are already pretty much equal. This is with tests in mind, and also the fact that the diversity of the grid (GT500) is good. Almost all cars are in. (some cars need a tune to be competitive: Lexus, Yellowhat Supra and possibly the Clarion Advan GT-R)

 

[Masi_23]

Well, the Silvia is a few years off compared to the four premiums, thats why its noticeably (way) off pace. I think for current gen cars, you should test them at default tunes. You have to remember that all drivers tune differently, and in most cases, they have no experience at all. We should show results in stock tunes so we can establish the 'real speed' of the cars and then we'll fiddle and remedy it later through hp/weight/mods. That make sense?

Otherwise, if you test cars tuned, you should publish the setup along with the lap times.

Heres the thing - lets look at GT300 (disregarding the standard cars). We test the four cars at default tunes at different tracks. We all get roughly the same results from the four cars. The IS350 is the slowest by about .500-.750 consistently. We will try to remedy that differnce by balancing the hp/weight in relation to the other cars... then it's up to the driver to tune it later on to his liking to get that winning edge.

 

[Denilson]

Well, the Silvia is a few years off compared to the four premiums, thats why its noticeably (way) off pace. I think for current gen cars, you should test them at default tunes. You have to remember that all drivers tune differently, and in most cases, they have no experience at all. We should show results in stock tunes so we can establish the 'real speed' of the cars and then we'll fiddle and remedy it later through hp/weight/mods. That make sense?

Otherwise, if you test cars tuned, you should publish the setup along with the lap times.

Heres the thing - lets look at GT300 (disregarding the standard cars). We test the four cars at default tunes at different tracks. We all get roughly the same results from the four cars. The IS350 is the slowest by about .500-.750 consistently. We will try to remedy that differnce by balancing the hp/weight in relation to the other cars... then it's up to the driver to tune it later on to his liking to get that winning edge.

No, that does not make sence.

I.e: The Clarion Advan is almost 4 seconds slower than the other GT-R's at Suzuka with default settings. But when tuned, it's possible to controll the loose rear and run about 1,6 seconds slower. If we use the 4 second gap 2 to decide what tunes are leagal, it would end up beeing to quick whan tuned correct.

I'd say that all cars that are tested needs a proper tune to be able to draw any conclutions at all.

 

[SteelToedSloth]

I'll find a photo later

Real Name: Jeremy
Age: 24
Lives: Madison, WI
Lives with: Fiancée
Status: Engaged
Pets: Cat
School: 1st year medical student at University of Wisconsin
Favorite motor-sport : F1
When and how did you get into Gran Turismo: GT3, friends house helping him with the license tests!
Real Life Racing Background: Went karting for the first time this last summer, ended up going 4 times since

 

[Masi_23]

No, that does not make sence.

I.e: The Clarion Advan is almost 4 seconds slower than the other GT-R's at Suzuka with default settings. But when tuned, it's possible to controll the loose rear and run about 1,6 seconds slower. If we use the 4 second gap 2 to decide what tunes are leagal, it would end up beeing to quick whan tuned correct.

I'd say that all cars that are tested needs a proper tune to be able to draw any conclutions at all.

Like i said, if that's the case, then you should publish your tunes along with the lap times.

But 4 seconds though? That's just inconceivable. I understand Suzuka is a long track, but 4 seconds is just way off. I'll have to see it for myself.

 

[Denilson]

Same as always.

 

[OwensRacing]

I have several GT cars and would be willing to gift out to run races with different drivers testing different cars. Maybe decide on an all around track and do 10 lap sprints for a week with drivers switching cars to get an average time from the group per car and work off that.


Also think the NSX that weigh 1100 need the 50kg hit the EPSON has. I feel that was implemented by the SGT series for the MR had a clear advantage. I dint know for sure. Just guessing.

I really want that EPSON to be competitive. Heck want all cars even like most.

 

[Denilson]

Why should I publish the tune used? I have no problems with it. But it would not say anything since most tunes for each car looks different.

It's not like I'm run sertain cars outside our regulations..

 

[Imari]

It strikes me that this is all very complicated.

We had a system that worked, for both GT500 and GT300. It could be improved no doubt, but it was functional. Both groups had multiple cars that were pretty evenly matched. May I suggest that the easiest solution could be to just stick with what we had? Then we can get to grips with the new systems slowly over the next month or so and fine tune cars then.

It seems a shame to have spent the better part of two months having built a system that works, only to throw it out the window when something new comes along. Let's get the first season under way with a set of cars that we know works. And then we can plan for amendments to the system for season two.

 

[OwensRacing]

Why should I publish the tune used? I have no problems with it. But it would not say anything since most tunes for each car looks different.

It's not like I'm run sertain cars outside our regulations..

I think he is saying if tune makes that much difference, then it is viable info for determining the level of each car. So with that he is asking it be included as part of the info that is being compiled to level the cars.

Basically I see this as a chance to use your tune in said cars and if indeed the results are repeated even with minor driving style setting tweaks it would back up your findings.

 

[Masi_23]

Same as always.

What do you mean by that?


Just to comment further on your last reply. Four seconds is huge. I don't think its a proper indication imo, since the time difference grows exponentially higher in multiple as you go along the long Suzuka track. I'm guessing if we test it in a smaller venue, we can get a much accurate representation of the speed of a car that's off pace to a superior car.


"No, that does not make sence."

I think you misunderstood what i meant. I'm not implying that we need to slap a turbo on the thing right away, if we get a proper baseline, we can do a check and balance along with the other cars by the way of the HP limiter and the ballast.

 

[Centura]

No, that does not make sence.

I.e: The Clarion Advan is almost 4 seconds slower than the other GT-R's at Suzuka with default settings. But when tuned, it's possible to controll the loose rear and run about 1,6 seconds slower. If we use the 4 second gap 2 to decide what tunes are leagal, it would end up beeing to quick whan tuned correct.

I'd say that all cars that are tested needs a proper tune to be able to draw any conclutions at all.

I tested all '08 GT-Rs except Motul a couple of weeks ago on Grand Valley Speedway (online) and I got roughly the same lap time on all of them, incl. WOODONE. You had to be more careful and it took longer to get a good lap together, but I could drive it just as fast as the other ones.

 

[nycrom1971]

I have several GT cars and would be willing to gift out to run races with different drivers testing different cars. Maybe decide on an all around track and do 10 lap sprints for a week with drivers switching cars to get an average time from the group per car and work off that.


Also think the NSX that weigh 1100 need the 50kg hit the EPSON has. I feel that was implemented by the SGT series for the MR had a clear advantage. I dint know for sure. Just guessing.

I really want that EPSON to be competitive. Heck want all cars even like most.

I agree 👍

 

[Denilson]

"Same as always" was an answer to nycrom's question about what rules we will use at Daytona to night.. My mistake..

OwensRacing: That's really good of you to pull similar lap times with those two cars.

Masi_23: The reason it actually is that much slower (stock) is that with the default settings it has way to much oversteer. You simply can't keep the same pace. I'm using suzuka as "base" cause I think that it contains every aspect of performance tests. Slow corners, long straights, technical parts, oversteer corners, understeer corners, fast corners and change of directions.. I'll post all my results and tunes by Monday.

 

[MaccGyver]

All we have to do is forget about the PP system.

The only things that add PP on SuperGT cars are tyres, engine upgrades, and downforce.

We can set the tyres to hard in race regulations so that is sorted.

We can set the bhp to whatever we want. ( 500bhp would be my choice for all cars). I would start using the Yellowhat Supra if bhp was set at 500hp:tup: i think it would be competitive then.

We should leave downforce up to the driver because it works bothways. Top speed or cornering.

500bhp and stock weight for all cars would even the field alot i think.

 

[RamoSapiens]

HEY HO!

Were having races today Maybe speak of the update more tomorrow...
What grid order are we supposed to use? Quali? Formation lap?

 

[Masi_23]

I'm not liking the PP system either

I think it's more in line with one make races - like Wardez's IS-F series.

 

[Andil]

We can set the bhp to whatever we want. ( 500bhp would be my choice for all cars). I would start using the Yellowhat Supra if bhp was set at 500hp:tup: i think it would be competitive then.

We should leave downforce up to the driver because it works bothways. Top speed or cornering.

500bhp and stock weight for all cars would even the field alot i think.

Agree.

300hp/Stock weight for GT300 would make things even in that category too, I'd guess.

That said, our current lineup of cars seems fine too, if you just ignore the PP system.

Anyway, racing tonight?

 

[L_Hamilton]

Is there a room up?

 

[Denilson]

Race #1, Friday 18th, Connect Time: 9pm GMT, Race Time: 10pm GMT. Daytona Road, 25 laps.

RACE #1​

7 GT500's and 7 GT300's​

GT500
C-Falcon89
Centura
chorda
Nycrom
Paginas
Vaga
JPzer

GT300
GTP_african_cat
ffocus2008
Neomone (Simply because I want your opinion)
Moieman
doctsuru_69
Scanny_Flick
SteelToedSloth

Grid for the race: We will just do it simple. Your place in the list above is also your grid spot.


Those of you that are interested in solwing any connection issues should try to be in the room at 9pm GMT sharp! We will set up a few small races during the first 30-45 minutes prior the race to test different room settings.

It will probably be 3 different small races. ("very high", "high (recommended)", and the next one on the list (don't know the name of that setting)). All other settings will be: no mic, not fixed, open lobby.

I will post the different roomnumbers IN THIS POST.

Room 1:
Room 2:
Room 3:
Race room:

Drivers marked with red are drivers that we need some feedback from regarding roomsettings/connection issues.
Drivers marked with blue are new drivers that need to do a practice race to meke sure that he fully understands the rules and regulations.

We will have a small discussion in this thread after each small race. Simply post "race 1. ok" or "race 1. not ok". And after race number 3, I'll simply start the race in that room-type we experienced less issues with. This only concerns drivers marked in red and blue.

I want the new drivers to post in the thread that you have got everything right, and if not, you have to ask the questions you might got in the thread as well. We will probably do the races at 09:10 pm, 09:25 pm and 09:40 pm (GMT).

The drivers listed in this post will be garanteed a spot in Race #1. Any new drivers or drivers that have experianced issues will from now on end up in Race #2.

XsApollo and GTP_Senninha was moved to Race #2 since we need to keep a race as close as possible to the real Championship for the new guys. (hope you guys don't mind)

RACE #2.​

The rest of the drivers on the list will be racing in race #2.
eppe00 is hosting. (It's in the OP)

Divers:

GT500:
XsApollo
OwensRacing
NilsUrban
GTP_Sigma
johnkiller2
Wardez

GT300:
eppe00
GTP_Aderrrm
KamyKaze1098
GTP_Senninha

About Race #2: eppe00 is hosting, contact him with questions about race #2.

 

[RamoSapiens]

Ok. We grid like in the list then. No more spots for a GT500 car, and 3 spots for GT300. We try with Race Quality --> High.I´ll open up the room about 21.GMT

The rest of the drivers on the list will be racing in race #2.
eppe00 is hosting. (It's in the OP)

Drivers:

GT500:
XsApollo
OwensRacing
NilsUrban
GTP_Sigma
johnkiller2
Wardez
L_Hamilton

GT300:
eppe00
GTP_Aderrrm
KamyKaze1098
GTP_Senninha

 

[L_Hamilton]

Can I have the last spot for GT500 in race 2?

 

[RamoSapiens]

Can I have the last spot for GT500 in race 2?

I put You in.👍

 

[L_Hamilton]

I put You in.👍

Cool, I sent you a PSN friend request

 

[Paginas1]

i will be on in about 45 mins looking forward to the race....

 

[Sail IC]

I will probably miss the race. Don't wait for me

 

[Stevisiov]

There is a way to check the power/weight of each car (or groups of cars rather, but it's awkward.

Say the NSX needs the lowest power/highest weight to balance, before the race the rules and regs are set to the NSX's standard, all NSX drivers must join the track to demonstrate we their car is eligible. After this point forward, NSX drivers cannot go to their garage or settings menu (we can see if they do). So their cars will be to the correct setting. You can then simply change the rule settings so the other cars are eligible.

The more different car groups we have, the harder it is.

It might be too complicated, but it definitely would work.