bound/rebound setting?
- Thread starter RB26DETT
- 10 comments
- 7,084 views
- 114
- Waynetheman84
i know that i turn up the rebound just a bit, cuz it seems to absorb the bumps easier
- 19,429
- HSV
Here's what I use for help; although I usually set them all at 5/5 and 5/5 and work from there, or just leave them stock.
Damper Bound/Rebound
This is probably one of the most useful setting for tuning your car. You can control almost all balance, oversteer, understeer, or any other quirks from here. Let it be known that the following info was taken from a post by "Exit Speed" (Thank You soooooo Much) in the Granturismo.com Settings Workshop Forum. Also with these, like springs, youll want to make them stiffer for flat tracks and softer for bumpy ones. Though Id mess with the springs first to correct bounce and contact. Remember: Bound = Shock going up / Rebound = Shock coming back down.
Loose into turns
Soften Rear Rebound / Stiffen Front Bound
Loose out of turns (Increase oversteer when throttle is released in mid-corner)
Soften Front Rebound / Stiffen Rear Bound
Push into turns
Stiffen Rear Rebound / Soften Front Bound
Push out of turns
Stiffen Front Rebound / Soften Rear Bound
Damper Bound/Rebound
This is probably one of the most useful setting for tuning your car. You can control almost all balance, oversteer, understeer, or any other quirks from here. Let it be known that the following info was taken from a post by "Exit Speed" (Thank You soooooo Much) in the Granturismo.com Settings Workshop Forum. Also with these, like springs, youll want to make them stiffer for flat tracks and softer for bumpy ones. Though Id mess with the springs first to correct bounce and contact. Remember: Bound = Shock going up / Rebound = Shock coming back down.
Loose into turns
Soften Rear Rebound / Stiffen Front Bound
Loose out of turns (Increase oversteer when throttle is released in mid-corner)
Soften Front Rebound / Stiffen Rear Bound
Push into turns
Stiffen Rear Rebound / Soften Front Bound
Push out of turns
Stiffen Front Rebound / Soften Rear Bound
- 47
- United States
(VOID)
Last edited:
- 47
- United States
Pupik - Thank you for posting this information regarding the effects of compression and expansion. Some time ago, when TeaKanji's Cappuccino VS GT40 Rome Circuit victory prompted me to gain a comprehensive understanding of tuning I discovered a general tuning guide you'd posted elsewhere and found it, along with TeaKanji's tuning tips, a useful primer indeed. It's very decent of you to provide this information. Thanks again.
- 98
- Ireland
Damper bounds / rebounds was something I tested quite recently, as I have always been confused about how they work in GT2 and wanted more clarity. Pupik's breakdown makes logical sense from a real-life standpoint, and I'm quite certain that's how dampers work in GT3 onwards, but I've always suspected that GT2's bounds and rebounds are improperly implemented.
So, I took a Lancer Evo V RS, applied various extreme damper settings (1 bounds 10 rebounds, 1 front bound + rebound 10 rear bound + rebound etc.), brought it to an arcade time trial at Grindelwald, started recording my display, then began the time trial and held left so the car immediately turned towards the wall as the trial started.
I did two recordings: one with full throttle, and another with zero throttle, to simulate corner entry and corner exit behaviour. I then loaded the recordings in DaVinci Resolve, matched each set of recordings frame-by-frame, then compared them to see how they differed. The main things I looked for were: how long did the car take to begin turning (responsiveness), how much speed did the car carry while turning, and where abouts did the car hit the wall.
Unfortunately, the results were, for the most part, inconclusive. What I feel comfortable establishing is the following:
The most balanced damper setting in my opinion is 2 bounds, 2 rebounds. While I tend to get good results stiffening the rear dampers on flat tracks, it's very situational, as it can make the car lose grip on bumpy wide turns on many tracks (Test Course, High Speed Ring, Red Rock Valley etc.). The car has a much easier time gliding through these corners with soft dampers (and, on particularly sensitive cars, soft rear springs). Setting them to 2 makes the car feel slightly tighter and less twitchy than 1, without overly impacting turning. You could raise the front bounds and rebounds to further reduce twitchiness, but I think front camber does this job slightly better.
Of course, I welcome any evidence that disproves anything I just said, because I'd like as much as anyone to solve this mystery. To me it feels like damper bounds and rebounds, along with toe and the LSD, were massively re-worked in GT3, so it seems logical to conclude that they were bugged in GT2.
So, I took a Lancer Evo V RS, applied various extreme damper settings (1 bounds 10 rebounds, 1 front bound + rebound 10 rear bound + rebound etc.), brought it to an arcade time trial at Grindelwald, started recording my display, then began the time trial and held left so the car immediately turned towards the wall as the trial started.
I did two recordings: one with full throttle, and another with zero throttle, to simulate corner entry and corner exit behaviour. I then loaded the recordings in DaVinci Resolve, matched each set of recordings frame-by-frame, then compared them to see how they differed. The main things I looked for were: how long did the car take to begin turning (responsiveness), how much speed did the car carry while turning, and where abouts did the car hit the wall.
Unfortunately, the results were, for the most part, inconclusive. What I feel comfortable establishing is the following:
- no combination of damper settings seemed to give a clear "stiff X soft Y induces corner entry oversteer and corner exit understeer" or such, they just seemed to mainly affect the car's ability to turn and how it responds to inputs
- setting the bounds to 1 and the rebounds to 10 does not noticeably induce oversteer in any scenario, compared to setting them all to 1
- setting all damper settings to 10 greatly reduces the car's responsiveness and turning ability, though this may also mean the car holds speed better in flat corners if the car is overly responsive and loses grip easily
- the front dampers (bound + rebound) have a more adverse effect on responsiveness and turning ability than the rear
- while stiff rear dampers (bound + rebound) slightly reduce the car's responsiveness, the car will turn just as much (if not more) than soft rear dampers, hitting the wall at around the same spot
- the bounds and rebounds seem to serve the same function based on what side of the car they're on, though it's possible that the bounds have a slightly more adverse effect than the rebounds
The most balanced damper setting in my opinion is 2 bounds, 2 rebounds. While I tend to get good results stiffening the rear dampers on flat tracks, it's very situational, as it can make the car lose grip on bumpy wide turns on many tracks (Test Course, High Speed Ring, Red Rock Valley etc.). The car has a much easier time gliding through these corners with soft dampers (and, on particularly sensitive cars, soft rear springs). Setting them to 2 makes the car feel slightly tighter and less twitchy than 1, without overly impacting turning. You could raise the front bounds and rebounds to further reduce twitchiness, but I think front camber does this job slightly better.
Of course, I welcome any evidence that disproves anything I just said, because I'd like as much as anyone to solve this mystery. To me it feels like damper bounds and rebounds, along with toe and the LSD, were massively re-worked in GT3, so it seems logical to conclude that they were bugged in GT2.
Last edited:
- 47
- United States
As always, TeaKanji delivers the goods, i.e. one cannot dispute the value of his posted GT content nor his honor/benevolence as sharing the results of his efforts on behalf of our collective edification makes him a giant on whose shoulders many of us stand. Or something like that. In other words, wow TeaKanji, that was an in-depth and useful examination of compression and expansion settings re: how they affect a Lancer Evo V (my personal fav Lancer EVO in GT 2 and a good choice for your experiment population of one). Nice.
Regarding the most balanced damper setting, the 2/2 TeaKanji mention is often a very desirable setting not just for an EVO V but for many vehicles; however it's not a strict rule by any means because, as TeaKanji makes clear, different car reacts differently to various bound/rebound setting changes.
My humble two cents regarding damper bound and rebound comes down to just this: For many FR and AWD (and even a few FF) vehicles, increasing the stiffness of rear damper bound by one increases cornering ability to a noticeable degree. I've used this technique to successfully improve cornering on a number of GT 2 vehicles much to my satisfaction and have to give credit to Pupik for putting this idea in my head via his tuning guide(s).
Additionally I've found that in some instances reducing bound and rebound front and rear has significantly desirable effects primarily in regard to cornering. For example, I recently adjusted the Mine's Evolution V (a car which in the past I'd disregarded out of ignorance but which I am now revisiting along with a number of other vehicles thanks to my ongoing acquisition of increased understanding re: vehicle systems, component upgrades and tuning sparked in large part by TeaKanji's noteworthy victories VS twin GT40s during the Rome Circuit event) from the default of 9/9 to 7/7 and wow did this produce a tremendous positive impact on cornering and, seemingly, overall stability in a car which much to my chagrin is in the category of speed shop built or modified circuit racers that cannot take the (R) racing modification upgrade and therefore lack the capacity to adjust downforce, something I have always found a bit silly as one requires not a factory or speed shop's racing modification to simply adjust the angle of spoilers/wings. So yeah, in some instances reducing compression and expansion produces desirable performance enhancement.
That being said, as TeaKanji makes clear, different cars are affected differently by changing compression and expansion. Some already high-response vehicles benefit from low front and rear settings hence the 2/2-2/2 mentioned by TeaKanji while others benefit from other ratios including at times whatever their default settings are.
In summary, TeaKanji's results from extensive testing of the EVO V response to damper bound/rebound setting changes seem IMO to reflect the reality of actual potential GT 2 bound/rebound effects and represents TK's hard work, ability to present quantitative test data very well and is a valuable addition to any GT 2 enthusiast's total knowledge set, complementing Pupik et al's previously posted information on tuning and enhancing our total understanding of damper bound and rebound as they apply to vehicles in Gran Turismo 2.
Thanks to both Pupik and TeaKanji for sharing so much useful information. "It's a trip, it's got a funky beat and I can bug out to it". That is, said information has absolutely assisted me (and, I'm certain, countless others) in developing a quality working understanding of vehicle systems, modification, tuning and driving technique helping the many increase their yields of feat as well as prompting a number of interesting driving challenges. The value of their total contributions to our collective GT understanding cannot be overstated so thanks guys. A lot. In contrast, there are many GT enthusiasts who do not share their "secrets" in favor of maintaining an competitive advantage while happily posting statements re: their victories in car A during event B, all too often neglecting to include video examples or at least static images demonstrating said victories. So the efforts of enthusiasts like Pupik and TeaKanji who provide valuable GT information selflessly, in earnest and apparently with the best of intentions plus actively continuing to provide interesting new GT challenges in addition to expanding knowledge in a number of way including via extensive experimentation and passing along the results to the ever-hungry-for-knowledge GT enthusiast masses are to be commended for their efforts which provide valuable insight and which are very much appreciated.
So again, and at the risk of redundancy and bordering-on-pedantic pontificating which my enthusiasm for GT and writing promotes all too often, I offer on behalf of myself and every other GT fan who has benefited from your guidance, a big tip of the hat and significant gratitude in recognition of the salient positive impact your contributions have had. "So say we all!"
Last edited:
- 98
- Ireland
Happy to help. I decided to do another test, this time with an FR (Skyline R32 GTS-T Type M) to see if its dampers behave differently. Similar test to before: start a time trial at Super Speedway, hold right and X so the car accelerates and turns immediately, then compare behaviours. The car had super soft racing tyres, a basic suspension setup (soft front springs and stiff rear springs, 96 / 145 ride height, 3.0 / 1.2 camber, -0.20 / 0.20 toe, 3 / 3 stabilisers), an LSD set to 1 / 1 / 1, and a long 1st gear so it wouldn't change gears mid-turn.
Here are some screenshots of the car one frame before hitting the wall (all three hit the wall on the same frame):
1 front, 1 rear
1 front, 10 rear
10 front, 10 rear
The timer in the 10 front, 10 rear test was 1 millisecond slower, as it took slighly longer to start turning and cross the start line than the other two. What I find interesting is how the rear tyres didn't skid (or no smoke at least) with soft fronts and stiff rears, but once the front dampers were stiffened, the car began skidding again and lost more speed than both of the other tests.
I guess this may be why stiff rear dampers felt better to me, if the car has more grip mid-corner. Both 1 rear and 10 rear hit the wall at roughly the same spot, so I don't think turning ability is being affected much here. All of this is still kind of nonsensical, but I'm starting to come to some solid conclusions on what each damper setting does.
Edit: on further testing, the car doesn't seem to skid as long as the rear dampers are set to 2 or higher.
Here are some screenshots of the car one frame before hitting the wall (all three hit the wall on the same frame):
1 front, 1 rear
1 front, 10 rear
10 front, 10 rear
The timer in the 10 front, 10 rear test was 1 millisecond slower, as it took slighly longer to start turning and cross the start line than the other two. What I find interesting is how the rear tyres didn't skid (or no smoke at least) with soft fronts and stiff rears, but once the front dampers were stiffened, the car began skidding again and lost more speed than both of the other tests.
I guess this may be why stiff rear dampers felt better to me, if the car has more grip mid-corner. Both 1 rear and 10 rear hit the wall at roughly the same spot, so I don't think turning ability is being affected much here. All of this is still kind of nonsensical, but I'm starting to come to some solid conclusions on what each damper setting does.
Edit: on further testing, the car doesn't seem to skid as long as the rear dampers are set to 2 or higher.
Last edited:
- 47
- United States
TeaKanji - Fascinating data indeed. Thanks for posting this, the results of your latest damper experiment. My reaction can be summarized concisely in that I too prefer stiffer rear damping (more specifically: slightly stiffer rear compression (bound)) for the same reasons you've cited. In any event, great work as always and thanks again!
