Unrealistic Tyre Wear(Softs,medium,hard) they wear at the same rate(UNREALISTIC)

[crunkmiester]

I couldn't agree more with the discussion in this thread. Every time I've enter an endurance race using either tires I've been noticing the same issues as everyone else has mentioned in this thread. I've always thought it was a drivers' flaw on my part but now that it is evident that other members are experiencing the same problems PD needs to seriously address and remedy this issue.

 

[C.D]

Not true. the difference just isn't as extreme as you might think it is. Soft tires might get you 10 good laps while mediums would get you 12 and hards would get you 13. Mediums are designed for the bulk of a long race when you are mostly trying to drive efficiently. Softs are best for the beginning if you want to try to move up quickly at the start. Hards are best if you need a set of tires that will last just a little longer than softs and mediums. It matters in close endurance races after things get messy.

This is a load of bull$hit, if anything soft tires actually last *longer* than medium and hard due to the fact that with them you won't be sliding left and right like crazy 24/7 as if you were driving on a frozen lake or something.

I run a Super GT 500 Class series and over the course of 15 races or so we've had several people screwing themselves up by picking medium/hard tires for a stint while leading the pack (we're talking about a hr, hr and a half+ races here)...which is why just about everyone uses softs all the time now (medium and hards make you a whole lot slower and won't last as long so why bother).

Even rain tires don't work as intended seeing as Softs wear at a slower pace, get warm faster (rain tires just never seem to get to high temps) and still give you more traction even during full fledged rainstorms.

 

[Enzo309]

This is a load of bull$hit, if anything soft tires actually last *longer* than medium and hard due to the fact that with them you won't be sliding left and right like crazy 24/7 as if you were driving on a frozen lake or something.

I run a Super GT 500 Class series and over the course of 15 races or so we've had several people screwing themselves up by picking medium/hard tires for a stint while leading the pack (we're talking about a hr, hr and a half+ races here)...which is why just about everyone uses softs all the time now (medium and hards make you a whole lot slower and won't last as long so why bother).

Even rain tires don't work as intended seeing as Softs wear at a slower pace, get warm faster (rain tires just never seem to get to high temps) and still give you more traction even during full fledged rainstorms.

Its probably you have a hardcore set up for hardcore grip that is why your tyre's wear so fast other than that you most probably don't know how to "save your tyres" keeping the pace with any slick compound is one of the basic fundamentals of racing if you don't know what saving your tyres is then I reccomend you turning off the tyre wearing well other than that you don't know it.


that is completely wrong in any kind of top motorsports racing , you need to understand the basic fundamentals first before you neglect something.

read the thread and watch the youtube video , that will definitely teach you some educational slick tyre's so you know what the durability are.

But those are only the facts , its up to you if you really know what tyre saving is or a proper setup because if you don't which you are because you are saying its BS well you are wrong. completely.

 

[C.D]

Its probably you have a hardcore set up for hardcore grip that is why your tyre's wear so fast other than that you most probably don't know how to "save your tyres" keeping the pace with any slick compound is one of the basic fundamentals of racing if you don't know what saving your tyres is then I reccomend you turning off the tyre wearing well other than that you don't know it.


that is completely wrong in any kind of top motorsports racing , you need to understand the basic fundamentals first before you neglect something.

I didn't say that my tires wore fast, I'm just stating that Hard and Mediums don't last any longer than Softs and since they tend to make the car a whole lot harder to control they actually end up lasting LESS, how couldn't you notice such an easily recognizable occurrence, have you actually played the game?

In our last GP @ Special Stage Route 5 I made my racing softs last about 18 laps during the race (starting with a full fuel tank) and 22 laps during the off-race tests (going from half-full tank to basically empty), at 1.15-1.17 minutes per lap you do the math (had to tweak the brakes balance a few times mid race though).

Get in an online lobby (I drove a Xanavi Nismo GT-R '08 capped at 550 CV fyi) and try doing that with Hards or Medium tires and then get back to me (pointless though cause I've been doing lots of testing in that sense since I'm constantly shooting for a 1-pit strategy in our series races).

 

[chuyler1]

I think Maffski's analysis pretty much sums up this debate. He ran several laps on each type of sport tire in his BMW M3. After 25 laps on each tire, it becomes clear that your lap times will not deteriorate quick enough on soft tires to make it worth while running medium or hard tires. The compound only affects lap times, not tire wear.

 

[Enzo309]

I think Maffski's analysis pretty much sums up this debate. He ran several laps on each type of sport tire in his BMW M3. After 25 laps on each tire, it becomes clear that your lap times will not deteriorate quick enough on soft tires to make it worth while running medium or hard tires. The compound only affects lap times, not tire wear.

you are correct but in any top motorsport racing division , F1,LMP1,GP2 the compounds do sort things out.

in a BMW M3 CSL you wouldn't really see the "difference" that is a road car and even if he is driving on the limit which he wasn't it still won't matter because it isn't a race car.

Driving on the limit is different from just lapping around to see what kind of tyre wearing rate is coming out of the sports tyres (not even slicks).

as you can see the durability of hard compounds compared to soft compounds have a difference of 50%

thats why if you ever follow F1 , some teams use hards at the start and some uses softs.

The compounds separate them in grip and durability.


Supersoft's won't even make it to 5th lap in F1.


tyre compounds are basic fundamentals in motorsports racing , unless your just lapping some pedestrian 5 or 10 laps then it wouldn't matter as much as in a real grand prix race when you are going to lap on the limit for a 300 km race.

But other than that if you don't know anything about tyre saving or just having a proper set up because again most people have hardcore set up which lead to complains on the unrealistic update months ago then I prefer you to turn off the tyre wear , I mean lets be honest you dont know how to set up a car and you also dont know what tyre saving is , you've never even been to a long distance on the limit racing. So you pretty much dont know anything about how tyres are in race strategies.

 

[Corpsey]

^ he's got a point, that data is only for 25 laps.. of course in any sprint race the softs will be better.. endurance racing is about, well, endurance..... and I think tire conservation does play a role, although it's obvious that the times for the soft tires will be better with abs, it will help stop the car faster at a shorter distance.. and for only 25 laps he's gaining 3 seconds for mediums!! that sounds like a lot of tire consumption :\

 

[crooky369]

The only time worth gambling on any thing over than softs is say a race where the softs need a pitstop and the hard's don't. Plus a massive pit lane and a lot of luck!

The thing is though the person who ran softs will be so far ahead by the time the you'd normally pit with the softs that'd they probably just not stop anyway knowing they had such a big cushion so I'm not sure anything other than softs is viable...

 

[Antonisbob]

Soft tires heat up quicker (IRL) than harder ones. Since rain tends to cool the track, a softer tire is theoretically gonna do the best job in rain, although other factors also come into play in real-life. The game of course tends to simplify all this.

The game does simplify it, ALOT. IRL if your using slicks in the rain.. basically the water has no where to go under the tire.. so you hydroplane. Rain tires have grips on them for a reason, so the water can go somewhere. GT5 kinda butchered this.

 

[Morgoth_666]

Not sure how much more obvious this can be. The graph chuyler1 brought up makes it as plain as day. The tire compounds all follow virtually an identical curve of how quickly they drop off. The only difference is in that the harder compounds are slower at every point. Hards lose 5.1 seconds from prime to worn condition, Mediums 4.8, and Softs lose 4.4. At 1:30 per lap, 25 laps is well over half an hour of driving, easily long enough to see a difference.

Yes it's using sports tires, not racing tires. And yes, it's only one set of runs. But many people have seen exactly the same result on racing tires. Setup/car/skill have little to do with this. Take any car and make three runs with exactly the same setup, with the same driver, driving exactly the same way. The hard tires will not last longer than the mediums in either time drop-off or overall wear. Mediums vs Softs will be likewise. If anything, it will be the opposite due to skidding less on softer compounds. Where's the confusion?

 

[hsdioce]

wait, in the beginning, were you saying softs had greater durability? because i'm pretty sure hard tires last the longest, but are harder to heat up, and softs are easy to warm up. and btw they are only using two compounds of tire in F1 at the moment, excluding wet weather tires.

 

[RB6]

Not sure how much more obvious this can be. The graph chuyler1 brought up makes it as plain as day. The tire compounds all follow virtually an identical curve of how quickly they drop off. The only difference is in that the harder compounds are slower at every point. Hards lose 5.1 seconds from prime to worn condition, Mediums 4.8, and Softs lose 4.4. At 1:30 per lap, 25 laps is well over half an hour of driving, easily long enough to see a difference.

Yes it's using sports tires, not racing tires. And yes, it's only one set of runs. But many people have seen exactly the same result on racing tires. Setup/car/skill have little to do with this. Take any car and make three runs with exactly the same setup, with the same driver, driving exactly the same way. The hard tires will not last longer than the mediums in either time drop-off or overall wear. Mediums vs Softs will be likewise. If anything, it will be the opposite due to skidding less on softer compounds. Where's the confusion?

Negative. My friend's cousin is a GP2 driver , I can tell you all the information in the thread is correct.

The compounds are separate in grip and durability.

In F1 the difference between the compounds are enormous in tyre wearing and lap times and obviously race strategies ex : how efficient the driver is or what set up you have

A car with Hard compounds can be .5s to 1s slower in pace than another same performing car that has Soft compounds , the only difference is hards last almost 50% longer than softs.

Obviously there is a big misconception between compounds to the people who don't really know how it works in the real world.

Hards will only wear a bit faster if you dont know how to drive with different compounds but even so that wont be enough to make hards wear as close to soft compounds.

If you are proffesional enough to drive on the limit with different compounds then you will understand it more.

I saw the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyInar4mMUA as it was in the thread , its correct.


For now they really do need to fix and update the tyre durability (wear rate).

 

[Enzo309]

wait, in the beginning, were you saying softs had greater durability? because i'm pretty sure hard tires last the longest, but are harder to heat up, and softs are easy to warm up. and btw they are only using two compounds of tire in F1 at the moment, excluding wet weather tires.

Nope read the thread again.Indeed you are wrong because for 2011 there's new pirelli slicks and has 4 compounds with supersofts (especifically mostly used for qualifying)

Intermediates are used when there is 2+mm of water on the track , Wets are used when there are over 5+mm of water patch

read the thread again but ill answer your 1st question , I said the opposite of that which is the real thing.

 

[Magzire]

Soft tires heat up quicker (IRL) than harder ones. Since rain tends to cool the track, a softer tire is theoretically gonna do the best job in rain, although other factors also come into play in real-life. The game of course tends to simplify all this.

No soft slick is good in rain period. Tires need grooves to push the water away. Slicks in rain have nearly zero grip. Temp of the tire completely hasn't nothing to do here.

 

[Enzo309]

No soft slick is good in rain period. Tires need grooves to push the water away. Slicks in rain have nearly zero grip. Temp of the tire completely hasn't nothing to do here.

thats completely wrong when there is aquaplanning , if the water is 2mm or above slicks will not penetrate through the water resulting to what is called "aquaplanning" , you will crash if you have slicks during aquaplanning unless you drive at 50 kmh pedestrian speeds.

soft slicks are good on 1mm or below water but surely when it reaches 2 mm , your car will hugely oversteer and hugely understeer and huge wheely 100% of the time.

Even if the intermediates were designed for 2-4mm of water there would never be a time that the car is not in "aquaplanning" state.

Worst even on 5+mm water because that would require Wet compounds , that's the best possible compound F1 and other top motorsports racing divisions have developed for maximum performance during the extreme conditions but its still more of aquaplanning handling wise but it is the fastest it can ever be in the rain.

 

[Morgoth_666]

Negative. My friend's cousin is a GP2 driver , I can tell you all the information in the thread is correct.

The compounds are separate in grip and durability.

In F1 the difference between the compounds are enormous in tyre wearing and lap times and obviously race strategies ex : how efficient the driver is or what set up you have

A car with Hard compounds can be .5s to 1s slower in pace than another same performing car that has Soft compounds , the only difference is hards last almost 50% longer than softs.

Obviously there is a big misconception between compounds to the people who don't really know how it works in the real world.

Hards will only wear a bit faster if you dont know how to drive with different compounds but even so that wont be enough to make hards wear as close to soft compounds.

If you are proffesional enough to drive on the limit with different compounds then you will understand it more.

I saw the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyInar4mMUA as it was in the thread , its correct.


For now they really do need to fix and update the tyre durability (wear rate).

So are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?

There seems to be some sort of mixup happening here. Enzo309 started by sharing that video which apparently(IMO not very effectively) shows how it should work in real life, and claiming that that is not how it works in the game, and the game is wrong. I, and many others, agree. Somewhere along the way it seems that Enzo309 began arguing with and insulting someone who was actually agreeing with him, and I apparently got caught up in it forgetting who the original poster was.

Chuyler1 posted Maffski's graph made from in-game tests, and then Enzo made a post which appeared to be disagreeing with what it shows, and I responded to that by stating how definitive I believe the graph's results are, and how myself and many others have also found that that is how the game works and that it is wrong.

You then tell me that I am wrong, and talk about how it works in the real world(which I am aware of and did not dispute, and which has nothing to do with the game), and that I don't know how to drive, or how the real tires behave, and then state that PD needs to fix something about how they work in the game.

It's my fault for getting involved without studying the whole thread to notice that something about it's current state makes no sense.


I'll make my position simple: In the real world, harder tires last longer but don't provide as much grip and so are slower. In the game, hard tires don't provide as much grip and are slower, but they don't last any longer than the softer tires, and as such you cannot use harder compounds to create different strategies for running a long race. I believe the game to be wrong and that it needs to be fixed.

 

[Enzo309]

So are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?

There seems to be some sort of mixup happening here. Enzo309 started by sharing that video which apparently(IMO not very effectively) shows how it should work in real life, and claiming that that is not how it works in the game, and the game is wrong. I, and many others, agree. Somewhere along the way it seems that Enzo309 began arguing with and insulting someone who was actually agreeing with him, and I apparently got caught up in it forgetting who the original poster was.

Chuyler1 posted Maffski's graph made from in-game tests, and then Enzo made a post which appeared to be disagreeing with what it shows, and I responded to that by stating how definitive I believe the graph's results are, and how myself and many others have also found that that is how the game works and that it is wrong.

You then tell me that I am wrong, and talk about how it works in the real world(which I am aware of and did not dispute, and which has nothing to do with the game), and that I don't know how to drive, or how the real tires behave, and then state that PD needs to fix something about how they work in the game.

It's my fault for getting involved without studying the whole thread to notice that something about it's current state makes no sense.


I'll make my position simple: In the real world, harder tires last longer but don't provide as much grip and so are slower. In the game, hard tires don't provide as much grip and are slower, but they don't last any longer than the softer tires, and as such you cannot use harder compounds to create different strategies for running a long race. I believe the game to be wrong and that it needs to be fixed.

Im not disagreeing on any unless it says that they wear at the same rate which in GT5 right now it does.

 

[chuyler1]

I think we are all in agreement then.

Real life: harder compounds provide less grip but allow you to run more laps
In Game: harder compounds provide less grip but last the same as softer compounds*

* tested and verifed after 25 laps on each tire (40 minutes of driving). What happens after 40 minutes is open discussion but if GT5 were anything like real life, we would've seen a drastic increase in lap times on soft tires to the point where it crossed the lap times of hard tires.

 

[alonsof1fan91]

Ok Enzo, first of all, im maybe not the best driver, but in enduros I always try to safe my tires. I try to drive smooth as possible and making 0 mistakes.

On the Grand Valley 300 a-spec race, Im lapping 9 seconds faster per lap on soft tires with my (stock) minolta then with hards. Also, the difference in grip level is so huge, loosing the back end or traction of that car is very easy. One donut and your tire strategy is destroyed. And they only last 4-5 laps more, I can get atleast 12 good laps out of the racing softs. The time I will loose in that laps with hard tires wont be making up with one less pit stop.
Aslong as nobody here (especially those guys who are indirectly accusing other people of bad driving skills) proves me that a hard tire is capable of beating soft tires through better strategys, I will still disaggee with such people. Furthermore, your "killing grip" setups don`t help you in the overall picture because it could be possible that the time loss is bigger then the benefit from less tire wear.

Im a huge F1 fan and what you say is definetly wrong. First of all, we aren`t racing Pirellis tire compound which is used in F1 this year. Second, during testing the supersofts were dead after 10 laps, not 5 (at Barcelona, by far the best testing circuit in the world). And you can be sure that no team is going to use the supersofts for more then qualifying+start of the race.
Last week in Malaysia most teams used softs, but only for 12-17 lap runs only, while doing much longer runs on hards. Mclaren tried a 2 stopper with hamilton with giving, but the tires didnt make it so he had to stop for a 3th time (he was a bit unlucky, that tires were really bad). But comparing the this Pirellis with other tires is utterly flawed, because those tires just break in after 18 laps, no matter how you drive and which compound you use.
The bridgestone provided a better picture, remember last year in Monaco, Alonso stopped at lap one and drove 77 laps around that track on hard tires without pitting. Doubt he could have done the same on supersofts.

 

[Enzo309]

Ok Enzo, first of all, im maybe not the best driver, but in enduros I always try to safe my tires. I try to drive smooth as possible and making 0 mistakes.

On the Grand Valley 300 a-spec race, Im lapping 9 seconds faster per lap on soft tires with my (stock) minolta then with hards. Also, the difference in grip level is so huge, loosing the back end or traction of that car is very easy. One donut and your tire strategy is destroyed. And they only last 4-5 laps more, I can get atleast 12 good laps out of the racing softs. The time I will loose in that laps with hard tires wont be making up with one less pit stop.
Aslong as nobody here (especially those guys who are indirectly accusing other people of bad driving skills) proves me that a hard tire is capable of beating soft tires through better strategys, I will still disaggee with such people. Furthermore, your "killing grip" setups don`t help you in the overall picture because it could be possible that the time loss is bigger then the benefit from less tire wear.

Im a huge F1 fan and what you say is definetly wrong. First of all, we aren`t racing Pirellis tire compound which is used in F1 this year. Second, during testing the supersofts were dead after 10 laps, not 5 (at Barcelona, by far the best testing circuit in the world). And you can be sure that no team is going to use the supersofts for more then qualifying+start of the race.
Last week in Malaysia most teams used softs, but only for 12-17 lap runs only, while doing much longer runs on hards. Mclaren tried a 2 stopper with hamilton with giving, but the tires didnt make it so he had to stop for a 3th time (he was a bit unlucky, that tires were really bad). But comparing the this Pirellis with other tires is utterly flawed, because those tires just break in after 18 laps, no matter how you drive and which compound you use.
The bridgestone provided a better picture, remember last year in Monaco, Alonso stopped at lap one and drove 77 laps around that track on hard tires without pitting. Doubt he could have done the same on supersofts.

Okay alonsof1fan91

Offline A-spec grip is no where to be found in online.

so you are correct hards do last about 45% longer than softs just like what the thread says obviously.

But I can tell you testing in Barcelona is different from driving on the limit in Barcelona or elsewhere in F1 its the same , so you are wrong about 10 laps. Completely.
And in valencia testing that's not yet the final tyre that will be used for the whole season its still a different tyre because the FIA is always looking for a more interesting development for performance and because in melbourne quali schumacher had his supersofts until only 3 laps.

your not gonna loose more from setup if you know how to adapt to the setup or just adapting to the car alone , that is why there is a difference between a soft efficient and hard grippy set up , for sure in qualifying hardcore works but in long distance grandprix races it won't work well. By the way for real LMP cars they have all sorts of aids like active steering, traction control , ASM , so you can't possibly tell me your having a hard time controlling that car because if your running without aids on an LMP car then you can pay for a loss of hundreths of a second per sector.

9 seconds faster on softs than hard's per lap? , well in F1 there difference are around a second for hard and half a second for medium compared to softs which is realistic in performance atleast but in durability all wear at the same rate hards do. Not sure about your lap times but I do know if your gonna run LMP cars without any aids well it has torque close to 1 thousand so anyway the difference won't be 9 seconds in the real world.

In malaysia , on hamilton it was all about pit strategy not about having him push further for only 2 stops because teams already know that 2 wont happen in 2011 , hamilton did push as far he could then team ordered for a pit stop to create a better strategy for the next 2 ones.

Not a hamilton fan but I can tell you vettel is better than him.

Hamilton won in 2008 but the cars in 2008 were the easiest of all F1 cars and that meant that there was no natural skill involved because they were pretty much taking the same line.

Just like an F2007 if you compare it to the F10.

in 2009 and up , hamilton did not stand a chance anymore because of the difference between the 2007/8 cars compared to the 2009/+ cars , Vettel will surely dominate the 2011 season onwards.

An example of that is in Suzuka Japan GP , before quali even started he was already out.

While vettel on the otherhand had been dominating in Suzuka.

Im just saying this because you are giving Hamilton as an example for tyre wear.