I tried a seach, because I thought I remembered someone here claiming that stock suspension was better than tuneable suspension. (But, obviously, I didn't find such a thread). However, in practical terms, in some cases, they may be right in some cases. In GT1 tuneable suspension in most cases seemed to come pre-adjusted to be generally better than stock suspension, to the tune of a couple of seconds a lap. In GT2 this sometimes (perhaps often) doesn't seem to be the case. A case-in-point was the Renault Clio Sport at Red Rock Valley. Racing suspension with its preset settings caused all sorts of handling problems. Perhaps I could have sorted them out, but it seemed a whole lot easier just to switch back to stock suspension, with which the car behaved so much better. An experiment I should try sometime is copying the numbers from the settings for the stock (normal) suspension, which are shown in complete detail, into the racing suspension, and see if the car handles just the same. That is, determine whether the racing suspension has other "magic parameters" which prevent this from working (e.g. perhaps assumed anti-roll stiffness which isn't actually "1"). Does anybody else have thoughts on this issue?