The Great Camber Experiment: Stage 1 "High Speed Ring" (closed/finished/ended)
- Thread starter DolHaus
- 389 comments
- 22,645 views
- 5,161
- Massachusetts
I did think about that DolHaus. You're totally right. Honestly, the desire to set lower lap times is just my ego talking. What I truly am looking for is the smoothest, cleanest running possible. I have never run 200 laps on a track like I just did with High Speed Ring and I know that I am a much, much better driver on that track now than I was the night I started. Even doing 10-15 warm-up laps isn't the same in my eyes. I might randomize the order in which I run the Camber level next round. That's probably a better idea.
I don't understand what you're saying here. Forgive me...
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
There is always an element of track/car learning, it can't be prevented without asking for unreasonable commitments from the test drivers (200+ practice laps over a few successive days). We have to maintain accessibility to gain results and therefore concessions must be made in the approach, I have considered the variables and I believe that the controls in place are adequate for maintaining the integrity of the results. 👍
- 5,161
- Massachusetts
It's been very quiet in this thread. I'm sure many are decompressing from Round 1. I know I am... 
I'm very happy that I decided to take part in this. Frankly, I wish a few more people would join also. The more data the better. But, it is what it is and we will be just fine with the numbers we currently have.
I decided to take the Jaguar, in the same exact configuration as we just used for Round 1, out for a spin on Special Stage Route 5. I think I remember reading that @DolHaus is considering this course for Round 2, or a later round. Anyway, I'm going to have a LOT of work to do...
I was all over the place. You know, just over-driving the car. I have a feeling it is going to get very interesting now that we are off of that high-speed race track. Different driving styles should really highlight different G Force loads, I believe. We shall soon see. 👍
I'm very happy that I decided to take part in this. Frankly, I wish a few more people would join also. The more data the better. But, it is what it is and we will be just fine with the numbers we currently have.I decided to take the Jaguar, in the same exact configuration as we just used for Round 1, out for a spin on Special Stage Route 5. I think I remember reading that @DolHaus is considering this course for Round 2, or a later round. Anyway, I'm going to have a LOT of work to do...
I was all over the place. You know, just over-driving the car. I have a feeling it is going to get very interesting now that we are off of that high-speed race track. Different driving styles should really highlight different G Force loads, I believe. We shall soon see. 👍
- 1,370
- Laval, Canada
- OutbackV6
I just hope it is the Clubman Man version of SSR5, because the regular version has too many technical difficulties to be regular on it, unless you run it in 2nd all the way.It's been very quiet in this thread. I'm sure many are decompressing from Round 1. I know I am...
I decided to take the Jaguar, in the same exact configuration as we just used for Round 1, out for a spin on Special Stage Route 5. I think I remember reading that @DolHaus is considering this course for Round 2, or a later round. Anyway, I'm going to have a LOT of work to do...
- 1,370
- Laval, Canada
- OutbackV6
. Sorry for double posting but I was sure there was one after my previous post? 
Aussie_HSV
(Banned)
- 721
- Australia
Hi Dolhaus,
Interesting read. 👍
You've been a great help to me in the past so I'ld like to pitch in here if I can.
I had what could only be described as an amateur attempt recently, but I didn't mind going through the process, as flawed as my system was.
So I guess my interest in trying this has grown from there.
I'm up to speed with the requirements you've set here.
I'm confident I can at least follow your guide lines correctly.
If I can't produce anything in time this time around, I'll simply consider it a warm-up for round 2.
I just have 1 main question and 1 concern.
I notice at the beginning most were using controllers, but I've also seen reports of wheels.
I have a G27 and would prefer to use that.
Any issues on that front?
My apologies if you've already confirmed that but I missed it in the thread.
The concern is the MoTec data logger.
I've read about it but haven't downloaded it, let alone used it.
So this will be a steep learning curve for me.
Last question.
I believe you are using the Pro. version.
I take it I will also need to upgrade my version to Pro.?
I'm worried this data logger may be a stumbling block for me, but we'll tackle that when I get there.
A late edit.
All seems well regarding the MoTec download.
I was under the impression it downloaded a standard version, but I have just completed the install and it's telling me it's MoTec i2 Pro 1.1.
Now all I need to do is work out how to use it.
Interesting read. 👍
You've been a great help to me in the past so I'ld like to pitch in here if I can.
I had what could only be described as an amateur attempt recently, but I didn't mind going through the process, as flawed as my system was.
So I guess my interest in trying this has grown from there.
I'm up to speed with the requirements you've set here.
I'm confident I can at least follow your guide lines correctly.
If I can't produce anything in time this time around, I'll simply consider it a warm-up for round 2.
I just have 1 main question and 1 concern.
I notice at the beginning most were using controllers, but I've also seen reports of wheels.
I have a G27 and would prefer to use that.
Any issues on that front?
My apologies if you've already confirmed that but I missed it in the thread.
The concern is the MoTec data logger.
I've read about it but haven't downloaded it, let alone used it.
So this will be a steep learning curve for me.
Last question.
I believe you are using the Pro. version.
I take it I will also need to upgrade my version to Pro.?
I'm worried this data logger may be a stumbling block for me, but we'll tackle that when I get there.
A late edit.
All seems well regarding the MoTec download.
I was under the impression it downloaded a standard version, but I have just completed the install and it's telling me it's MoTec i2 Pro 1.1.
Now all I need to do is work out how to use it.
Last edited:
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
I'm sure you'll do fine mate, glad to have you aboard 👍Hi Dolhaus,
Interesting read. 👍
You've been a great help to me in the past so I'ld like to pitch in here if I can.
I had what could only be described as an amateur attempt recently, but I didn't mind going through the process, as flawed as my system was.
So I guess my interest in trying this has grown from there.
I'm up to speed with the requirements you've set here.
I'm confident I can at least follow your guide lines correctly.
If I can't produce anything in time this time around, I'll simply consider it a warm-up for round 2.
I just have 1 main question and 1 concern.
I notice at the beginning most were using controllers, but I've also seen reports of wheels.
I have a G27 and would prefer to use that.
Any issues on that front?
My apologies if you've already confirmed that but I missed it in the thread.
The concern is the MoTec data logger.
I've read about it but haven't downloaded it, let alone used it.
So this will be a steep learning curve for me.
Last question.
I believe you are using the Pro. version.
I take it I will also need to upgrade my version to Pro.?
I'm worried this data logger may be a stumbling block for me, but we'll tackle that when I get there.
A late edit.
All seems well regarding the MoTec download.
I was under the impression it downloaded a standard version, but I have just completed the install and it's telling me it's MoTec i2 Pro 1.1.
Now all I need to do is work out how to use it.
There are no restrictions on input devices (ds3/wheel) as long as yo feel you can drive somewhat consistently with what ever you chose (ie. wouldn't recommend using a wheel if you're more comfortable and confident with a DS3). The basic rule of thumb is that I'm happy to accept results if you are happy with how you performed the test, the study is ongoing so there is no deadline for testing data.
If you have any further questions then feel free to ask
(Important: There is a slight time variation between GT6 and MoTeC so be aware of this when exporting your data, I'd advise doing them one at a time to avoid confusion 👍)
I would like to wish everyone involved a happy and prosperous new year and to thank you all for your participation so far, I feel that we are on the right track and that if we keep working at it then we will eventually find the answers we are looking for.
I will try and update the tables and charts over the next week to encompass the new data, should hopefully have some time now that the festive period has passed. Having done a little bit of testing at SSR5 I fear that it might be too much car for the circuit and a return to Silverstone may be necessary
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
@ALB123
I was putting your data into the tables and I think there is a slight issue with the speed data, it looks like you have collected the max speed for the entire corner rather than the speed at which the highest lateral G load occurred.
Its only a minor problem as the rest of the data seems fine. I will just need you to manually track down the Lateral G peaks on the graph and record the speed at the appropriate moment, thanks 👍
I was putting your data into the tables and I think there is a slight issue with the speed data, it looks like you have collected the max speed for the entire corner rather than the speed at which the highest lateral G load occurred.
Its only a minor problem as the rest of the data seems fine. I will just need you to manually track down the Lateral G peaks on the graph and record the speed at the appropriate moment, thanks 👍
- 5,161
- Massachusetts
Oh, I'm so sorry about that @DolHaus... At first, I was sitting here scratching my head thinking "How the hell am I going to be able to do that?!" because I was thinking of the track map/track editor and how we define straights and corners -- then when you are building a report it only asks if you want Max or Min speed at the beginning or end of the corner (or avg speed). The same thing with the sections you define as Straight(s).
After much panic I realized how simple it is -- just go to the very first Tab labelled "GRAPH" and move my cursor over to where I'm pulling the most G's and then look up to see what the speed is. Wow...That's nice and easy, right?
Again...Sorry about that. I wonder if there is a way I can automate that to put the speed that corresponds to the highest G load into my Channel Report(s).
After much panic I realized how simple it is -- just go to the very first Tab labelled "GRAPH" and move my cursor over to where I'm pulling the most G's and then look up to see what the speed is. Wow...That's nice and easy, right?
Again...Sorry about that. I wonder if there is a way I can automate that to put the speed that corresponds to the highest G load into my Channel Report(s).
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
Its ok, I figured something like this would happen when using the automated analysis. Unfortunately I have no idea how to automate the data collection on this one, I've had very little time to play with the software since it became available, if anyone else knows then please feel free to share 👍Oh, I'm so sorry about that @DolHaus... At first, I was sitting here scratching my head thinking "How the hell am I going to be able to do that?!" because I was thinking of the track map/track editor and how we define straights and corners -- then when you are building a report it only asks if you want Max or Min speed at the beginning or end of the corner (or avg speed). The same thing with the sections you define as Straight(s).
After much panic I realized how simple it is -- just go to the very first Tab labelled "GRAPH" and move my cursor over to where I'm pulling the most G's and then look up to see what the speed is. Wow...That's nice and easy, right?
Again...Sorry about that. I wonder if there is a way I can automate that to put the speed that corresponds to the highest G load into my Channel Report(s).
I did mine the old fashioned way by just reading the graphs and identifying the peaks but I'm sure there must be a way to automate it
Aussie_HSV
(Banned)
- 721
- Australia
Hi guys.
I've just had a go at 0.0/0.0.
Bit confused tbh.
Anyway, loaded into MoTec.
No idea what I was doing so simply 'arrowed' my way along the data to find peak G's.
Car was exact with setup.
I find it tough driving with a ghost, bit distracting.
Tended to push too hard and lit up the fronts quite often.
Used a G27.
Manual, driving line, ABS 1, FFB settings 7/9.
Here's my results, and a few pretty pics.
Camber 0.0/0.0
Lap Time:
1:04.600
Peak lateral G (Speed)
Turn 1: 2.67 G 280.7 kph(174.5 mph) *speeds correspond with peak G, not max. for corner.
Turn 2: 2.68 G 176.3 kph(109.6 mph)
Turn 3: -2.17 G 142.5 kph(88.6 mph)
Turn 4: 2.22 G 141.9 kph(88.2 mph)
Turn 5: 3.00 G 192.5 kph(119.6 mph)
Peak longitudinal G (Braking)
Turn 1: N/A
Turn 2: -2.14 G
Turn 3: -2.71 G
Turn 4: -0.33 G
Turn 5: -1.12 G
Is it possible to share my multi-lap replay file?
If so, maybe someone wants to check what's going on.
*Edit*
Been having a bit more of a play.
Organised some track maps with G minimums, maximums, and averages.
I've just had a go at 0.0/0.0.
Bit confused tbh.
Anyway, loaded into MoTec.
No idea what I was doing so simply 'arrowed' my way along the data to find peak G's.
Car was exact with setup.
I find it tough driving with a ghost, bit distracting.
Tended to push too hard and lit up the fronts quite often.
Used a G27.
Manual, driving line, ABS 1, FFB settings 7/9.
Here's my results, and a few pretty pics.
Camber 0.0/0.0
Lap Time:
1:04.600
Peak lateral G (Speed)
Turn 1: 2.67 G 280.7 kph(174.5 mph) *speeds correspond with peak G, not max. for corner.
Turn 2: 2.68 G 176.3 kph(109.6 mph)
Turn 3: -2.17 G 142.5 kph(88.6 mph)
Turn 4: 2.22 G 141.9 kph(88.2 mph)
Turn 5: 3.00 G 192.5 kph(119.6 mph)
Peak longitudinal G (Braking)
Turn 1: N/A
Turn 2: -2.14 G
Turn 3: -2.71 G
Turn 4: -0.33 G
Turn 5: -1.12 G
Is it possible to share my multi-lap replay file?
If so, maybe someone wants to check what's going on.
*Edit*
Been having a bit more of a play.
Organised some track maps with G minimums, maximums, and averages.
Last edited:
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
Looks great so far, if you could edit the lap time into the post so its easy to see then its perfect 👍Hi guys.
I've just had a go at 0.0/0.0.
Bit confused tbh.
Anyway, loaded into MoTec.
No idea what I was doing so simply 'arrowed' my way along the data to find peak G's.
Car was exact with setup.
I find it tough driving with a ghost, bit distracting.
Tended to push too hard and lit up the fronts quite often.
Used a G27.
Manual, driving line, ABS 1, FFB settings 7/9.
Here's my results, and a few pretty pics.
Peak lateral G (Speed)
Turn 1: 2.67 G 280.7 kph(174.5 mph) *speeds correspond with peak G, not max. for corner.
Turn 2: 2.68 G 176.3 kph(109.6 mph)
Turn 3: -2.17 G 142.5 kph(88.6 mph)
Turn 4: 2.22 G 141.9 kph(88.2 mph)
Turn 5: 3.00 G 192.5 kph(119.6 mph)
Peak longitudinal G (Braking)
Turn 1: N/A
Turn 2: -2.14 G
Turn 3: -2.71 G
Turn 4: -0.33 G
Turn 5: -1.12 G
Is it possible to share my multi-lap replay file?
If so, maybe someone wants to check what's going on.
Aussie_HSV
(Banned)
- 721
- Australia
👍
*Edit*
Well I probably shouldn't have done as I've been up all night, literally.
But I had another go, this time 1.0/1.0.
TBH I probably could have done a little better.
The eclectic time shows I dropped the ball a little.
I was on target a few times but couldn't hold it together.
But clearly, even though my consistency perhaps dropped a little, my lap times were still almost always faster than before.
Anyway, 2 reasonable difference this time.
The biggest, most obvious change was the final corner.
Dropping to 4th had me choking the rev limiter and losing speed unlike last effort.
In the end I started again and decided to hold 5th.
Quite dodgey to handle, but certainly quicker than losing power and speed on the rev limiter.
The other was the 3rd and 4th corner combo.
Seemed to like to hug the kerb line better, and was smoother in the transition from right to left turns.
So, results.
Camber 1.0/1.0
Lap Time:
1:04.434
Peak lateral G (Speed)
Turn 1: 2.78 G (171.7 mph) *speeds correspond with peak G, not max. for corner.
Turn 2: 2.55 G (111.8 mph)
Turn 3: -2.13 G (84.5 mph)
Turn 4: 2.18 G (87.9 mph)
Turn 5: 3.29 G (130.8 mph)
Peak longitudinal G (Braking)
Turn 1: N/A
Turn 2: -2.06 G
Turn 3: -2.50 G
Turn 4: -0.36 G
Turn 5: -1.16 G
*Edit*
Well I probably shouldn't have done as I've been up all night, literally.
But I had another go, this time 1.0/1.0.
TBH I probably could have done a little better.
The eclectic time shows I dropped the ball a little.
I was on target a few times but couldn't hold it together.
But clearly, even though my consistency perhaps dropped a little, my lap times were still almost always faster than before.
Anyway, 2 reasonable difference this time.
The biggest, most obvious change was the final corner.
Dropping to 4th had me choking the rev limiter and losing speed unlike last effort.
In the end I started again and decided to hold 5th.
Quite dodgey to handle, but certainly quicker than losing power and speed on the rev limiter.
The other was the 3rd and 4th corner combo.
Seemed to like to hug the kerb line better, and was smoother in the transition from right to left turns.
So, results.
Camber 1.0/1.0
Lap Time:
1:04.434
Peak lateral G (Speed)
Turn 1: 2.78 G (171.7 mph) *speeds correspond with peak G, not max. for corner.
Turn 2: 2.55 G (111.8 mph)
Turn 3: -2.13 G (84.5 mph)
Turn 4: 2.18 G (87.9 mph)
Turn 5: 3.29 G (130.8 mph)
Peak longitudinal G (Braking)
Turn 1: N/A
Turn 2: -2.06 G
Turn 3: -2.50 G
Turn 4: -0.36 G
Turn 5: -1.16 G
Last edited:
Aussie_HSV
(Banned)
- 721
- Australia
Haven't had much time but I ran the 2.0 run.
I'll organise some MoTec data soonish.
A couple of things.
After some deliberation I did a quick 3 lap run again with 1.0/1.0.
And sure enough I hit 1:04.2's straight away.
Moral of the story is don't test while dead tired.
I'm also considering re-doing 0.0/0.0, because I think (in fact I'm almost certain) that not using 5th gear for the final corner (I only switched up to holding 5th for 1.0/1.0) has stolen time from those results.
Saying that, I'm not overly confident I'll hold enough speed with 3.0 and upwards (maybe, we'll see) so will possibly be dropping to 4th for those runs anyway, but I feel fairly confident that if I can run 5th gear at 2.0/2.0, I can run 5th at 0.0/0.0
As it stands I'm looking at probably keeping my 2.0/2.0 effort, but re-doing both 0.0/0.0 and 1.0/1.0, even if the repeated runs are just a short 4 or 5 lap affair.
Consistency on those cambers is obviously there so I wouldn't bother doing a long run, but I think a truer lap time can be found for both of them.
Thoughts?
*Edit*
Well I've just had a think about it and I'm going do it.
I'll run 3.0/3.0 and do those short repeats at the same time.
This will get the main 0.0 to 3.0's done, as I can only imagine it's all downhill from there anyway.
I'll organise some MoTec data soonish.
A couple of things.
After some deliberation I did a quick 3 lap run again with 1.0/1.0.
And sure enough I hit 1:04.2's straight away.
Moral of the story is don't test while dead tired.
I'm also considering re-doing 0.0/0.0, because I think (in fact I'm almost certain) that not using 5th gear for the final corner (I only switched up to holding 5th for 1.0/1.0) has stolen time from those results.
Saying that, I'm not overly confident I'll hold enough speed with 3.0 and upwards (maybe, we'll see) so will possibly be dropping to 4th for those runs anyway, but I feel fairly confident that if I can run 5th gear at 2.0/2.0, I can run 5th at 0.0/0.0
As it stands I'm looking at probably keeping my 2.0/2.0 effort, but re-doing both 0.0/0.0 and 1.0/1.0, even if the repeated runs are just a short 4 or 5 lap affair.
Consistency on those cambers is obviously there so I wouldn't bother doing a long run, but I think a truer lap time can be found for both of them.
Thoughts?
*Edit*
Well I've just had a think about it and I'm going do it.
I'll run 3.0/3.0 and do those short repeats at the same time.
This will get the main 0.0 to 3.0's done, as I can only imagine it's all downhill from there anyway.
Last edited:
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
Don't worry, it doesn't start getting bad until about 6.0+Haven't had much time but I ran the 2.0 run.
I'll organise some MoTec data soonish.
A couple of things.
After some deliberation I did a quick 3 lap run again with 1.0/1.0.
And sure enough I hit 1:04.2's straight away.
Moral of the story is don't test while dead tired.
I'm also considering re-doing 0.0/0.0, because I think (in fact I'm almost certain) that not using 5th gear for the final corner (I only switched up to holding 5th for 1.0/1.0) has stolen time from those results.
Saying that, I'm not overly confident I'll hold enough speed with 3.0 and upwards (maybe, we'll see) so will possibly be dropping to 4th for those runs anyway, but I feel fairly confident that if I can run 5th gear at 2.0/2.0, I can run 5th at 0.0/0.0
As it stands I'm looking at probably keeping my 2.0/2.0 effort, but re-doing both 0.0/0.0 and 1.0/1.0, even if the repeated runs are just a short 4 or 5 lap affair.
Consistency on those cambers is obviously there so I wouldn't bother doing a long run, but I think a truer lap time can be found for both of them.
Thoughts?
*Edit*
Well I've just had a think about it and I'm going do it.
I'll run 3.0/3.0 and do those short repeats at the same time.
This will get the main 0.0 to 3.0's done, as I can only imagine it's all downhill from there anyway.
- 5,161
- Massachusetts
Okay...I loaded up all my log files and took the speed that corresponded with the max Lateral G's for each turn. I really hope everyone was using Corr Speed and not Vehicle Speed in MoTeC because I used Corrected Speed. Anyway, here is the results. I hope this is easy enough to read for you @DolHaus. Sorry about giving the wrong information originally. I won't make that mistake in future rounds...
Click for a bigger picture!
Click for a bigger picture!
Thorin Cain
Premium
- 2,296
- Glasgow
- THORIN-RAYVEN
Yup, Corrected Speed was what I was using at least. Looking good ALB 👍
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
I'm just compiling the current results, once this is done I will run my final tests to check it will work adequately. Apologies that its taking a while but there is a lot of work going on behind the scenes and I can only do so much by myself 👍
Perfect, thank you for updating your results 👍Okay...I loaded up all my log files and took the speed that corresponded with the max Lateral G's for each turn. I really hope everyone was using Corr Speed and not Vehicle Speed in MoTeC because I used Corrected Speed. Anyway, here is the results. I hope this is easy enough to read for you @DolHaus. Sorry about giving the wrong information originally. I won't make that mistake in future rounds...
Click for a bigger picture!
View attachment 285195
- 5,489
- mid west USA
- Otaliema
Wow lot of missed posts for me in here wasn't getting notifications.
@ALB123 if you feel your first couple sets of laps could be improved / smoothed out after finishing the last set of results than, personally I would just run them again, because as @DolHaus has said with out logging 200 laps in the car on the tracks your not going to have a smooth line. For me making sure the data is relavent across the board is more important than another 30 minutes on the track.
I should be able to set up my new toy today and actually get some track time! But I need to finish the Xmas clean up first so um I can't even promise my self that but that's my motivation to get done quickly
@ALB123 if you feel your first couple sets of laps could be improved / smoothed out after finishing the last set of results than, personally I would just run them again, because as @DolHaus has said with out logging 200 laps in the car on the tracks your not going to have a smooth line. For me making sure the data is relavent across the board is more important than another 30 minutes on the track.
I should be able to set up my new toy today and actually get some track time! But I need to finish the Xmas clean up first so um I can't even promise my self that but that's my motivation to get done quickly
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
Its been put in the tables now so I would rather not change it now.Wow lot of missed posts for me in here wasn't getting notifications.
@ALB123 if you feel your first couple sets of laps could be improved / smoothed out after finishing the last set of results than, personally I would just run them again, because as @DolHaus has said with out logging 200 laps in the car on the tracks your not going to have a smooth line. For me making sure the data is relavent across the board is more important than another 30 minutes on the track.
I should be able to set up my new toy today and actually get some track time! But I need to finish the Xmas clean up first so um I can't even promise my self that but that's my motivation to get done quickly
Small sways in consistency are fine and expected, I would only object if you changed your line considerably during the test period eg. not braking where you were previously braking.
We are not looking for exact numbers or figures at any given moment, we are looking for patterns across the whole lap and across as wide a spectrum of results as possible. This is a real world test so there will be variables, they can't be avoided and will actually help us gain a better practical understanding in the end.
Believe me when I say that everything is going well so far, you've all done a great job in collecting the data 👍
@Otaliema Being that you have just got the wheel I would prefer to have your results using the DS3, I have experienced the transition period before when tuning for racers and it is a complete wash in terms of consistency. Nothing personal but I've seen what it does to drivers and I can't accept that big of a variable. In 6 months or so I'm sure you'll be fine and dandy using the wheel but for the time being I can't take the risk 👍
- 5,489
- mid west USA
- Otaliema
I understand what your saying @DolHaus on the wheel vrs controller. I'm currently only 10 laps on board about 1/2 a second off pace the braking is what is getting me the steering has come pretty quick for me my lines are already smoother. I'll finish up the XKR on the controller for this test but I'm going to be logging 99% of my track time with the wheel Now so I should get as consistant if not more so pretty quick I seem have a shirt curve on this one.
Edit; I'll provide you both sets of data, might be interesting to see if only after a short period of time the wheel makes a difference
Edit; I'll provide you both sets of data, might be interesting to see if only after a short period of time the wheel makes a difference
Last edited:
- 1,175
- In front of you.
- F1_Racer68
OK folks. Bear with me please as I post a rather lengthy test result.
I have an upcoming league event this weekend at Trial Mountain. Now I have always struggled at this track for some reason. It's just not one of my better venues. As a result, I am looking for any edge I can get, which means I am spending a LOT of time tweaking my setup. I decided that this would be an ideal situation for me to test the effects of Camber and see if it could possibly improve my performance. Here are the details and results.
Test Vehicle = Subaru BRZ GT300 Base Model '12
330HP, 1150KG, Racing Medium Tires
Test Track = Trial Mountain
Wet/Track Edge Grip level = Real
Driving Aids
ABS = 1, All other Aids = off/0
Testing Methodology
Since I know that I am not the most consistent driver on this track, I decided to approach it a little differently. Rather than just focusing on the "Fastest" lap for any given camber level, I decided to run a set number of laps for each Camber level and then use an average value from the total set for each measurement.
I decided to look at 2 key measurements: Maximum Lateral Gs in each corner and Minimum MPH in each corner. This was based on my initial hypothesis that if I am able to hold a higher Maximum G in any given corner then the corresponding Apex speed should also be higher.
I ran 8 laps on each Camber setting and recorded the Max Lateral G and Minimum Speed for each corner. I then had the spreadsheet calculate an average value for each corner based on the 8 laps. Front and Rear Camber settings were identical for each test.
Resulting Data
Camber = 0.0
Camber = 0.5
Camber = 1.0
Camber = 1.5
Camber = 2.0
Camber = 2.5
Conclusions
So what conclusions have I made from this? There are several, but the key conclusions are:
So that's it for now. I guess I will just sit back and get my flame retardant suit on. I am sure some of this (if not most) is going to get picked apart.
At some point, I may try the same test on a track that I am more consistent on. As I mentioned at the start, this was killing two birds with one stone, so to speak.
EDIT: Forgot to mention the test was done using a Logitech G27 Steering Wheel.
I have an upcoming league event this weekend at Trial Mountain. Now I have always struggled at this track for some reason. It's just not one of my better venues. As a result, I am looking for any edge I can get, which means I am spending a LOT of time tweaking my setup. I decided that this would be an ideal situation for me to test the effects of Camber and see if it could possibly improve my performance. Here are the details and results.
Test Vehicle = Subaru BRZ GT300 Base Model '12
330HP, 1150KG, Racing Medium Tires
Test Track = Trial Mountain
Wet/Track Edge Grip level = Real
Driving Aids
ABS = 1, All other Aids = off/0
Testing Methodology
Since I know that I am not the most consistent driver on this track, I decided to approach it a little differently. Rather than just focusing on the "Fastest" lap for any given camber level, I decided to run a set number of laps for each Camber level and then use an average value from the total set for each measurement.
I decided to look at 2 key measurements: Maximum Lateral Gs in each corner and Minimum MPH in each corner. This was based on my initial hypothesis that if I am able to hold a higher Maximum G in any given corner then the corresponding Apex speed should also be higher.
I ran 8 laps on each Camber setting and recorded the Max Lateral G and Minimum Speed for each corner. I then had the spreadsheet calculate an average value for each corner based on the 8 laps. Front and Rear Camber settings were identical for each test.
Resulting Data
Camber = 0.0
Camber = 0.5
Camber = 1.0
Camber = 1.5
Camber = 2.0
Camber = 2.5
Conclusions
So what conclusions have I made from this? There are several, but the key conclusions are:
- Lower Camber seems to work better for high speed, sweeping style corners
- Higher Camber seems to work better for lower speed and medium speed corners
- Camber does have an affect, and it does appear to follow real world expectations. There is a noticeable difference in the handling of the car.
- As Camber increases, straight line grip decreases (as it should)
- Decreased straight line grip affects both braking and acceleration
- Higher camber definitely felt better mid-corner, but corner entry and exit felt more difficult
- I still need more practice at Trial Mountain (sorry, had to include that one)
So that's it for now. I guess I will just sit back and get my flame retardant suit on. I am sure some of this (if not most) is going to get picked apart.
At some point, I may try the same test on a track that I am more consistent on. As I mentioned at the start, this was killing two birds with one stone, so to speak.
EDIT: Forgot to mention the test was done using a Logitech G27 Steering Wheel.
Last edited:
- 3,867
- Saltash
- Dolhaus
Would you mind messaging me the setup? I always feel its hard to gauge results without knowing the basic characteristics of the car.OK folks. Bear with me please as I post a rather lengthy test result.
I have an upcoming league event this weekend at Trial Mountain. Now I have always struggled at this track for some reason. It's just not one of my better venues. As a result, I am looking for any edge I can get, which means I am spending a LOT of time tweaking my setup. I decided that this would be an ideal situation for me to test the effects of Camber and see if it could possibly improve my performance. Here are the details and results.
Test Vehicle = Subaru BRZ GT300 Base Model '12
330HP, 1150KG, Racing Medium Tires
Test Track = Trial Mountain
Wet/Track Edge Grip level = Real
View attachment 285359
Driving Aids
ABS = 1, All other Aids = off/0
Testing Methodology
Since I know that I am not the most consistent driver on this track, I decided to approach it a little differently. Rather than just focusing on the "Fastest" lap for any given camber level, I decided to run a set number of laps for each Camber level and then use an average value from the total set for each measurement.
I decided to look at 2 key measurements: Maximum Lateral Gs in each corner and Minimum MPH in each corner. This was based on my initial hypothesis that if I am able to hold a higher Maximum G in any given corner then the corresponding Apex speed should also be higher.
I ran 8 laps on each Camber setting and recorded the Max Lateral G and Minimum Speed for each corner. I then had the spreadsheet calculate an average value for each corner based on the 8 laps. Front and Rear Camber settings were identical for each test.
Resulting Data
Camber = 0.0
View attachment 285360
Camber = 0.5
View attachment 285361
Camber = 1.0
View attachment 285363
Camber = 1.5
View attachment 285364
Camber = 2.0
View attachment 285365
Camber = 2.5
View attachment 285366
Conclusions
View attachment 285367
View attachment 285370
So what conclusions have I made from this? There are several, but the key conclusions are:
These results are far from conclusive. For one thing, they were done using the same Camber level on both Front and Rear. That would most likely not be the case on a fully tuned, race ready car. A setup that combines a higher camber on one end of the car and a lower camber on the other may allow the car to take advantage of the apparent corner style benefits of each setting.
- Lower Camber seems to work better for high speed, sweeping style corners
- Higher Camber seems to work better for lower speed and medium speed corners
- Camber does have an affect, and it does appear to follow real world expectations. There is a noticeable difference in the handling of the car.
- As Camber increases, straight line grip decreases (as it should)
- Decreased straight line grip affects both braking and acceleration
- Higher camber definitely felt better mid-corner, but corner entry and exit felt more difficult
- I still need more practice at Trial Mountain
So that's it for now. I guess I will just sit back and get my flame retardant suit on. I am sure some of this (if not most) is going to get picked apart.
At some point, I may try the same test on a track that I am more consistent on. As I mentioned at the start, this was killing two birds with one stone, so to speak.
EDIT: Forgot to mention the test was done using a Logitech G27 Steering Wheel.
One of my main theories for people finding gains using camber is that the cars grip balance is being affected in a pseudo-positive manor, the effect is altering the front/rear balance in a seemingly positive way but is actually reducing overall grip and the same effect could be attained in a different way without reducing grip. Without direct comparison it is hard to gauge overall gains compared to localised gains 👍
- 1,175
- In front of you.
- F1_Racer68
