FITT - Federation of International Tuners and Test-Drivers

  • Thread starter DigitalBaka
  • 2,660 comments
  • 156,009 views
@Bee_Bee9 if you look back at our GT5 events you'll find that in general only very limited use of Power Limiter and Ballast was made by most tuners.
The Power Limiter and the way it works doesn't appear to have changed much if at all from GT5.
Anyways this is a very old discusion that we can hopefully put to rest finally, or at least move to Hami's GT6 physics thread.

Let's try and keep this thread primarily about setting up and running events and welcoming questions regarding FITT.
 
I remember in the beginning, most FITT challenge hosts would set a restriction on power limiting. I stopped doing that after 2.09. I noticed that cars would have just a bit more HP if you could keep power limiting above 98%. So, if you chose to use lots of power limiting, you were only robbing yourself of power.
 
Good luck, and thanks to all you tuners, I as many here have used your tunes, setups, articles, and in general knowledge.

Why is it that you dont use each new time trial as one of your criteria?
 
nowayback
Good luck, and thanks to all you tuners, I as many here have used your tunes, setups, articles, and in general knowledge.

Why is it that you dont use each new time trial as one of your criteria?
Click to expand...
We have done some smaller side events based on the Online Seasonals.
However it takes a bit longer to prepare tunes and get them all tested for a major event.
Consider we've had over 20 tuners enter events in the past and that means the Test drivers are signing up to run that many different cars/tunes around the specified track/s enough times to get a solid time for the tune and be able to give some honest feedback on it. Even on a single short track that can become a major investment in time.
 
Zuel
The more you build the cars and de-tune them the cars going to take a great hit when using the power limiter. The norm of detuning while keeping high torque is no longer there. I’ve added every part to the Boss 302 for extra power and removing weight along with the flat floor. I’ve found the more the car is built and detuned the harder for the car to truly preform. Every time I lowered the PP number the slower the car became, even with the high torque number. Without having all the street cars is hard to tell how much each group is losing. From the math I’ve worked without having all the cars, drivers could lose 10 points to detuning which could lose up to five seconds off pending on lap time, track, driver and how well balanced the set is.

From what I’ve found so far no matter what class car you’re running or building the higher the horse power and how the power limiter is used the greater the hit on the car. Overly building the cars and detuning them the same way as in GT5 is no longer going to work. The cars are even more unbalanced than before. Running in lobbies with race cars had mad that very clear from the numbers I seen, 600PP for GT3, 570 for GT500 and 560 for DTM. From the testing of the racing cars it clearly show no one as of now will be able to get the ALL the race cars to run with each other just to accommodate the need. I'm not sure how the street cars will fair thought.
Click to expand...

From the math I’ve worked without having all the cars, drivers could lose 10 points to detuning which could lose up to five seconds off pending on lap time, track, driver and how well balanced the set is.

There is no way that statement can be true. In GT5 for example, 10PP was about a half second at Deep Forest or about 0.60% of a lap time. The only track you'd lose even close to 5 seconds on would be the Nurb and even then, 10PP was closer to 3 or 4 seconds. If you have some testing evidence to show these lap time changes are dramatically different in GT6 you should throw it up here so we can repeat the testing to verify it.
 
Johnnypenso
There is no way that statement can be true. In GT5 for example, 10PP was about a half second at Deep Forest or about 0.60% of a lap time. The only track you'd lose even close to 5 seconds on would be the Nurb and even then, 10PP was closer to 3 or 4 seconds.

If you have some testing evidence to show these lap time changes are dramatically different in GT6 you should throw it up here so we can repeat the testing to verify it.
Click to expand...

Where's your evidence to show that 10pp is half a second at deep forest - for what? Every car in the game with all variables - tyre, power, setups, tuning, driver, driving style etc....???? Or one car, one drivetrain, online / offline - what?
 
Highlandor
Where's your evidence to show that 10pp is half a second at deep forest - for what? Every car in the game with all variables - tyre, power, setups, tuning, driver, driving style etc....???? Or one car, one drivetrain, online / offline - what?
Click to expand...

I said "some testing evidence" not "every car in the game".

In the meantime there is plenty of evidence here:

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/thre...chleife-pp-board-car-tune-submissions.260349/

to suggest that on the Nurb the difference in lap times with 50PP + 1 tire compound is generally around 30-40 seconds. Some specific examples:

07:14.845 - MAZDA RX-7 SPIRIT R TYPE A (FD) '02- 500PP/SM (Praiano)
07:49.829 - Mazda RX-7 Spirit R, Type A (FD) 02 - 450PP/SH (Johnnypenso)

07:20.210 - SCION FR-S '12- 500PP/SM (Praiano)
07:57.394 - Toyota 86 GT '12 - 450PP/SH (MrGrado)

07:15.447 - LOTUS 111R '04 - 500PP/SM (Praiano)
07:45.635 - LOTUS 111R '04 - 450PP/SH (Praiano)

07:18.415 - HONDA HSC '03- 500PP/SM (Praiano)
06:50.350 - HONDA HSC '03 - 550PP/SS (Praiano)

06:50.668 - LOTUS EVORA '09- 550PP/SS (Praiano)
07:17.902 - LOTUS EVORA '09- 500PP/SM (Praiano)

I have many more examples of my own testing at much shorter tracks but my results concur with the examples above and it's crystal clear. I can provide some if you want but the above should be convincing enough to anyone with an open mind that the general trend is that 10PP will not make a 5 second difference on any track, especially with the same tire compound at least in GT5. Maybe that's changed in GT6. Zuel can easily show this by showing us the testing that he's done to back up his claim.
 
Johnnypenso
I said "some testing evidence" not "every car in the game".
Click to expand...


Sorry, don't mean to be argumentative, you said "....10PP was about a half second at Deep Forest..", I simply asked for your evidence to support this, but you're quoting Nurb results?
 
Hey guys can we take the discussion about the difference PP makes in lap times and how/what the best way to achive given PP is to another thread please.

We should be discussing what and when our first GT6 event will be here. Not debating the relative merits of power limiting vs ballast vs building up to a given PP and the effects such practices have on lap times.

Valid discussion just needs to be carried out elsewhere like the FITT physics thread or its own thread that can be linked by Hami to the physics thread if any useful data is produced by the discussion.
 
Double Post Time!:lol:

Strongly in favor of a FiT fest for our first GT6 event.
Everyone has them already and showing the community how to crank out some great performance from them would be good.
 
With so many options available to us do we want to limit to a single car? I'm definitley in favor of the lower end of the PP spectrum though since folks are still winding up their bank rolls and garage counts. Maybe we go back to the first big shootout we did and go 4-500PP by drivetrain to see if all the usual suspects are still at the top of the range and compare performance between say FF and FR and a second event after for MR/RR and AWD?

Though I still haven't seen a way to share so we may need to wait on that feature to get patched in...
 
DigitalBaka
With so many options available to us do we want to limit to a single car? I'm definitley in favor of the lower end of the PP spectrum though since folks are still winding up their bank rolls and garage counts. Maybe we go back to the first big shootout we did and go 4-500PP by drivetrain to see if all the usual suspects are still at the top of the range and compare performance between say FF and FR and a second event after for MR/RR and AWD?

Though I still haven't seen a way to share so we may need to wait on that feature to get patched in...
Click to expand...

I think that's going to be a while being patched in, if at all. And now that we have all cars at our disposal straight from the dealership, and there is no "break-in" period for cars, it's probably best to just set a max budget, say 50k, have the tuners post tunes as usual, then testers will buy the cars put the tunes on them and feedback.

I think 50k is a fair budget, and will be easily acquired x10 if there is ten tuners for a tester to try out because the testers can grind or glitch for credits, and 500k is not a huge ask. Though if you think the budget is still too high, I'm sure you could make a good car and tune with as little as 30k.
 
Johnnypenso
From the math I’ve worked without having all the cars, drivers could lose 10 points to detuning which could lose up to five seconds off pending on lap time, track, driver and how well balanced the set is.

There is no way that statement can be true. In GT5 for example, 10PP was about a half second at Deep Forest or about 0.60% of a lap time. The only track you'd lose even close to 5 seconds on would be the Nurb and even then, 10PP was closer to 3 or 4 seconds. If you have some testing evidence to show these lap time changes are dramatically different in GT6 you should throw it up here so we can repeat the testing to verify it.
Click to expand...


I'm really not sure why you're comparing GT6 to GT5 but anyway. The track I've been testing at is Brands Hatch the full course the street car I've been using the most there to is the 240SX '96 and it feel like a real 240SX I kid you not. I built my track car that I ran a lot a Summit Point, so I know how the car should feel. Here is the build and times to follow, the only alterations that were done was lower the power limiter buy 10% ever time.

Car
Nissan 240SX (511PP)
402hp 396ft-lb 2.78kg-hp (100%)
Stage 1 engine
Sport Computer
Semi-Racing Exhaust
Isometric Exhaust Manifold
Catalytic Converter:Sport
Intake
Mid RPM Turbo
Stage 1 weight
Carbon Hood Light weight window

Track and Time
Brand Hatch

1:36.613 (100% power)
1:37.655 (90% power)
1:37.930 (80% power)
1:38.568 (70% power)

As you can see the lower the % got the lower the times got. I really don't see the OLD GT5 solid group numbers are going to work in GT6.
 
@DB - I like the idea of a budget challenge. Nice solution for early in the game. Not everyone is comfortable doing the money glitch, but 100,000 in credits can be done in an evening of driving. So this works for the tuners.

I just don't know what the solution is for the test drivers? Maybe test driving becomes "use car one to race in events until you've earned another 50k, then buy car two." Feedback would then have to be about feel and overall speed/finishing positions in the events. ???
 
It's an interesting problem. Not sure what the ideal solution will be but that's not a bad idea. Budget challenge for a general tune to be used in whatever events the tester wishes. Results end up being purely driver's choice, more or less.

I think until we see a way to share cars online it would be a lot to ask of testers to run 20+ cars AND have to finance the purchase of every single one plus parts.
 
DigitalBaka
It's an interesting problem. Not sure what the ideal solution will be but that's not a bad idea. Budget challenge for a general tune to be used in whatever events the tester wishes. Results end up being purely driver's choice, more or less.

I think until we see a way to share cars online it would be a lot to ask of testers to run 20+ cars AND have to finance the purchase of every single one plus parts.
Click to expand...
That's why a single car or limited car selection would make sense.
FF challenge?
FiT
MiTo
Clio
Scirocco
All are prize cars except the FiT that everyone has to buy anyways.
Limit it to say 450-475PP so parts costs don't skyrocket to badly.
Testers only need one of each car since all modifications can now be changed.
 
Good idea @XDesperado67 using the cars that we win to make it seamless and easier on for the people that wish not to use the software whole or go out and buy the credit as I have a number of time.. We could see what we come up with, while speeding very little. Got to pick the parts correctly to get the best out of the car. I can't remember how much I spent on tuning but I got the best power to torque for what I spent. (402hp-396ftlb-2.29kg,hp~100%)
 
Zuel
1:36.613 (100% power)
1:37.655 (90% power)
1:37.930 (80% power)
1:38.568 (70% power)

As you can see the lower the % got the lower the times got. I really don't see the OLD GT5 solid group numbers are going to work in GT6.
Click to expand...

Makes perfect sense if you understand the relationship between torque, horsepower and power curves. Excessive limiting vs removing parts also made cars in GT5 slower so I am not sure why some are surprised?
 
First of all @esoxhntr, my testing will not reflect any pass results from GT5 due to the findings within the last few weeks. And more to the point of KW, Yokohama having involvement along with the new aerodynamic algorithm. From that point all of my testing besides the PP system went out the window. In GT5 when some of us built the cars up and de-tuned out of class or to a lower class the car still preformed or out performed that class some cars in that class. Even when a car built to class, with a better power curve that overly built and de-tuned car still out preformed even though it was de-tuned and the power curve was out of norm.

The test you quoted was to see if the NORM GT5 tuning method still works and I found that it doesn't. Even though the cars have all that torque and low hp the car is slower, in GT5 the cars still stayed at speed or feel behind slightly, not up to 5 seconds as it done it GT6.
 
XDesperado67
That's why a single car or limited car selection would make sense.
FF challenge?
FiT
MiTo
Clio
Scirocco
All are prize cars except the FiT that everyone has to buy anyways.
Limit it to say 450-475PP so parts costs don't skyrocket to badly.
Testers only need one of each car since all modifications can now be changed.
Click to expand...

But..but, I sold my FiT:(

What will I do?💡 Good thing I cancelled 1.02 update, bought a bunch of VGT's and then maxed my credits using 330P4's:D Too bad we can't share/ send cars yet either. It would be nice to put up something like a custom tuned car (directly from a tuning garage) as a prize.
 
good morning my friends stayed many days outside gt6 and also no internet but now all normalized, I would continue to participate in your events makes me feel useful, I appreciate your understanding
 
You could just do one car for all tuners but list different style which they then choose which one to enter, fast track, tight track, dirt, mountain etc etc, that way testers need buy one car which will have multiple setups depending which catagory the tuner has entered into
 
Bee_Bee9
You could just do one car for all tuners but list different style which they then choose which one to enter, fast track, tight track, dirt, mountain etc etc, that way testers need buy one car which will have multiple setups depending which catagory the tuner has entered into
Click to expand...
An interesting idea, but how would you compare them? Even if you only compare 2-3 tuners in the same category it doesn't end up being very competitive.

However, that may fall in with something I have been toying with in my head. What if we did a "FITT Car of the Month"?

The idea would be to choose one particular car at random or by category (drivetrain, decade, muscle, supercars, etc.) and just have people post tunes for it. Not competitive but more of a collection of tunes and learning.

People come into the tuning forum all the time asking for "the best car for x race" or "the fastest tune at x track". The FCOTM would be a way of getting tuners and others to branch out to the more low key, unused and forgotten cars in the game...so everything @krenkme does, basically. Racers get their massive collection of tunes, tuners get to share and get feedback and people learning to tune can look at a bunch of tunes all in the same place to see how different settings can be used on the same car. We can also have the community vote on the category for the next month's car. It's not even something we need to manage closely like a shootout other than to maybe collect links in the OP.

Thoughts?
 
@DigitalBaka tuner car of the month sounds good.
Perhaps tie it in somehow with the Beater or Sleeper Car of the Week thread that's getting set to kick off?💡
 
Competitions based on multiple rounds, each round is set by a PP limit, sure there must have been similar comps like that, providing a round winner and a overall champ. So similar style, each round is based on a style of racing, the tuners have to get the best out of the designated car for that round. Obviously to appeal to tuners they could enter just the odd round or all, they decide.
 
While tuning a car for Ron's Reviews, GT6 Edition (Coming Soon!) I noticed that changes to Engine Tuning and all forms of Weight Reduction take effect across all tabs. So if tab A calls for Engine Tuning S1 and tab B calls for Engine Tune S3 one of the tabs will be wrong.

Just a warning...

Looking forward to the first Shootout. I believe that 50 - 80k per tuner is easily done. Especially when we have multiple layouts per car (400pp CH, 450ppSH, Rally, track specific), or multiple tuners per car. Crossover helps.
 
Last edited:

Latest Posts

Back