Tyre Grip Levels

[justin700]

Long time lurker, first time poster.

As I only live maybe 3 hours from Mt Panorama, this has been my testing platform in GT6. It allows me to really gain a sense of the speed compared to local racing times.

So this morning I decided to pick up a Ford (AU) Falcon XR8 V8 Supercar and run it at the only suitable track, Mt Panorama.

I immediately realised my times were considerably faster then the car was capable of. I threw a set of SS on and still lapped too fast. A set of SM brought them much closer to reality although still a 2:13.093 is still a second faster then the fastest lap set in the 2000 FAI 1000 (Bathurst 1000).

I am by no means a fantastic driver, although using no aids (tc 0, abs0).

In essence my question is, In GT6 are racing tyres comparable to SM or even more likely SH?

 

[TexasTyme214]

It probably depends on the car. I think the racing tires are just general tires. We don't have perfect tire wear values and grip levels on any car (at the same time), so racing tires might be too slow for some cars and too fast for others.

 

[Johnnypenso]

It probably depends on the car. I think the racing tires are just general tires. We don't have perfect tire wear values and grip levels on any car (at the same time), so racing tires might be too slow for some cars and too fast for others.

Do you have some examples where a car is slower on racing tires in GT than it's real life counterpart?. Generally speaking GT tires are more grippy in relation to real life tires if we take comfort softs as tires for low end sedans and older cars, and sports hards as a basic kind of rubber found on better sports cars and modern sports sedans etc.

 

[TexasTyme214]

Do you have some examples where a car is slower on racing tires in GT than it's real life counterpart?. Generally speaking GT tires are more grippy in relation to real life tires if we take comfort softs as tires for low end sedans and older cars, and sports hards as a basic kind of rubber found on better sports cars and modern sports sedans etc.

The only thing I can think of that might be an example are the LMP cars. It's incredibly tough (at least for me) to match those qualifying times. Whereas, in any other car/track/tire combo, it wouldn't take nearly as much effort to beat the IRL lap records. A good example would be the 2011 Audi R18's qualifying lap of a 3:25.738 (the slowest R18 in qualifying was a 3:26.165). I haven't gotten well under 3:30 yet with racing softs.

Source: http://www.lemans.org/wpphpFichiers...res_du_mans_qualifying_practice_3_results.pdf

 

[ironman44321]

It's going to be more than just the tires though. No matter how good a racing driver is he isn't going to push as hard as someone who doesn't have to worry about being killed in a crash.

 

[phil_75]

Do you have some examples where a car is slower on racing tires in GT than it's real life counterpart?. Generally speaking GT tires are more grippy in relation to real life tires if we take comfort softs as tires for low end sedans and older cars, and sports hards as a basic kind of rubber found on better sports cars and modern sports sedans etc.

You could try beating this

 

[vticoupe]

It's going to be more than just the tires though. No matter how good a racing driver is he isn't going to push as hard as someone who doesn't have to worry about being killed in a crash.

But IRL you get much more feedback from your car, i've driven the Nordschleife IRL and, for example at Schwedenkreuz i pushed much harder than i do in GT. Just because the car gave me that feeling that it's ok to push. In GT this is one section, where you only know that by crashing or not.

 

[Nikked]

So this morning I decided to pick up a Ford (AU) Falcon XR8 V8 Supercar and run it at the only suitable track, Mt Panorama.

I immediately realised my times were considerably faster then the car was capable of. I threw a set of SS on and still lapped too fast. A set of SM brought them much closer to reality although still a 2:13.093 is still a second faster then the faster lap set in the 2000 FAI 1000 (Bathurst 1000)

I'm not sure what times you are refering to, but the AU Supercar was capable of 2:09.XXX around Bathurst with a qualifying setup...

 

[trustjab]

Even on softs, I havent been able to match the SuperGT times (GT500) with the 500hp. I think they have closer to 520-530hp, but its tough to crack off 1:52's at Suzuka.

 

[justin700]

I'm not sure what times you are refering to, but the AU Supercar was capable of 2:09.XXX around Bathurst with a qualifying setup...

http://racing.natsoft.com.au/637082818/object_11984560.67U/Times?11

Is where I was quoting times from. The fastest qualifying lap of the weekend was 2:11.XXX. The fastest lap of the race was a 2:14.XXX.

I presume the broken aero model could be playing havoc with the pursuit of a realistic time.

Hopefully we get the modern day cars. Would be great to reenact the "Great Race".

 

[f1webberfan]

Is where I was quoting times from. The fastest qualifying lap of the weekend was 2:11.XXX. The fastest lap of the race was a 2:14.XXX.

I presume the broken aero model could be playing havoc with the pursuit of a realistic time.

Maybe you are not counting the weather in this. If the track temperature IRL was for example 20 degrees and in the game 30 degrees ... you see where I'm pointing at. And I think it's relevant to say that on different tracks in GT6 you are getting different grip levels.
So I'm actually questioning more and more, for myself at least, these RL vs GT6 lap times on certain tracks. maybe they are good reference point but it seems they are nothing less ... since GT6 is way from perfect.
Instead I'm more interested in driving sensation comparisons - for example - is this car behaving like the real counterpart?
And my point/question is - justin700 - did you actually drove that track IRL? If so what car were you using and on what tires and how was it compared to a car similar in the game, comparing driving feel and lap times?
Cheers, mate!

 

[justin700]

In real life I have driven the track in an 06 VW Golf 2.0 FSI. The closest I have in game is the MKV Golf GTI. I have tuned it to have the same power and weight as my model.

I ran it in street spec and not wanting to loose my license couldn't perform any 'real' insight into how the track felt at raving speed, although cruising around feels uncannily familiar. Nothing can compare to driving the actual track and feeling the elevation change.
It's a real shame the track is a sort of semi-premium track. It's almost as if they have half finished the track surrounds as most of the trees look awful.

 

[f1webberfan]

Are there no track days? Because you say you will lose you driving license?! ... I'm a bit confused.

 

[Nikked]

The track is a public road most of the year, limited to 60km/h.

 

[Spinodontosaur4]

I have a feeling that this might be due to incorrect aero levels for the Falcon more than anything, which is a problem on a lot of slightly older race cars (where they have identical aero levels to much newer and much gripper versions).

I'll do a bit of extrapolation as an example (you can skip to the conclusion if you like).

____

V8 Supercar results taken from http://racing.natsoft.com.au (i'll also use V8 SC to refer to V8 Supercar from here on in.. it's just quicker)
So at Bathurst in 2000 the fastest times were in the 2:11's, whilst in 2011 the pole time was 2:12.765. Around Albert Park (Melbourne) in 2011 the pole time was a 1:58.195, which seeing as the 2000 times are not listed on the site above we will have to extrapolate (based on their respective times at Bathurst) to say a 2000 car should have been able to lap at around the 1:57 mark around Albert Park.
The 2011 F1 pole time was a 1:23.529 at Albert Park (which is the unofficial record at the circuit btw).

Now onto Suzuka (yes I am going somewhere with this) and the 2011 F1 pole lap was a 1:30.466. We can now use this, plus the estimate time of a 2000 V8 SC at Albert Park, to extrapolate a rough lap time for a 2000 V8 SC at Suzuka. We would the latter to lap Suzuka in around 2:07 based on these extrapolations, now not only is this miles slower than the low 1:50's that GT500 class cars regularly pump in around there, but is even slower than any decent GT300 time! (Check supergt.net for times).

_____

So in real life the 2000 V8 SC's appear to have been a lot slower than GT500 (for which the exact year doesn't really matter, but the record was set in 2007 and is linked in a video in a previous post), yet in Gran Turismo 6 the sole representative of the 2000 V8's has more downforce than any GT500 car does, so it is thus quite easy to understand why the GT6 version of the car is seemingly so much faster than in real life.
Racing Hard tyres in GT6 work fine on something like the aforementioned GT500 & GT300 classes, plus the GT3 class and LMP1, so this further suggests that it is the aero (or chassis) of the Ford Falcon that is in the wrong here, not the tyres.

 

[devildog666]

I am by no means a fantastic driver, although using no aids (tc 0, abs0).

We all "love" that you use no tv and abs.

 

[justin700]

We all "love" that you use no tv and abs.

It's seems as though you have no interest in the actual topic at hand but rather my efforts at enjoying my game??

I have a feeling that this might be due to incorrect aero levels for the Falcon more than anything, which is a problem on a lot of slightly older race cars (where they have identical aero levels to much newer and much gripper versions).

I'll do a bit of extrapolation as an example (you can skip to the conclusion if you like).

____

V8 Supercar results taken from http://racing.natsoft.com.au (i'll also use V8 SC to refer to V8 Supercar from here on in.. it's just quicker)
So at Bathurst in 2000 the fastest times were in the 2:11's, whilst in 2011 the pole time was 2:12.765. Around Albert Park (Melbourne) in 2011 the pole time was a 1:58.195, which seeing as the 2000 times are not listed on the site above we will have to extrapolate (based on their respective times at Bathurst) to say a 2000 car should have been able to lap at around the 1:57 mark around Albert Park.
The 2011 F1 pole time was a 1:23.529 at Albert Park (which is the unofficial record at the circuit btw).

Now onto Suzuka (yes I am going somewhere with this) and the 2011 F1 pole lap was a 1:30.466. We can now use this, plus the estimate time of a 2000 V8 SC at Albert Park, to extrapolate a rough lap time for a 2000 V8 SC at Suzuka. We would the latter to lap Suzuka in around 2:07 based on these extrapolations, now not only is this miles slower than the low 1:50's that GT500 class cars regularly pump in around there, but is even slower than any decent GT300 time! (Check supergt.net for times).

_____

So in real life the 2000 V8 SC's appear to have been a lot slower than GT500 (for which the exact year doesn't really matter, but the record was set in 2007 and is linked in a video in a previous post), yet in Gran Turismo 6 the sole representative of the 2000 V8's has more downforce than any GT500 car does, so it is thus quite easy to understand why the GT6 version of the car is seemingly so much faster than in real life.
Racing Hard tyres in GT6 work fine on something like the aforementioned GT500 & GT300 classes, plus the GT3 class and LMP1, so this further suggests that it is the aero (or chassis) of the Ford Falcon that is in the wrong here, not the tyres.

I think it's more a broken (unrealistic) representation of the car(chassis). Much like you said.

 

[Exorcet]

It's going to be more than just the tires though. No matter how good a racing driver is he isn't going to push as hard as someone who doesn't have to worry about being killed in a crash.

Debatable. If you're really good, odds are you don't have to be overly concerned about crashing. Or you may be so good that your inflated ego keeps you from thinking about it until it's too late. There is more than tires at play here, but I don't know how much the psychological effects matter.

I think the biggest issue is that GT6 still uses grip multipliers to define 99% of a tire's performance. This is why there is sometimes so much debate on what the right tire is for a car, the car itself barely impacts grip performance.

 

[Nikked]

I doubt if PD would have really taken too much data from the AU falcon, probably just the specs. The Au V8 supercar suffered from a lack of mid corner grip due to a decrease in the front undertray, decreasing down force (this was a parity bandaid, Falcons had double wishbone that was superior to the Commodores multilink). Power is down too, you need to do the oil change to match the real output. You could play with the settings to try and match a setup that would be found on the car.

The diff ratio from 2005 is 3.15:1.

Bathurst qualifying laptimes, AU V8 Supercar.

1999 - 2:09.5146
2000 - 2:28.3844 (wet)
2001 - 2:09.7785
2002 - 2:09.0988

Fastest ever lap was 2:06 XXX in a VE Commodore.


My fastest was 2:08:XX on racing softs. Perhaps mediums might be more lifelike.

 

[wowbaggerBR]

The only thing I can think of that might be an example are the LMP cars. It's incredibly tough (at least for me) to match those qualifying times. Whereas, in any other car/track/tire combo, it wouldn't take nearly as much effort to beat the IRL lap records. A good example would be the 2011 Audi R18's qualifying lap of a 3:25.738 (the slowest R18 in qualifying was a 3:26.165). I haven't gotten well under 3:30 yet with racing softs.

Source: http://www.lemans.org/wpphpFichiers...res_du_mans_qualifying_practice_3_results.pdf

I was about to post the same thing. In a LMP1 car, specially the newer ones, is insanely hard to get the same times in Le Mans.