Natalie's Gr.4 BoP Testing! (DS4)

Discussion in 'Gran Turismo Sport' started by Natalie_GT, Aug 7, 2020.

  1. Natalie_GT

    Natalie_GT

    Messages:
    222
    Location:
    Argentina
    Hello again! :gtplanet:

    After searching around the forums I've come to the conclusion that perhaps we are lacking some form of definitive BoP test for the Gr. classes, aside from the stickied tyre wear and fuel consumption thread. I've decided to make my own, since I have loads of free time thanks to passing my test week, to compare car performances and share tips and information with each other, perhaps learning something new along the way. All tests will be conducted with Brake Balance on 0, and BoP on.

    We will be going through the Gr.4 car class first and foremost, in alphabetical order. Today, our star guest is somewhat of a fallen star in recent days; the Alfa Romeo 4C!

    Screenshot_20200806-201757_YouTube.jpg

    As you can see by the image, I've put up a testing plan for all the Gr.4, and hopefully all the other Gr. class, cars.

    We will have three hotlaps at Dragon Trail - Seaside, Lago Maggiore - GP and Interlagos, which I've chosen because they are my personal best tracks, and I feel I can get the most out of the cars here. Plus, they are tracks that come up quite frequently in daily races and lobbies, so they are relevant tracks where a lot of people play on.

    Then, a simple 0-160 km/h (or 0-100 mp/h if you're from an imperial-system-using country) acceleration test will take place at Maggiore. From a standstill, TCS on 1 until the car doesn't need it, and RH tyres.

    And finally, we will return to Seaside for a fuel consumption and tyre wear test (both at x10). I've picked the track because it combines high speed corners, hard braking zones and loads of kerb usage, making it quite the tyre shredder. Most of the lap is done at full throttle too, therefore giving us the maximum fuel consumption possible.

    Here is the video of the respective tests. I will be sharing my insight on the car below it:



    Now, onto some of my notes about the car.

    *Max. Power with BoP applied: 322 BHP (109%)
    *Max. Torque with BoP applied: 39.6 kgfm (109%)
    *Weight with BoP applied: 1,234kg (121%)

    To start with the power delivery before heading onto the handling; you have to rev the crap out of it to get the maximum horsepower, but the turbo engine develops the maximum torque way before the redline. Revving at around 60 to 75% did not harm performance very noticeably, and can be quite a useful fuel saving tactic.

    The 4C is a pretty deceptive car. It may look easy to drive because of it being a Gr.4 car, but don't let looks fool you. It wants to kill you in certain sections.

    The main advantage of the 4C is also it's "Achilles' Heel", in it's eagerness in rotation. You will not find a corner where the 4C will show understeer on corner entry, and it's a pleasure to drive around Seaside's and Maggiore's fast esses. By downshifting you can improve this even further; it eats hairpins for breakfast. However, I've mentioned that this is also a disadvantage, and it is; corners like turn 1 at Interlagos can show that you must really have a grip over the Alfa Romeo or it will break away from you quite easily on entry. Trail braking in the car is a must; it's an exercise on your precision in weight distribution and weight shift as you enter a corner, and it's quite fun to drive, but always teethering on the edge.

    Bringing us to the next point; kerb usage. The 4C really suffers over kerbs, and over corners like Interlagos' turn 1 and the Laguna Seca Corkscrew. Since it's a mid engined car, front weight is kept to a minimum, and it sits quite low to the ground. I've lifted the front more times than I can count at the Corkscrew (and it's terrifying).

    It is not entirely unpredictable over kerbs, though. With some practice you can overcome it, such as with Seaside's famous Chicane of Death. I could quite easily, with some practice, fly through it at full throttle, but you need to keep it just right. If you make the 4C jump over a kerb, like entering a corner too tight and clipping the kerb, you will send the whole car flying like it's a paper towel and most times, there is no saving it; it will deviate you off course pretty badly.

    I've also noticed that some kerbs make it want to snap and start to oversteer; turns 2 and 4 at Seaside, and turn 9 at Interlagos show this perfectly as you're better off avoiding the kerb in the first place. If you do start to feel the back coming out, lift the gas a bit and the car will correct itself, but that wastes time, of course. The final corner at Interlagos is also a killer for this car; I've found myself oversteering many times as I clipped the inside kerb or accelerated too eagerly out of it.

    To every bad, there is a good, though, especially in the acceleration department. Obviously there are many more cars to test and the 4C may possibly be beaten, but it's quite brisk off the line, as shown in the 0-160 test. Off corners you can put the power down early thanks to the car's grip too, which is a bonus. I am afraid it may not be very fast in a straight line compared to other cars, especially the FFs, but we will see.

    The 4C is very much a handling car, and it did feel very strong around Maggiore, the Seaside esses and Interlagos' second sector. You can really attack the corners after you're accustomed to the car and it is quite awesome. I think the over-rotation issue could be fixed by bringing the brake balance to the front a few notches, however I have not tried it myself.

    Tyres and fuel proved to be pretty good too. I did not find any noticeable difference with the tyre wear by the end of my laps and the Alfa is quite economical on the fuel side of things, as it crossed the line with 34% remaining in the full speed test and a remarkable 48% remaining in the conservative test (shifting at around 60 / 75% of the tachometer). That's pretty good for 3 laps around a mostly full speed circuit with 10x fuel consumption! Like I've said before, we will have to test other cars, but for now, that's where we stand.

    To top things off, here is a leaderboard that I will be updating with every subsequent car we drive in this thread, with all the lap times of the hotlaps and the fuel consumption percentages:

    / Dragon Trail Seaside - Hotlap:
    -1: Alfa Romeo 4C: 1:46.149

    / Lago Maggiore GP - Hotlap:
    -1: Alfa Romeo 4C: 2:04.797

    / Autódromo de Interlagos - Hotlap:
    -1: Alfa Romeo 4C: 1:38.529

    / 0-160 km/h (0-100 mp/h) Test:
    -1: Alfa Romeo 4C: 9.650 seconds.

    / Fuel Consumption Test (Full Speed / Conservative):
    -1: Alfa Romeo 4C: 34% / 48%

    I hope you enjoyed watching the video and reading my insight. The next car, the Aston Martin V8 Vantage, should be coming soon. Until then, farewell!

    *This test is correct as of Version 1.61 of Gran Turismo Sport.

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

    *UPDATE (07-08-2020):

    Added the Aston Martin V8 Vantage Gr.4's BoP Test, with updated leaderboards for hotlaps, acceleration test and fuel / tyres test.

    Link:


    https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/posts/13196381/
    -------------------------------------------------------------

    *RESERVED FOR FUTURE UPDATES*


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

    :gtpflag:
     
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2020
    Qyn, Timm Sheehan, Alex p. and 16 others like this.
  2. XSquareStickIt

    XSquareStickIt

    Messages:
    483
    I'm quite curious as to how you plan on doing this as BoP changes. Will you retest every car when hit by BoP changes for tyre wear, fuel consumption, lap times, and 0-160?

    I'd much prefer if you wrote down the results of the 0-160 times in the thread as well, instead of it being just on video. Same goes for tyre wear and fuel con, though I think a picture works better for that.

    Lastly, my two cents: you might want to leave your first post as an index with links to your later tests, with one post later for each car (like the Car of the Week thread). It'd also be helpful if you provided the exact percentages BoP applies to each car's power and mass figures, and what game version those percentages applied at. So, for example, the 4C would be:

    327PS (109%)
    1,234kg (121%)
    Ver. 1.61

    Also, where your Ford GT review at? :lol:
     
  3. Natalie_GT

    Natalie_GT

    Messages:
    222
    Location:
    Argentina
    Think those are some pretty nice recommendations, Mr. Stickman! I'll keep them in mind. And the whole test took about 2 hours, breaks included, so BoP updates will most likely be taken into consideration.

    My Ford GT review is nowhere because I was too far gone to really gain any insight on the car and I was just along for the ride :lol:
     
  4. NevilleNobody

    NevilleNobody

    Messages:
    1,247
    You're not married with kids are you.
     
    Qyn, Alex p., Jwptexas and 1 other person like this.
  5. fastone371

    fastone371

    Messages:
    2,340
    Location:
    United States
    Which part of the game are you doing the testing, Time Trial?? Just curious because lap times are so different between lobbies and off line use.
     
    Qyn and Natalie_GT like this.
  6. Natalie_GT

    Natalie_GT

    Messages:
    222
    Location:
    Argentina
    Offline time trial.
    Edit: to add, because I've done some laps with the Scirocco Gr.4 at Seaside, then qualified for this week's Daily B at Seaside, and raced a fair few races. Car behavior wasn't impacted noticeably so... ;)
     
    Qyn and fastone371 like this.
  7. fastone371

    fastone371

    Messages:
    2,340
    Location:
    United States
    I think daily A and B races are not affected by fuel weight and race on the equivalent of an empty tank whereas C accounts for fuel weight and tire wear, correct?? Also lobbies have fuel weight added to the cars?? I notice a noticable difference in lap time between time trial and racing league race lobbies, probably 1 1/2 seconds for GR4. I was just curious for comparison sake
     
    Qyn and Natalie_GT like this.
  8. Jwptexas

    Jwptexas

    Messages:
    288
    I'll 2nd the Ford GT review... waiting on it :cheers:

    Surprised Tigney reviews it's been #1 so far waiting on his other reviews as well!
     
    Qyn likes this.
  9. Natalie_GT

    Natalie_GT

    Messages:
    222
    Location:
    Argentina
    Welcome again to the thread, and to the BoP testing sessions! Today, we're going to be taking a look at the Aston Martin V8 Vantage Gr.4 under BoP conditions!

    Screenshot_20200807-142117_YouTube.jpg

    The tests, as always, will be a few hotlaps around three of my best tracks where I am confident I can get the most out of the car (Dragon Trail - Seaside, Lago Maggiore - GP and Interlagos), an acceleration test and a fuel and tyre test where I will drive 3 laps at full speed and 3 laps at a more conservative pace, and compare the results. Let's play the video first!



    Now, onto some of my notes about the car.

    *Max. Power with BoP applied: 383 BHP (96%)
    *Max. Torque with BoP applied: 47.9 kgfm (96%)
    *Weight with BoP applied: 1,390kg (103%)

    As we can see already from simply looking at the specifications, the Aston Martin seems to be the complete antithesis to the Alfa Romeo 4C we tested before. The V8 Vantage excels in the power department, but is also pretty heavy for a racing car, especially in Gr.4 trim. Moving to the engine behavior, the Aston Martin really loves to be revved high, like the 4C. It's maximum power is just before the limiter, and it's maximum torque is around the 70% rev point, so remember to rev it to the top to extract the most out of it's big NA V8 engine.

    Onto the testing tracks themselves we move on then, with a hotlap around Dragon Trail - Seaside. We can see just in a few corners how different the Aston Martin is to the Alfa Romeo, as it exhibits solid stability over kerbs and in braking, since it's weight transfer is not as abysmal as in the 4C, courtesy of being F-R. However, it seems that you cannot have both stability and agility, and the V8 Vantage really does feel quite lumpy on turn in compared to the 4C. It can be noticed most at the famous Chicane of Death, where with the 4C I could take it flat out with a fair few varying lines, the Aston Martin requires a lot more precision since you must turn in earlier than you expect (and it did end up with me lifting halfway through most of the time), but it definitely is possible to take the corner flat out. Where the V8 Vantage exceeded the most was in the power section, as in, mostly everywhere else in the track. It's fair to say it simply walked all over the Alfa Romeo in the overall lap time, even though it did not feel as quick as the 4C.

    Moving on to Maggiore, things were a lot closer than expected, but I had faith in both cars to excel at respective parts of the track. I would say Maggiore is a balanced circuit with more reliance on handling than power, and the Vantage, with it's stability over the kerbs, did prove to be quite a contender, and pretty fun to take around the track. Understeer was more apparent though, as I did have to turn in earlier than expected at the exit of the consecutive esses to get the best possible line, and it also surprisingly exhibited power oversteer at the second corner hairpin. The Aston's trail braking is impeccable as well, as you can really control the approach of the car like if it were an extension of yourself through a corner, and it was very apparent at the consecutive right handers after the famous "banky boi" corner. The times were much closer here, but the Vantage edged out the 4C once more by a few tenths in raw pace.

    Onto Interlagos then, for our last piece of the hotlap puzzle. Interlagos being another balanced track, I had hopes for the fight between these two completely opposite cars to be quite good. The Vantage gave me the confidence to push a lot more than the Alfa Romeo did, as with it's stability and great trail braking, you don't have the sudden snaps at turn 1 and the final corner as you do in the 4C, therefore letting me focus on my line a lot better. The Vantage exhibited, once more, quite the get up and go over the uphill and the home straight, but it did feel a bit lazy in the infield, as you have to nurse it's understeer tendencies quite a bit before stomping the gas; the V8 Vantage rewards patience more than eagerness, if you want to put it that way. Over the quick up-then-downhill corner that is turn 11, power oversteer was again a thing, but nothing too major that completely destroys the Aston, and it pulled quite a gap to the 4C, again.

    Moving over to the acceleration test, the Aston Martin clocked an impressive 9.416 seconds; 2 tenths quicker than what the Alfa Romeo got. I suspect it's much to do with the extra power, as Gr.4 cars don't seem to benefit a lot from stuff like engine position because they don't spin their wheels almost at all.

    To the final tests, which were the tyre wear and fuel, this is where the Vantage kind of goes meh. On the full speed test I could certainly start feeling some understeer in the final lap, as the front tires take a lot of beating from having the engine on top of them, having to brake and also steer at pretty high speeds; and I could not do a lot to help the tyre wear in the conservative test.

    The fuel was also noticeably worse than the Alfa Romeo (disadvantages of having a big arse engine, I guess), as I clocked a staggering 24% on the full speed test and 41% in the conservative test. That's 10% less than the Alfa at full chat! The silver lining, however, is that the fuel consumption can be vastly improved by shifting around 60-75% of the tachometer, and you don't lose too much time doing so.

    Let's do a recap of the whole ordeal, with the rankings!

    / Dragon Trail Seaside - Hotlap:
    -1: Aston Martin V8 Vantage: 1:45.495
    -2: Alfa Romeo 4C: 1:46.149

    / Lago Maggiore GP - Hotlap:
    -1: Aston Martin V8 Vantage: 2:04.422
    -2: Alfa Romeo 4C: 2:04.797

    / Autódromo de Interlagos - Hotlap:
    -1: Aston Martin V8 Vantage: 1:38.087
    -2: Alfa Romeo 4C: 1:38.529

    / 0-160 km/h (0-100 mp/h) Test:
    -1: Aston Martin V8 Vantage: 9.416 seconds.
    -2: Alfa Romeo 4C: 9.650 seconds.

    / Fuel Consumption Test (Full Speed / Conservative):
    -1: Alfa Romeo 4C: 34% / 48%
    -2: Aston Martin V8 Vantage: 24% / 41%

    The next car, the Audi TT Cup, should be coming soon. Until then, farewell!

    *This test is correct as of Version 1.61 of Gran Turismo Sport.


    :gtpflag:
     
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2020
    Qyn, Timm Sheehan, cosme and 7 others like this.
  10. fastone371

    fastone371

    Messages:
    2,340
    Location:
    United States
    Great review!!!!
     
    Qyn and GTP_Guido like this.
  11. sirjim73

    sirjim73

    Messages:
    1,969
    Location:
    England
    Impressive stuff!

    So, in summary then, the Aston Martin currently has the ad-Vantage :sly:...
     
    Qyn, cosme, VBR and 1 other person like this.
  12. breeminator

    breeminator

    Messages:
    1,174
    I had a go with the 4C at DTS myself, as I like Gr.4 on that track. I was 0.3 slower than you, so your pace seems pretty solid, which is important for getting good results from this sort of testing.

    For the hot laps without fuel and tyre wear, I think it would be better to optimise brake balance, rather than leaving it at 0, as those tests are relevant to daily races A and B, where everyone can set the BB to give the fastest lap times. I felt the 4C was quite a bit better with the BB moved 2 clicks forwards.

    For the test with fuel use and tyre wear, this is relevant to daily race C and FIA races. Fuel remaining is an important metric, but ideally you also want to know the fastest lap time (relevant to qualifying performance for FIA races), and the total race time (to reveal which cars suffer more with tyre wear over race distance). For example, this is data I generated from PX7 Windfire's Fuji testing that he posted on YouTube. You can see that the Gr.4 Peugeot has about the same qualifying pace as the AMG but is 8 seconds slower for total race time due to tyre wear. At the moment, your testing wouldn't capture which cars suffer with tyre wear like that.

    ******* N.B. THIS IS NOT FOR THE CURRENT BOP *******

    windfire bop testing.png
     
    Qyn, cosme and sirjim73 like this.
  13. XSquareStickIt

    XSquareStickIt

    Messages:
    483
    Who would have FOuR-SEEn that?
     
    Qyn, fastone371 and sirjim73 like this.