2.08 tested on GTR 09

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mikeybc
  • 33 comments
  • 2,383 views
Mikeybc

Mikeybc

Messages
3,155
Canada
49°16'43.22"N 81°37'50.21W
Messages
mikeybc
Just tested update 2.08, My gtr 09 had a tune for auto trans that ran 9.030 with a wing, and 9.031 without. After update 2.08 it ran a best of 9.045 with wing and full down-force, adjusted to minimum down-force and it ran a best 9.033. I then removed the wing entirely and it ran the 9.030.

Have a manual trans tune. pre 2.08 it ran 9.024 with a wing and without the wing after the update it I just ran a 9.024 again. I didn't touch one other setting...not ride height, nothing. I have tried testing the viper yet...someone else can do it, I'm going to bed. For for now I can say on AWD cars wings will slow you down and not much else changed.
 
Mikeybc
Just tested update 2.08, My gtr 09 had a tune for auto trans that ran 9.030 with a wing, and 9.031 without. After update 2.08 it ran a best of 9.045 with wing and full down-force, adjusted to minimum down-force and it ran a best 9.033. I then removed the wing entirely and it ran the 9.030.

Have a manual trans tune. pre 2.08 it ran 9.024 with a wing and without the wing after the update it I just ran a 9.024 again. I didn't touch one other setting...not ride height, nothing. I have tried testing the viper yet...someone else can do it, I'm going to bed. For for now I can say on AWD cars wings will slow you down and not much else changed.
Click to expand...

There ya go.. Wings are now pointless for AWD. Great work mikey 👍
 
There doesn't seem to be a major difference in how cars run... I'd be curious to know what happens when you flip the ride height on an AWD now though. (max/min instead of min/max)
 
Just tested acr. Before update my full throttle launch was 9.026 and timed launchwas 9.990 - 991. After update full throttle launch is 9.038 and timed is 9.004, Lowering downforce slowed it down, full throttle time with reduced downforce was 9.047. Seems acr's are going to run slower now by .012 - .014 on average.

Again ride height wasn't touched or anything else , So maybe time variance will be different after further testing on rwd's
 
NISSANTOS
Yeap!...I see an encrease of numbers all over too.
Click to expand...

Not on my gtr 09 though, cars that never relied on wings don't seem to be affected much.....then again I only did one awd car, will try the spec c tomorrow.
 
So far it seems the cars that don't run traditional front down rear up are getting the worst of it. And wings that are aftermarket are now useless. (I haven't tested the speed 12 or f1 or any car that has high DF after installing a wing) The TC GTR actually seems to like it and has factory DF, however the RX7 which also has factory DF doesn't like it. Though it uses a wonkie suspension to get it the fastest it can.

Evo - same time (down/up)
Gtr 09- same time (down/up)
Chevelle- slower (down/up) although it prefers (up/up)
Charger 440- slower (up/up)
Taurus SHO- slower (down/up)
GT1 turbo- faster (down/up) aero removed
GTR TC- faster (down/up) aero removed
Celica GT four- same time (down/up)
Camaro SS 10- slower (down/up) this was odd it never could reach its old time even though aero was removed and it prefers down/up
MR2 gt-s- same time (down/up)
GTR R34- same time (down/up) aero removed
86 MR2 S/C- same time (down/up)


It appears cars that ran faster with there nose up are now running slower with it that way. A lot of the muscle cars I've been testing (which require funky suspension height) are the main ones. I'm assuming this will also effect the gt350r, 90 zr1, silverado, midget, cuda, 69 Camaro, Gto I know there's many more I only tested cars that run well enough in auto so I could have constituency.

Just tested the speed 12 and it looks like 2.08 has come through for atleast 1 car. The speed 12 seems to love the added DF. I'm gonna bet the cein will like this too.
 
Last edited:
Basically, cars that had enough downforce to hit the aero glitch have gotten faster. Those that didn't will have gotten slower (or we'll have to do a balancing act on wing settings).

I wonder what'll happen the next time someone toys with an Atenza touring car with the GT Auto wing installed. Dat rear downforce + max/min + 50/50 torque distribution = OOPS.
 
Aero glitch?

How does that explain the chevelle, Taurus, cuda or charger? None have a wing on them.

I guess I'm not getting at where your going.
 
So I busted out some of the cars I tuned on Automatic Transmission so I could compare with consistent redline launches

RUF CTR2 (no wing): No change in time

Evolution VI RS T.M (factory wing): Is now 0.003 slower with the factory 0 / 5 downforce. When lowered to 0 / 0, no change in time

Camaro Z28 '69 (gtauto wing): Is now 0.018 slower; 0 / 20 downforce and max/max ride height. 0.022 slower with 0 / 5 downforce. 0.023 slower with no wing at all. Changing ride height to min/max made no change in time. This camaro is now slower.

RX-7 Spirit R Type A (factory wing): Is now 0.008 slower with the factory 0 / 8 downforce. When lowered to 0 / 0, it is 0.007 slower. This RX-7 is now slower than before.

Nissan R33 (no wing): No change in time

So my prognosis:

Cars that did not have a wing, and had ideal times from min/max ride height will not change at all. This is evidenced by the CTR2. So cars like Evo's, STi's, 3000gt, LFA, should be unaffected.

Keep your wings on your cars. They are still faster with them, evidenced by the Camaro, a wing and full DF made the car faster by 0.005. Nowhere near as big a benefit as before, but a benefit none the less.

The cars seem to have lost the benefit of Max front ride height. This is evidenced only by the Camaro so I cannot state it as fact. But probable.

So yeah, prepare to take new pictures of new times for 90% of your cars
 
Last edited:
Mikeybc
Just tested acr. Before update my full throttle launch was 9.026 and timed launchwas 9.990 - 991. After update full throttle launch is 9.038 and timed is 9.004, Lowering downforce slowed it down, full throttle time with reduced downforce was 9.047. Seems acr's are going to run slower now by .012 - .014 on average.

Again ride height wasn't touched or anything else , So maybe time variance will be different after further testing on rwd's
Click to expand...

Same with Ford GT No Stripe.

My best pre-2.08 was 9.042 - Just ran it there 9.054, so 0.010 slower... (as a rough average, didnt keep trying for a better time)...

Kept all stats/suspension/aero as was...
 
Basically now downforce takes effect at lower speeds and I think its more powerfull. My no stripe pre 2.08 was 9.031, now its 9.040. My 0-60 was the same but my 0-100 was .005 slower after 2.08. Thats how I came up with my conclusion. 👍
 
I have a few mediocre 1/4 tunes
GTR
- auto
- black screen launch?
- front down, rear up
- 60/40 split
- everything the same besides aero

Full down-force
- 9.06 or 9.6 i forget lol

Minimum down-force
- 9.04 or 9.4


On a side note, the one with full down-force was 1st in every category except the 1/4 mile time

Looks like max down-force ate away top end right before the 1/4 mark


A lot more to test since I didn't want to wait till the maintenance was over to go online and test 3k tunes. I will check tonight with a few friends.

I dont have many wing tunes, i am more interested in the suspension changes.
 
Last edited:
Sean you only tested that on 1 car. Lets get more evidence before saying keep the wings they make them faster.

I'm not sure which Camaro you tested standard, premo or RM. But whichever probably suffered from bad wheel spin. The added DF now helps the car. As I stated the 10' SS Camaro is slower with aero even with it on its lowest setting. Taking the wing off completely made it still .004 slower but faster than aero on its lowest setting.

I'm still stuck on the idea that cars that don't run traditional down/up have been effected. I don't know if its the DF doing it or the new ride height junk. But that's why I threw the Taurus in there and it to was also effected. (I dont think theres a better setup for ff other than down/up) I think some cars setup although are now slower, it is the best setup possible for them still.

Now take it as you want guys the 0-60 does improves slightly but between that 60-100 is where the DF really takes effect and drag starts slowing the car down. If you get what I'm saying and you know how Indy works, there might be a sweet spot for DF for online.

Also remember when your online the guy next to you is also going to be feeling the effects so don't get to frustrated if you think the 2.08 is only affecting your tune. And TBH time have only slightly changed!! Seriously give your cars that run aero or wonky ride height 10 minutes and you'll be close to your old time (guy next to you may have not changed his).

I think the low 9.9 - high 9.7 class will be getting much more competitive since there's so much variety in that range. The ACR, 09 GTR and ZZ will be VERY close now. FF's should stay the same since all of them will be effected.
 
Last edited:
michrulejj
So less downforce is faster on awd. And rwd doesn't like min max height anymore?
Click to expand...

It appears so I have run the ZZ, r34, TC 35 and celica. They all ran faster with no aero or if they have factory DF to have it on minimum.

And no just cars that run better with there nose up for 1/4. That's fr. FF (I haven't tested) will run faster down/up....but still slower.
 
I ran my R34 and before it ran 9.315 after it ran a 9.322. I didnt change downforce or anything I just stretched 1st gear and 2nd gear a bit then it ran the 9.315 again.
 
r4a2g0
I ran my R34 and before it ran 9.315 after it ran a 9.322. I didnt change downforce or anything I just stretched 1st gear and 2nd gear a bit then it ran the 9.315 again.
Click to expand...

I ran my r34 and it ran 9.309. After the update it ran 9.315. It had max DF. Took it to minimum and it ran 9.311.

Took the wing off and it ran 9.309
 
Well the patch notes did say that downforce was increased. But online I doubt it makes much difference.

The Cuda is still the fastest muscle car.
 
I read through this and can someone give me the gist of it? Keep getting error 80029564 and cant update. I contacted Sony and everything and isn't working. So can you just give me a short summary of what changed?
 

Latest Posts

Back