Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Gran Turismo Sport' started by phil_75, Mar 11, 2018.
PD working their magic again. .
I think there are two things at play, here: 1) How much fuel you save by short shifting, and 2) achievable top speed (edit: per sector) while short shifting.
With the former, I think that is a result of the fuel consumption multiplier set for the race. Both savings and consumption are affected by that multiplier. Any savings you make are drastically multiplied, to the point where it can become ridiculous.
The achievable top speed is the real problem, here, I think. You absolutely should not be able to set the same lap times by short shifting like that. Not reaching those top speeds should be the offset of fuel savings.
I noticed this too. The M4 is able to do it and not lose ANY pace. It seems to be more of an issue with that car in particular because I tried with the Toyota 86 and wasn't able to replicate the amount of fuel I saved in the M4 and maintain pace with the lead cars.
Although the rate at which short shifting in this game saves fuel is pretty ridiculous. You should not be able to essentially double your fuel load by short shifting, even with a noticeable drop in lap times.
This is only possible with M4 because of its engine. I can't remember seeing others like it in GTS. Effectively it's the same "trick" people used back in PS3 days with the power limiter to improve acceleration when only HP was limited.
M4's power band looks like this:
Peak horsepower starts at 5,7K and drops off maybe at 7,7K or so. If you keep the revs between those you'll see no loss in acceleration. The car's rev bar starts at around 6,5K and flashes at 7,5K, and when shifting normally you drop to the beginning of the rev bar so you'd think shifting at the beginning of the bar would drop to around 5,5K. As you yourself demonstrated in your video, doing this will net you better mileage as you're getting nearly the same power output with less revs.
Too right. Nerf it. No wonder you see it a lot in the upper ranks.
Up until a couple of weeks ago, I'd mess with the fuel map during races, until I started to discover that short shifting saved significantly more gas. I never knew to this extent though as I always have the radar up. The speed the M4 is able to maintain while doing this is nuts.
I understand the M4 has good low down torque and power, however the rate at which it saves fuel doing this is way to high, the fact this only works in M4 actually makes it worse, as now only way to really win a race where you need to pit is by using M4. They need to adjust the rate at which the fuel is saved, just so that it's still a option but maybe to just save you time when actually in pits etc.
Hey! I just discovered this on Kie25's Youtube channel and thought you guys would wanna know about it:
It seems like atleast with the M4 the way you can shortshift, save fuel and still lose no straightline speed is waaaaay too much. I get it that the M4 has a turbocharged engine and has a wide powerband but it's just too much. You basically use a higher gear ratio all the time, which just has to affect acceleration, but somehow in GTS it doesn't...
Your opinions about this?
Already a thread for this.
It's not a bug. It's just that the M4 is great on fuel. It kinda makes the car OP on races with wear because of that.
And here's silly old me thinking it was widespread and a "game killer".
It is a bit of a killer cause the M4 is waaay OP on these races.
Due to personal health issues I haven't been able to race for a while.
But from what I've noticed the M4 has been a rather dominate car in Gr.4 for quite some time anyway, regardless of fuel consumption.
On a side note, I've spoken of short shifting to save fuel for months.
Many times I've suggested people check out the power/torque graphs.
For certain cars it works well, depending on the track, and changing up early while still landing in peak power isn't going to suddenly loose you 2 seconds a lap just because you short shifted.
People are free to argue if it's too much, or if it's fuel multiplier related, or if certain cars have too big an advantage, etc.
But it's nothing new.
A little too great!
This is more like an eco-drive. The tank even fills up at some point
Yeah i think i went slightly overboard lol, i mistakenly believed it was an issue for more cars than it was.
I don't believe the M4 is over powered at all, I've won against them many a time and I'm a crap driver! However, I do find the average M4 pilot to be an absolute arse hat. They seem to have the belief that they're entitled to the win at what ever cost (TT drivers are similar) and constantly nudge, dive bomb and make ridiculous and overly aggressive moves. As I say, I've beaten them on many occasions but they have never been clean about it.
It's not about the overall speed of the M4 it's about the fuel consumption. The M4 can be driven with a high amount of fuel saving via short shifting without giving up almost any pace. I Now agree that this is not a bug but poorly programmed and balanced. In short: the m4 is definetely OP in race C dailys.
That all about it, I think.
They drive like people drive bmw's in real life (and not like they stole it.
Actually it's not just the M4 that can do this.
The McLaren has a low power band too, early shifting is optimal as well - and thus is saves a fair bit of fuel.
Problem is the M4 has top end speed combined with the ability to conserve fuel at a very efficient clip whereas other cars like the Atenza need to run deep into the red to maximize power output which kills any fuel efficiency.
Sounds like your typical real life Bimmer driver.
I thought we were getting a new Beetle when I saw the title
How would this compare to the GTR? Because that's already a great fuel economy car.
Well, the GTR is noncompetitive, so it might conserve fuel, but it won't keep up with the M4, or any other top end car for that matter.
How they regulate the cars in balance need to be adjusted. You can save just as much in any other car in Gr4 and Gr3 just not have the low end pace obviously. Short shiftings been benificial since GT5, there’s nothing new or game breaking here, the M4 is just the best because of how the torque is chopped. I mean look at that graph up there for it?! They just need to be de-tuned properly. It’s been a problem since they introduced the Performance Point systems and how you just turn down your car to meet regulation and have this stupid looking hp/torque graph.
I tried this at Mount Panorama yesterday, i entered the pits half way, and was at 44% fuel, the nearest was 35 (might have been a M4).
I refuelled to 6.5 laps (6 left) and then did the last half of the race as usual, but somehow i was close to running out of fuel at the end of the race.
Short shifting is something i have hardly done in these races but it does make a difference (to big in the M4 i gather)
I also tried short shifting the M4 yesterday but I was 2-3 seconds off pace and couldn‘t really keep up. The second half of that race was carnage anyways, what was going on there @_ApexPredator?
Tonight at Bathurst someone was short shifting in the M4. I could pass him before pitting, although not that easily on that track. Then he would be 15 sec ahead of me at the finish. It didn't give him any wins though as the S/S squad always caught up with him in lap 7. No chance with tires running out.
I had a really bad start at the nations race yesterday in the jag, so opted for a 1 stop strategy, using good fuel saving, I was dead last.
Short shifting, fuel map on 2 and using higher gears in corners saw me getting mid-high 43 second laps while conserving enough fuel to be able to one stop, I was even able push a bit when following other cars, finished 10th.
Theres a massive amount of gains from saving fuel in that regard!