Bring back realistic engine tuning!

  • Thread starter Thread starter shirakawaa
  • 188 comments
  • 25,634 views
reece22345
They dumbed it down, probably because most of us aren't mechanics or know much about the whole thing. Don't forget, GT5 is for a very wide demographic, I was like 12 years old playing GT4 and didn't understand the options then completely, but thankfully I still had fun because they weren't waaaay over my head.

Hell I don't even understand some of the suspension settings or downforce settings to this day. If they are to make it more realistic, they better supply a very large manual that teaches you how to tune your car.

Maybe they should have a toggle tuning setting of like Simplified -> Realistic. That way it doesn't alienate consumers such as myself that are in it more for the racing and driving experience and don't want to spend ages setting up a car just to get it to go around a track.
Click to expand...
I thanked the Lord for those tickers, I became the 7 year old that knew everything about cars playing GT2. But I would love for them to put realistic engine tuning; makes the car exactly how I want it to be (and even more awesome if we could see the engine).
 
SHIRAKAWA Akira
I'm guessing that the first peak at +100 represents the torque curve of the engine working almost naturally aspirated, with essentially close to no boost. Then boost starts building up and torque starts rising up again. The second peak is at higher rpm due to different turbocharger characteristics. I don't think it's a bug, and it's not a graphic error either (I've been fairly accurate this time), it's probably meant to be like that. At +50 the turbocharger was probably giving more boost between 4000 and 6000 rpm, but less above.
Click to expand...

I understand what the graph shows, I don't understand why you would "tune" your car to start losing power before you tune it to gain power. Maybe I'm not explaining it right but I know you're not understanding what I'm trying to say. I'm not comparing the stock to the +50 and to the +100. If I was doing that then the low end loss would be fine as you up the peak hp. What I'm talking about is the individual hp/tq curves and how within them they have spans where they start losing power before the big gains kick in. Maybe I'm just used to "smooth" graphs but even the high hp supras, evos and v8 I've witnessed, never had any dips. It's just a sudden spike in power as the huge turbo spools.
Also, if you're showing "dyno" sheets, please have the tq/hp curves cross at 5250rpm, it just makes things easier.
 
Griffith500
Sorry, what I meant is, I don't know what the area signifies; i.e. what the integral of thrust with respect to speed actually means, since there didn't at first, to me, appear to be that much of a difference between all three cases - at least not to the degree I expected from the torque / power curves themselves. I imagine there's a significant difference in the 0-200 kph or 1/4 mile times, but it's hard to see in the thrust graphs (area, or linear plots equally).
Click to expand...
The area itself doesn't mean much in this graph. It's only a mean to show clearly the difference in thrust at a given speed for the provided gearing/engine combo. If there's twice the thrust (you have to mentally subtract losses first) than with another engine at, for example, 30 Km/h, then the engine there is also capable of making the car accelerate twice as fast (depending on tire grip).

Although, looking at it again, and taking into account the aero and drivetrain losses, I see it better now. I guess the visual representation needs some numerical backup?
Click to expand...
Yes, sorry for not inserting additional visual aids, I made that kind of quickly and thought you would mentally relate the chart with the one above (with lines).

Maybe it should have looked more like this:



But even so it isn't very readable. It should probably be better thought.

dave_sz
I understand what the graph shows, I don't understand why you would "tune" your car to start losing power before you tune it to gain power. Maybe I'm not explaining it right but I know you're not understanding what I'm trying to say. I'm not comparing the stock to the +50 and to the +100. If I was doing that then the low end loss would be fine as you up the peak hp. What I'm talking about is the individual hp/tq curves and how within them they have spans where they start losing power before the big gains kick in. Maybe I'm just used to "smooth" graphs but even the high hp supras, evos and v8 I've witnessed, never had any dips. It's just a sudden spike in power as the huge turbo spools.
Click to expand...
You certainly wouldn't want that, true. Inevitable dips or torque losses are however a side effect of tuning certain engines, especially if the components used are specifically made to better work in a certain RPM range. Probably it's what happens in this game with the 660cc Cappuccino engine. Or perhaps PD simply put that dip at medium RPM for game balancing reasons, to counterbalance the higher power at higher RPM.

Also, if you're showing "dyno" sheets, please have the tq/hp curves cross at 5250rpm, it just makes things easier.
Click to expand...
The crossing at 5252 rpm happens only if:
- The same scale is used for torque and power
- Torque is in lb-ft
- Power is in HP

In my charts I use torque in Nm (Newton-meters) and power in kW (kilowatts). The formula to calculate power in kW with torque in Nm is
((RPM x Torque) / 9549)
Click to expand...
The crossing would therefore happen at 9549 rpm, too high for most engines.
I prefer my charts to show information in a more meaningful way, especially if several torque/power curves are overlapped (otherwise they would have looked more like a bunch of tangled spaghetti).
 
Last edited:
dave_sz
...
Also, if you're showing "dyno" sheets, please have the tq/hp curves cross at 5250rpm, it just makes things easier.
Click to expand...

Aah, the spirit of the imperial age lives on! :lol: ;)
Or maybe I'm just used to working in a variety of (often mixed) units...

SHIRAKAWA Akira
Maybe it should have looked more like this:

Click to expand...

Actually, despite being so busy, I do get the gist from that one, yes. Thanks. 👍

I'm looking forward to actually applying this stuff in the near future (in real life) - so far, I've only studied the "philosophy" and pointed others in the "right" direction :sly:
 
Griffith500
Aah, the spirit of the imperial age lives on! :lol: ;)
Or maybe I'm just used to working in a variety of (often mixed) units...
Click to expand...

I don't like the units used in the US, I liked growing up in europe with their measuring usnit being much simpler and more understandable.
However when it comes to cars, through my hobby and through schooling, hp and tq are chiseled into my brain for good.
 
There's nothing wrong with US units; it's the recognition that people use different units, and a demonstration of willingness to interpret those units that matters. Although, the petroleum industry is a haven for stubbornness. :p There are some units in there that are akin to some of the obscure stuff used to build the Pyramids...

Anyway, it's just that your post seemed to echo the ideologies of the (European) Imperial Age, whereby any standardised system in use by the local "savages" was automatically inferior (only because it wasn't known to the imperialistic ignorantia). This gives rise to the requisite that all notions of this system be described using the method known to the invaders, not the residents. Or, rather, by the receiver, not the provider. I suppose, then, that it ought to work both ways - both systems being equally understood by both parties. This latter attitude, I'm sure at times in the various European Empires, probably did prevail - although, these aren't the stories you hear about...

Disclaimer: I'm not here to reprimand, and my use of language is not for its emotional effect, rather for its "plain" meaning. In my initial response to you, I was just making a tongue-in-cheek observation. :)

----------------

More on topic ish...

Whatever happened to the data logger in GT3?
Are we expecting it will return, what with the possibility of a GPS / telemetry interpretation to create ghost laps? Has this been discussed to death already, and I've missed it? Probably...

I quite liked using it in GT3, though I never really made "proper" use of it outside of ironing out suspension damping issues (via the slow motion playback) and fine-tuning gear ratios (via the lap overlays).
 
Griffith500
More on topic ish...

Whatever happened to the data logger in GT3?
Are we expecting it will return, what with the possibility of a GPS / telemetry interpretation to create ghost laps? Has this been discussed to death already, and I've missed it? Probably...

I quite liked using it in GT3, though I never really made "proper" use of it outside of ironing out suspension damping issues (via the slow motion playback) and fine-tuning gear ratios (via the lap overlays).
Click to expand...

I've wondered about that too, since this Toyota/PD telemetry thing must mean we can look at laps in more detail, no? The data logger was incredibly helpful for actually learning from faster peoples' replays (although it had that nasty habit of not matching the replay time).

GT has seemingly given us less details to follow with each iteration (like race records, a la GT1), and I really wouldn't mind some of the more technical stuff like the Data Logger, better gear graphs, turbo boost controller, and some other things to make a return.
 
Personally I'd like to see more real-time data like what happens on Forza (I think I've seen some screenshots of a replay with many numbers referring to various physical parameters) and, to a lesser extent, Enthusia (a racing sim for PS2 which came out after GT4). In particular Enthusia had a very nice real-time graph representing the load on each which helped tuning a lot (expecially since we don't physically "feel" the forces on our bodies). Have a look at it. It's called "VGS":


(not to mention the fact that it's got generally much better engine sounds than GT4, but it's offtopic here)

Personally, and again, I think that the lack of real physical feedback should be covered by more dials and information. Tuning in general (and ultimately, also driving) would benefit from that.
Regarding telemetry, I don't remember very well what was in GT3, but surely what we've got in GT4 was totally insufficient. I don't expect something as complex as MoTeC telemetry (it would be great though), but surely more available data and more precision than that.
 
The realtime stuff is OK, most of what is shown on that combo G-meter and grip-o-meter could be inferred from the environment and from the sounds (since GT3 it was clear, if you used surround sound, which wheel was making all the racket - though, I suppose, not everyone has surround sound...)
Anyway, it's probably just because I think of it more as a driving aid than a tuning aid.

The data logger in GT3 gave you curves, like this one:



You could have two curves to compare, though they weren't actually overlaid, just stacked on the screen with a cursor that gave simultaneous readout of speed only. I think there were one or two other features, I just can't remember now!
 
GT5 should have some sort of G meter. The debug build has it, so it should be implemented in the final code. You can have a glimpse of it in the following vid. It's on the top center of the screen, but you can't really see it before the 4'20 mark. Another video exists, in which the G meter is shown and explained in the company of a JGTC driver, but I failed to find it.



It's a step in the right direction, I'd say.

PS : Reading this topic brings back the GTP I met (and loved) while waiting for GT4. Good thread.👍
 
Been absent from GTP for quite sometime, I like the idea of more realistic tuning and response 👍 also the idea to give choice for player who want to have simplified tuning or full blown
This is what I felt from GT4 too, increasing the power seem unrealistic... Hopefully GT5 nail it or at least heading the right direction
 
Trueno86GTV
Been absent from GTP for quite sometime, I like the idea of more realistic tuning and response 👍 also the idea to give choice for player who want to have simplified tuning or full blown
This is what I felt from GT4 too, increasing the power seem unrealistic... Hopefully GT5 nail it or at least heading the right direction
Click to expand...

By the way, from information I've found around it appears that in GT5 tuning will be more detailed/comprehensive than in GT4, so I guess this, together with the more realistic engine response to power increases in GT5P, at least partially answers the question of the opening post.
 
Ascari_Gruppe
So who wants to explain the difference between torque and power hmm?

(no twisting force explanations :P)
Click to expand...

Power is just a measurement of the torque applied at the RPM

if the torque curve is flat and equal in all rev ranges then power output should look like a 45 degree angle rise on the graph
 
SHIRAKAWA Akira
By the way, from information I've found around it appears that in GT5 tuning will be more detailed/comprehensive than in GT4, so I guess this, together with the more realistic engine response to power increases in GT5P, at least partially answers the question of the opening post.
Click to expand...

Yup :) I really cant wait for the GT5 :) Hopefully they really make it more realistic :)
 
CoolColJ
photo01a.jpg
Click to expand...

hmmmm hks....here's hoping for real life pakages!
 
I agree with the author of this thread. I can understand GT is still a console game but if you want deliver the REAL driving simulator you have to be real, realistic at least. I know for most consumers it's not so easy but you can always create different difficoulty levels.
For Pro users a wide range of tuning possibilites will be great, not only about engine, but also tyre preassure, tyre temperature, wight positioning, something similar to PC sims will be MUCH appreciate, and if someone is getting creazy thre will be always the "quick tune button" 👍
oh.. and sorry for my english :crazy:
 
Trueno86GTV
OMG... I'm so excited!!! At first I thought why the picture... then I noticed it was taken from booklet with GT5 at the footer... unfortunately.. I cant read Japanese...
Click to expand...

sorry forgot to mention it's from the collector's edition book! yea ae lol...any japanese speaker's in here?
 
Very shortly, the image above is about engine compression; it mentions its benefits and drawbacks, and what components to tune/improve in order to increase it, like tuning the squish, changing pistons, using a thinner head gasket, trimming the cylinder head.

I wonder if we will have control over it in the game and if we will have to pay attention to not increase it too much (depending on the engine configuration) in order to avoid detonation problems.
 
Last edited:
omg!!hope it is implemented! thank you shirakawa.

hopw we do have to do in depth tuning, eg not be able to shove a masive t51r on a 12.1 compd type r and expect it to last and make descent power lol. i want consequences for not thinking and planning.
 
godzilla_GTR
omg!!hope it is implemented! thank you shirakawa.

hopw we do have to do in depth tuning, eg not be able to shove a masive t51r on a 12.1 compd type r and expect it to last and make descent power lol. i want consequences for not thinking and planning.
Click to expand...

👍 totally agree!!! realistic tuning and mod and also wear and tear on engine side.
 
Well, looks like it has gone the other way. :grumpy:

Was hoping for many more and more indepth tuning aspects not less. Even super-soft tyres have been left by the wayside.
 
Was hoping for many more and more indepth tuning aspects not less. Even super-soft tyres have been left by the wayside.
Click to expand...

Maybe super soft, snow, rally tyres fall under a different menu...lets hope
 
Aloha62_2
Well, looks like it has gone the other way. :grumpy:

Was hoping for many more and more indepth tuning aspects not less. Even super-soft tyres have been left by the wayside.
Click to expand...

This:
CoolColJ
The detail will be in the setting and adjusting, not the buying which is tedious spread across plenty of cars we will all have.

Just have everything on one screen, and click to buy would save a lot of unnecessary clicking and loading....
Click to expand...
 

Latest Posts

Back