Pescarolo C60 Judd Vs. Audi R8

  • Thread starter Thread starter [IKickPigeons]
  • 45 comments
  • 6,361 views

Which do you think is better and/or like more?


  • Total voters
    71
[IKickPigeons]
Yes. It makes a world of difference.

Also I hope that you turn ASM off on all your cars and raise TCS for enduro races. You probably didnt get good tire life on the '03 Pesky because you didnt turn ASM off and didnt raise TCS to somehting like 8. ALso what tire compounds did you use? In the '03 Pesky I can use R3/R3 for almost any race and sometimes a R4/R4 combo.

Try some of those settings, you might find yourself surprised by the performance increase. I am by no means a tuning expert so I just use settings from either Duck or from gtvault.com

I'll have to check out those links, thanks.

I've never turned off ASM for any race on any car! I don't know what it does and don't know when/if I should turn it off so I've never bothered, yet. Raising TCS to something like 8, is that only good for the Pescarolo or can I set all of my cars to that setting? Or just LMP/Group C?
Should I leave ASM on only for non-endurance races?
I used R1/R1 for the Super Speedway.

Thanks for the help.
 
fulcrumdriver:

As I said earlier I'm not a tuning expert or genius, but the way I understand it is that a sloped ride height like that can make the car brake and turn better.

(Taken from Fumes's Tuning Guide from gtvault.com)

Examples:
Lower front and Higher rear ride height - the weight of the car is shifted towards the front. Provides more stability while accelerating. Brake response is faster since weight is already where the braking power is highest. Best for FF, FR and 4WD cars. (Be careful though, if it’s too low, you will find the car twitchy and liable to veer off in random directions under heavy braking).

Equal front and rear ride height – weight is distributed equally. Best suited for MR cars.

High front and Low rear ride height - the weight of the car is shifted to the rear, provides immediate throttle response during acceleration. Braking response will suffer, however, since more weight shifting during braking from rear to front is required. As such, this configuration is not used very often. If used, probably only FR cars would benefit.

What I'm guessing is that the front ride height is SO low compared to the rear, I think its was like 50 / 85, that it made the car very unbalanced.

In some causes a sloped ride height can be beneficiary. For instance I have my R8 slightly sloped at 67 / 70, but in the case of the '04 Pesky it is to the extreme causing an unbalanced setup.

Furthermore, ask Zardoz about the ride height in the Pesky. He was the one who brought this to my attention. (Zardoz was the guy who did the Le Mans comparision which can be found here:
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=61921

Theoritically a sloped ride height should help a little but I think when the difference between the front and rear is as high as 35mm it becomes extreme and malignant to the balance of the car.

*EDIT*

whatupdet:

Your asking the same questions I did a couple months ago. So here I go.

I've never turned off ASM for any race on any car! I don't know what it does and don't know when/if I should turn it off so I've never bothered, yet.

ALWAYS turn ASM off. What it does is that it specifically reduces power to your car when your are turning. The computer sysytem isnt smart enough to tell when you are oversteering, understeering, or steering perfectly. So what happens is that your car will either just be 25% slower through a corner or understeer. Your will ALWAYS be slower with ASM on than off. So always change ASM to 0. If you tune anything in your cars it should be turning ASM off.

Raising TCS to something like 8, is that only good for the Pescarolo or can I set all of my cars to that setting? Or just LMP/Group C?

I would recommend only raising TCS for tire conservation or if you have trouble controlling the throttle output on your cars.

TCS, traction control system, restricts power to tires that are spinning. So what this means is that a car with a TCS setting of 1 will almost always accelerate faster than a car with a TCS of 10. Take any car and change TCS to 10 then drive a couple laps. Next take that exact same car and change TCS to 1. You will notice that the car is accelerating at a much higher rate.

TCS comes in handy for enduro races when you want to conserve your tires. For instance I can make it 7 laps on La sarthe II in my '04 Pesky with R3/R2 with TCS setting of 8. I could probably only make 4 or 5 laps with a TCS setting of 1 or 0.

TCS is also handy with rally races when your tires will slip on ice or gravel for obvious reasons.

I would recommend you to read some tuning guides either on these forums or at gtvault to find out proper TCS settings.

So just spend 10 minutes reading a tuning guide on these forums or at gtvault.com

Taken from Fumes's tuning guide at gtvault.com
The main aim of TCS tuning is to use only enough TCS to stop wheel spin and drifting. No more, no less. This has the added benefit of preserving tire wear, but not sacrificing too much power.
Finding the right TCS figure for a car is a bit of a Trial and Error effort.
Light and More powerful cars will require more TCS. Heavier and less powerful cars will obviously need less TCS. You want to reach a point where the car is not loosing it’s rear end around slower corners, while still keeping the TCS figure as low as possible to get the most power to the road. On take offs, reduced wheelspin on the spot will increase acceleration.
Fine tuning here can see increase tire wear benefits, but remember the more TCS you use the slower the car is, even if you have better tire wear.

However, when tuning TCS for 4WD cars, it is best to use close to no TCS at all. Since we have 4 driving wheels, there will always be at least one set of wheels with grip even if the other set is loosing grip. By having TCS on at any figure, will just be slowing a 4WD car down.
Always use 0 TCS for 4WD cars.

FR cars benefit the most from TCS.I find anything under 500bhp in GT4 will not need TCS. The weight of the car will also determine the need for TCS. Light cars eg F1, Sprinter Trueno Shigeno, can have TCS at 4 to 6 with great benefit. For heavier cars, start TCS at 3 and tune. You should not need much more than 5, unless you want to conserve more tire wear.
This is not THE rule, just a guide. Tuning is still required.

FF cars benefit from TCS a bit, but not as much as FR cars, since the driving wheels are also the ones that TCS will be affecting. Too much TCS and it slows the car's acceleration and reduces understeer. No TCS and it understeers. So with FF cars, use between 1 to 2 TCS.

Should I leave ASM on only for non-endurance races?
I used R1/R1 for the Super Speedway.

Always turn off ASM. Try some TCS with your pesky and you should be able to pit in less than the AI.

If I forgot to answer anything let me now and I will try. But seriously spend some time to read the tuning guides. Those guys spent a lot of time writing those guides for tuning impaired people like you and me.

Lastly, if you dont want to read the tuning guides you can pick up settings that WILL be better than stock settings at here:

http://www.gtvault.com/gt4/

or here:

https://www.gtplanet.net/guides/index.php/Gran_Turismo_4_:_Car_Settings

Also take a look at these pages:

https://www.gtplanet.net/guides/index.php/Gran_Turismo_4_:_Tuning

or what I read and reference:

http://www.gtvault.com/gt4/tuning-guide/
 
Thanks for the info.

I can't wait to give it a try and read up a little more. I'll first try removing ASM and try a few laps at the 'Ring and Cote D'Azur, then I'll experiment with TCS for 0-400, 0-1000 and Super Speedway using the Pesky and other cars.
 
Great. Glad I could help. Remember that this is an awsome community so use the knowledge it offers.
 
id say the r8, it seems stronger in corners, which i like.

but this is all opinion based. :)
 
Why make such a fuss over straight line speed? We all know that GT4 is easily and unrealistically manipulated in this way. And why the fuss anyway?

As Gilles put it: "It's not just the speed. You can go 600mph in a straight line and it doesn't mean anything."

The Pescarolo seems to be a little bit faster around the Le Mans circuit.
 
i prefer the pescarolo, i can't wait till the 2005 model is out on GT5! i love the car, it is faster in real life but it isn't that reliable!
 
I'd personally choose the R8. Pescarolo isn't so fun to drive and I do not like boring cars. When you drive the Pescarolo Judd the biggest challange aren't your opponents - it's to stay awake.... :grumpy:
 
The Audi R8 gets my vote. Its just plain better, although I cant explain why
 
The R8 is the better car, Henri Pescarolo's entry is known to be the local favorite of the 24hr classic.
 
For me, its the Audi R8, it just has an elegance about it, and is an absolute dream to drive, some may say that it 'feels like its on a knife's edge' but thats how i like to drive, it gives the feeling that you're actually doing something to drive the car, instead of just turning a wheel or pressing a button, the Audi gets my vote anyday!
 
I like the Stability of the Pescarolo over the R8. That said, I like the LMR12 BMW better than both of them.
 
I personally think the PlayStation Pescaralo is the best car in the game (exluding F1s*), for a multitude of reasons; great stability, phenomenal tire wear, great acceleration, etc.
*I have actually tried racing it alongside F1s, and its really not that hard to keep up with them on most circuits.
 
GT Pro
To be fair I will have to go with the Audi R8:idea:
Why? Think of it this way:
Isn't it funny how Sony's 'Company Car' on GT4 seems to be a little faster than it's meant to be?, Because in yes, 'Real Life' they are a class down performance-wise from the Audi R8's...:odd:
Actually, the Pescarolo '04 is faster than the overly-limited, BHP strapped '04 R8 (as was the '03 and '05 Pescarolo's to those year's respective Audis) The Pesky's always break though. But the '04 R8 isn't in the game. The '01 is, which is the fastest of the R8's, but still slower than the '04 (at the time anyway) Pesky, which I would say is realistic. The tire wear on the two Pesky's is pretty rediculous though: Better than the Peugoet 905 for both of them? Please.
​
 
Back