Understanding the GTP consensus on how Camber is Broken

Status
Not open for further replies.
Think it's been made clear 1 guy beating his own time, or another beating his means very little to the debate. Actually nothing really at all.. Driver factor ;) I don't drive Laguna often I much prefer Brands Hatch or Silverstone :D

If you want to do your "speed through a corner test" let's see some stuff at Silverstone on SS so easier for anybody to replicate, it's the replicating that is key ;)

What am I supposed to show?? I don't see anything from you guys except a bunch of stuff copied off other people from various websites... And you say it's broke with BS reasons why.....

Joker laughs
 
Driver skill doesn't come into it if the same driver is comparing his/her own times,

Slow or fast driver beating his/her own times with 0/0 camber must mean 0/0 camber is better,
Simple logic lol

But saying that, I tested the yellow bird with your yoda guidance, silverstone national, 0/0 toe both tests
0/0 camber second lap 59.0 (meh just get a lap in )
6/1.5 camber 15 laps later best i could get was 59.7 ( I really did try to )
yes the car has less oversteer but from the very first corner I understeer way to much and lose ground on my ghost never to catch it again.

This seems to match what EVERYBODY is trying to tell you
Camber = less overall grip

I'm pretty sure if you did really do this test you would know this already.
 
Jack Napier
Think it's been made clear 1 guy beating his own time, or another beating his means very little to the debate. Actually nothing really at all.. Driver factor ;)
Click to expand...
DAYTONA
Actually the track where the camber is the most important and the driver factor is the less important.

You're still dodging, dodger.
 
Jack Napier
In the end who am I debating, you ? The guy you copy off of, OR an I arguing your interpretation if somebody else explaining something about tuning??? Go get the guy writing the stuff you guys copy, Im sure he and I could have a real convo on tuning....
Click to expand...
Actually you're a funny guy. Really funny guy.
I am the one that suggested the camber is positive instead of negative there and I could find you the original post is there and clarified there and there.

As for my convo, your YB tune was pure crap. +0.35 front toe and no clue about why it understeered saying 6 full degree of camber stabilized it, can you even look at you in a mirror without shame ?

As for the GT350, that was mine, rigth ? I suppose your KTM wasn't ready yet, rigth ? Since you're a pic taker, could put the results there ?

No you can't.

Now if you want screenshot, I will provide them tomorow. I used my drag 908 on Road X under heavy 470km/h/wind compression in the U turn.
 
Last edited:
BlueShift
DAYTONA
Actually the track where the camber is the most important and the driver factor is the less important.

You're still dodging, dodger.
Click to expand...
Yes that's why I asked him to do his test at Daytona.
 
Voodoovaj
Actually, it's called using the facts to reach the speculation..
Click to expand...

I think you mistake "fact" with your "interpretation" of said "facts"

Let's have a look shall we

Voodoovaj
AFACT - Your suggested setting to the Yellow Bird (yes I tried it) leads to a more reactive front, but less adhesive front and rear. That is completely consistent with positive camber. Not at all consistent with negative camber. (BTW, I love the Yellow Bird and the BTR. My favourites for sure and mine are awesome handing cars :D).
Click to expand...

No that's absurd.. Much more "reactive" with no wheel angles ;) the toe angle not the camber makes her MUCH LESS "reactive" the camber gives the control in the corner otherwise not there.. Drive it with zero camb and toe to actually compare, the front end gaining control without stuffing a bunch of ballast, still light.. Joker laughs because your review is backwards....

Voodoovaj
AFACT - EVERYONE ELSE has found that camber reduces grip regardless of car, body roll, weight, spring settings, damper settings, roll bars settings, or any other setting or combinations..
Click to expand...

The only fact in there is there is a shared opinion camber is broken but still unproven ;)

Voodoovaj
AFACT - Every element of the tuning menu is listed as positive amounts. Toe, being the one element that has both positive and negative. Negative toe is clearly stated as a negative value (ex -0.1).
.
Click to expand...

It clearly says

"Camber(-)" the (-) meaning we are setting negative values... Jokes you couldn't figure that out???

Voodoovaj
AFACT - Although the intention is for camber to be negative (as indicated in the heading title in the UI for camber). The numbers shown are in fact positive. There is no "-" before the number as there is with the negative values of toe.
Click to expand...

Look up its Camber(-) my goodness couldn't figure that out but think you have the PD program figured out but missed that???? Seriously?

Voodoovaj
AFACT - The UI is flawed. It clearly indicates that the ride height value is INCHES, when we all know that cannot possibly be the case and it is more likely indicating millimeters.
Click to expand...

In actually marked "in." No other setting has a period, Maybe to indicate something

in.value

Possibly, although I haven't had a sit down with Kaz yet and assumptions are not facts....

Voodoovaj
AFACT - KW suspension is proudly displayed in the suspension menu (if you purchase through the GT Auto area). KW's simulations can deal with positive and negative camber. It would then require that the values entered be either positive or negative. I do not know how much of their technology (if any) is in the system. However, if there is any, it would assume positive values are indeed positive.
Click to expand...

Again still can't believe you yap so much but couldn't figure out

"Camber(-)" lmfao

Voodoovaj
ABased on these facts, I believe that the physics is using the value from the suspension settings without multiplying the value by -1 in order to obtain negative camber..
Click to expand...

You sure about all that, I can show you In game wheel in air riding a camber angle just like your pics IF that logic were remotely true Id be rolling over with such a high camber setting...

Look familiar?? Lol

Voodoovaj
AI also made video games for 20 years and I've seen stuff like this happen plenty.
Click to expand...

Not relevant you had no hand in this one, and couldn't figure out "Camber(-)"

Sure you understand what facts are???
 
FussyFez
Someone.

Please.

End.

This.

Troll.
Click to expand...

Crime scene pics to graphic, So I have used a crimestoppers reconstruction
troll.jpg
 
Voodoovaj
Well, the good that came out of this is that I have now built a 600PP yellow bird :D ...with 0/0 camber :D
Click to expand...
Throw some race mediums on it like Jack did and I'm sure it'll stick like glue..but then so would a Sherman tank on race mediums...:lol:

From Jack's Yellowbird video:
Jacks tires on YB.jpg
 
I was trying to help originally, I didnt pick sides or become rude or anything.
but now, both sides are being testy with each other.
I didnt sign up for this s##t.
understand, don't understand, I honestly could care less.

Best of luck jack, best of luck everyone else, im not even going to acknowledge this thread from here on out. Noone is changing their minds, noone is learning, I think everyone should follow my lead and exit stage left.

Goodnight.
 
Jack Napier
In actually marked "in." No other setting has a period, Maybe to indicate something

in.value

Possibly, although I haven't had a sit down with Kaz yet and assumptions are not facts....
Click to expand...
You don't even deserve to be replied Jack. I'm out too.
 
PsuPepperoni
The Yellowbird is a boatload of fun out of the showroom, I don't know why you'd want to tune it.
Click to expand...
And quicker (3sec at Streets of Willow) than with 6deg camber, too (god knows why, I've actually tried it. Gotta admit there's at least a certain novelty to see Yellowbird with all the nimbleness of the Exxon Valdez...)
I think in GT6 they've come closer than ever before to nailing the handling of the old Porsches (would kill to get a chance to drive a CTR for real, but at least I can muster about 40,000 miles in a '88 Carrera, including the occasional track day). When I put Yellowbird on Comfort tires and detune it to about the power of my car (full left on the power limiter :( ) things actually start to become very familiar. Only lift off oversteer is indeed too pronounced and needs some LSD tweaking to be spot on...
 
killerjimbag
Yes that's why I asked him to do his test at Daytona.
Click to expand...

I have tested just about every possible combination of camber numbers at Daytona, and unlike GT5 where camber helped grip in the corners, in GT6 it does not. I have tested this with all tire wear settings and have not seen any benefit to adding even the slightest amount of camber.

I don't have enough automotive knowledge to know what in the game relates to real life, I just know that when I make an adjustment does it help or hurt. I started setting up my GT6 Nascars for Daytona by taking a completely stock car and worked on only one adjustment at a time to see what it would do to the handling. Example; Front ARB starting at 1 and going up to 7 and back down to 1, I would then be able know what moving the front ARB's did for the handling and speed in GT6.

I can stay within .005 lap after lap with tire wear off so I can tell pretty quickly what effect changes have. With my fastest nascar setup that I can run 43.57's with I will loose grip and be a tenth slower with just .01 added to the front or rear. I can even hear the tires loosing grip as I add more camber, the louder the tires the slower the lap times, I believe. I wish that camber would be as helpful in GT6 as it was in GT5 but it just doesn't seem to be the case right now.

I honestly don't know what most of the numbers even mean and I actually think that helps me, because I don't have to ever question if it is a right or wrong adjustment the lap timer tells me if it was or was not.
 
Thanks Whoosier, I knew what the results would be having done a little tuning myself. Now if Mr Napier can prove that point wrong then I guess we can all apologize to Mr Napier. I can't see it happening. Bye the way gentlemen,she may not understand the numbers but I would put $ 100 on her she would humble you pretty quickly in any Nascar room.
 
WhoosierGirl
I have tested just about every possible combination of camber numbers at Daytona, and unlike GT5 where camber helped grip in the corners, in GT6 it does not. I have tested this with all tire wear settings and have not seen any benefit to adding even the slightest amount of camber.

I don't have enough automotive knowledge to know what in the game relates to real life, I just know that when I make an adjustment does it help or hurt. I started setting up my GT6 Nascars for Daytona by taking a completely stock car and worked on only one adjustment at a time to see what it would do to the handling. Example; Front ARB starting at 1 and going up to 7 and back down to 1, I would then be able know what moving the front ARB's did for the handling and speed in GT6.

I can stay within .005 lap after lap with tire wear off so I can tell pretty quickly what effect changes have. With my fastest nascar setup that I can run 43.57's with I will loose grip and be a tenth slower with just .01 added to the front or rear. I can even hear the tires loosing grip as I add more camber, the louder the tires the slower the lap times, I believe. I wish that camber would be as helpful in GT6 as it was in GT5 but it just doesn't seem to be the case right now.

I honestly don't know what most of the numbers even mean and I actually think that helps me, because I don't have to ever question if it is a right or wrong adjustment the lap timer tells me if it was or was not.
Click to expand...

Your credentials are impeccable so we all should take your results as further proof that camber doesn't work on ovals. And it's an easily repeatable test if Jack wants to try it out, but you know what he's going to say.

"You said you don't know about tuning, so your results don't mean anything, you aren't a professional race car driver. On top of that you have to add caster and change the tire pressure for camber to work, so sorry, not buying it.

Ok here's my Nascar tune

Camber 6.0/1.5
Toe -0.60/+0.85

I can run easy low 43's. You guys can't beat that can you? Hahaha...:lol:"
Click to expand...
 
I'd like to point out that while the GTP crowd is trying to smoke the proof camber works correctly in GT6.

I have proved it.

It was said to prove it I needed to produce a car that the camber would make faster and better driving. I've done so,

While those upset will try to add the wheel angles off the DEMO car to their set up and say it's slower, they miss the point. The setting given were for the DEMO CAR and it has stock ride height and springs, those wheel angles tuned to that.

The TEST is

Drive DEMO CAR no angles, un-drivable oversteer

Add wheel angle to DEMO CAR and the oversteer is changed to controllable understeer...

Not a tuned car at all, it's demonstrating wheel angles doing what they should.

Do some corner speed test with the DEMO CAR not your tune D-A

lol you don't understand stock Ride Height and Stock springs??

You can't even perform a simple test yet think you have figured out camber is broken??? What?!? Where have you shown anything but crap that can be chalked up to setting of all other car settings and driver.... Not one shrewd of proof, just BS theories that don't make sense and don't Cary any weight.

Even if you top a time I post, that means squat. It's still faster then many in the same cars driving with zero camb. If the camber hurt me so much I would not even get close to as fast as I am, but this all has no real relevance aside from pointing out to you and all that your point is moot.... Top my time? Big Hairy Deal, you have clearly more free time... Point being Im NOT Slower then anybody driving camber zero...

Next picture of the wheel up YB, this pic CLEARLY SHOWS me riding a front camber angle OVER 6 (near 7) degrees, if camber was really acting like positive camber, with that lean, and near 7 degrees camber, IF that camber were visually negative but broken acting positive, the car would be rolling over instead of riding the angle.. Think about that near 14 degrees pos camber from position in the pic your theory suggest, I'd be rolling on the lip of the rim rolling over, but noooooooo, rides the camber just like IRL D-A's look just like some IRL pics posted eh...

Oh and if adding minuscule amounts of camb duh should help any car as some would like to point out, what's broken??? Would that not suggest it works as should??? lol you seem not to even realize when the crap you guys post supports the apposing side, you guys just copy past before even getting through the article your stealing opinions from, and it's interpretations you post...


What is clear is GTP refuses to acknowledge any of the facts proving the consensus wrong don't even have the stones to address them directly can't dispute the evidence disproving how they theorize it's broke, and they have yet to put up any facts at all let alone prove the consensus...

One of you even says camber is in positive value as a fact because it's not marked negative, he must be confused by "Camber(-)" so the "facts" posted by you guys are not FACTS at all, it's a joke...

I'm like Mike Tyson in the early 90's fighting Mike Tyson 2014, not a fair fight. It's a group of you Trolls agains lil-O-me, even still, 10second Knock-out

I see more proving camber works, I don't see ANYTHING proving it's broken.....

Time for the Trolls pointing calling the kettle black to Troll up the thread & bury the facts in BS......

Joker Laughs
 
I'd like to point out that while the GTP crowd is trying to smoke the proof camber works correctly in GT6.

I have proved it.

It was said to prove it I needed to produce a car that the camber would make faster and better driving. I've done so,

While those upset will try to add the wheel angles off the DEMO car to their set up and say it's slower, they miss the point. The setting given were for the DEMO CAR and it has stock ride height and springs, those wheel angles tuned to that.

The TEST is

Drive DEMO CAR no angles, un-drivable oversteer

Add wheel angle to DEMO CAR and the oversteer is changed to controllable understeer...

Not a tuned car at all, it's demonstrating wheel angles doing what they should.

Do some corner speed test with the DEMO CAR not your tune D-A

lol you don't understand stock Ride Height and Stock springs??

You can't even perform a simple test yet think you have figured out camber is broken??? What?!? Where have you shown anything but crap that can be chalked up to setting of all other car settings and driver.... Not one shrewd of proof, just BS theories that don't make sense and don't Cary any weight.

Even if you top a time I post, that means squat. It's still faster then many in the same cars driving with zero camb. If the camber hurt me so much I would not even get close to as fast as I am, but this all has no real relevance aside from pointing out to you and all that your point is moot.... Top my time? Big Hairy Deal, you have clearly more free time... Point being Im NOT Slower then anybody driving camber zero...

Next picture of the wheel up YB, this pic CLEARLY SHOWS me riding a front camber angle OVER 6 (near 7) degrees, if camber was really acting like positive camber, with that lean, and near 7 degrees camber, IF that camber were visually negative but broken acting positive, the car would be rolling over instead of riding the angle.. Think about that near 14 degrees pos camber from position in the pic your theory suggest, I'd be rolling on the lip of the rim rolling over, but noooooooo, rides the camber just like IRL D-A's look just like some IRL pics posted eh...

Oh and if adding minuscule amounts of camb duh should help any car as some would like to point out, what's broken??? Would that not suggest it works as should??? lol you seem not to even realize when the crap you guys post supports the apposing side, you guys just copy past before even getting through the article your stealing opinions from, and it's interpretations you post...


What is clear is GTP refuses to acknowledge any of the facts proving the consensus wrong don't even have the stones to address them directly can't dispute the evidence disproving how they theorize it's broke, and they have yet to put up any facts at all let alone prove the consensus...

One of you even says camber is in positive value as a fact because it's not marked negative, he must be confused by "Camber(-)" so the "facts" posted by you guys are not FACTS at all, it's a joke...

I'm like Mike Tyson in the early 90's fighting Mike Tyson 2014, not a fair fight. It's a group of you Trolls agains lil-O-me, even still, 10second Knock-out

I see more proving camber works, I don't see ANYTHING proving it's broken.....

Time for the Trolls pointing calling the kettle black to Troll up the thread & bury the facts in BS......

Joker Laughs
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Posts

Back