NSX TYPE R wieght reduction problem

[rodolfo]

Hi

I dont know if it´s just me, my driving style or what. maybe someone can help.

The problem is that I used to run Trial Mountain on 1:25:00 - 1:26:00. The car has aprox 417 hp. Mods:
-Stage 1 reduction (also Hood and windows)
-Stage 2 engine
-And practically all the other mods

When I upgrade to STAGE 2 reduction it was a different car and my laps were around 1:29:00 - 1:30:00. I tried different setups (mine and others from the net) with no results.

Finally just bought another NSX upgrade just STAGE 1 reduction weight and my times are back.

Any ideas or comments? Anyone has notice this?

Regards

 

[dark_ruffo]

Probably the car loses weights in places where it damages its handling with the S2 weight reduction.

 

[Lambob]

too much power, too little weight, tires take it all.= bad.
I'm into driving heavier cars, imo.

 

[MONSTAR-1]

Hmm interesting find. You'd think that it would be faster but that's not always the case in GT5.

I was having trouble with the NSX prototype road car, so I decided to put ballast in it and my times dropped. Sometimes weight really helps. It could just be a problem with the NSX.

I'd suggest posting your find I'm the tuning section. Someone has probably an answer for you there.

Let us know what happens..

 

[Energizerrr]

And again this is why you shouldn't tune some cars (eg McLaren F1, Enzo, NSX etc) - it ruins them (cars behave worse).

 

[MONSTAR-1]

And again this is why you shouldn't tune some cars (eg McLaren F1, Enzo, NSX etc) - it ruins them (cars behave worse).

Wrong.

They are harder to find the sweet spot.

I have all those cars that have been tuned and they are all faster than stock.

 

[Energizerrr]

Wrong.

They are harder to find the sweet spot.

I have all those cars that have been tuned and they are all faster than stock.

Tuning those cars is like using bibles as firewood.
Yes they can be used as fuel and yes they burn but that doesn't mean it should be done.

 

[MONSTAR-1]

Err ok.....

 

[Johnnypenso]

Lighter cars don't do so well over the rises and dips at tracks like TM and Deep Forest, Nurb etc. Could also be your dampers and springs are a bit hard with the lighter weight. I find a lot of cars do really well at their stock weight. Usually I weight reduce and then add ballast, in case I want to shift the weight around, but that isn't usually necessary. On a lot of cars it works against their natural handling characteristic and makes it handle worse. You didn't need to buy a car though...just add ballast to get the weight back.

 

[Tornado]

Tuning those cars is like using bibles as firewood.
Yes they can be used as fuel and yes they burn but that doesn't mean it should be done.

Except proper tuning would make them better then they were to begin with, so it is in fact nothing like that.

 

[SopranoStylle]

And again this is why you shouldn't tune some cars (eg McLaren F1, Enzo, NSX etc) - it ruins them (cars behave worse).

Veyron a good example of this too

 

[Johnnypenso]

Except proper tuning would make them better then they were to begin with, so it is in fact nothing like that.

Not every car responds to max tuning. The extra hp you get at 450pp by leaving the weight stock, more than makes up for the slight handling deficit due to the added weight. The extra hp makes an even bigger difference on larger tracks like Road Course Indy

 

[Onboy123]

And again this is why you shouldn't tune some cars (eg McLaren F1, Enzo, NSX etc) - it ruins them (cars behave worse).

So wrong. Especially for the NSX. If you leave it on its original set up but with 200hp added for the car to handle and 200kg less to pin it to the ground, of course it won't drive as well. But if you bothered to tune it (by tune, I do mean tune, changing the setup to compensate for the extra power and lighter weight), you'd be able to make the car behave, if anything better than stock.

 

[shirakawaa]

A lighter weight means that you will have to make suspensions proportionally softer to maintain the same balance (damping frequency, although this can't be measured in GT5).

 

[Maccer_42]

From my experiance revoming too much weight ruins the cars front / rear weight ballance causing it to handle worse, of course you could tune the suspension to compensate for the lighter weight and differnent front/rear ballance but unless you know what you're doing you usualy make the car handle worse. I often find keeping at stock weight or using a ballast is the best option.

 

[Exorcet]

Probably the car loses weights in places where it damages its handling with the S2 weight reduction.

Weight reduction as far as I know only scales weight, so balance never changes.

too much power, too little weight, tires take it all.= bad.
I'm into driving heavier cars, imo.

More weight does not help. A car should always try to be lighter. Too much power is a possibility (for the tires).

And again this is why you shouldn't tune some cars (eg McLaren F1, Enzo, NSX etc) - it ruins them (cars behave worse).

All of my copies of those cars drive fine with heavy tuning.

Lighter cars don't do so well over the rises and dips at tracks like TM and Deep Forest, Nurb etc. Could also be your dampers and springs are a bit hard with the lighter weight. I find a lot of cars do really well at their stock weight. Usually I weight reduce and then add ballast, in case I want to shift the weight around, but that isn't usually necessary. On a lot of cars it works against their natural handling characteristic and makes it handle worse. You didn't need to buy a car though...just add ballast to get the weight back.

Weight doesn't have anything to do with bumps. Gravity accelerates all masses at the same rate. The problem is a lighter car sees more force from the same spring constant. In other words, a lighter car needs a softer suspension to keep itself from pushing too hard against a bump and launching.

From my experiance revoming too much weight ruins the cars front / rear weight ballance causing it to handle worse, of course you could tune the suspension to compensate for the lighter weight and differnent front/rear ballance but unless you know what you're doing you usualy make the car handle worse. I often find keeping at stock weight or using a ballast is the best option.

I think that 90% of the time, weight reduction is pure improvement. The problem is overpowering the tires, lack of driver throttle control, or a car that had issues to begin with.

Either way, ballast is a good way to deal with it, but it should be a last resort because weight is the enemy.

 

[iamjajo]

I have tuned and setup over 500 cars. I've kept some added ballast on 2 of them. The ballast is the minimum amount needed to improve either lap times or tire wear, or both. But, the car is slower with ballast for a single lap.

For cars in this game, I never say never, and I never say always because there are exceptions to every rule. But, all of my tuned/set up cars have improved performance over the stock settings.

Some setups are purely for my driving style, which makes the car more comfortable to drive, thus improving my performance. These cars might be slower for you or someone else to drive because of your driving style.

The NSX performs best for me with complete weight reduction, but it does need to be set up properly. You can find a number of NSX tunes in the tuning forum and one might work great for you.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Weight doesn't have anything to do with bumps. Gravity accelerates all masses at the same rate. The problem is a lighter car sees more force from the same spring constant. In other words, a lighter car needs a softer suspension to keep itself from pushing too hard against a bump and launching.


I think that 90% of the time, weight reduction is pure improvement. The problem is overpowering the tires, lack of driver throttle control, or a car that had issues to begin with.

Either way, ballast is a good way to deal with it, but it should be a last resort because weight is the enemy.

Weight reduction is a benefit if nothing else is restricted. In PP racing less weight = less hp. More weight = more hp. Especially in the lower PP levels, I've found the higher weight is beneficial to overall lap times. 290 hp at 1400 kgs will be faster at the top end than 240 hp at 1180 kgs or whatever the case may be, with little, if any, sacrifice in cornering ability.

And gravity is a "real" thing, this is a video game. Gravity is modelled. It may or may not behave similar to real gravity, depending on the situation. If in doubt, take any car and lower the front end by 5 points and see if that creates massive oversteer as it should based on real life. Things don't always work in GT5 the way they do in the real world.

 

[Exorcet]

Weight reduction is a benefit if nothing else is restricted. In PP racing less weight = less hp. More weight = more hp. Especially in the lower PP levels, I've found the higher weight is beneficial to overall lap times. 290 hp at 1400 kgs will be faster at the top end than 240 hp at 1180 kgs or whatever the case may be, with little, if any, sacrifice in cornering ability.

PP does indeed complicate things, as I was talking about the general case - ie no rules, and real cars (though I do believe it applies to GT too, as far as I've seen).

I do agree with you on weight vs power in a PP room under certain conditions. However, GT does seem to be accurate enough to make downforce/mass ratio important, so when downforce is available, the more weight option might be harmful.

And gravity is a "real" thing, this is a video game. Gravity is modelled. It may or may not behave similar to real gravity, depending on the situation. If in doubt, take any car and lower the front end by 5 points and see if that creates massive oversteer as it should based on real life. Things don't always work in GT5 the way they do in the real world.

Of course. However if gravity does cause different acceleration for different masses in game, it would be a gross oversight. I don't see any reason for it to be modeled in such a way. Also, the differences would probably be subtle based on experience with the game. The only thing I've ever seen create a noticeable difference on jumps is downforce.