Oversteer vs Understeer: Which One Do You Prefer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ferrari_1996
  • 374 comments
  • 33,186 views

Oversteer vs Understeer

  • Oversteer

    Votes: 388 85.3%

  • Understeer

    Votes: 67 14.7%
  • Total voters
    455
Bobalob
Let's take an example of a motorsport in which the conditions are constantly changing and the surface dictates a constant amount of slip (although varying), rally.

Which condition do drivers go to great lengths to keep their vehicle in? not understeer.

Oversteer gives you the best of both situations in terms of managing the weight and grip of the vehicle through the turn, as that's basically all were doing here. We have the option to keep the powerband in the sweetspot while making a corner. We have the option of additional turn in at a similar cost to speed as understeer (we still have to make the corner) however we have the weight of the car and the load on the right tyres to get some power down sooner than understeer (cars prob pointing right way too).

There are serious debates about drifting being faster in some corners than equivlant grip runs, can't say the same for understeer.

Damn fun too.
Click to expand...

I just knew someone was gonna mention rally cars. This is comparing apples and oranges. Your already driving on a surface where a good degree of slip is involved. In Rally you have to use the throttle to steer the car because the front tires are already fighting for traction. Also most are AWD as well so front tire turning grip is even more reduced 'cause your asking them to do more than just steer. And actually, even in Rally they only use it to rotate the car and then try to get a four wheel drift on exit, that again is not oversteer, all four wheel are working equally to pull out of the corner and the straighter you are pointed the better run you get to the next corner.

I agree with another post on here however, that you can think of different situations where we need to clarify things 'cause I believe some folk's are talking about different things. Some sound like like drifters, some are talking grip, some , like Rally, are talking steering with throttle, which in some cases, even on asphalt in necessary. I have been talking soley about the inherent balance of the car. Drifters obviously are drifters. Throttle on oversteer or induced oversteer is different than a natural tendancy to oversteer because of the suspensions tune.
 
Problem is that with a DS3 or wheels < 900 degrees, there are unremovable steering aids helping the driver the driver during countersteering and to cope up with the increased steering twitchiness at speed. The DFGT or other 900 degrees (or more) wheels don't have them. This behavior can be seen by checking in the external view how the front wheels steering angle (even when applying full "lock") changes depending on the situation with those controllers.
 
Drifting + countersteer is EASY on gt5 (on a wheel) I use both a wheel and ds3, ds3 must interprit your intentions and you cannt control the speed of counter steer, hanging out on max lock on a ds3 is massivly harder than a wheel (because your doing most of the work with the throttle). IRL and in other better simulators oversteer does bite a lot harder.

Mr Mustang, you are incorrect, oversteer allows you to control weight and throttle in the right place, understeer does not.

I've stated many times neither are ideal for racing, and there's no argument for understeer being more productive than oversteer.

Also your rally argument is flawed, mostly awd cars yes, which are inherently understeery due to steering wheels being driven, how is this countered for speed? oversteer. This IS oversteer (rear slip angle greater than front) and your making my point nicely thank you.

Also not one pro for understeer.
 
Last edited:
Personally I dislike both, but I'd rather have oversteer because I can counter-act it.
 
Bobalob
Drifting + countersteer is EASY on gt5 (on a wheel) I use both a wheel and ds3, ds3 must interprit your intentions and you cannt control the speed of counter steer, hanging out on max lock on a ds3 is massivly harder than a wheel (because your doing most of the work with the throttle). IRL and in other better simulators oversteer does bite a lot harder.

Mr Mustang, you are incorrect, oversteer allows you to control weight and throttle in the right place, understeer does not.

I've stated many times neither are ideal for racing, and there's no argument for understeer being more productive than oversteer.

Also your rally argument is flawed, mostly awd cars yes, which are inherently understeery due to steering wheels being driven, how is this countered for speed? oversteer. This IS oversteer (rear slip angle greater than front) and your making my point nicely thank you.

Also not one pro for understeer.
Click to expand...

Don't see how I made your point. All I said was you need to use the throttle too rotate the car because the front wheels are already overtaxed. If your slip angle on exit is not adjacent to the road, either pushing or hanging the tail out, your still losing forward bite. And again, the rally argument is not relavent too tarmac. In rally, your already sliding or spinning the wheels most of the time, so the difference in speed between traction and sliding is much less than on tarmac. However, it still remains true that the more your sliding coming out of the corner, the more momentum you lose. On tarmac the difference in speed between sliding and grip is far, far greater.

And yes there is one and probably the most relavent pro too understeer. How about, finishing a race without spinning out and crashing. If you race with people who don't make a lot of big mistakes, or race in real life, a spin can end your day. You have to finish the race 1st, so you can collect whatever points you can in a series. Then hopefully you might be in a position too win. But if you don't finish, you have no chance too win and that is #1 PRO to slight understeer at the limit and is more important than any
plus you can say about oversteer.

Every professional driver in the world(on tarmac) will tell you they prefer slight understeer. That meaning if all 4 wheel are at thier limit, they would want the front to give up 1st. If they need oversteer to get the car to turn sharper when slowing down a tad isn't enough, they can get it with extra throttle. Once turned, they don't want anymore wheelspin on exit.

Maybe I should blame GT for this flaw in thinking. If the consequences of overdriving the cars were more, which is why most dont like heavy damamge, more people would want that safety net. You have to be in the race at the end to be in position too win.
 
From F1 Official website
Oversteer and understeer are vital to understanding the way a car corners. They refer simply to the question of which end of the car runs out of grip first. In an understeer situation the front end breaks free first, the car running wide as centrifugal force takes over. Oversteer is where the back end of the car loses adhesion and tries to overtake the front - think in terms of a road car's 'handbrake skid'.

Understeer is inherently stable - once the car reduces speed sufficiently grip will be restored, which is why almost all road cars are set up to understeer at the limit of adhesion. But it also slows a car, which is why Formula One chassis engineers try to avoid it. Oversteer is, by contrast, highly unstable. Unless a driver acts to correct it quickly with skilful use of steering and throttle it can result in a spin. But an 'oversteery' chassis helps the driver to turn into a corner and, at the limit of adhesion, enables a skilled driver to carry far more speed through a corner than understeer. Which is why, to a greater or lesser extent, all F1 cars are set up with an oversteer characteristic.
Click to expand...

...

Maybe this will enlighten you Mustang.

Full article here.
 
BOSS Mustang
Don't see how I made your point. All I said was you need to use the throttle too rotate the car because the front wheels are already overtaxed. If your slip angle on exit is not adjacent to the road, either pushing or hanging the tail out, your still losing forward bite. And again, the rally argument is not relavent too tarmac. In rally, your already sliding or spinning the wheels most of the time, so the difference in speed between traction and sliding is much less than on tarmac. However, it still remains true that the more your sliding coming out of the corner, the more momentum you lose. On tarmac the difference in speed between sliding and grip is far, far greater.

And yes there is one and probably the most relavent pro too understeer. How about, finishing a race without spinning out and crashing. If you race with people who don't make a lot of big mistakes, or race in real life, a spin can end your day. You have to finish the race 1st, so you can collect whatever points you can in a series. Then hopefully you might be in a position too win. But if you don't finish, you have no chance too win and that is #1 PRO to slight understeer at the limit and is more important than any
plus you can say about oversteer.

Every professional driver in the world(on tarmac) will tell you they prefer slight understeer. That meaning if all 4 wheel are at thier limit, they would want the front to give up 1st. If they need oversteer to get the car to turn sharper when slowing down a tad isn't enough, they can get it with extra throttle. Once turned, they don't want anymore wheelspin on exit.

Maybe I should blame GT for this flaw in thinking. If the consequences of overdriving the cars were more, which is why most dont like heavy damamge, more people would want that safety net. You have to be in the race at the end to be in position too win.
Click to expand...

I still don't understand why we should be using an understeering car then oversteer it to make corners? that's kinda my point. And of course we don't want to crash.

I agree with understeer at the limit but more in terms of a safe way of letting you know you've overstepped the line than giving you some tailout notification instead.
 
KamyKaze1098
...

Maybe this will enlighten you Mustang.

Full article here.
Click to expand...

Kudos's to you for actually showing a piece of information that favors oversteer. however, I'm not enlightened. I disagree with the statement. I've seen plenty of F1 races, practice and qualifying and when they exceed the limit you almost always see the wisps of smoke come off the front wheels 1st, and usually when they miss a corner they go straight into the barriers, that means they're understeering. Find me a quote where a professional driver says he prefers oversteer at the limit and then I might be enlightened. As for that article, I believe it's false, just from actually watching F1 racing. Why else would you see visually the front tires giving up first most of the time. F1 drivers are some of the best drivers in the world and are seeing some very high G-forces, so when one end or the other loses grip it is usually voilent in either case. I think the actual statement that they are tuned to oversteer to help them turn-in was an easy way for the writer to say that they try to set brake bias so that the front tires are not overwhelmed during braking. Even saying that, he states that nuetral is used on mid-corner and corner-exit.
 
I'm resting my case. Oversteer at the limit is different to the balance were talking about here, we're talking about everything upto this point, entry mid and exit, and so is that first f1 article.

I MYSELF prefer it at the limit, not before that.

OBSERVING F1 where a crazy weight shift, bald spot, downforce issue (driver error/wind) brake bias (which is continually shifted, nullifying your point) kers issue, can effect the handling balance makes it a very very difficult place to base an understeer/oversteer fact. If you can I suggest applying for a job at one of the teams, although the cars will sound **** in a couple of years running 4cyl turbos ;)
 
Last edited:
Bobalob
I'm resting my case. Oversteer at the limit is different to the balance were talking about here, we're talking about everything upto this point, entry mid and exit, and so is that first f1 article.

I MYSELF prefer it at the limit, not before that.

OBSERVING F1 where a crazy weight shift, bald spot, downforce issue (driver error/wind) brake bias (which is continually shifted, nullifying your point) kers issue, can effect the handling balance makes it a very very difficult place to base an understeer/oversteer fact. If you can I suggest applying for a job at one of the teams, although the cars will sound **** in a couple of years running 4cyl turbos ;)
Click to expand...

Thank you, and agreed. I've been saying that too. Everyone been talking different scenarios and I'm with you, I've always been talking about overall balance at the limit which most seem to agree should be nuetral, which should of been on the poll or the originator of this thread should have been more specific as too what scenario he was talking about. You can quote me I'm sure as stating that induced oversteer is useful and needed under certian circumstances. I have also said repeatedly that most drivers would prefer to be warned that they've exceeded the nuetral limit of thier car with SLIGHT understeer, key word, SLIGHT!
 
Bobalob
I still don't understand why we should be using an understeering car then oversteer it to make corners? that's kinda my point. And of course we don't want to crash.

I agree with understeer at the limit but more in terms of a safe way of letting you know you've overstepped the line than giving you some tailout notification instead.
Click to expand...

It would seem we agree on that! So case closed! Then in one of the next posts you contradict your own quote.
 
BOSS Mustang
I have also said repeatedly that most drivers would prefer to be warned that they've exceeded the nuetral limit of thier car with SLIGHT understeer, key word, SLIGHT!
Click to expand...

There is the the white triangle with an exclamation in it (that's the warning indicator but it's very sensitive
 

Latest Posts

Back