Ballast Weight

P

ProjectLegacy

11
now. I have a question about the usage and meaning of the Ballast Weight.

Am I right to assume it is just weight added to increase stability as in ships? or no?


and Secondly, if above is correct, then does the weight balance control where i put it? As in, if i put -50 wieght, did i put all that weight onto the rear wheels?

If ya could help me out, this would be great. and would make tuning a little quicker if i understood this
 
ProjectLegacy
now. I have a question about the usage and meaning of the Ballast Weight.

Am I right to assume it is just weight added to increase stability as in ships? or no?


and Secondly, if above is correct, then does the weight balance control where i put it? As in, if i put -50 wieght, did i put all that weight onto the rear wheels?

If ya could help me out, this would be great. and would make tuning a little quicker if i understood this
Click to expand...

Some rear engine cars oversteer when coasting or decelerating into or through turns. Adding weight to the front balances the car when entering a corner. Some front engine cars understeer when entering a corner, adding weight to the rear will balance that.
But with both of these will drastically change the way the car handles. Both of these steering problems can be corrected for the most part with proper suspension tuning. The ballast is a "free" way to help balance the car.
No matter how you look at it, adding weight to the car may help it handle a turn with more stability, but with the added weight it will require negotiating turns slower.

I've played with it, didn't like it, don't use it.
 
I have only experemented with ballast and don't currently use it. I assume it is most useful in the high power/weight ratio cars and possibly dirt and ice.
 
The only use I have found for the balast is adding some to increase A-spec points for a race.
If you have oversteer/understeer, it is best to try and correct it with proper suspension tuning.
 
No-one's answered the question, and Im worried Ive got it wrong:

I thought that -50 on the balance meant the weight was carried over the front, and 50 at the very rear. Anyone can confirm this?? I tried diggin thru the Official Alignment values thread, but that's so full of stuff it'll take forever to find it.
 
Setting the slider all the way to the left puts the added weight fully at the front of the car.

The instructions that appear mention "front versus rear" weight distribution, so I remember it by the order of the words: "front <---||------> rear".
 
Orbit
Setting the slider all the way to the left puts the added weight fully at the front of the car.

The instructions that appear mention "front versus rear" weight distribution, so I remember it by the order of the words: "front <---||------> rear".
Click to expand...
This is the deductive assumption I also make, and actual testing does indeed tend to support this theory; however, I have seen no official (Polyphony) description of why -50 means all the way forward, in that regard I assume the confusion stems from cultural/language translations.
As far as A-Spec points goes; I find it interesting to note that the computer can calculate when your car is likely to perform better or worse, it seems like a very simple calculation and I wish I had a copy ot the equation. :mischievous:
 
Orbit
Setting the slider all the way to the left puts the added weight fully at the front of the car.

The instructions that appear mention "front versus rear" weight distribution, so I remember it by the order of the words: "front <---||------> rear".
Click to expand...


Same logic I used - seemed to work in practise, but I hadnt tested it. I put weight at +30 in my RX-8 and it seems to make it a bit more stable. I was actually after more A-spec points though. Howver, to get 200 on some races one might need 500kg of ballast!! :scared:
 
Anyone here own a pickup truck? Ever put bags of sand in the back to help with traction during the winter?

I used ballast for the chevrolet silverado SST concept. But only after fine tuning the truck. I set ballast weight to 50 and ballance to 25. It worked like a charm.

I haven't touched the setting otherwise.

I couldn't seem to get the same results through suspension tuning. And really, in a pickup, the weight distribution is WAY off to begin with. At 835 hp, I didn't think 50 (lbs??) would really make any real diffrence.
 
I found that it can help in drag racing a bit. Have a high power rwd car, add a few pounds and set it to the rear.

Adding weight over the rear tires will help hookup a bit better, as Nostej described.

As to racing, I don't mess with it.
 
Nostej
Anyone here own a pickup truck? Ever put bags of sand in the back to help with traction during the winter?

I used ballast for the chevrolet silverado SST concept. But only after fine tuning the truck. I set ballast weight to 50 and ballance to 25. It worked like a charm.

I haven't touched the setting otherwise.

I couldn't seem to get the same results through suspension tuning. And really, in a pickup, the weight distribution is WAY off to begin with. At 835 hp, I didn't think 50 (lbs??) would really make any real diffrence.
Click to expand...
I'd like to see the reaction at the NASCAR (hicks turnin left) pits when you tell them they should put one bag of cements' weight in the bed to make those pick-ups they race go faster.
 
rk
I'd like to see the reaction at the NASCAR (hicks turnin left) pits when you tell them they should put one bag of cements' weight in the bed to make those pick-ups they race go faster.
Click to expand...


LOL I would too..

Actually, I was thinking about that when I was adding ballast to the truck. All those trucks have a cover over the bed., and ofcourse a rear wing. GT4's Silverado SST has neither. It's actually a little odd with the HUGE ground effects around the truck. It almost seems a little incomplete.

I wouldn't mind seeing inside the bed of those nascar trucks. I would be willing to bet they use some kind of ballast aswell. Ofcourse you can't really compare real world tuning to GT4 tuning.
 
Ok, so I've a time posted on Apricot Hill with a 240z of 1:17.511.

I set a 10 lb ballast and put it to +25, and now I'm running a 1:16.046

So it seems to have a positive effect on handling of rwd cars as well.
 
I wouldn't mind seeing inside the bed of those nascar trucks. I would be willing to bet they use some kind of ballast aswell. Ofcourse you can't really compare real world tuning to GT4 tuning.
Click to expand...

I think that's where you'll find their radiators, actually. At least, that's the case for offroad racing trucks.


Anyway, they aren't going to have much need for ballast over the rear wheels because it's oval racing, not drag racing. They spend virtually all of their time at very high speeds where torque at the drive wheels is quite small.

- Skant
 
I've just been trying ballast for the first time.
Took a '95 Eclipse 226 bhp, back to beginner hall, ff series at midfield reverse. It was up against, 2000 Megane IDE 146 bhp, '03 Megane 138 bhp, '03 Dodge SRT4 233 bhp, 2000 Fiat Coupe Turbo 216 bhp, '96 Honda Prelude Type S 217 bhp. Pretty easy victory, stock car, no balllast, 42 a-spec points. Gradually increased ballast to 200, still easy race win, fully ballasted, actually made the car more stable, located centrally, and got 72 a-spec points.
Then started playing around, moving ballast further forward or back to see the effect. 20% forward or back had little effect. But, moving the ballast fully forward or fully back, made the tail loose. I actually managed to win the race by more distance fully ballasted, either fully to the front or rear. Moving the ballast fully forward on this front/front car, did increase the tyre wear, but that was to be expected. Moving it fully to the rear did seem to even out tyre wear a bit.
Forget to say, both ASM's on 0, TCS on 1, letting my b-spec try it out now.
I set b-spec on pace 3, overtake on, 100% ballast fully to the front, he placed 5th, 100% fully to the back, placed 2nd +6.3 seconds, 100% centally, placed 3rd + 7.0. I then removed the ballast all together and he placed 4th, + 9.1 seconds !!
Variable results in b-spec, quite surprising, ran the race again, same field, same settings, this time he finishes 2nd + 3.8.
Obviously just showing the b-speclearning curve, ran the race a third time and he finishes just 2.5 behind the winner, how many re-runs till he wins it.
 
rk
This is the deductive assumption I also make, and actual testing does indeed tend to support this theory; however, I have seen no official (Polyphony) description of why -50 means all the way forward, in that regard I assume the confusion stems from cultural/language translations.
As far as A-Spec points goes; I find it interesting to note that the computer can calculate when your car is likely to perform better or worse, it seems like a very simple calculation and I wish I had a copy ot the equation. :mischievous:
Click to expand...

This would be very nice... maybe in the next one they'll give us a "calculator" to help us out... I've noticed what you've been talking about though... and you know those guys at Poly've got killer settings all dialed out... look at the cars you use for the licence tests. I got the exact same models in my garage, and they don't move like those do... :grumpy:
 
I have also driven arcade cars that handle like dogs. Half the LMP's are good, the other half sux, the 905 is a spinner and I can't even drive Kazunori's version of the poly F1, so, actually, it goes both ways, the non-tunables aren't always better
 
Aside from just adding balance to a car, adding weight to the back of a car can add traction. I've found this to be true with the RX7s and Supras (also very effective for the pick ups in this game, add weight to the back and you can own the rally races). Perhaps not the greatest thing for racing tracks, but for straight runs such as the Vegas Strip, this can help keep those back tires down and pushing forward. It's too bad that GT4 won't let you pick exact areas to weight reduce, but at least giving us this setting to play with makes up for it a bit, even if it's not realy needed or could be done in another way.
 
I think the ballast is quite useful with center of gavity and weight transfer. I used it in the 905 a very light car at less than 1700 lbs. I took it to Laguna Seca with R5 tires:

Lap time w/o ballast: 1.10.617
Lap time w/ballast: 1.09.635

I added 20kgs and went +50 on the balance. In the increase in lap time was instant. So, I can imagine gaining more time with fine tuning and testing. The downside (at Laguna) is coming out of the corkscrew, the car was prone to "tank slapping".
 
We got into ballast discussion at this thread about the RUF vehicles: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=60072 We also got into discussing shock settings. Currently the RR cars are the only ones I do have ballast weight installed in, but there is room for improvement in many cars.

The ballast in the nose really helps those cars. The rear engine configuration makes them very much like a pendulum. As the car turns, the weight over the rear wants to keep going in that direction. Countering the weight in the rear with some weight in the nose helps a lot. Keep in mind that the ballast weight is added in kilograms and that a negative value moves the weight to the front, while a positive value moves weight to the rear.

Ballast weight can be very useful. You'll hear about ballast weight in race series like the Speed World Challenge. The leaders of one race will have weight added to their car in time for the next race. However! There are restrictions about where the "rewards weight" may be added. Some locations can be advantageous to have extra weight. For example- when moving the battery to the back of a fox body Mustang ('79-'93) it was benefitting to the car to put it over the passenger side rear wheel because that was the side that would burnout. With the weight of the battery over it, it helped that tire gain traction quicker. GT4 only allows one dimension to locate the ballast weight, front/rear. If they could also give us an adjustment for the left/right sides of the car, that would be far better.
 
I don't know if it's been mentioned or not, but you can adjust the weight bias without actually adding ballast. I found this very helpful in getting my TSX adjusted.
 
Duke
I don't know if it's been mentioned or not, but you can adjust the weight bias without actually adding ballast. I found this very helpful in getting my TSX adjusted.
Click to expand...
You're saying that you were able to get handling improvements by adjusting bias without weight? Interesting.
 
Yes! I gave it a shot, and it seemed to work. At first I set the bias to +50 in order to get the car to generate some lift-off oversteer, but that gave me wheelspin issues at corner exit (FWD car). So I eventually got the suspension doing what I wanted without the rear weight bias so I set it to -25, which helped get the power down on acceleration.

All this was with ballast weight set to zero.
 

Latest Posts

Back