Notable matter for tuners (regarding 2.08).

[GTP_CargoRatt]

On the subject of ride height, I have a Suzuki GSX-R that I have been using for the current TT at Laguna Seca. I have a RH of +28/-17 on it and its been that way for a week. I have noticed no difference in the handling of it after the update. If anything, it feels a tad better that way as I improved my time by .300 last night. I reversed the settings ( -17/+20 ) and the thing pushed like a dump truck through the corners. I've tried a few other cars and experienced the same thing with the RH. So, for what its worth, thats been my experience so far. Nose up, ass down still works the same after the update. Peace.

@ HIGHLANDOR: Yea, even after I showed them the email from Sony/PD, they still wanted to argue with me about that, lol.

 

[PIGBOY]

I ran my Prius TC again in the Laguna TT and it handled the same,at various heights
Are the tyre life updates only in A or B spec endurance races,if it is that sux because if you make a long endurance online race ,same bad tyre wear.

 

[CSLACR]

Ride height is still very much backwards online, but it did feel as though lower gripped more earlier, for the first time in a long time. I'll have to test it more. I'm not sure it's physically possible, so long as the "backwards" problem exists. If raising the front increases rotation, it would presumably be adding grip to the front, and vice versa.

 

[CyKosis1973]

So yeah, take a photo - I got that wrong..

Apology accepted. The first car I tried appeared to work in the 'correct' fashion, but every car after that exhibited the same 'traits' as pre 2.08...

{Cy}

EDIT:

Ride height is still very much backwards online, but it did feel as though lower gripped more earlier, for the first time in a long time. I'll have to test it more. I'm not sure it's physically possible, so long as the "backwards" problem exists. If raising the front increases rotation, it would presumably be adding grip to the front, and vice versa.

I don't think grip is increased by raising the front of the car, I think it's merely acting like there's a bag of cement hanging off the rear bumper...

{Cy}

 

[Z1-AV69]

Ride height is still very much backwards online, but it did feel as though lower gripped more earlier, for the first time in a long time.

That's my impression too. You can now lower the car more without feeling a loss of grip.

 

[dr_slump]

I don't think grip is increased by raising the front of the car, I think it's merely acting like there's a bag of cement hanging off the rear bumper...

{Cy}

A lovely description

 

[Highlandor]

All my posts and setups are re ONLINE only.

NOTE: large / very large ride height differences for me would be anything over 10mm. Norm for me is around 0-6mm on all cars, exceptions being things like Yellowbird etc or 700bhp+ Le Mans cars on hard tyres which could be 9-15mm difference.

Online, pre 2.08 it used to be a "no brainer" to have your car at stock ride height (at least the driven wheels) if you were struggling for traction, but the 'teg and viper last night showed this was different post 2.08.

My initial impression is to seperate 2 things:

Traction - from the 'driven' wheels'
Handling / balance - how the car feels generally

Because - Pre 2.08 having a difference of 10mm (roughly), or more, would improve traction aswell and how the car 'felt' i.e. handling / balance. Bigger ride height differences 15-30mm (with driven wheels @ stock height) always had a large impact on how the car felt.

Every week we race cars from 400pp historics on low grip tyres to 700bhp Le Mans cars on racing tyres, plus alot of variety in between. Generally, it was always the same:

Stock height for driven wheels + veyr large difference in ride height = better traction for driven wheels and (depending on what you wanted) far better stability or turn in.

The 'teg and viper, this was different post 2.08. Traction didn't seem to be affected as much, if anything even very large differences didn't seem to affect traction on the 'teg, but it did on the the Murcielago @ -20 / 0.

Reasonable differences on the Oreca Viper (10mm) did seem to affect handling BUT no where near as much as pre 2.08, and traction hardly felt any different.

Pre 2.08 - driving that viper with -10 / 0 & 0 / -10 & 0 / 0, the differences would have been so obvious, but now, although differences can be felt, but no where near as much as before.

Talking to a friend - we had a crazy theory:

Polyphony know they screwed the ride height, got it backwards to real life. They tried to fix it, but, like so many other fix's on GT5 - you correct one thing but it causes another problem. So, basically, Polyphony (for whatever reason) can't fix this, or won't because of the new problems it would cause or the cost in resource / time / money to put a true fix in.

So, instead of fixing the problem they have diluted or weakened the "affect" of the ride height generally as a variable within a setup, not changing what it does, just making the affect alot less than before with maybe a little twist in there somewhere..

This would explain why small differences and small reversals don't seem to have much affect, you need to go big differences to feel an affect, and then you get the same affect as pre 2.08.

It makes no sense that this is such a huge issue (and embarresment) to Polyphony, they publically recognize (for the first time in over 1 1/2 years) there is a problem, but the fix doesn't atually 'fix' it - more like cover it up as much as possible via confusion.

 

[Johnnypenso]

It makes no sense that this is such a huge issue (and embarresment) to Polyphony, they publically recognize (for the first time in over 1 1/2 years) there is a problem, but the fix doesn't atually 'fix' it - more like cover it up as much as possible via confusion.

This is the assumption we all make, that PD actually cares about this, but I don't believe it's the case. Everything I've seen so far from PD indicates a cockiness or arrogance that their stuff don't stink. The game is so wonderful a couple of minor imperfections don't matter. They've been at the top of the heap for too long and they've gotten lazy. They throw out a few crumbs once in a while to keep the huddled masses happy. Look at the hue and cry for nearly two years for more tracks especially some of the recent tracks in their very own series. If they cared we'd be racing on them as we speak but we're not. We approach GT5 with a dedication and enthusiasm of a devotee...to them it's just a business, nothing more. It's run it's life cycle and that's it.

 

[Highlandor]

Everything I've seen so far from PD indicates a cockiness or arrogance that their stuff don't stink. The game is so wonderful a couple of minor imperfections don't matter. They've been at the top of the heap for too long and they've gotten lazy. They throw out a few crumbs once in a while to keep the huddled masses happy.

Agree 110% - you have absolutely hit the nail on the head.

This is something that is echoed by many other websites. Guys who are trying to run series / leagues / championships / organised racing online are so often tearing their hair out over GT5 and the way it's been managed by Polyphony.

As I said in my first post on this thread, let's hope Project CARS or another rival game gives Polyphony the reason it needs to change, because they need to as so many people involved in organised racing on GT5 have already left for the PC sims, or are at their wits end.

So many websites are reporting more and more guys giving up on GT and migrating to the PC sims.

GT online should have been the greatest game ever, instead, it's one of the biggest dissapointments ever.

Being left with the majoity of lobbys being "need for speed" / "marokart" lobbys will kill GT reputation once and for all. GT has already been knocked down once, but has managed to 'beat the count' and get back up. If they're not careful a rival will knock them out once and for all and it'll be game over.

This happened with FIFA and Pro Evo, same with MW / COD and Battlefield - why can't this happen with GT5 and a rival..

Gutted - only reason I own a PS3 and have ever bought a PS is because of gran turismo.

Battlefield 3 got "slaughtered" upon release, much like GT5, there was uproar amongst so many Battlefield fanboys - half my squad gave up on it and went to PC gaming. In less than a year that's been turned around and it's now the game it should be, with most/all problems solved. Polyphony has had 2 years to sort out GT5, and there's still so many problems.

👎

 

[MrGrado]

I was in the middle of a 24h race when the 2.08 changes took effect, so I can't make changes to my tunes just yet.

To me the new changes are huge. I suspect there has been a far more comprehensive upgrade to the game than PD is admitting to.

Tire wear for me has reduced significantly. The track is wet, before the update I could only get through 1/4 - 1/2 tank of fuel before the car would become undrivable on it's worn tires, now I can go through an entire tank of fuel and the tires are worn maybe 5% on the gauge and the car is still as easy to drive as ever.

I have ABS and TCS on for this race and they seem less intrusive now.

The car is far easier to maneuver while performing heavy braking, and generally easier to maneuver, far more difficult to spin coming out of corners, mashing the throttle etc. The car rides bumps far better also.

 

[Onboy123]

Tire wear for me has reduced significantly.

Part of the 2.08 changes. It effects every car apart from the formula cars, I think.

 

[Motor City Hami]

If I wanted to test ride heights across drive trains, what does the community think are the best cars to use for this test for each? What PP level and which tires? Maybe if we can agree on some specs we can talk about our tuning results in a more relative way across tuners?

My inital thoughts:
FF - Integra
FR - RX7 or RX8
4WD - Impreza
MR - Elise
RR - ?

450PP
Sport Hard

 

[praiano63]

if i wanted to test ride heights across drive trains, what does the community think are the best cars to use for this test for each? What pp level and which tires? Maybe if we can agree on some specs we can talk about our tuning results in a more relative way across tuners?

My inital thoughts:
Ff - integra
fr - rx7 or rx8
4wd - impreza
mr - elise
rr - ?

450pp
sport hard

rr - ? Ruf btr???

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

If I wanted to test ride heights across drive trains, what does the community think are the best cars to use for this test for each? What PP level and which tires? Maybe if we can agree on some specs we can talk about our tuning results in a more relative way across tuners?

My inital thoughts:
FF - Integra
FR - RX7 or RX8
4WD - Impreza
MR - Elise
RR - ?

450PP
Sport Hard

RR: Ruf CTR or DMC DeLorean

 

[Onboy123]

RR: Ruf CTR or DMC DeLorean

Death and crashes ensue. But the DeLorean would actually be quite good. We'd all be seeing some crazy 🤬 at 88mph[/overused to hell cliche]

But seriously, either the DMC or maybe even the Alpines for the RRs could be tested. It's not all Ruf.

 

[Highlandor]

Death and crashes ensue.

LOL.. Not always - CTR2 is easily tuned to be driveable online, I race it and it's a great car. It's the BTR and Yellowbird that need most owrk. DeLorean is crazy, should be a piece of crap, but it isn't, it's surprisingly good drive considering how bad the real life one was.

If I wanted to test ride heights across drive trains, what does the community think are the best cars to use for this test for each? What PP level and which tires? Maybe if we can agree on some specs we can talk about our tuning results in a more relative way across tuners?

My inital thoughts:
FF - Integra
FR - RX7 or RX8
4WD - Impreza
MR - Elise
RR - ?

450PP
Sport Hard

I'd use cars that feel reasonable well balanced / good as stock with only custom suspension (added) on default settings, just changing ride height.

Using cars that are unbalanced means it's going to be harder for all those testing it to 'agree' on affects of ride height changes.

As ride height (pre 2.08) affected traction aswell as the car's balance / feel / handling, I'd go for cars that have a fair bit of power too, so wheels can spin reasonably easily in 2nd gear, but not cars so fast it's hard for all 'testes' (who want to try) to be able to accurately give feeedback.



FF - Integra - yep, why not.. Possibly Volvo C30 or Scirroco - better torque, more wheelspin, possibly easier to feel changes in traction?

FR - RX7 or RX8: maybe bit more oooomph - BMW Z4m on sports hards (just oil change) is fabulous car. Very similiar performance to RX7, but more power means more action at rear end, so ride height changes should be easier to "feel". Z4m - oil change, sports hard @ Spa = awesome

Also - Vette C6 Z06 '06 - superb as stock car, easy to drive, fairly neutral, fabulous on sport mediums, or viper srt 10 '06 on sports softs is great too, same as above, easy and neutral.

4WD - Impreza - '10 Impreza is great car, would prefer more power but choice is lacking on 4wd premiums, maybe use comfort softs for this instead of a more powerful car on slightly better tyres?

MR - Elise: Scuderia / 458 Italia - both great as stock on sport mediums

RR - RUF RGT - again, superb stock car, most should have one too, if not, easy to trade for. I got loads of these stockpiled if anyone needs one. Just engine & chssis rebuild needed, sports medium or softs.

450PP - I wouldn't put pp limit on, try to leave cars as stock as possible, keep the amount of "variables" that could potentially interfere, create arguement / conflict or affect car down to a minimum

Hope you don't mind suggestions..

 

[esoxhntr]

I see two sets of test cases here.

i) traction

ii) car's balance / feel / handling

the former requires cars/tire combos that can overpower their tires (wheelspin)

the latter would likely be best served with cars/tire combos that cannot overpower the tires in order to mitigate the effects of wheelspin while cornering.

 

[C-ZETA]

DMC DeLorean

I'll get my Maid's Perfect Weapon tune then. Just a tad of part removal should do it.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

I see two sets of test cases here.

i) traction

ii) car's balance / feel / handling

the former requires cars/tire combos that can overpower their tires (wheelspin)

the latter would likely be best served with cars/tire combos that cannot overpower the tires in order to mitigate the effects of wheelspin while cornering.

I agree.

In fact, as stupid as this might sound, here's my list by drivetrain for checking ride height's effect on handling.

FF:
Scirocco
FR:
FD RX-7 or GT86/FR-S/BRZ ballasted to 50/50 weight distribution
MR: Elise
RR: Eh, RGT is probably the best shot.

Here's the thing though. Stock power, sports softs. They're all cars that on those tires, at stock power, should not have any problem with wheelspin outside of 1st gear, and therefore the traction changes caused by rear ride height (higher is still better for traction regardless of drive type) will not be as pronounced and possibly masking as they would be with more power.

 

[Highlandor]

I see two sets of test cases here.

i) traction

ii) car's balance / feel / handling

the former requires cars/tire combos that can overpower their tires (wheelspin)

the latter would likely be best served with cars/tire combos that cannot overpower the tires in order to mitigate the effects of wheelspin while cornering.

I agree.

Make that 2 👍👍

In fact, as stupid as this might sound, here's my list by drivetrain for checking ride height's effect on handling.

FF:
Scirocco
FR:
FD RX-7 or GT86/FR-S/BRZ ballasted to 50/50 weight distribution
MR: Elise
RR: Eh, RGT is probably the best shot.

Here's the thing though. Stock power, sports softs. They're all cars that on those tires, at stock power, should not have any problem with wheelspin outside of 1st gear, and therefore the traction changes caused by rear ride height (higher is still better for traction regardless of drive type) will not be as pronounced and possibly masking as they would be with more power.

Wise words.... aslong as that Elise is well balanced through ballast.. 👍

Go GT86, not DLC cars, not everyone might have DLC plus they can't be gifted, RGT can..

I think testing same car / tyre combo for both offline and online on same circuit. Keeping as many variables the same will help validate things.

Online - all driving aids off, tyre and fuel off too, so guaranteed same 'grip' from tyres lap after lap after lap.

Custom suspension (gives large ride height differences) only 'modification' other than ballast and tyres. All settings on custom susp must be stock - only ride height changed? Engine & Chassis rebuild (for RGT) and oil changes for premiums cars, which must be 0 mile, brand new.

Test results with full demographics - each test car detailed by exact power, mileage etc etc for each test.

If we're gonna do it, might aswell do it properly....eliminate as many variables that could be used to invalidate or interfere with test results / conclusions.

??

 

[dr_slump]

Death and crashes ensue. But the DeLorean would actually be quite good. We'd all be seeing some crazy 🤬 at 88mph[/overused to hell cliche]

But seriously, either the DMC or maybe even the Alpines for the RRs could be tested. It's not all Ruf.

The BTR is actually very gentle.

 

[Drevenger]

A few interesting info saw in drifting forum
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=264951
Dont know if that can help but Comfort tires seems to have noticeably more grip .

 

[Onboy123]

The BTR is actually very gentle.

The BTR is, but not the yellow canary.

 

[dazdilly75]

Ok so im gonna give another angle on 2.08. When I went to my garage after the update and tested my cars I am one of the racers who found their cars to be better or needed a slight tweak. Why? because i have stayed true to my tuning ideology. I have been wishing for realistic suspension physics since i bought the game and now it's here. I used to try and simulate the perfect setting I have now by adjusting the dampers and spring rates. I dont have to do that anymore and the results are much better. If you appreciate that PD are trying to make the cars respond to real tuning characteristics then you will welcome this tune. If you have been winging your tunes or glitch tuning then you will suffer. I used to see some people posting tunes online which I knew were a mess but they were getting great times. Now those same people have to go back to scratch. The advice I would give to all is less is more. Think about what you want your car to do and how you need to get it there. Although it may not seem so at the moment but Kaz and PD just added another tool to make all our cars go faster and handle better.

One thing that no one has mentioned is that tracks now have a notable atmosphere which is simply incredible. You will travel less faster behind someone than you would in clean air (especially if you have a wing) this is obviously to compliment the update made to areo dynamics. It also now means that the co effecient drag of each car plays more of a role than before. There are many things in this update that Kaz and PD have not mentioned but im sure the smart ones on here will work it out. The game will alienate a lot of players and those unable to adapt will abandon GT5 for less complicated racing titles. This is not a bad thing and will only improve the quality of racers online.

Good luck everyone and keep the faith because the reward is out there if you know where to find it.

I have seen this game develop from PS1 and I love it just as much today as I did back then.

 

[Highlandor]

I have been wishing for realistic suspension physics since i bought the game and now it's here. I used to try and simulate the perfect setting I have now by adjusting the dampers and spring rates. I dont have to do that anymore and the results are much better. If you appreciate that PD are trying to make the cars respond to real tuning characteristics then you will welcome this tune. If you have been winging your tunes or glitch tuning then you will suffer.

Can you post some of your tunes & details of your racing then?

Just curious - not dis-believing or having a go, just curious; I don't, or never have "glitch tuned", I tune according to what worked for me and my friends online only, generally "across the board" for all the diversity of cars and variables we race.

At first, I thought the same, but after further testing, I realised the 'physics" still seemed to be pre 2.08 (large ride height differences cause an affect opposite of real life), but the only way I found that out was by trying glitch ride heights I wouldn't normally use.

Keeping to what I'd call realistic ride heights it's very difficult to 'feel' this, you need to go to glitch ride heights before it really starts to make a difference, then the difference is still pre 2.08.

You haven't explained what syle of racing you do - short / long, random lobby / organised.. Can you give more details please?

Thanks 👍

The game will alienate a lot of players and those unable to adapt will abandon GT5 for less complicated racing titles. This is not a bad thing and will only improve the quality of racers online.

Er...there was a mass exodus of people (who played prologue religiously) at the start of GT5 because of this.. This has already happened, I don't think the last update will directly cause another exodus. It's generally how many issues were in the game and how Polyphony acted regarding these issues, not specifically to one update or 'reason' that so many have already, or will in future, left GT5 who previously played it religiously.

 

[praiano63]

Sorry, i don't have even a bicycle in the real life and i don't have any experience with true settings ,only what i've read around here, but in the game you add grip on the side where you increase the springs stiffness ,online or offline. Don't seem so real ....... But i'm just a beach boy , don't want to make any polemic writing this.👍

><(((((°>°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

 

[CyKosis1973]

So I thought I'd test extreme ride height settings and ballast, as both seem to work the same way.

Stock Premium Mazda RX8, Sports Hard tyres, custom suspension. Stripped down to 1100kg and added 200kg ballast. High Speed Ring Reverse.

I've recently driven the track a lot, so there was little need to learn it. The car has even weight distribution. I changed nothing, other than what you can see above and below. Tested online in a private lobby with grip reduction set to real (I did start to test with tyre wear on, but I couldn't be arsed with warming tyres up, etc). All aids off other than ABS1.

• FL / RH - 200kg/0 - 01:19.0 - Drove like SFR was on, impossible to oversteer, zero wheelspin.
• Even - 200kg/-50 - 01:19.1 - Drove like TC was on, nearly impossible to oversteer, some wheelspin.
• FL / RH - 200kg/-50 - 01:19.9 - Drove like a dump truck, impossible to oversteer, but required lift to make it through certain corners, zero wheelspin.
• Even - 200kg/0 - 01:21 - Car has a tendency to oversteer, worse in the high camber corners, manageable in the flat sections. Stock Ride Height & Ballast
• Even - 200kg/50 - 01:23.4 - Same as above, but more prone. Plus side, it's easier to control the slide, still slow though.
• FH / RL - 200kg/50 - 01:26.1 - OMG. The weight over the rear axle is the only thing that saves this from the utter disaster that is below.
• FH / RL - 200kg/0 - DNF - Epic fail. Couldn't even be arsed to finish a lap, difficult to even drive in a straight line.

Most of the above will not come as a surprise. I'm not opening a debate on what is and isn't back to front, I don't care, I just want to know about cause and affects in the game. In my opinion, I've found that ride height and ballast work in similar way, by 'moving' weight forwards and backwards. You can feel when ballast has been moved, the car behaves slightly differently. Tilting the nose down and pointing the arse in the air produces understeer/eliminates oversteer in the same way, but without the 'pushing' that ballast produces.

Make of that what you will...

{Cy}

 

[dr_slump]

I'm a bit surprised that "even - 200kg/0" isn't the fastest config.....

With extreme settings you mean minimum and maximum values?

 

[CyKosis1973]

I'm a bit surprised that "even - 200kg/0" isn't the fastest config.....

With extreme settings you mean minimum and maximum values?

Indeed I do, Sir. That car suffers from oversteer when suspension is default and the 200kg ballast is central. If you drop the nose to MIN and raise the tail to MAX, you have the fastest configuration, absolutely no oversteer at all, drives straight through everything, not even a chirp from the tyres. 0/0 ride height with the 200kg shifted over the front axle produced the 2nd fastest time. Very similar to drive, but obviously ballasting the car is slight more detrimental. The handling is slightly different, but the net result is pretty much the same. Which is what makes me think that ride height and ballast have been implemented similarly. Changing the ride height seems to just move the center of gravity...

{Cy}

 

[Z1-AV69]

If you drop the nose to MIN and raise the tail to MAX, you have the fastest configuration, absolutely no oversteer at all, drives straight through everything, not even a chirp from the tyres.

I wonder if this might bring us closer to understand the online/offline difference. I did my testing (results mentioned earlier) with an offline tune. This tune was very well balanced with equal front and rear ride height. Online this same tune had brutal oversteer. When I raised the rear by 20mm though, the car was as well balanced as offline. Offline again differences in ride height have no impact as far as I can tell. So now it could be the best way to balance the car offline by using everything but ride height and then balance for the typical online oversteer by raising the rear. This could lead to a car well balanced for both.