Tuning question(s)

[mindwise]

Hi Experts, some tuning questions, i hope they have not been answered in another thread

Brake balance.
In general, cars will have about 60%/40% Front/Back brake balance, so when i open a 'stock' car and the brake balance is set to 5-5, does that mean this 5-5 distribution represents the expected 60/40 distribution, and setting the BB to i.e. 6-5 would make it something like 66/34?

Because, if that is not the case, and 5-5 represents 50/50 % balance, i don't understand any tune that has a higher bias to the rear, i cannot wrap my head around that.... so it has to be the former option, right?

Camber.
In GT3 i remember deriving the correct camber by the temperature distribution along the width the tires, so how do you guys do it without those temperature readings?

Springs:
Most cars i see have a 2-2 spring rate by default, some exceptions exist, but is see the 2-2 for both FF and MR cars, which seems a bit strange, surely the placement of the engine effects the spring rate distribution...
(a F430 and an A147 for example). Yet, (i think, since it's been a while since i looked) some cars dont have the springrate equal, like (i think) the amuse2000, so how should i interpret the default settings of the springrate..
(same for damper of course).

I'll have more questions (and yes, i did read Scaffs guide) but i'll conclude with 2 enigma's to me this post..

1)
The F430 has down force by default, the California has the same amount of DF, how the hell is that possible, it's a cabrio with the top off for crying out loud.
Surely the PD guys have much more knowledge wrt cars then i do, but my common sense says that it's impossible.
So is it my common nonsense, or is PD way off with these numbers.

2)
4WD vs RWD.
Every tuningguide i read, they hammer home 1 thing, and that is that the higher the speed of the car, the higher the "penalty" for the "rolling inertia" (i think the word is )

My Common 'non'Sense says to me, the penalty for rolling innertia is higher for 4WD, then for 2WD, i understand the extra traction the 4WDrives have exiting corners, but shouldn't they have a bigger penalty wrt top speed?

Perhaps it is not the case, but i have this nasty feeling that the GTR is unfairly balanced......

Well, thanks in advance for any help with the tuning questions

 

[clacksman]

Hi Experts, some tuning questions, i hope they have not been answered in another thread

Brake balance.
In general, cars will have about 60%/40% Front/Back brake balance, so when i open a 'stock' car and the brake balance is set to 5-5, does that mean this 5-5 distribution represents the expected 60/40 distribution, and setting the BB to i.e. 6-5 would make it something like 66/34?

Because, if that is not the case, and 5-5 represents 50/50 % balance, i don't understand any tune that has a higher bias to the rear, i cannot wrap my head around that.... so it has to be the former option, right?

Camber.
In GT3 i remember deriving the correct camber by the temperature distribution along the width the tires, so how do you guys do it without those temperature readings?

Springs:
Most cars i see have a 2-2 spring rate by default, some exceptions exist, but is see the 2-2 for both FF and MR cars, which seems a bit strange, surely the placement of the engine effects the spring rate distribution...
(a F430 and an A147 for example). Yet, (i think, since it's been a while since i looked) some cars dont have the springrate equal, like (i think) the amuse2000, so how should i interpret the default settings of the springrate..
(same for damper of course).

I'll have more questions (and yes, i did read Scaffs guide) but i'll conclude with 2 enigma's to me this post..

1)
The F430 has down force by default, the California has the same amount of DF, how the hell is that possible, it's a cabrio with the top off for crying out loud.
Surely the PD guys have much more knowledge wrt cars then i do, but my common sense says that it's impossible.
So is it my common nonsense, or is PD way off with these numbers.

2)
4WD vs RWD.
Every tuningguide i read, they hammer home 1 thing, and that is that the higher the speed of the car, the higher the "penalty" for the "rolling inertia" (i think the word is )

My Common 'non'Sense says to me, the penalty for rolling innertia is higher for 4WD, then for 2WD, i understand the extra traction the 4WDrives have exiting corners, but shouldn't they have a bigger penalty wrt top speed?

Perhaps it is not the case, but i have this nasty feeling that the GTR is unfairly balanced......

Well, thanks in advance for any help with the tuning questions

Brake balance: Street cars brake balance is more like 90/10. The 5/5 in the game I believe represents this.

Camber: GT3 had temperatures? Are you sure you're not thinking about Nascar Heat?

Downforce question: The California is much newer than the F430, and therefore benefits from a better knowledge base during design and development.

AWD cars don't lack top speed compared to RWD as you surmised. This is due to reduced friction of the tire, as the power is more evenly distributed among four tires, rather than two tires powered and two tires coasting. Yes, there's more bearing friction and inertia to overcome with all those driveshafts whizzing around.

 

[mindwise]

Brake balance: Street cars brake balance is more like 90/10. The 5/5 in the game I believe represents this.

Alright, so fiddling a bit with the bias in GT5P is working in the margins a bit, well at least that would explain the 3/6 i sometimes see in tunes

Camber: GT3 had temperatures? Are you sure you're not thinking about Nascar Heat?

Hmm, not sure it had the actual temperatures, but i think it had colors right, and i seem to remember at least an indication of too little/much camber.

If i am confused, it's not with any nascar game, perhaps with some Ubisoft F1 titles from a year or 4/6 back

I'm not yet convinced the california DForce is anywhere near realistic, but i've been surprized by reality before

Thanks..

 

[NLxAROSA]

Brake sensitivity is just that: sensitivity. I believe clacksman is right, it does not have a bearing on the actual braking power applied, since we have no way of knowing what power the brakes actually apply (Street cars usually have different brakes for front and rear). I assume the numbers are just a scale where you can set sensitivity anywhere from 0-100% where 5 is about 50%. I also noticed that you can get away with a high setting for the rear on most of the /Tuned cars; I assume this is due to the high amount of rear downforce, making the rear wheels lock up slower. I've used settings up to 2/7 and still got understeer while cornering and braking at the same time. Not for all cars, though, the GTR is notorious for its oversteer while braking.

Still, this is food for discussion, I've had many discussions about this and not everybody agrees with the above.

Camber is just a matter of trial and error. Just give it some value, see how it runs. Up the value, if it runs better: up it again, if it runs worse: lower it a bit. Repeat until you have the optimum value.

As for spring and damper rate: again I'm not completely sure (like with the brakes) whether the values are absolute or relative. That said: it doesn't prevent me from making a decent tune. I let laptimes and overall feel decide whether if the setting is good rather than the number.

 

[clacksman]

Brake sensitivity is just that: sensitivity. I believe clacksman is right, it does not have a bearing on the actual braking power applied, since we have no way of knowing what power the brakes actually apply (Street cars usually have different brakes for front and rear). I assume the numbers are just a scale where you can set sensitivity anywhere from 0-100% where 5 is about 50%. I also noticed that you can get away with a high setting for the rear on most of the /Tuned cars; I assume this is due to the high amount of rear downforce, making the rear wheels lock up slower. I've used settings up to 2/7 and still got understeer while cornering and braking at the same time. Not for all cars, though, the GTR is notorious for its oversteer while braking.

Clacksman is right? typo

Re: brakes: I have tunes at
1/10 (Mustang on R1s)
2/8 (Alfa 147 on S3s)
6/0 (GT-R on Ss)

I've used the Tuned cars very little, but that's interesting.

 

[EERS4YEARS]

If you read the caption's when you select an area to be tuned it tells you at bottom of screen what will happen. But Im not so sure every street car comes with 0 camber and 0 toe. This leads me to believe the numbers arent relative to actual number of degrees, of mm of toe. The numbers just give you a refrence point. i.e when you choose a car and it says 0 fr camber 0 rr camber, the car has some stock camber but we dont know how much, and 0.1 doesnt really mean 0.1 degrees of camber, its just a number. Same hold true for springs and damper, numbers are refrerence points, not real life settings. I am sure every car doesnt have same suspension setting from their perspective manufacture's. Am i Right??

 

[Scaff]

First can I just say that default tuning settings in GT5 are just like those in all the previous GT games, pretty pointless. I would on the whole ignore them and start from scratch, spend to much time focusing in the defaults and you end up with a big headache.

Right onto the more specific questions.

Brake Bias
Brake bias is the distribution ratio of braking force applied to the front and back. As such 5/5 is a 50%/50% split between the front and rear.

However if you have ABS set to even 1 this will take over some of the brake force distribution. This is why its possible to drive a car with 1/10 set and still get understeer when braking and turning, set the ABS to zero and try the same distribution, I promise you that stopping the car from spinning while braking and turning is now rather difficult.


Camber
Being honest in GT5 you are looking at trial and error to get it set right, until we get the ability to take temp readings at 3 points across the face of a tyre thsi will not change.


Spring rates
Ignore the defaults and tune for the track and car, also ignore the drive train type and instead focus on the static weight distribution of the car for your initial front/rear split.

The same applies to damper settings.


Downforce
Keep in mind that downforce is not just a product of what you see on the top of a car, but also what is going on under the car. On most road cars the design of the underneath of the car plays far more of a role that what you can see on top.

That said the California would need the top up to make the most of its aero package and off the top of my head I believe the 430 should have the great level of downforce at top speed of the two cars.

Finally in regard to top speed you are correct that a 4wd car would have more drive-train losses than a 2wd car, however that is only one part of what is required to calculate top speed, and as power at the wheels figure are already used then in most cases we would not need to worry about it.

In regard to rolling resistance, well a nondriven wheel still has a hub, bearings, etc and as such will still have a resistance, and not one a great deal different to a driven wheel.

At the end of the day calculating top speed very much depends on which figures you use.


Regards

Scaff

 

[NLxAROSA]

Brake Bias
Brake bias is the distribution ratio of braking force applied to the front and back. As such 5/5 is a 50%/50% split between the front and rear.

However if you have ABS set to even 1 this will take over some of the brake force distribution. This is why its possible to drive a car with 1/10 set and still get understeer when braking and turning, set the ABS to zero and try the same distribution, I promise you that stopping the car from spinning while braking and turning is now rather difficult.

This does raise some more questions (well at least with me ). I think the brake settings in GT5P are not just about bias. If it were just a distribution ratio, it should be represented by a percentage like torque split (you're always distributing 100% of the total amount braking force).

So what if I put the brakes at 10/10? Or 1/1? Or 4/4? Or 7/7? Those are all perfect splits (50%/50%), but the total amount of power applied will be be different for each setting. So IMO it's not just about distribution ratio, but also about individual brake sensitivity (the game specifically states sensitivity, not power or force).

So I see it like this: the result of choosing a certain combination of front and rear sensitivity lead to an amount of power being applied and a distribution between front and rear. But wouldn't the type/size of brakes fitted in front or rear affect these numbers? So if I have better brakes in front than rear, a 5/5 setting for sensitivity may still make it front biased?

I have tuned many, many cars in GT5P, but this area still seems like a bit of black art to me.

 

[Blitz187]

But wouldn't the type/size of brakes fitted in front or rear affect these numbers? So if I have better brakes in front than rear, a 5/5 setting for sensitivity may still make it front biased?

I have tuned many, many cars in GT5P, but this area still seems like a bit of black art to me.

This is the same idea I go by when I tune the brakes on a car... I think the size of brakes has something to do with it as well, like you state here...

 

[Scaff]

Sorry my bad as I was typing in a hurry.

Brake Bias is both the ratio and the power applied.

So 1/1, 5/5 and 10/10 are all 50%/50% splits, but they do differ in the degree of force applied, with the greater number being the greater the force applied.

I've never noticed GT needing to be tweaked for the different size brakes fitted front and back, and even if these needed to be accounted for a 5/5 split would still be wrong, as real world brake bias is often closer to 70%front and 30%rear as a minimum (often even great bias to the front, particularity for FWD cars).

Regards

Scaff

 

[Paulie]

I just tune what feels good on the brakes, it's pretty easy to get a brake balance you are happy with most of the time.

 

[Dragonistic]

There's a simple way to test the braking power debate, get 1 car, set the brakes to 1/1 and drive to 100mph, pick a marker and slam the brakes with ABS on, then repeat with 10/10 and see if there's any difference. Theoretically the 10/10 would stop in a shorter time or distance and having ABS on removes the chance of locking up.

I've always thought of the BB as a measure of sensitivity so say if i have 5/5 and i depress the brake pedal half way, i have 50% of the brakes power on front and back, and if I did say 10/1 and had the brake pedal half way again i'd have something like 80/20% of the brakes power applied to front/back respectively. I personally think that the 100% power never changes, but the way they are applied does so with 10/1 i'll reach 100% of the front brakes power with less depression of the pedal then it will take to reach 100% power on both sets.

 

[Blitz187]

There's a simple way to test the braking power debate, get 1 car, set the brakes to 1/1 and drive to 100mph, pick a marker and slam the brakes with ABS on, then repeat with 10/10 and see if there's any difference. Theoretically the 10/10 would stop in a shorter time or distance and having ABS on removes the chance of locking up.

I've always thought of the BB as a measure of sensitivity so say if i have 5/5 and i depress the brake pedal half way, i have 50% of the brakes power on front and back, and if I did say 10/1 and had the brake pedal half way again i'd have something like 80/20% of the brakes power applied to front/back respectively. I personally think that the 100% power never changes, but the way they are applied does so with 10/1 i'll reach 100% of the front brakes power with less depression of the pedal then it will take to reach 100% power on both sets.

Hey man! Havent seen you around in a while... 👍 Hope all is good... anyway what your saying here also makes sense... Never looked at it in that perspective...

 

[clacksman]

I just tune what feels good on the brakes, it's pretty easy to get a brake balance you are happy with most of the time.

This.

As has been stated, the GT5P 'numbers' representing any aspect of the setup are just that. Numbers. Not values.

The tuning realism of GT has gone steadily downhill with almost every iteration of the game.
Remember having real spring rates? Neither do I.

 

[Blitz187]

Remember having real spring rates? Neither do I.

Didnt GT4 always have real spring rates? Dont remember that well because I havent played it in ages!

 

[Paulie]

Just as a side note, I agree it's about sensitivity and not strength with the brakes.

This.

As has been stated, the GT5P 'numbers' representing any aspect of the setup are just that. Numbers. Not values.

The tuning realism of GT has gone steadily downhill with almost every iteration of the game.
Remember having real spring rates? Neither do I.

Relax, this is supposed to be an arcade style of tuning (probably because they hadn't finished modelling the tuning aspect of the game completely when this came out), the full GT5 will have some more real values (like spring rates at least). <- Sorry if that sounded rude or insulting, it isn't meant to be.👍

 

[NLxAROSA]

The main conclusion is that it really doesn't matter whether the values are real (absolute) or not (a relative scale from 1-10); as long as they behave in a predictable way we can use them. Just don't try to apply them to a real car.

 

[Scaff]

This.

As has been stated, the GT5P 'numbers' representing any aspect of the setup are just that. Numbers. Not values.

The tuning realism of GT has gone steadily downhill with almost every iteration of the game.
Remember having real spring rates? Neither do I.

Every version of GT apart from GT5 has had real spring rate values in it (well apart from Concept and GT4 but they had no tuning at all), so I have no idea from where you have got that from at all.

I've also tuned across all versions of GT and the relationship between tuning, its effect on the car and its relationship to real world tuning applications has not gone downhill at all, quite the opposite.

No GT is not the same as real world tuning (and one of the first things my own guide state is exactly that), however the basic fundamentals of real-world tuning can be applied directly to GT and do work out the same.

A great example of how the series has improved in this direction is in regard to spring rates. Prior to GT4 very little in the way of problems (apart from grinding the bottom of the car) occurred from running very, very soft spring rates.

Simply put in GT, GT2 and GT3 all that happened was the car got softer. The real world doesn't work like that, set spring rates to soft and as soon as the suspension travel bottoms out and the stops are hit the effective spring rate (not from the actual spring but from the bump stop) goes through the roof.

So we would have a spring rate on a corner than would be soft up to a point, but once enough load is on it to fully compress the spring, the effective rate would get very hard, and very quickly at that.

Now GT4 models this to a small degree and GT5 models it to a greater degree, so while the values are just 'numbers' they are numbers that work in the same way as the real world does.

So sorry to say but I totally disagree with you on this one.


Regards

Scaff

 

[clacksman]

Every version of GT apart from GT5 has had real spring rate values in it (well apart from Concept and GT4 but they had no tuning at all), so I have no idea from where you have got that from at all.

I've also tuned across all versions of GT and the relationship between tuning, its effect on the car and its relationship to real world tuning applications has not gone downhill at all, quite the opposite.

No GT is not the same as real world tuning (and one of the first things my own guide state is exactly that), however the basic fundamentals of real-world tuning can be applied directly to GT and do work out the same.

A great example of how the series has improved in this direction is in regard to spring rates. Prior to GT4 very little in the way of problems (apart from grinding the bottom of the car) occurred from running very, very soft spring rates.

Simply put in GT, GT2 and GT3 all that happened was the car got softer. The real world doesn't work like that, set spring rates to soft and as soon as the suspension travel bottoms out and the stops are hit the effective spring rate (not from the actual spring but from the bump stop) goes through the roof.

So we would have a spring rate on a corner than would be soft up to a point, but once enough load is on it to fully compress the spring, the effective rate would get very hard, and very quickly at that.

Now GT4 models this to a small degree and GT5 models it to a greater degree, so while the values are just 'numbers' they are numbers that work in the same way as the real world does.

So sorry to say but I totally disagree with you on this one.


Regards

Scaff

Um, it seems I wasn't nearly as clear as I thought I was.

By 'tuning realism', I meant having good, labeled graphs for gearing, real values for various settings (not just spring rates), things like that.
NOT their effects on the car.

And Paulie, I'm just disappointed at the overall number of arcade-style games, and I don't want GT going down that road.

 

[Paulie]

And Paulie, I'm just disappointed at the overall number of arcade-style games, and I don't want GT going down that road.

It won't, ever.

 

[EERS4YEARS]

If you guys would read the captions it tells you what the number for Brakes mean. it says how fast the brakes get applied, not the force. If the number is 1 it has same amout of force as 10, its just applied more abruptly on ten rather than 1, LIKE THE CAPTION SAYS! Ten will make brakes lock up because all force applied at once, on 1 it is applied slower so tires wont lock up.

 

[Blitz187]

If you guys would read the captions it tells you what the number for Brakes mean. it says how fast the brakes get applied, not the force. If the number is 1 it has same amout of force as 10, its just applied more abruptly on ten rather than 1, LIKE THE CAPTION SAYS! Ten will make brakes lock up because all force applied at once, on 1 it is applied slower so tires wont lock up.

Thanks for pointing that out, but I think we all knew that already 👍 I can understand though that from the previous posts it looks like we havent read those captions...