RIDOX Replica Garage-In Memory of TurnLeft-GT40,300ZX,F430,TVR,AEM S2000,Cizeta,TransAm Doug Nash
- Thread starter Ridox2JZGTE
- 5,032 comments
- 880,285 views
- 205
- Portugal
- JoaoCsO
- 5,161
- Massachusetts
Oh, you guys have no idea how happy I am that I'm not the only one who's done it.. 
Hey @Ridox2JZGTE - I've probably asked you this before, but I can't remember if I did or not. Have you ever tried researching the Lamborghini Miura for a replica build in GT6? I'm sure precise specifications, like suspension information, wouldn't be the easiest to find, but then again, I don't know how the heck you pull off half of the builds you do!
👍
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
Hey @Ridox2JZGTE - I've probably asked you this before, but I can't remember if I did or not. Have you ever tried researching the Lamborghini Miura for a replica build in GT6? I'm sure precise specifications, like suspension information, wouldn't be the easiest to find, but then again, I don't know how the heck you pull off half of the builds you do!
Miura,
I don't have the credits to buy it 
Still only have about 2 million in the bank, needsmore Want GT5 gift/sharing feature badly 
Pete05
Premium
- 6,970
- Melbourne, Australia
Earlier today I did some mathematical calculations on the 20 million collection.Miura,
At $307,000 for the Nurburgring 24 without the log-in bonus (cause I'm an offline pauper), it'll only take 65 events or 195 laps to almost payoff your shiny new motor
I haven't looked into what events the Muira is eligible for or how long it'll take for it to pay for itself
- 5,161
- Massachusetts
Oh yeah...I think you did explain that to me once before. My bad... That's a bummer. The car is so freakin' nice. I think it might be a little unrealistically good, to be honest. At 500PP-550PP it's a killer!Miura,
@Pete05 The Miura pays for itself the very first lap you take!
Pete05
Premium
- 6,970
- Melbourne, Australia
Oh yeah...I think you did explain that to me once before. My bad... That's a bummer. The car is so freakin' nice. I think it might be a little unrealistically good, to be honest. At 500PP-550PP it's a killer!
@Pete05 The Miura pays for itself the very first lap you take!
I know it does from the Lamborghini licence test at Brands Hatch. Financially though... 
- 205
- Portugal
- JoaoCsO
Since @ALB123 asked about the Miura, i never saw a Alpine car in @Ridox2JZGTE garage, no garage can be complete without the A110, back in the 80 my dad use to had a Alpine A110 and that's awesome right? But it was the 1.3 model lol... nevertheless its an A110!!!
I don't know if I'm asking to much and/or I don't know if there's enough information out there about the Alpine. But it would be awesome to see one here
I don't know if I'm asking to much and/or I don't know if there's enough information out there about the Alpine. But it would be awesome to see one here
- 5,161
- Massachusetts
The Alpine A110 1600 is one of my favorite GT6 cars. I never knew much about Alpine before I bought GT6, but I have grown to absolutely love the looks and the way it drives in GT6. 👍
- 5,161
- Massachusetts
Oh. My. God. I just realized that I have completely ignored an entire Ferrari F40 tune here at Ridox's Garage. There are actually two separate listings for the EU Spec F40. One is based on the data Ridox collected via Auto Motorsport Magazine and the other, I'm just assuming, is probably information he gathered from Ferrari, various digital sources and wherever else he collects stuff for his amazing library of car information.
Right now I own three Ferrari F40s, but that does not allow me to have all the variations I would like to have ready to drive at a moments notice without manually changing things like Ride Height or LSDs. I am going to purchase two more F40s sometime this evening. One will be for the EU Spec F40 that I somehow managed to overlook (not the Auto Motorsport Magazine F40) and I will then setup my 5th F40 with various optional settings...like ride heights, alignment settings and/or LSD settings. I will probably need more than 2 additional cars, but that should get me started.
Obsessed much? Nah...
Right now I own three Ferrari F40s, but that does not allow me to have all the variations I would like to have ready to drive at a moments notice without manually changing things like Ride Height or LSDs. I am going to purchase two more F40s sometime this evening. One will be for the EU Spec F40 that I somehow managed to overlook (not the Auto Motorsport Magazine F40) and I will then setup my 5th F40 with various optional settings...like ride heights, alignment settings and/or LSD settings. I will probably need more than 2 additional cars, but that should get me started.
Obsessed much? Nah...
Last edited:
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
I found some detailed data taken from printed manual ( third party ), so I may be able to built one, although the weight distribution is not possible
- 5,161
- Massachusetts
Let me guess... The actual weight distribution of the Alpine A110 1600S is much heavier in the rear end than the game claims?I found some detailed data taken from printed manual ( third party ), so I may be able to built one, although the weight distribution is not possible
- 5,161
- Massachusetts
Hey Ridox... I'm currently building Ferrari F40 #4 for my garage. This time I'm building your EU Spec F40 (Not the magazine tested car which also happens to be EU Spec). You have provided not only the stock ride height, which I usually use, but also some alternative ride heights:
Ride Height: 101 101 - standard - Alternate Ride Height F/R : 63 56 ( lowest ), 115 115 ( high ) and 81 101 ( track lowered)
Then you also include an optional suspension & alignment setup which uses a ride height of F/R: 81 81. The springs in this optional suspension setup are only marginally softer. Speaking strictly about the first suspension setup listed in your build sheet, would you mind offering any advice as to when it might be advantageous to use the 63/56 setup or the 81/101 setup? Are you only offering these alternative ride heights for purely cosmetic reasons, or would those ride heights be beneficial to us drivers on a race track in a race setting? 98% of my F40 miles have been driven with the 101/101 ride height, but I'm beginning to wonder if the 115/115 setup might be better on a track like the Nordschleife. I would appreciate any thoughts you may have on the 4 different ride heights available with the first suspension setup.
The second suspension option, which uses slightly softer springs, has only one ride height option and that is 81/81. I can understand why you chose not to provide alternate ride heights in this particular case as that suspension is supposed to reflect the chosen ride height of driver Motoharu Kurosawa. The rear damper's compression setting is just a tick higher on this setup, otherwise they're almost identical to the first suspension setup. I'm guessing that this particular setup is better suited for extremely flat tracks, but you can correct me if I'm wrong.
Finally, I have questions about this:
Ferrari F40 US Edition Technical Manual Alignment Range :
Camber Angle : 1.10 1.0 ( Front Camber Range : -1.16 +/- -1.50, Rear Camber Range : -1.0 +/- -1.33 )
Toe Angle : 0.20 0.33 ( Front Toe In Range : 0.20 +/- 0.33, Rear Toe In Range : 0.33 +/- 0.46 )
The stock camber values are F/R: 0.5 1.8. If I were to use the optional camber value of 1.10 for the front does that mean I must also use 1.0 for the rear? When you list optional values like these, do you have to use them in pairs, both front and rear? Or can I choose to only use the optional rear camber value but keep the stock camber value?
I know you're probably going to say "Use whatever you feel better with!", but I can't do that...I want to do what is the proper thing. The thing that would be done in real life. 👍
Ride Height: 101 101 - standard - Alternate Ride Height F/R : 63 56 ( lowest ), 115 115 ( high ) and 81 101 ( track lowered)
Then you also include an optional suspension & alignment setup which uses a ride height of F/R: 81 81. The springs in this optional suspension setup are only marginally softer. Speaking strictly about the first suspension setup listed in your build sheet, would you mind offering any advice as to when it might be advantageous to use the 63/56 setup or the 81/101 setup? Are you only offering these alternative ride heights for purely cosmetic reasons, or would those ride heights be beneficial to us drivers on a race track in a race setting? 98% of my F40 miles have been driven with the 101/101 ride height, but I'm beginning to wonder if the 115/115 setup might be better on a track like the Nordschleife. I would appreciate any thoughts you may have on the 4 different ride heights available with the first suspension setup.
The second suspension option, which uses slightly softer springs, has only one ride height option and that is 81/81. I can understand why you chose not to provide alternate ride heights in this particular case as that suspension is supposed to reflect the chosen ride height of driver Motoharu Kurosawa. The rear damper's compression setting is just a tick higher on this setup, otherwise they're almost identical to the first suspension setup. I'm guessing that this particular setup is better suited for extremely flat tracks, but you can correct me if I'm wrong.
Finally, I have questions about this:
Ferrari F40 US Edition Technical Manual Alignment Range :
Camber Angle : 1.10 1.0 ( Front Camber Range : -1.16 +/- -1.50, Rear Camber Range : -1.0 +/- -1.33 )
Toe Angle : 0.20 0.33 ( Front Toe In Range : 0.20 +/- 0.33, Rear Toe In Range : 0.33 +/- 0.46 )
The stock camber values are F/R: 0.5 1.8. If I were to use the optional camber value of 1.10 for the front does that mean I must also use 1.0 for the rear? When you list optional values like these, do you have to use them in pairs, both front and rear? Or can I choose to only use the optional rear camber value but keep the stock camber value?
I know you're probably going to say "Use whatever you feel better with!", but I can't do that...I want to do what is the proper thing. The thing that would be done in real life. 👍
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
The 1st question, ride height options are mainly for visual purpose, but in GT6, as lower front also reduce rotation, it can beneficial if the driver having difficulties managing car rotation. It's up to driver preference, visual appearance + added lower rotation for lower front.
The Tsukuba ride height 81/81 also visual representation of the car as seen in the video, it suited better for flatter tracks like Fuji and Tsukuba.
For alignment, the US Edition Tech Manual is strictly for US F40, which is heavier overall than EU cars and might be set to better safety margin for road use. You can try mix the camber value, say 1.1 front and 1.8 rear, and see if you like it. EU F40 alignment I think is better for F40 ( more neutral for me )
I think real F40 owner would use manual alignment range as guidelines only, and fine tune the value according to usage ( track day or road use )
I provided variety of options available to give the same possibility as in real car.
Yes, and I'm going to get close as possible by using wet weight ( including driver ) at 800+kg. This will be 1800 '73 Gr4 Rally version on CH tires.
- 5,161
- Massachusetts
Thanks for taking the time to answer those questions, Ridox!! 👍 
I just ran a few laps with the EU Spec (not the Auto Magazine setup) F40 around La Sierra with Thorin-Cain. I've set her up a bit differently than the other F40s in my Garage. I could totally feel those differences too! I'm sure I'll be used to her in no time...
I just ran a few laps with the EU Spec (not the Auto Magazine setup) F40 around La Sierra with Thorin-Cain. I've set her up a bit differently than the other F40s in my Garage. I could totally feel those differences too! I'm sure I'll be used to her in no time...
- 5,161
- Massachusetts
Oh, you have no idea how happy that makes me. It really is a scary monster on CS tires at Suzuka. Take the same setup to Nurburgring GP and it's not too bad at all. I was so worried that you were going to post 2:20s... I found myself short-shifting in a few places, just to try and keep the car settled. Like, through the 'S' Curves section, I feel like I should be pushing harder. Yet, if I try I just end up spinning out or understeering off the track. She is a fickle ride...but I love her!Ran it.
First session - 5 Laps: 2:26
Second session - 1 Lap: 2:25.361.
Scary monster on CS.
- 1,370
- Laval, Canada
- OutbackV6
This question goes to @Ridox2JZGTE & anybody who has driven online with tire wear on.
I'm looking for a couple of tracks to use a standard to test tire wear, I'm going to use Tsukuba because it has so many qualities in a short package, if anybody has ideas for other tracks please feel free to share. The Nurb, Ascari, Sierra are out of the question, it will be to hard to duplicate my driving from one setup to another consistently
on these tracks.
I'm looking for a couple of tracks to use a standard to test tire wear, I'm going to use Tsukuba because it has so many qualities in a short package, if anybody has ideas for other tracks please feel free to share. The Nurb, Ascari, Sierra are out of the question, it will be to hard to duplicate my driving from one setup to another consistently
on these tracks.
- 5,161
- Massachusetts
I like the Nurburgring GP/D (or GP/F if you want a little longer lap times). I think it's a little better than Tsukuba, in one way, Tsukuba's turns are pretty slow hairpin style, except for the sweeper at the end. But, Tsukuba certainly will do the job. If you're more comfortable running consistent laps on Tsukuba -- that is the key, in my opinion.This question goes to @Ridox2JZGTE & anybody who has driven online with tire wear on.
I'm looking for a couple of tracks to use a standard to test tire wear, I'm going to use Tsukuba because it has so many qualities in a short package, if anybody has ideas for other tracks please feel free to share. The Nurb, Ascari, Sierra are out of the question, it will be to hard to duplicate my driving from one setup to another consistently
- 1,370
- Laval, Canada
- OutbackV6
I've noticed that, I'm using Tsukuba because I use it for testing brakes to give me a general idea and I can be consistent on it. I set the BB here because it will transfer quite well to other tracks, but I could use a track that's a tire shredder to get a better idea and combine the data. I was thinking of using an oval but the banked curves might upset the reading when I try different suspension setups.
Thanks, I'll probably have to test a few tracks to see which one can eat tires fast. I already use GP/D for some tests, other tracks I've thought off were Willow Streets, Brand Hatch Indy & GP, Silverstone National, TRM East, Suzuka East, Autumn Ring, Cape Ring South, Madrid, SSR5 & Clubman, GVS & GV East. I guess I'll just have to calculate how much tire each track eats per km and go with that monster
. I was hoping that one of you had noticed that a certain track is not tire friendly,
- 205
- Portugal
- JoaoCsO
Btw, doesn't temperature, like day and night, besides rain of course, change the way tires shreds on the pavement? For example the autumn ring circuit haves a low atmospheric temperature so doesn't that changes the way the tire grips and stuff, i remember a couple lonng weeks ago a seasonal where it was on autumn ring reverse and a lot of people were complaining about tire grip.
I'm don't want to state anything, I'm just saying...
I'm don't want to state anything, I'm just saying...
- 1,370
- Laval, Canada
- OutbackV6
Yes temperature counts 👍, so many things count, I'm still preparing the data sheets for this so I haven't went on the track to record data, I know we can change the time of day thus the temperature, so maybe I'll be able to get something close on a few different tracks. Just for my info, for Autumn Ring were the comments in regard of the track having to much grip or not enough? Did you notice if the tires were wearing out fast?
- 205
- Portugal
- JoaoCsO
- 1,370
- Laval, Canada
- OutbackV6
Thanks Pete 👍, it didn't even cross my mind
, that is the one track I've never got right or even close , whenever there's been a seasonal here I always have the greatest trouble getting a decent time, I usually rank between 4000 to 20000, but here ...
, I don't know what I'm doing wrong but I'm doing that wrong right , and there's that little "S" sand trap just before going home 
. I might just give it a try and see what it gives, I've just finished entering the calculations for the % tire wear to 1km, I thought of way of calculating the temperature effect but the number of laps I'll have to do just doesn't tickle me right .
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
Apricot Hill and Tsukuba is a good combo indeed, I often test my car at Apricot Hill after doing rigorous test at Tsukuba. For online vs offline, both are the same in physics IMO, many still got the bad memories of GT5 and still think the same thing still exist in GT6. I tune and test all of my cars offline, and when these cars raced online, they are all work so well for racing with tire wear very fast. The only difference online vs offline is when tire wear is enabled and the added fuel weight which makes the car initially slower in lap times by close to a second ( average ), once fuel is low ( 10% ) and tire is ideal temp and condition, lap times and handling is similar to offline.
When I tested the NA2 NSX-R online at Tsukuba ( same tire, tire wear very fast ) I can easily get close to my offline best lap time after the fuel is about 25% with brand new tires. Same exact handling behavior, same cornering grip, same speeds and sector times within less than a tenth of each other. The majot difference offline vs online is fuel and tire wear, but if that can be enabled offline, then both modes are the same.
When I tested the NA2 NSX-R online at Tsukuba ( same tire, tire wear very fast ) I can easily get close to my offline best lap time after the fuel is about 25% with brand new tires. Same exact handling behavior, same cornering grip, same speeds and sector times within less than a tenth of each other. The majot difference offline vs online is fuel and tire wear, but if that can be enabled offline, then both modes are the same.
