Ride Height

I've been looking at a lot of tunes lately and I've noticed that there are a lot of people who lower their cars all the way. My question is why do they do that. Is it because they don't know they are doing?

I've just never had any success with cars that a slammed to the ground.

It's probably to make this car a little more lower for a higher speed, or to increase the handling.

That's how I would explain it ^^... sometimes I keep it onto the same ride height

When I tune cars I normally don't lower them any more than -10

I find it offers no noticeable advantages, and a few drawbacks. In theory, lower ride-height = less weight transfer under load, but I don't notice it much, if at all.

Adjustment to ride height depends on how the stock car handles. I would start by driving the stock car before tuning and noting improvements I might want to make. If you plan to use a sport grade tire at high speeds or the car does not corner well, then you may benefit from higher ride height. In other cases negative ride height can be used to counteract overly sensitive steering or to reduce weight transfer when using grippier race tires. I am of the opinion negative ride height is used too often, but to each his own.

Too low of a ride height will inhibit your handling, fact. You have to balance the height with the spring setup to get the most out of your suspension.

I adjust rideheight to alter the f/r weight distribution, I almost never lower a car all the way and won't at all if I don't notice any positive change in the handling characteristics.

GT is somewhat flawed in that the negative effects of having too little suspension travel are much less apparant than in real life. This is why you get people blasting around the Nur with minimum ride height and soft spring rates with little or no problems. However, with no real indication of if or when the car is actually hitting the bumpstops I tend to error on the side of caution and never, ever "slam" a car.

oppositelock

GT is somewhat flawed in that the negative effects of having too little suspension travel are much less apparant than in real life. This is why you get people blasting around the Nur with minimum ride height and soft spring rates with little or no problems. However, with no real indication of if or when the car is actually hitting the bumpstops I tend to error on the side of caution and never, ever "slam" a car.

Click to expand...

I couldn't agree with you more. Ive been having a real hard time with this recently as i've been tuning a few cars as good streetable cars so I want them to look decent and lowered but its important for the car to be very good in terms of handling, on rough "public" roads aswell. I really wish there was an indication as to when a car bottoms out, it would be a real help because i have noticed a slight decline in lap times on a bumpy track like Trial mountain when a car was excessively lowered.
A sound of either the floor scraping or a thump on the bump stops would be helpful.

i just lower my cars all the way cos i like the look

Driving over the rub strips gives a good indication of when your damper settings are inappropriate for a lowered car, or when your spring rates are too soft. But there isn't a good way to see when you're bottoming out.

I've olnly "slammed" the one car; and it was with the understanding that it was purely for looks and that it would drive like garbage afterward. Seeing "serious" tunes with the car at -30 on both ends makes me very, very skeptical of the tuner's skill and understanding of suspension geometry.

You have two indications : sparks for rear and fumes when braking hard for front.

Lowering RH helps for handling properties. I agree with the guy saying there was no real consequencies when your car hit the road, or your tires hit your ride.
I think this is mainly because RH range is set within values that don't cause much problems with that.

I'm watching a replay now and I can see the tyre coming out the top of the wheel arch. I doubt the physics engine is aware of this, or I might have noticed at the time.

Since GT simulates downforce I would think they would simulate lift too. In a car with no wings/spoilers, lowering helps with this lift. I also agree that the consequences of going too low aren't noticed in the game. But, I tend to do a reasonable amount of lowering depending on the track, car, & other suspension settings.

Slamming (lowering to the fullest extent possible) the ride height car ruin the handling on a car.

The disadvantages of a super-low ride height are never more apparent than when driving a go-kart around a track with any sort of elevation change. That rapid jerking that occurs when the cart is on an uneven surface is the chassis bottoming out. As you know, this DESTROYS the handling of the kart and slows it considerably.

So, use the ride height to influence the weight balance of the car, not the height of the center of gravity.

I think the issue with a go-kart is more from the lack of suspension than the low ride height.

speedy_2

Since GT simulates downforce I would think they would simulate lift too. In a car with no wings/spoilers, lowering helps with this lift. I also agree that the consequences of going too low aren't noticed in the game. But, I tend to do a reasonable amount of lowering depending on the track, car, & other suspension settings.

Click to expand...

I doubt the aerodynamic model is that sophisticated. It probably has an extremely simple formula like X amount of downforce times Y vehicle speed equals Z amount of grip. It certainly doesn't model ground effects or actual air moving around the vehicle, which would be required for what you're describing.

Because it looks cool.

I look at it more as whether or not sparks are flying from the underside of my car... aside from that there isn't any reason not to lower all the way.

So no real effect on dirt and snow either?

daveyules

I look at it more as whether or not sparks are flying from the underside of my car... aside from that there isn't any reason not to lower all the way.

Click to expand...

Just because the car isn't scraping the pavement doesn't mean the suspension hasn't run out of travel. The question is how exactly PD models this phenomenon. Someone here said they saw a tire pop out of the top of the fender, so it's quite possible they don't model it at all, in which case you would be correct.

Most if not all race tunes are negative ride height. Regarding in game settings(obviously not reality): I have been wondering what is the point of putting the optional positive setting on many cars. For instance a Taurus SHO ranges from -20 to +50. As a last ditch effort to get a top speed, I changed height to max height since the gt5 menu description claims that lowering the car lowers your top speed. Apparently this is not true. What is true is that going too low or too high will influence handling, not speed. In extreme cases you might bottom out with a premium tune setting, very rarely does that disadvantage outweigh the benefits of better handling. (you have to slam certain cars, like a viper to get rid of understeer)

you know your ride height is too low when...

Chassis Maintenance costs $20,000K from a single drag 1/4 mile portion of the track.

I don't think they have set the parameters of the RH low enough to induce serious negative handling characteristics for most cars. Generally its just a couple of centimeters.

oppositelock

Just because the car isn't scraping the pavement doesn't mean the suspension hasn't run out of travel. The question is how exactly PD models this phenomenon. Someone here said they saw a tire pop out of the top of the fender, so it's quite possible they don't model it at all, in which case you would be correct.

Click to expand...

Agreed. In GT4 I remember seeing the tire come right through the fender on an M3 during cornering, but nothing so far in GT5... I usually set my ride height by photographing my car at a moment of maximum spring compression and ensure the lip of the fender doesn't come down over the top of the wheel rim. That and make sure the bodywork isn't connecting with the road...

p-coletray

I have been wondering what is the point of putting the optional positive setting on many cars. For instance a Taurus SHO ranges from -20 to +50.

Click to expand...

I have a theory that the maximum ride height value on non-race cars is equal to stock ride height. Having a positive range of 50 would mean the default 0 value is 50 mm lower than stock. I have no way of proving this, however. It might be possible with photo mode.

on a rally car, with a low spring rate, you would want to increase travel quite a bit. My Evo rally car is at max height.

oppositelock

GT is somewhat flawed in that the negative effects of having too little suspension travel are much less apparant than in real life. This is why you get people blasting around the Nur with minimum ride height and soft spring rates with little or no problems. However, with no real indication of if or when the car is actually hitting the bumpstops I tend to error on the side of caution and never, ever "slam" a car.

Click to expand...

oppositelock

I have a theory that the maximum ride height value on non-race cars is equal to stock ride height. Having a positive range of 50 would mean the default 0 value is 50 mm lower than stock. I have no way of proving this, however. It might be possible with photo mode.

Click to expand...

It's a theory, better than mine, which is that PD put alot of retarded things in the game. The spoiler of the SHO is upgrdeable, with 3 options. All 3 are nothing. Not one difference from stock besides the adjustability which I doubt is visible when you change it.

redsuns-vtec

i just lower my cars all the way cos i like the look

Click to expand...

This! It makes my cars look nicer in photo mode and photo travel, because I can get rid of empty space between the top of the tire and the wheel well. Not big on huge camber, but a lower, leaner look has never served ill!

what about all the sparks that fly?