Car of The Month: April! - Build your own Racing Modification/Touring Car!

RMan72
Here are my views on the cars that I have tested so far, this is my first time reviewing so please be gentle. I am also not a tuner and generally change my driving to hide or minimise issues in a tune. All aids are off except ABS which is set at 1 unless the tune is designed for ABS 0 and all tests are on Sport Soft tyres and at 550PP at Deep Forest and Trial Mountain.
Scion FR-S '12 550pp (SS) - By @TheInfamousJEW6
The car is very stable and I was able to run very consistent lap times it does have a hint of understeer but this can be rectified slightly by reducing the rear wing setting to 5. The car seemed quicker than the lap times achieved.
At Deep Forest I ran a 1:17.236, though all times were within .3s of each other (with the rear wing at 5 was able to do 1:16.860, all 5 laps like this were under the 1:17 barrier.
At Trial Mountain the car handled the undulations very well and again performed consistently, understeer was still evident. I also found that the car can bog down a bit in 2nd gear at the right hander just after the first tunnel. I managed to get a best of 1:29.131 with all times again within .3s of each other and with the rear wing reduction I got down to 1.28.664
Even though the car was tuned for Racing Hards it performs very well on Sports Soft. Not sure if we are doing DC but I'd give the tune an 8.
​
Mazda RX-7 Spirit R Type A (FD) '02 550pp (SS) - By @Rotary Junkie
After the calm of the FR-S, I found this to be a very lively car and tune, turn is sharp, occasionally too much, resulting in some oversteer but she quickly recovers allowing you to get back on the throttle and power through the rest of the corner. The first three corners at Trial Mountain are a blast and the tune encourages you to go faster and faster through them. Running at Deep Forest the oversteer is still there and you have to be cautious into the three turns after the straights.
Deep Forest Time was 1:15.380, Trial Mountain Time was 1:27.317, again times were consistent but one or two were a lot slower due to be caught out be the over rotation on corner entry, DC 9
​
Honda NSX Type R '02 550pp (SS) - By @Bowtie-muscle
The liveliness continues with this NSX tune, even though the car is on the edge it can be driven hard and can produce consistent times, the bumps at Deep Forest can upset the balance a little bit and there is a hint of traction loss powering out of slow corners but that might be due to a heavy thumb on the X button chasing lap times. There is a hint of oversteer on corner entry but only when pushing hard.
Deep Forest Time was 1:15.213, Trail Mountain was 1:27.170, DC 9
​
Honda NSX-R '02 550pp (SS) (pre 1.09 tune AKA R2D2 tune) - By @Thorin Cain
Not sure I should review this tune as its been on my NSX since I bought it and even though I've tried many others I always come back to this one when I need to race hard with or without the flat floor for me this tune is fast. The car rotates well and gives you confidence on corner entry, there can be a hint of understeer mid corner but a slight lift off gives the front end the grip it needs.
Deep Forest Time was 1:14.715, Trial Mountain was 1:26.205, DC 10​
Click to expand...

Thanks for taking the time to do reviews! Very well done and thought out. 👍 I'm glad you found my tune stable and consistent as that's what I tune for.:D And only a second away from NSX's and an RX-7! :bowdown:Now I have to go back and try my tune again with the downforce change! Thanks again! :cheers:
 
Review: @TheInfamousJEW6 FR-S/S206 NBR/RX-8

This time around I will give a brief review of all three of the above mentioned tunes. Each tune tested in Arcade Mode, but I did give each a quick run in IA races first to get used to each one.

Up first was the FR-S, quick race at Brands Hatch GP then off to Trial Mountain. Found the tune extremely stable and easy to drive, which is more the way I prefer them so I really got along with this tune. Here it was full of grip, had awesome turn in and exit. Very easy to get on the powr and found I could get on really early as well. No issues with LSD, suspension or trans. Best lap was 1:27.270.
Then it was off to Deep Forest Reverse, and more of the same. Both tracks with lots of bumps and elevation changes that were no match for the tune. Only issue being entry could be over done if pushing too deep. Normally I don't but had to try. Really good tune, quick and consistent, should be a really good endurance tune. Best lap 1:17.560.

Next I took out the Scooby, S206 NBR but this time changing tracks and testing at Grand Valley Speedway. Problem with this tune is the inability to do anything with the trans. It does hamper the car a bit but adding big power makes the most of it. I did find it to understeer slightly, mostly from mid-corner to exit if getting on throttle too quick or trying to use too much. This did cause some lost time in the need for patience. Raising LSD numbers may help, or shifting Centering Diff a little more forward, something like 35:65 maybe. But that's just my opinion. Did find the lower rear ride height and negative rear toe helped with rotation and entry. Brakes, as with most cars here, could get a touch squirrely especially into turn one if driven in too deep or too hard. Best lap was 1:50.593.

Final test, Mazda RX-8 and another trip around Grand Valley Speedway. Felt faster than the Scoob right off the bat. Having an adjustable trans didn't hurt, the looseness from rear ride height and negative rear toe helped a bunch as well. Great grip, easy to drive but you had to get used to the rear trying to get away from you every now and then. It did make it fast, and fun, but you needed to be mindful of it and occasionally would have to catch it on exit. Best lap was 1:50.345.

Side note: The FR-S was my favorite of the three. I have a S206 built, and took a slightly different approach to trying to get rotation. It was about half a second faster thou not unexpected being my own tune. If I ever get around to publishing, you should give it a go and return the favor of giving your impressions. As for the other two, I built an 86 "Racing" and found it very similar. My RX-8 has only 550pp and is therefore slower than yours. Three really good fun tunes here, great job 👍
 
Last edited:
@Thorin Cain NSX Type R comparison, Version I vs Version II:

This should bring back shades of the Great Reventon Experiment. I took both of this tunes, though not much different, and ran each around Grand Valley Speedway. Started with Version II (with camber). Did have to add an oil change on the initial build as the numbers did not match.

As with what most would agree an extra love car, this thing was awesome. Great fun and quite quick. Had to adjust quickly to MR but was a breeze with the way this tune handled. Great grip, good brakes (just don't push your luck as to how far into the corner you can go), trans setup really nicely. WARNING, DO NOT TOUCH A CURB OR TRY TO TRIM THE EDGE OF THE GRASS WITH A REAR WHEEL!!!! As with most MR cars, the rear could get a touch loose on exit, taking the proper line quickly repairs. Best lap was 1:49.738.

Now for the original tune (without camber), I understand this was tuned pre 1.09, and perhaps (maybe) another update after may have also altered the physics slightly so had that in mind when testing. Found the front end on this version liked to slided on entry and some medium speed corners unlike the Version II tune which really had great grip. Also found the rear seemed to have more grip than the other version but with a limit. You could find that limit and cross the line, stay at the limit and you were ok, cross it and you would lose the rear. It was however, easy to regain control. The LSD settings were the other change, and to be honest, I personally preferred this setup. Brakes were also better surprisingly on the other version. Normally, camber hurts braking, unless it was just my imagination. I did test them one after the other although I did remove the ghost. Best lap was 1:49.776.

Even though Version II was only an eye blink faster, it is the version I would prefer of the two. Much more consistent and for me, easier to drive. Both equally fast, but with differing characteristics.

Now, if you will excuse me, I have an NSX '91 with something that needs to be tried with the suspension (good thing I have not posted yet). And I may need to find time to (have no idea where I can find the time but) up my Type R to 575pp and see if I can come close to yours.
Fantastic tune, Version II that is, Version I is not too shabby either.
 
Bowtie-muscle
Review: @TheInfamousJEW6 FR-S/S206 NBR/RX-8

This time around I will give a brief review of all three of the above mentioned tunes. Each tune tested in Arcade Mode, but I did give each a quick run in IA races first to get used to each one.

Up first was the FR-S, quick race at Brands Hatch GP then off to Trial Mountain. Found the tune extremely stable and easy to drive, which is more the way I prefer them so I really got along with this tune. Here it was full of grip, had awesome turn in and exit. Very easy to get on the powr and found I could get on really early as well. No issues with LSD, suspension or trans. Best lap was 1:27.270.
Then it was off to Deep Forest Reverse, and more of the same. Both tracks with lots of bumps and elevation changes that were no match for the tune. Only issue being entry could be over done if pushing too deep. Normally I don't but had to try. Really good tune, quick and consistent, should be a really good endurance tune. Best lap 1:17.560.

Next I took out the Scooby, S206 NBR but this time changing tracks and testing at Grand Valley Speedway. Problem with this tune is the inability to do anything with the trans. It does hamper the car a bit but adding big power makes the most of it. I did find it to understeer slightly, mostly from mid-corner to exit if getting on throttle too quick or trying to use too much. This did cause some lost time in the need for patience. Raising LSD numbers may help, or shifting Centering Diff a little more forward, something like 35:65 maybe. But that's just my opinion. Did find the lower rear ride height and negative rear toe helped with rotation and entry. Brakes, as with most cars here, could get a touch squirrely especially into turn one if driven in too deep or too hard. Best lap was 1:50.593.

Final test, Mazda RX-8 and another trip around Grand Valley Speedway. Felt faster than the Scoob right off the bat. Having an adjustable trans didn't hurt, the looseness from rear ride height and negative rear toe helped a bunch as well. Great grip, easy to drive but you had to get used to the rear trying to get away from you every now and then. It did make it fast, and fun, but you needed to be mindful of it and occasionally would have to catch it on exit. Best lap was 1:50.345.

Side note: The FR-S was my favorite of the three. I have a S206 built, and took a slightly different approach to trying to get rotation. It was about half a second faster thou not unexpected being my own tune. If I ever get around to publishing, you should give it a go and return the favor of giving your impressions. As for the other two, I built an 86 "Racing" and found it very similar. My RX-8 has only 550pp and is therefore slower than yours. Three really good fun tunes here, great job 👍
Click to expand...

Wow! Thanks for all the kind words and taking the time to drive all 3 of my entries! I will absolutely return the favor when you get around to publishing your Scooby tune. I drove myself crazy trying to dial in the LSD's on that Scooby while trying to keep as much power as I could on the front end... I was least pleased with that tune, of course not being able to adjust the tranny really hurt it's potential. Thanks again! I love seeing how others get along with my tunes especially DS3 users! :cheers:
 
Bowtie-muscle
@Thorin Cain NSX Type R comparison, Version I vs Version II:

This should bring back shades of the Great Reventon Experiment. I took both of this tunes, though not much different, and ran each around Grand Valley Speedway. Started with Version II (with camber). Did have to add an oil change on the initial build as the numbers did not match.

As with what most would agree an extra love car, this thing was awesome. Great fun and quite quick. Had to adjust quickly to MR but was a breeze with the way this tune handled. Great grip, good brakes (just don't push your luck as to how far into the corner you can go), trans setup really nicely. WARNING, DO NOT TOUCH A CURB OR TRY TO TRIM THE EDGE OF THE GRASS WITH A REAR WHEEL!!!! As with most MR cars, the rear could get a touch loose on exit, taking the proper line quickly repairs. Best lap was 1:49.738.

Now for the original tune (without camber), I understand this was tuned pre 1.09, and perhaps (maybe) another update after may have also altered the physics slightly so had that in mind when testing. Found the front end on this version liked to slided on entry and some medium speed corners unlike the Version II tune which really had great grip. Also found the rear seemed to have more grip than the other version but with a limit. You could find that limit and cross the line, stay at the limit and you were ok, cross it and you would lose the rear. It was however, easy to regain control. The LSD settings were the other change, and to be honest, I personally preferred this setup. Brakes were also better surprisingly on the other version. Normally, camber hurts braking, unless it was just my imagination. I did test them one after the other although I did remove the ghost. Best lap was 1:49.776.

Even though Version II was only an eye blink faster, it is the version I would prefer of the two. Much more consistent and for me, easier to drive. Both equally fast, but with differing characteristics.

Now, if you will excuse me, I have an NSX '91 with something that needs to be tried with the suspension (good thing I have not posted yet). And I may need to find time to (have no idea where I can find the time but) up my Type R to 575pp and see if I can come close to yours.
Fantastic tune, Version II that is, Version I is not too shabby either.
Click to expand...
Many thanks Mr. Muscle, for such a great and wonderfully apt review :bowdown:👍

It did strike me a little familiar yes, shades of the Reventon Experiment indeed :odd:. I can't say I'm too surprised you chose that route, it's what I would have done :lol:. If I'm honest, I think I'd have been a little disappointed if you'd passed up the opportunity :cool:

First thing first, That was some pretty nice driving there 👍, such a close call over the course of the lap :eek: I think you'd have just been able to make the call in a photo finish :lol: It's been a long time since I tuned that (either version ;)) but I do remember when I made the changes, the goal was to run the same sort of times as it did before that update and to handle as closely as it could to how it did before. I guess by the look of how close you were around it's home track ;) I managed to get pretty close :D
Could I just ask for reference, did you leave the tune(s) as posted (I'll fix the Oil Change, thanks 👍) or did you use some tyres you are more comfortable with? :odd: I didn't notice if you mentioned it or not :dopey:

I'm glad you liked them, and a little more so that you preferred version II 👍 After all, it was supposed to be the new and improved version :D I don't know about "extra love" though, as I have always understood the NSX-R is in a class of it's own and had been since it's arrival all those years ago. So much so it forced Ferrari to change the way they made cars :eek:, I've seen video of a stock NSX-R (probably a promo version with a bit more Honda love ;)) take on race cars at Tsukuba and do better than just hold it's own. It's a very special machine by all accounts. Honda gave it enough love already :D, I don't think PD needed to :lol:

You were right about the brakes when you mentioned that applying camber normally causes a loss in that department:tup:. And it probably did here too :odd:. But there are also gains to be found in the braking department with camber applied too ;) It seems that on this one, the gains outweighed the losses :), I only wish I had kept good notes on why I made the changes I did and when :rolleyes:. They could have been pretty helpful :banghead: :dunce: :lol:

There are a few things worth noting about camber's effect on braking. Our Canadian friend @TurnLeft has some nice data showing some of these in his Breaking Brakes:The Final Chapter. (as well as how other things can effect them 👍).
Basically, how much the camber effects the braking is based almost completely on the camber gain of the suspension set-up. But there are some general things that can be guaranteed. Raising camber from 0.0 on the front wheels will always reduce the braking efficiency in a straight line. This is because the front wheels always gain negative camber during braking (as well as a little toe-in ;)) which will reduce the straight-line grip the higher you go.
On the other hand, at the rear, the opposite is true. If we start at 0.0 camber, then when the brakes are applied, the camber gain at the rear starts at neutral and gains positive camber. This will reduce the grip and efficiency of the brakes because there is less contact across the tyre. However, if we start to add negative camber, the grip at the rear actually starts to increase with every 0.1 degree you add until you have added more than enough to cancel out the positive camber gain (Positive camber gain is around 2.0 degrees max. on the rear wheels for every car I've checked :dopey:). Then we will start to see a loss again, but this should still be better than 0.0 for braking until we reach the about the same amount of negative dynamic-camber at the rear, as you had positive dynamic-camber in the first place. This can be anywhere from 3.0 degrees to 4.0 degrees (added static camber) usually, as we may not have had full extension during braking in the first place ;)

I believe that in the case of this NSX-R tune, the front braking loss was reduced a little with the extra toe-out up front and the gains at the rear made most of the difference....in the braking department at least :)👍

Anyway, thank you for trying them out and giving me your opinions of them, glad they did well for you :cheers:
 
Thorin Cain
Many thanks Mr. Muscle, for such a great and wonderfully apt review :bowdown:👍

It did strike me a little familiar yes, shades of the Reventon Experiment indeed :odd:. I can't say I'm too surprised you chose that route, it's what I would have done :lol:. If I'm honest, I think I'd have been a little disappointed if you'd passed up the opportunity :cool:

First thing first, That was some pretty nice driving there 👍, such a close call over the course of the lap :eek: I think you'd have just been able to make the call in a photo finish :lol: It's been a long time since I tuned that (either version ;)) but I do remember when I made the changes, the goal was to run the same sort of times as it did before that update and to handle as closely as it could to how it did before. I guess by the look of how close you were around it's home track ;) I managed to get pretty close :D
Could I just ask for reference, did you leave the tune(s) as posted (I'll fix the Oil Change, thanks 👍) or did you use some tyres you are more comfortable with? :odd: I didn't notice if you mentioned it or not :dopey:

I'm glad you liked them, and a little more so that you preferred version II 👍 After all, it was supposed to be the new and improved version :D I don't know about "extra love" though, as I have always understood the NSX-R is in a class of it's own and had been since it's arrival all those years ago. So much so it forced Ferrari to change the way they made cars :eek:, I've seen video of a stock NSX-R (probably a promo version with a bit more Honda love ;)) take on race cars at Tsukuba and do better than just hold it's own. It's a very special machine by all accounts. Honda gave it enough love already :D, I don't think PD needed to :lol:

You were right about the brakes when you mentioned that applying camber normally causes a loss in that department:tup:. And it probably did here too :odd:. But there are also gains to be found in the braking department with camber applied too ;) It seems that on this one, the gains outweighed the losses :), I only wish I had kept good notes on why I made the changes I did and when :rolleyes:. They could have been pretty helpful :banghead: :dunce: :lol:

There are a few things worth noting about camber's effect on braking. Our Canadian friend @TurnLeft has some nice data showing some of these in his Breaking Brakes:The Final Chapter. (as well as how other things can effect them 👍).
Basically, how much the camber effects the braking is based almost completely on the camber gain of the suspension set-up. But there are some general things that can be guaranteed. Raising camber from 0.0 on the front wheels will always reduce the braking efficiency in a straight line. This is because the front wheels always gain negative camber during braking (as well as a little toe-in ;)) which will reduce the straight-line grip the higher you go.
On the other hand, at the rear, the opposite is true. If we start at 0.0 camber, then when the brakes are applied, the camber gain at the rear starts at neutral and gains positive camber. This will reduce the grip and efficiency of the brakes because there is less contact across the tyre. However, if we start to add negative camber, the grip at the rear actually starts to increase with every 0.1 degree you add until you have added more than enough to cancel out the positive camber gain (Positive camber gain is around 2.0 degrees max. on the rear wheels for every car I've checked :dopey:). Then we will start to see a loss again, but this should still be better than 0.0 for braking until we reach the about the same amount of negative dynamic-camber at the rear, as you had positive dynamic-camber in the first place. This can be anywhere from 3.0 degrees to 4.0 degrees (added static camber) usually, as we may not have had full extension during braking in the first place ;)

I believe that in the case of this NSX-R tune, the front braking loss was reduced a little with the extra toe-out up front and the gains at the rear made most of the difference....in the braking department at least :)👍

Anyway, thank you for trying them out and giving me your opinions of them, glad they did well for you :cheers:
Click to expand...
Ran them both on RH so I could add to the Leaderboard. Braking info interesting to me, as an auto technician, makes total sense, but not everything that makes sense follows PD coding. Will play around with that myself, eventually. Actually testing and tuning time has been reduced by life. Still, my time over the next week will be to try and get more reviews in for the other tuners who I have not gotten to yet.
 
Bowtie-muscle
Ran them both on RH so I could add to the Leaderboard.
Click to expand...
:cool:👍

Bowtie-muscle
Braking info interesting to me, as an auto technician, makes total sense, but not everything that makes sense follows PD coding. Will play around with that myself, eventually. Actually testing and tuning time has been reduced by life. Still, my time over the next week will be to try and get more reviews in for the other tuners who I have not gotten to yet.
Click to expand...
Good luck finding that time, it has been getting that way for a lot of us lately :(

As for the braking info, I had been meaning to mention this to you before :guilty: That's why I suggested a different BB on your Reventon when I tried it before 👍 I'm glad you brought it up during the comparison :)

:cheers:
 
Kitchen Sink Entertainment presents a Dan's Garage Production ... 2 IS F tunes for everyone to try.

Purchases
  • Lexus IS F ‘07
  • All upgrades for the vehicle

Tune 001
  • Body rigidity installed
  • Oil change performed
  • Stats
    • Max power: 798HP
    • Max torque: 586ft-lb
    • Weight: 1299kg
    • Power-to-weight ratio: 1.62kg/HP
    • Suspension
      • Ride height: 111/117
      • Spring rate: 10.51/8.98
      • Dampers (compression): 5/5
      • Dampers (extension): 5/5
      • Anti-roll bars: 2/2
      • Camber angle (-): 0.0/3.5
      • Toe angle: -0.10/0.19
    • Brakes
      • Racing brakes: 2/8
    • Transmission
      • Max speed (auto set): 440km/h
      • 1st gear: 3.725
      • 2nd gear: 2.470
      • 3rd gear: 1.780
      • 4th gear: 1.340
      • 5th gear: 1.055
      • 6th gear: 0.865
      • 7th gear: 0.710
      • Final gear: 4.010
    • LSD
      • Initial torque: 0/9
      • Acceleration sensitivity: 0/24
      • Braking sensitivity: 0/9
    • Downforce: 0/35

Tune 002
  • Body rigidity installed
  • Oil change performed
  • Stats
    • Max power: 798HP
    • Max torque: 586ft-lb
    • Weight: 1299kg
    • Power-to-weight ratio: 1.62kg/HP
    • Suspension
      • Ride height: 89/93
      • Spring rate: 15.40/12.92
      • Dampers (compression): 6/6
      • Dampers (extension): 6/6
      • Anti-roll bars: 3/3
      • Camber angle (-): 0.0/3.0
      • Toe angle: -0.08/0.09
    • Brakes
      • Racing brakes: 5/5
    • Transmission
      • Max speed (auto set): 440km/h
      • 1st gear: 3.725
      • 2nd gear: 2.470
      • 3rd gear: 1.780
      • 4th gear: 1.340
      • 5th gear: 1.055
      • 6th gear: 0.865
      • 7th gear: 0.710
      • Final gear: 4.010
    • LSD
      • Initial torque: 0/10
      • Acceleration sensitivity: 0/24
      • Braking sensitivity: 0/12
    • Downforce: 0/50

Have fun and enjoy the tunes, Dan.
 
Bowtie-muscle
15260306046_1703cd40f2_z.jpg

NSX Type R '02 (Flat Floor) #27​

Monte Carlo Blue Pearl
Aero Type A
Custom Wing Type A
Flat Floor
Monza Red or Salsa Red Calipers
SSR Professor VF1 (Standard size rims)
PP: 550 // HP: 424
WEIGHT: 1150kg // WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION: 49:51
TIRE(S): Sports Soft/Racing Hard
OIL CHANGE - Yes

SUSPENSION: Full Custom // BRAKES: Racing
RIDE HEIGHT - 95 / 96
SPRINGS - 7.50 / 12.00
COMP - 4 / 6
EXT - 7 / 5
ARB - 3 / 4
CAMBER - 0.5 / 0.0
TOE - -0.16 / 0.10
BRAKES - 5 / 6

TRANS: Full Custom (install all power upgrades first!)
FINAL TO - 5.500 // TOP SPEED TO - 124
1ST - 3.050
2ND - 2.235
3RD - 1.725
4TH - 1.390
5TH - 1.170
6TH - 1.015
7TH - n/a
FINAL - 4.200

LSD: Full Custom
INITIAL - 11
ACCEL - 14
DECEL - 26

CLUTCH TYPE: Triple-Plate
CARBON SHAFT: Standard
TORQUE CENTERING DIFF: n/a

POWER PARTS:
ENGINE TUNING - Stage 3
COMPUTER - Sports
EXHAUST - Racing
MANIFOLD - Standard
CATALYTIC CONVERTER - Sports
INTAKE TUNING - Standard
SUPERCHARGER/TURBO - no
POWER LIMITER - 94.7%

WEIGHT REDUCTION - Stage 3
CARBON HOOD - Body Color
WINDOW WEIGHT - Yes

BALLAST - 111kg @ -30
DOWNFORCE - 15

NOTE: As much as I do not like using Racing Tires on street cars, I do like adding flat floor and turning them into "Touring Cars". This was intended to compete with 530-550pp Touring cars, even though this car does not really need to have the flat floor to handle well. Adding it does act just like having downforce and that is why I installed. Tested at Twin Motegi full course.
Click to expand...
Was there a change to this car? I followed everything (including #27) except I have Blue Streak Pearl Coat for the paint. I get 97.5% limiter to hit specs not 94.7? I wanted to see what I could do at GVS since that's my test track!:mischievous:
 
If I may, I have a tune that I like to share with you. This tune, courtesy of @GhostRider65, turns an Scion FR-S into a decent race car. Note: the tune says RS tires, but believe me, it runs on RH tires just fine. You might not get the car to some of the specs of the tune, so just bear with that. Mine has 528 PP @ 375 HP.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/resources/scion-fr-s-12.1691/

I hope to contribute to this thread with some reviews of other tunes very soon.
 
Rotary Junkie
So, anyone planning to give the Integras a go? I'd post up notes on the one that's not mine, but bias is bad, and I have a lot of it when it comes to FWDs. :lol:
Click to expand...

I've got notes from when I tested the 2 SS ones, just need to find time to make sense of them and type up a review.
 
RacingOtaku86
If I may, I have a tune that I like to share with you. This tune, courtesy of @GhostRider65, turns an Scion FR-S into a decent race car. Note: the tune says RS tires, but believe me, it runs on RH tires just fine. You might not get the car to some of the specs of the tune, so just bear with that. Mine has 528 PP @ 375 HP.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/resources/scion-fr-s-12.1691/

I hope to contribute to this thread with some reviews of other tunes very soon.
Click to expand...
Any review is always appreciated, look forward to hearing all and any. I will get that tune added later I hope, tomorrow at the latest.
Rotary Junkie
So, anyone planning to give the Integras a go? I'd post up notes on the one that's not mine, but bias is bad, and I have a lot of it when it comes to FWDs. :lol:
Click to expand...
I found them all fairly good but 1 stood head and shoulders above. Have not had time to get results posted, likely will not get to until tomorrow. And still have more to test. On another note, my limited time has been spent trying to finish off a few tunes to add to the list. Well, maybe more than a few. Most of these cars have already been done in my garage So adding a few aero parts and the flat floor made some good (or good enough) right out of the box. Found one that really surprised me and is the new leader on my personal board dethroning your RX-7. Will try and get some of them posted as well. Just have been very busy and short on time.
RMan72
I've got notes from when I tested the 2 SS ones, just need to find time to make sense of them and type up a review.
Click to expand...
If you find time, that would be great. Don't feel has though you have to give long reviews, I've been trying to keep them short myself but always seem longer when I post. And of course, more times on the leader boards is always a good thing.
 
I literally just noticed there are two Tegs on RHs now. :lol:

As for my RX-7 getting dethroned, good! It's slow. Very capable, but there are several "better" for pace.

Then again, the RX-7 doesn't bite. The amount you can overdrive it without finding a wall is obscene.
 
Took @shaunm80 's Subaru Impreza STi '07 out on SSR11 and got 2:34.781. He did make an error on his tune; you need Engine 3 to get the PP and HP values correct (he has Engine 1 listed), and F/R weight distribution is 53:47, not 51:49. Next up: Bowtie's own NSX flat floor (one of my personal favourite tunes).

EDIT: 2:38.018 with the NSX at SSR11. I think I can go faster than that, but not right now.
 
Last edited:
RacingOtaku86
Took @shaunm80 's Subaru Impreza STi '07 out on SSR11 and got 2:34.781. He did make an error on his tune; you need Engine 3 to get the PP and HP values correct (he has Engine 1 listed), and F/R weight distribution is 53:47, not 51:49. Next up: Bowtie's own NSX flat floor (one of my personal favourite tunes).

EDIT: 2:38.018 with the NSX at SSR11. I think I can go faster than that, but not right now.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the heads up about my tune information. I shall get the tune out of stockyard and correct the info. Great time by the way. :)

Edit: Sorted now. Thanks again. :)
 
Last edited:
Integra Type R Reviews - @randyrockstiff / @Rotary Junkie / @danlimski / @nijalninja

A quick review with some impressions of the tunes, tested on SS tires at Deep Forest with the exception of @randyrockstiff which was at SSR11.

@randyrockstiff :
3rd gear I think had a typo, listed at 1.581 but I tested at 1.851.
Added flat floor and aero, left rims and wing stock.
It may me feel as though I was fighting the LSD and wheel spin.
Did have typical FF understeer, but not bad.
Had really good off throttle rotation, but sometimes not enough in really slow corners.
Good - sense of speed, brakes, easy to get used to.
Trans could be spread a bit longer, one lap I burned inside wheel through 5th to the finish line :eek:
Still, good tune, might have been better at Deep Forest.
Best lap - 3:09.558 (but should have been better)

@Rotary Junkie :
Star of the group, by a ton.
Minimal understeer, if any!
Stiff/low ride, but still handled awesome and was not upset by bumps.
Great grip and rotation, lovely setup.
Good burn outside wheel if getting aggressive, proper throttle would easily remedy the issue.
Awesome surprise 👍
Best lap - 1:19.133

@danlimski:
Handling was good, rear toe helped cornering without going too far.
Trans setup did seem as though it was laboring, RPM dropping too low between gears.
Brakes worked well, but could cause entry understeer, thus slower lap time.
Try more rear brake, something like 3 / 7, should help.
Still a fun ride and felt faster than the time I got out of it.
Exit was really good with only minor throttle understeer, which is normal for FF.
Best lap - 1:22.113

@nijalninja :
Tested this one once before, but since I was trying the others ......
I used trans default at 300km/h
Good LSD setup, brakes also worked really well.
Just a touch more negative with the rear toe and the time might drop.
Very stable and smooth ride, easy to drive and get comfortable.
Minimal exit understeer, handled the track really well.
Best lap - 1:20.334

**all times have been added to the Leaderboards.
As well as @RacingOtaku86 's times.
 
I hope I'm not too late to the party, really enjoyed of thinking how to go about tuning these cars :)
The tracks listed are the ones I tested the cars on, so they're a little geared towards those tracks. Quite interesting to see how they do on other tracks, though. Hope you guys enjoy driving these ones :D
 
Antares26
I hope I'm not too late to the party, really enjoyed of thinking how to go about tuning these cars :)
The tracks listed are the ones I tested the cars on, so they're a little geared towards those tracks. Quite interesting to see how they do on other tracks, though. Hope you guys enjoy driving these ones :D
Click to expand...
I will get them added to the list, you are not even close to being late. Even when February comes around, I will still take more from this month's list. Hoping to get a few of my own posted. Thanks for joining in, hope you enjoyed tuning them.
 
@Bowtie-muscle, you put the NSX time for SSR11 in the wrong place. The car uses SS tires so it should go under the SS category.

Anyways, quick reviews of the cars time! (no guarantees that they are good reviews...)

Subaru Impreza WRX STi '07

I have a soft spot for the Impreza. Their unmistakable engine noise always makes me turn my head and say, "Yeah." So it's understandable that I had to try this out, and it is good. VERY good. It's quick in a straight line, handling is great for a 4WD (as long as you don't go gung-ho in the turns), and it's a Subaru. Sure, it has some weaknesses, but the grip plants the car on the track quite well. Very well done.

Honda NSX Type R '02 (Bowtie)

Oh man, this tune is hands down my FAVOURITE for the car. It's light, nimble, and it's a blast to drive. It's got the speed to back it all up, too. This review is shorter than the one above, but I can't come up with the words to praise this car. It might have its flaws, but I'm having too much fun with it to care. AWESOME!
 
Last edited:
Bowtie-muscle
@Rotary Junkie :
Star of the group, by a ton.
Minimal understeer, if any!
Stiff/low ride, but still handled awesome and was not upset by bumps.
Great grip and rotation, lovely setup.
Good burn outside wheel if getting aggressive, proper throttle would easily remedy the issue.
Awesome surprise 👍
Best lap - 1:19.133
Click to expand...

Hey, my FWDs are still fast! :dopey: Biggest surprise with the car was it going faster when I turned the rear wing up, actually held considerably higher speeds through Trial's first sector.
 
Took @Antares26 's Supra 3.0 Turbo out to GVS, got 1:54.518. You have to be patient with this one, it will bite you if you're not careful. Smooth and slow around the corners is key. It does feel a little heavy around the corners as well, and some won't like that, but it just adds to the challenge. I don't think the car in its current state could handle technical tracks very well, but I'm sure Supra's were not known for that from the beginning. If you want a challenge, try this out.
 
RacingOtaku86
Took @Antares26 's Supra 3.0 Turbo out to GVS, got 1:54.518. You have to be patient with this one, it will bite you if you're not careful. Smooth and slow around the corners is key. It does feel a little heavy around the corners as well, and some won't like that, but it just adds to the challenge. I don't think the car in its current state could handle technical tracks very well, but I'm sure Supra's were not known for that from the beginning. If you want a challenge, try this out.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what I felt with the car, even without the additional weight from the ballast the car really felt heavy around corners, the ballast helped it turn just a little better though it suffered a bit on the straights. For an FR, the weight distribution of the A70 Supra felt like it was done for stability rather than agility, even the A80 Supra didn't see much improvement in its agility.

The most I could get with the JZA70 Supra on Grand Valley was a 1'53.3xx, and comparing it with the Z32 which had the exact same PP level, the Z32 was still 2 seconds faster at 1'51.1xx. The lighter weight of the Z32 helped, but the weight distribution really made the difference. On faster tracks with more high speed corners, I think the Supra can be a bit more competitive.
 
RacingOtaku86
@Bowtie-muscle, you put the NSX time for SSR11 in the wrong place. The car uses SS tires so it should go under the SS category.

Anyways, quick reviews of the cars time! (no guarantees that they are good reviews...)

Subaru Impreza WRX STi '07

I have a soft spot for the Impreza. Their unmistakable engine noise always makes me turn my head and say, "Yeah." So it's understandable that I had to try this out, and it is good. VERY good. It's quick in a straight line, handling is great for a 4WD (as long as you don't go gung-ho in the turns), and it's a Subaru. Sure, it has some weaknesses, but the grip plants the car on the track quite well. Very well done.

Honda NSX Type R '02 (Bowtie)

Oh man, this tune is hands down my FAVOURITE for the car. It's light, nimble, and it's a blast to drive. It's got the speed to back it all up, too. This review is shorter than the one above, but I can't come up with the words to praise this car. It might have its flaws, but I'm having too much fun with it to care. AWESOME!
Click to expand...
Will get that time in the correct place, thank you.
As for the reviews, great job. Always appreciate others giving their feedback. And truly am grateful that you are enjoying my NSX, even if it's not perfect. Still, I like it, and it is one of the fastest I have at 550pp. Think it was 10th or 11th on my Ascari Leaderboard. Thank you for the kind words:embarrassed:

Rotary Junkie
Hey, my FWDs are still fast! :dopey: Biggest surprise with the car was it going faster when I turned the rear wing up, actually held considerably higher speeds through Trial's first sector.
Click to expand...
Fantastic setup, reminded me of the original GT when stiff and low worked well. Rear downforce surprised me that it helped instead of hindered. Amazing:dopey:
RacingOtaku86
Took @Antares26 's Supra 3.0 Turbo out to GVS, got 1:54.518. You have to be patient with this one, it will bite you if you're not careful. Smooth and slow around the corners is key. It does feel a little heavy around the corners as well, and some won't like that, but it just adds to the challenge. I don't think the car in its current state could handle technical tracks very well, but I'm sure Supra's were not known for that from the beginning. If you want a challenge, try this out.
Click to expand...
Not an easy car to tune, kind of like the Mustang GT. Plows in, loose off, tight in the center. But if it's driveable, that's saying something.
Antares26
That's exactly what I felt with the car, even without the additional weight from the ballast the car really felt heavy around corners, the ballast helped it turn just a little better though it suffered a bit on the straights. For an FR, the weight distribution of the A70 Supra felt like it was done for stability rather than agility, even the A80 Supra didn't see much improvement in its agility.

The most I could get with the JZA70 Supra on Grand Valley was a 1'53.3xx, and comparing it with the Z32 which had the exact same PP level, the Z32 was still 2 seconds faster at 1'51.1xx. The lighter weight of the Z32 helped, but the weight distribution really made the difference. On faster tracks with more high speed corners, I think the Supra can be a bit more competitive.
Click to expand...
Those are good times in those cars, I have a Z32 to post but not sure it's that fast. The Supra however, I sent to the scrap yard as it just was a bear. Not terrible, but far from what I was hoping for. I have a bunch of tunes to get to, will get to some of yours. Just give me time.
 
Antares26
That's exactly what I felt with the car, even without the additional weight from the ballast the car really felt heavy around corners, the ballast helped it turn just a little better though it suffered a bit on the straights. For an FR, the weight distribution of the A70 Supra felt like it was done for stability rather than agility, even the A80 Supra didn't see much improvement in its agility.

The most I could get with the JZA70 Supra on Grand Valley was a 1'53.3xx, and comparing it with the Z32 which had the exact same PP level, the Z32 was still 2 seconds faster at 1'51.1xx. The lighter weight of the Z32 helped, but the weight distribution really made the difference. On faster tracks with more high speed corners, I think the Supra can be a bit more competitive.
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree. The Supra would be a beast on the drag strip or on the Wangan. I know my time is a tiny bit conservative (that goes for all my times as well), but I go for consistency.

Bowtie-muscle
Will get that time in the correct place, thank you.
As for the reviews, great job. Always appreciate others giving their feedback. And truly am grateful that you are enjoying my NSX, even if it's not perfect. Still, I like it, and it is one of the fastest I have at 550pp. Think it was 10th or 11th on my Ascari Leaderboard. Thank you for the kind words
Click to expand...

You're welcome!

Not an easy car to tune, kind of like the Mustang GT. Plows in, loose off, tight in the center. But if it's driveable, that's saying something.
Click to expand...

It's drivable, but just barely. I'd drive that over NASCAR anyday. No offence to you, @Antares26, but it's no Touge racer.
 
Last edited:
Did some NSX runs on Trial Mountain, all on SS tires.
@Bowtie-muscle NSX Type R - 1'26.228
  • Kinda weird driving an NSX that likes to understeer, especially on Trial Mountain, really stiff handling and the car doesn't like the kerbs much. Brakes also feel too strong so I had to be really careful when braking late. Still, the gears are very well done so acceleration is a breeze, and the car is so hard to spin so I can just go full throttle exiting the corners. I feel like the settings just doesn't suit Trial Mountain, because the understeer felt like it was more because of the undulation of the track. The car's definitely able to go faster, but I couldn't really keep on pushing cause the understeer was frustrating enough.
@Thorin Cain NSX Type R - 1'24.876
  • Pretty much the opposite of the other NSX, this one wants to rotate. While I could take the final chicane just by lifting off the throttle with Bowtie's NSX, this one gives me lift-off oversteer so I have to brake before entering a fast corner. Despite that, I really love the agility on this car, the loose braking actually points me to the direction of the turn so it makes it easier to accelerate early. Very fast car, I'd love for a little more stability, but it's already a nice cornering machine.
 

Latest Posts

Back