Why is the Veyron undriveable?

  • Thread starter Topsu
  • 152 comments
  • 16,222 views
No, it demonstrates that with the right delicacy you can complete that event while keeping the car under control, that's not a demonstration that the car is ultimatley a stable car, that's a demonstration of delicate control. Now you can try to argue that demonstrating one proves the other, but that is most certainly not the case as whilst lacking the requisite levels of control can make an even stable car feel unstable, being deft enough to control an unstable car in a given situation does not suddenly make that car stable.

Even if there was an issue only with certain settings/driver aids, it still doesn't negate that there is an underlying issue with the physics causing the problem in the first place. I'm not sure why this is such a hard concept to grasp or why you have such a problem believing that such an issue could be there. With a game that contains over 400 cars there are bound to be some anomolies amongst them.

There plenty of issues with other cars in the game too, incorrect gearing for example.
I dont know how else to show you that the Veyron is stable. I've already shown you in one video that the car can hit its top speed without getting out of control, then in a second video doing the mission that people are complaining about showing the car being stable again. Is it always stable? Not in the mission. Like I said in the second video, the time I hit 250+ the car got unstable. So what if PD nerfed the car settings in that mission? The mission is the mission and you have to use what is given to you.

Have you ever driven a Veyron in real life? My guess is that you haven't. I haven't driven one in real life so I can not say how the car feels at its top speed. Is it 100% stable and would I ever take my hands off the wheel at top speed in real life? Probably not, but I can do that in the video game. So one could say that the driving physics of the car are better in the game than they are in real life.

The fact of the matter is, it's a video game. It's not real life. PD has no way of perfecting the real driving physics of the cars in the game. They can give us close approximations at best, but it's not real.
 
No, it demonstrates that with the right delicacy you can complete that event while keeping the car under control, that's not a demonstration that the car is ultimatley a stable car, that's a demonstration of delicate control. Now you can try to argue that demonstrating one proves the other, but that is most certainly not the case as whilst lacking the requisite levels of control can make an even stable car feel unstable, being deft enough to control an unstable car in a given situation does not suddenly make that car stable.

Even if there was an issue only with certain settings/driver aids, it still doesn't negate that there is an underlying issue with the physics causing the problem in the first place. I'm not sure why this is such a hard concept to grasp or why you have such a problem believing that such an issue could be there. With a game that contains over 400 cars there are bound to be some anomolies amongst them.

There plenty of issues with other cars in the game too, incorrect gearing for example.
Wtf
As I said previously, the game has still many physics issues to fix and things to improve. But the Veyron instability isn't one of them.
I have never had the opportunity to drive a car over 350 km/h but I'm quite sure that it is very dangerous and it is easy to lose control/spin/crash if you don't know what you're doing - IE turning the wheel too agressively. Usually, the more speed, the more instability you get.
You can see videos out there about old land speed record attempts and the issue was always the same, to get the necessary stability to run safely enough. If this instability and aerodynamic struggles happens even with space rockets, then even more so with cars driving on uneven/bumpy roads
 
Last edited:
I dont know how else to show you that the Veyron is stable. I've already shown you in one video that the car can hit its top speed without getting out of control, then in a second video doing the mission that people are complaining about showing the car being stable again.
No, because you caren't countering what I just posted. Saying "I don't know" about a load of things including "I don't know how else to show you" isn't an argument. I'm in no way criticising your videos by the way, the second one is perfectly good demonstration of how to pass that mission. But they aren't disproving what people are describing in this thread.
Like I said in the second video, the time I hit 250+ the car got unstable. So what if PD nerfed the car settings in that mission? The mission is the mission and you have to use what is given to you.
Well if that were all it was it demonstrates poor design as opposed to/in tandem with a flaw in the underlying physics and let's be honest, there are plenty of pooly designed elements in the game, so I wouldn't completey discount that normally. However given the behaviour is replicated outside of that mission, I'm inclined to lean towards it being something wrong/interfeering in an unexpected way with the underlying physics of the stock suspension. That the mission is harder as a result is just a coincidence as far as the discussion is concerned.
Have you ever driven a Veyron in real life? My guess is that you haven't. I haven't driven one in real life so I can not say how the car feels at its top speed. Is it 100% stable and would I ever take my hands off the wheel at top speed in real life? Probably not, but I can do that in the video game. So one could say that the driving physics of the car are better in the game than they are in real life.
No, and I don't need to have to know that some of the behavious I've seen and experienced is wrong. Let's all say it's correct because we don't have first hand experience is a weak argument and you can apply that logic a number of potential discussions with varying levels of obsurdity. However....
The fact of the matter is, it's a video game. It's not real life. PD has no way of perfecting the real driving physics of the cars in the game. They can give us close approximations at best, but it's not real.
This I completely agree with. GT7 has does a good job overall, it's not a demonstration of the most realisitc driving physics in a videogame out there, but it's a pretty good one overall. As per my previous post, there are quirks, some bigger than others, some isolated to specific cars, but the quirks are there. That's not to say GT7 doesn't do a good job overal, it absolutely does.

I'm going to throw one concession out there, I haven't driven the Veyron in GT7 since maybe, mid-late November. So my personal experience with the car at high speed may be something that has since been tweaked and therefore out of date. However, the number of people in this thread complaining of the same issues I expereinced suggests otherwise, but I without driving it myself agian I won't discount that recent updates could also be a factor at play here.
 
Last edited:
No, because you caren't countering what I just posted.
My videos were to counter the OP's issue from their very first post:
Why is this car so unstable at high speeds? Anything over 300 kph and it starts sliding like it's on ice, even with RS tyres. The Veyron mission at Le Mans was almost impossible for me. The car just starts veering left and right, and sliding around. It's crazy. Surely someone else has the same issue?
This is your original post to me about the driving characteristics of the Bugatti:
Which isn't correct behaviour. The car shouldn't spin out like that on the SSRX banking. It went full speed around the banking at Nardo in real life without a hint of drama (beyond the speed). The tyres aren't the problem, it's something to do with the physics of the stock suspension.
How do you know the car shouldn't spin out at this speed? It's a fictional track with a car you have never driven in real life. I would say you or anyone else that has not had real life experience in this scenario is 100% unqualified to say the car should or shouldn't handle a certain way in this situation.

You keep talking about an "underlying issue" that you have not clearly defined. I show video evidence of the car being stable at speed, video evidence of completing the mission the OP was originally complaining about where the car can be 100% stable throughout it and yet you keep saying there is an "underlying issue" that I'm not addressing. If it is a stability issue, I have proven that the car can be stable. I have also stated that at times the car isn't stable and that you need to slow down a bit to fix the issue. I have addressed every issue that has been spoken about in this thread with the exception of your "underlying issue" that you have not clearly defined.

Give me a concrete explanation of what the underlying issue is and show me evidence of this issue. Without that, this discussion is pointless because you have no case to argue. You seem like a smart guy and know what you are talking about, but I can only work with what I am given. Right now I don't have the information I need to work on the problem.
 
But the Veyron instability isn't one of them.
I'm going to help you out here. When you make a statement like this it is considered rude/dismissive. Particularly after admitting you have no experience in backing up said statement. What I think you meant to say was, "IN MY OPINION, the veyron instability isn't one of them." And yes, that makes a big difference in how you are perceived by others.

Here's a quick video I just made for this challenge. Stupid simple gold medal. Counter-steering assistance turned off. Again, I'm not sure why that was turned on. Anyway no assists. First try Gold.


I tried the mission again and it was somehow easier... Maybe I was just having a bad day on my first attempt? I've had some limited experience driving real cars quite fast on track. Lamborghinis (no V12 :(), Ferraris, Corvettes, etc. I haven't broken 300 kmh but got real close. All of these vehicles felt very comfortable to drive at these speeds. Even when applying steering input. Much more comfortable and stable than my little Jetta at 220-230 kmh. From this experience I'd infer that the instability of the veyron is a bit excessive. But it is just that, an inference. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that driving anything at 350 kmh plus is a deathwish even with all the technology of the veyron. Maybe I'm wrong but I feel like one should be able to put at least some steering input, even at 350 kmh plus, without dying. Particularly in a videogame that's just as much about having fun, as it is simulating real life imo. I'm going to try it again today on route x or sarthe and see if I get the same results.

I just recorded a video going round Route X where, for the first half of the lap, I tried to keep it centred within a lane, and the second half, within the lane itself. Will have it up a little later today.

No assists, stock car, Sports: Hard tyres, controller. If you don’t touch the steering at all, it’s stable, but as soon as you nudge the wheel, it starts veering in that direction, and correcting will cause it to slowly slingshot/whip around the other way.
Question is, how do you feel about the veering? I feel it's excessive. My opinion is that it's close to how it should be, but I think it should be a little more forgiving. For enjoyments sake.


So I think we have a couple of unanswerable questions here...

#1 Is how the game handles diving at 350 kmh plus realistic? I don't think any of us here really have any authority on this. (I may be wrong) However my question would be regardless if this is the case or not, does this add or subtract from the overall enjoyment of the game? I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that would rather GT7 be a simulation rather than fun. (BTW I'm not saying those things are mutually exclusive.) However my opinion on the subject would be, I'd rather GT7 be enjoyable, and take some liberties with it's physics, than be a hardcore simulation. But that's a matter of preference that's going to be different for everyone.

#2 What exactly makes a car stable? Or in this case where exactly is the line between ease of use and skill. In a game like this, I lean towards the ease of use side, hence my overall opinion on this matter being that the physics at extreme speed are too twitchy.

#3 Is there an underlying issue here with the physics exacerbating instability at high speed? I think only PD could answer this one. Maybe this was there intention, maybe not. I'd like to think that this wasn't there intention but they've made some odd design decisions before. Again, I lean towards making GT7 accessible and fun, rather than a hardcore, punishing simulation.

Edit: for spelling etc...
 
Last edited:
My videos were to counter the OP's issue from their very first post:
Well that's fair enough, but they aren't countering the ongoing discussion at present.
This is your original post to me about the driving characteristics of the Bugatti:

How do you know the car shouldn't spin out at this speed? It's a fictional track with a car you have never driven in real life. I would say you or anyone else that has not had real life experience in this scenario is 100% unqualified to say the car should or shouldn't handle a certain way in this situation.
Because I've seen several videos of it being done, I also have some understanding of dynamics and I can tell you 100% that it would be a very poorly designed car IRL if it spun out so easilly and wallowed in the manner it does in GT7. To claim someone is 100% unqualified without having actually driven the Veyron at full speed is 100% incorrect reasoning. You don't have to have held a gold bar and let go of it 1m from the ground to know it will fall as soon as you let go.

You can have an idea of what will happen if you do x or y to z based on a knowledge of what x or y does.
You keep talking about an "underlying issue" that you have not clearly defined. I show video evidence of the car being stable at speed, video evidence of completing the mission the OP was originally complaining about where the car can be 100% stable throughout it and yet you keep saying there is an "underlying issue" that I'm not addressing. If it is a stability issue, I have proven that the car can be stable.
Yes, and I have explained why I beleive there is an underlying issue and I have even explained that it feels like the car is wallowing unrealsiitcally and may be bottominig out with stock suspension (just a theory). You may have been adressing the OP originally, which is fine, but that's not the discussion ongoing at the moment not have I referenced the original post, in fact I've made very clear that I am not specifically talking about the mission. So if you are not countering what I am saying there's no need to do more than just confirm you're only countering the OP, which is fine, that's all there is to it.
I have also stated that at times the car isn't stable and that you need to slow down a bit to fix the issue. I have addressed every issue that has been spoken about in this thread with the exception of your "underlying issue" that you have not clearly defined.
Yes, and my point is the car is unstable at speed when stock in a way which isn't realistic nor comparable with most of the other cars in the game. So there is something that definitely feels not right.
Give me a concrete explanation of what the underlying issue is and show me evidence of this issue. Without that, this discussion is pointless because you have no case to argue. You seem like a smart guy and know what you are talking about, but I can only work with what I am given. Right now I don't have the information I need to work on the problem.
Descriptions of what is happening are found throughout this thread, the case is wide open. You've countered the OP that the mission is almost impossible very well, but I've not seen anything that counters the claims made otherwise.

Unfortunately I don't play GT7 very often anymore, but if possible I will try to find/create a video clip of this in action (assuming it's not been patched out since I last drove the Veyron) if possible.
 
Last edited:
I’m not here to fan any flames and don’t have a dog in this either way but have an interesting observation to state again if someone else wants to check this, only takes a minute.

If you upgrade to the Fully Custom Suspension and input All of the settings identical as they are “stock” it changes everything. It becomes almost impossible to lose control of the car at high speed. You can swerve left and right quickly and the side to side movement becomes less the Faster you drive
 
I’m not here to fan any flames and don’t have a dog in this either way but have an interesting observation to state again if someone else wants to check this, only takes a minute.

If you upgrade to the Fully Custom Suspension and input All of the settings identical as they are “stock” it changes everything. It becomes almost impossible to lose control of the car at high speed. You can swerve left and right quickly and the side to side movement becomes less the Faster you drive
Which is what I find most odd about this. I'm honestly leaning on the side of there is no "bug" in the physics. Just possibly an unintended outcome of the physics limitations as programmed. But this makes me suspect otherwise. Like I said in my previous post, weather this was intentional or not, weather this is realistic or not, I don't think anyone here can say for certain. But I do feel that something isn't quite right.
 
#1 Is how the game handles diving at 350 kmh plus realistic? I don't think any of us here really have any authority on this. (I may be wrong) However my question would be regardless if this is the case or not, does this add or subtract from the overall enjoyment of the game? I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that would rather GT7 be a simulation rather than fun. (BTW I'm not saying those things are mutually exclusive.) However my opinion on the subject would be, I'd rather GT7 be enjoyable, and take some liberties with it's physics, than be a hardcore simulation. But that's a matter of preference that's going to be different for everyone.

#2 What exactly makes a car stable? Or in this case where exactly is the line between ease of use and skill. In a game like this, I lean towards the ease of use side, hence my overall opinion on this matter being that the physics at extreme speed are too twitchy.

#3 Is there an underlying issue here with the physics exacerbating instability at high speed? I think only PD could answer this one. Maybe this was there intention, maybe not. I'd like to think that this wasn't there intention but they've made some odd design decisions before. Again, I lean towards making GT7 accessible and fun, rather than a hardcore, punishing simulation.

Edit: for spelling etc...
For question 1, I have no clue if it is realistic. From the few videos I have watched of the Veyron (the original, not the super sport or the Chioron) doing a top speed test, the car is stable. I have shown the same thing happens in the game. Stable at top speed. Those that think you should easily be able to weave from lane to lane or through traffic at this speed should post up video evidence of a real life stock Veyron weaving through traffic at top speed. If you can do that, then I think a case could be made that the car in the game is not acting like the car does in real life.

For #2, I would love if all the cars in the game handled excellently. Unfortunately that's not the case, even with all the mods and tuning you can do. Some cars are still going to be a handful to drive. But if all of them drove perfect and stable, wouldn't that be kind of dumb? What would be the point of having so many cars if they all drove the same? Some of the fun and challenge is in having a car that may be super fast in a straight line but is really uncomfortable at corner entry or exit. It may be a perfect car, but the brakes are antiquated by comparison, like in the case of the McLaren F1 GTR (boy those brakes are a disappointment). But that gives every car its personality. Easy or hard? It just is what it is. If the car doesn't perform how you want then pick a different car. No one is thinking you are a baller for driving a Veyron around in a video game.

#3, Again, no clue. Maybe there is a physics problem, maybe it's just a quirk to this specific car, maybe everything is just fine and we should worry about things that are more important in life than the made up physics of a video game simulating the driving characteristics of a car none of us have ever driven, nor will likely ever drive in real life. You can always change the difficulty settings on the game, add driving aids to help you, and in some cases just slow down.
 
Question is, how do you feel about the veering? I feel it's excessive. My opinion is that it's close to how it should be, but I think it should be a little more forgiving. For enjoyments sake.
Definitely excessive, you couldn’t make quick moves in a race without destabilising the car. If you need to switch lanes fast, the correction will just send it into the wall, or at the very least into a slide.

The Tomahawk X used to be bullet stable, but a recent patch made it, and the Veyron, super sensitive at high speed. The Tomahawk will literally sway by itself because of how sensitive it is with the flaps down. There’s no way it wouldn’t produce enough downforce at 300+ MPH to stay stable in a straight line.
 
Last edited:
If you have to give a car a crappy setup to make a challenge, that's just bad design imo. I mean if your car had a crappy setup. wouldn't you address that before going racing? There's a lot of design choices that PD made with GT7 that I don't understand. But that's for a different thread. As for S-10, slick tires and rain does happen in motorsport. Hence a good challenge imo.

Which aid is that you have on in the video? Aside from ABS. I haven't tried it outside the mission yet but someone else did earlier in the thread and posted a video. Same thing as me. Do you use a DD wheel? I'm wondering if the "play" in a gear driven wheel could be just enough to exaserbate it.
PD have form for that. There was a NASCAR event in GT5 around Daytona. It was hard. Until someone found that turning ABS off made it easy. PD patched the game making it impossible to turn ABS off in that event......
 
For question 1, I have no clue if it is realistic. From the few videos I have watched of the Veyron (the original, not the super sport or the Chioron) doing a top speed test, the car is stable. I have shown the same thing happens in the game. Stable at top speed. Those that think you should easily be able to weave from lane to lane or through traffic at this speed should post up video evidence of a real life stock Veyron weaving through traffic at top speed. If you can do that, then I think a case could be made that the car in the game is not acting like the car does in real life.

For #2, I would love if all the cars in the game handled excellently. Unfortunately that's not the case, even with all the mods and tuning you can do. Some cars are still going to be a handful to drive. But if all of them drove perfect and stable, wouldn't that be kind of dumb? What would be the point of having so many cars if they all drove the same? Some of the fun and challenge is in having a car that may be super fast in a straight line but is really uncomfortable at corner entry or exit. It may be a perfect car, but the brakes are antiquated by comparison, like in the case of the McLaren F1 GTR (boy those brakes are a disappointment). But that gives every car its personality. Easy or hard? It just is what it is. If the car doesn't perform how you want then pick a different car. No one is thinking you are a baller for driving a Veyron around in a video game.

#3, Again, no clue. Maybe there is a physics problem, maybe it's just a quirk to this specific car, maybe everything is just fine and we should worry about things that are more important in life than the made up physics of a video game simulating the driving characteristics of a car none of us have ever driven, nor will likely ever drive in real life. You can always change the difficulty settings on the game, add driving aids to help you, and in some cases just slow down.
I agree with you for the most part. I just think PD went just a little too far with the instability. Of course you shouldn't be able to easily weave at those speeds but my opinion is they should dial it back juuust a bit. I mean if you can't pull out to pass without dying then what's the point? And this is what I mean with skill vs accessibility. Perhaps you and a select few other people as skilled enough to pull that off, but if the majority of players can't, then why put something in the game for only a select few people? Perhaps I'm reaching here a bit I admit but this is where I think GT7 has a bit of an identity crisis. Is GT7 meant to be an accessible entry level simulator or a strict, punishing, real to life simulator? If one tries to be two things at once, you usually end up being lousy at both. But again we are speculating about design choices from a company know for making questionable design choices. Anyways, who knows what PD intended. Maybe I just need to get gud lol.

Same with question #2. Of course we want our cars to have personality. For example I love the Lancia Stratos. Now that car has personality. But again my opinion is that PD has gone a little too far in this instance (veyron). As for #3, I'm leaning towards this amount of instability being unintentional. Solely due to Bob's post above. But like I said before, that's only speculation on my part.


Definitely excessive, you couldn’t make quick moves in a race without destabilising the car. If you need to switch lanes fast, the correction will just send it into the wall, or at the very least into a slide.

The Tomahawk X used to be bullet stable, but a recent patch made it, and the Veyron, super sensitive at high speed. The Tomahawk will literally sway by itself because of how sensitive it is with the flaps down. There’s no way it wouldn’t produce enough downforce at 300+ MPH to stay stable in a straight line.
But should you be able to make quick moves at 350 kmh plus? I don't think so. However, to me it feels like making ANY move is guaranteed death and that is where I have an issue. But like I said before, maybe I'm just a pleb.

PD have form for that. There was a NASCAR event in GT5 around Daytona. It was hard. Until someone found that turning ABS off made it easy. PD patched the game making it impossible to turn ABS off in that event......
Great example. Honestly, I just don't understand PD sometimes... Sometimes I think PD is split. Some want to make GT a hardcore simulator, and some want it to be nice and accessible to pretty much everyone.
 
I agree with you for the most part. I just think PD went just a little too far with the instability. Of course you shouldn't be able to easily weave at those speeds but my opinion is they should dial it back juuust a bit. I mean if you can't pull out to pass without dying then what's the point? And this is what I mean with skill vs accessibility. Perhaps you and a select few other people as skilled enough to pull that off, but if the majority of players can't, then why put something in the game for only a select few people? Perhaps I'm reaching here a bit I admit but this is where I think GT7 has a bit of an identity crisis. Is GT7 meant to be an accessible entry level simulator or a strict, punishing, real to life simulator? If one tries to be two things at once, you usually end up being lousy at both. But again we are speculating about design choices from a company know for making questionable design choices. Anyways, who knows what PD intended. Maybe I just need to get gud lol.

Same with question #2. Of course we want our cars to have personality. For example I love the Lancia Stratos. Now that car has personality. But again my opinion is that PD has gone a little too far in this instance (veyron). As for #3, I'm leaning towards this amount of instability being unintentional. Solely due to Bob's post above. But like I said before, that's only speculation on my part.



But should you be able to make quick moves at 350 kmh plus? I don't think so. However, to me it feels like making ANY move is guaranteed death and that is where I have an issue. But like I said before, maybe I'm just a pleb.


Great example. Honestly, I just don't understand PD sometimes... Sometimes I think PD is split. Some want to make GT a hardcore simulator, and some want it to be nice and accessible to pretty much everyone.
The key is that this instability doesn't affect all cars, it only affects some and even then it only affects them on the stock suspension. As soon as you install adjustable suspension the cars become much more stable, as you would expect them to be, even if you set the adjustable suspension to mimic the stock settings.

You shouldn't be able to agressively weave or manouver at these high speeds, but at the same time you should be able to manouver without having to be super delicate as demonstrated in the Mission. There is a huge middle ground between that degree of subtle movement and manouvering agressively and the balance is somewhere in that area. Granted, it's nearer to the delicate end of the spectrum than agressive, but it shouldn't need to be as delicate as in the game.

People who have driven the Veyron at maximum speed have described it as easy, undramatic and safe. Make of that what you will.
 
Last edited:
I dont think you should be able to take out a stock car on street tires (that's what I assume sport tires are) and drive 260 mph (that's over 400kph) and reasonably expect it to weave and change lanes like it was driving 250kph. So yeah, it should be right on the edge of being a death trap if you try moving the car around at those speeds. The good thing is that you can make suspension upgrades and I guess this problem is fixed. I haven't modified my Bugatti yet, but I do have the ultra high turbo and weight reduction stage 5 waiting for me from some roulette tickets, so I should probably get on that. The thing is, it's fixable unlike the abysmal brakes on the McLaren F1 GTR. Okay, well they aren't abysmal, but when compared to all the other great things that car has, it's brakes are it's Achilles heal and you can not upgrade them in the tuning shop. Not even a pad upgrade is available. So that kind of sucks.

I'm really not a great driver in this game. I'm a D level sport driver with an S level safety rating. Every time I get up to the C level in Sport mode I get punted around, fall 3 seconds per lap behind the leaders and go back down to D where I can win some races. So I'm not a great driver. I believe anyone can get to my level with a little bit if practice. If you are using a controller... well that will make the game harder. I had the hardest time with mid-corner stability when using a controller. Think Hugh Speed RI g or Daytona and I was all over the place on the banked turns. First time using a wheel made all those issues go away. It still took a couple weeks to get used to using the wheel but now it's all second nature and I think I'm faster than I was on the controller.
 
The key is that this instability doesn't affect all cars, it only affects some and even then it only affects them on the stock suspension. As soon as you install adjustable suspension the cars become much more stable, as you would expect them to be, even if you set the adjustable suspension to mimic the stock settings.

You shouldn't be able to agressively weave or manouver at these high speeds, but at the same time you should be able to manouver without having to be super delicate as demonstrated in the Mission. There is a huge middle ground between that degree of subtle movement and manouvering agressively and the balance is somewhere in that area. Granted, it's nearer to the delicate end of the spectrum than agressive, but it shouldn't need to be as delicate as in the game.

People who have driven the Veyron at maximum speed have described it as easy, undramatic and safe. Make of that what you will.
Completely agree with you. However I wouldn't be surprised if installing any suspension other than stock completely changes the base coding for the car, regardless of the settings. I'm having trouble finding the correct words to describe my point, but what you just described is why I suspect something isn't quite right with the stock suspension. It just doesn't make sense to me why two suspensions, with the same values, would behave so differently. But then again I have been surprised to learn that things like brake temp, tire temp, dirty tires, dirty air, are actually programed into the game, despite never being mentioned. (that I know of) Maybe there is a legitimate reason, true to the real world, why these two suspensions would behave so differently despite the same values and they just neglected to mention it? Or maybe I'm giving PD too much credit and there is something unintentional going on. Or maybe PD just went, meh close enough.
 
I dont think you should be able to take out a stock car on street tires (that's what I assume sport tires are) and drive 260 mph (that's over 400kph) and reasonably expect it to weave and change lanes like it was driving 250kph. So yeah, it should be right on the edge of being a death trap if you try moving the car around at those speeds.
Why? What is your basis for this claim? And you say "weave" what precisely do you mean by that? You previousely referred to not being able to be agressive, which I totally agree with. But now you say the car should be "right on the edge of being a death trap" which flys directly in the face of feedback from some of the people who have maxed it, none of whom I've read or seen describing it as feeling like it was on the edge or close to a death trap.
Completely agree with you. However I wouldn't be surprised if installing any suspension other than stock completely changes the base coding for the car, regardless of the settings. I'm having trouble finding the correct words to describe my point, but what you just described is why I suspect something isn't quite right with the stock suspension. It just doesn't make sense to me why two suspensions, with the same values, would behave so differently. But then again I have been surprised to learn that things like brake temp, tire temp, dirty tires, dirty air, are actually programed into the game, despite never being mentioned. (that I know of) Maybe there is a legitimate reason, true to the real world, why these two suspensions would behave so differently despite the same values and they just neglected to mention it? Or maybe I'm giving PD too much credit and there is something unintentional going on. Or maybe PD just went, meh close enough.
Precisely, that's why I beleive there's something incorrect with the cars stock suspension physics. It simply makes sense.
 
Last edited:
I dont think you should be able to take out a stock car on street tires (that's what I assume sport tires are) and drive 260 mph (that's over 400kph) and reasonably expect it to weave and change lanes like it was driving 250kph. So yeah, it should be right on the edge of being a death trap if you try moving the car around at those speeds. The good thing is that you can make suspension upgrades and I guess this problem is fixed. I haven't modified my Bugatti yet, but I do have the ultra high turbo and weight reduction stage 5 waiting for me from some roulette tickets, so I should probably get on that. The thing is, it's fixable unlike the abysmal brakes on the McLaren F1 GTR. Okay, well they aren't abysmal, but when compared to all the other great things that car has, it's brakes are it's Achilles heal and you can not upgrade them in the tuning shop. Not even a pad upgrade is available. So that kind of sucks.

I'm really not a great driver in this game. I'm a D level sport driver with an S level safety rating. Every time I get up to the C level in Sport mode I get punted around, fall 3 seconds per lap behind the leaders and go back down to D where I can win some races. So I'm not a great driver. I believe anyone can get to my level with a little bit if practice. If you are using a controller... well that will make the game harder. I had the hardest time with mid-corner stability when using a controller. Think Hugh Speed RI g or Daytona and I was all over the place on the banked turns. First time using a wheel made all those issues go away. It still took a couple weeks to get used to using the wheel but now it's all second nature and I think I'm faster than I was on the controller.
So let's just say, for a moment, that gingerly changing lanes at these speeds while using a wheel is possible. And that this was also the intention of PD. I think we'd all agree that this is mostly fine. However this then leaves controller players hung out to dry. If something is very challenging with a wheel then it's going to be next to impossible with a controller. (I know there are exceptions to this statement but I think it applies specifically here.) If you have a game that is meant to be played with either a wheel or a controller, but certain aspects of the game are next to impossible with a controller, well that's just bad game design then. Hence why people are potentially jumping to the conclusion that there is a bug, or at the very least that this wasn't intentional on PD's part. And this bring us back to my point about accessibility vs skill. If PD's intention is that this game should be playable with a controller, then shouldn't the whole game be as such? Yeah it's going to make it "too easy" for wheel users but that's the sacrifice you have to make in order to make it accessible with a controller. As I mentioned before, I think GT7 has a bit of a personality crisis. It's trying to be both a challenging simulator, and an entry level racing game at the same time. And now they've just frustrated both types of customers.
 
But should you be able to make quick moves at 350 kmh plus? I don't think so. However, to me it feels like making ANY move is guaranteed death and that is where I have an issue. But like I said before, maybe I'm just a pleb.
By quick moves, I mean a dart into the next lane to pass. As @Dave A said, the Veyron is known for its stability. Weaving two lanes over and back again is probably too much, but I don’t see why - and perhaps it’s not on rails if you shoot into the next lane - it shouldn’t be fairly stable to where you can comfortably do it without upsetting the car too much.
 
By quick moves, I mean a dart into the next lane to pass. As @Dave A said, the Veyron is known for its stability. Weaving two lanes over and back again is probably too much, but I don’t see why - and perhaps it’s not on rails if you shoot into the next lane - it shouldn’t be fairly stable to where you can comfortably do it without upsetting the car too much.
Lol The words you are using to describe changing lanes are so aggressive. "Dart" "Shoot" I assume your intention is not what I'm picturing in my head based on those words but I don't know dude. I personally don't think any car is going to be too stable at 350 kmh plus either. But I think we agree for the most part. Just differ on a measure of how much is too much. As I mentioned before, I've driven pretty fast before. No I didn't feel like the car was trying to kill me like here in GT7, but your damn right that I was very careful with my inputs.
 
Lol The words you are using to describe changing lanes are so aggressive. "Dart" "Shoot" I assume your intention is not what I'm picturing in my head based on those words but I don't know dude. I personally don't think any car is going to be too stable at 350 kmh plus either. But I think we agree for the most part. Just differ on a measure of how much is too much. As I mentioned before, I've driven pretty fast before. No I didn't feel like the car was trying to kill me like here in GT7, but your damn right that I was very careful with my inputs.
Haha, yeah it’s definitely slower than it sounds, but I suppose I mean the initial change in direction. A quick turn of the wheel to move into the next lane. The movement itself won’t be as fast, but just when you pull in a direction. I feel like it produces enough downforce to handle that without the possible correction sending it spiralling.

Big movements will definitely unsettle any car at such speeds, but fairly rapid lane changes - at least the “bite”, initiating one, shouldn’t do what it does in the game, I don’t think.
 
I'm honestly leaning on the side of there is no "bug" in the physics
No bug in the physics of the Veyron or the physics writ-large? If the latter, all you have to is attempt to drive the Plymouth Ghia, D-Type, C1 Proto, DB3S, etc, to see that there's a major issue with cars that cannot have downforce applied, especially FR, and doubly so if they have a short wheel-base. I've even had issues with the infamous "pendulum swing under braking" when trying to put together "no wing" tunes for modern cars, so downforce is clearly acting as a band-aid to some kind of physics issue that was introduced in 1.23.
 
Last edited:
Why? What is your basis for this claim? And you say "weave" what precisely do you mean by that? You previousely referred to not being able to be agressive, which I totally agree with. But now you say the car should be "right on the edge of being a death trap" which flys directly in the face of feedback from some of the people who have maxed it, none of whom I've read or seen describing it as feeling like it was on the edge or close to a death trap.
My basis is that there are very few cars that can actually go 259mph in street trim. Maybe less than a handful. Every time I watch a top speed run of these cars (Im talking real life cars), it never moves out of its lane at top speed. It's dead straight. Why aren't they weaving between lanes at this speed? My guess is that it would be too dangerous to do and could lead to the car spinning out. Like I said in a previous post, show me video evidence of a stock Veyron changing lanes or weaving through traffic at its top speed and you have got a case for the the physics of the car in the game not matching real life.

Someone had mentioned the idea of the car being like a death trap if you turned while at top speed, so I went with that analogy. Is it truly a death trap in real life? I sure hope not. I think the idea that you can't be agressive with the car at speed should be true, especially in stock trim. And that is the case in the game. You can change lanes at top speed, but not very quickly. I changed lanes in one of the videos I posted and it handled just fine. You can't weave and dart through traffic, though. This isnt a Gr.1 car after all. Then again, Gr.1 cars generally aren't hitting 259 mph either. 235 maybe? I don't have much desire to test this car in stock trim at various speeds to see what speed it is stable at to weave between lanes, but it probably is capable of doing that at over 200mph. That's just a guess.

Considering the speed the Veyron is capable of going and looking at what other dedicated race machines drive at, it seems like a really big ask for the Veyron to hit its top speed and find it to be stable changing lanes and being able to move through traffic, especially in stock form. With modifications, aero and suspension adjustments, sure I can see it being a more capable machine.
 
More food for thought… I believe I found an anomaly with Natural Frequency of the front tires in the stock suspension. Not sure how relevant it is but definitely strange.

I noticed when re-entering the tuning menu after copying the stats from the stock suspension to custom that any tune brought up with the original stock suspension highlights the NF figure of the front tires (160) in blue to indicating its different from what’s currently equipped… Even though the figures are still exactly the same.

When creating the custom suspension, the 160 figure turns white to show that it matches; however once you exit and return it shows up blue again, as if it’s been changed. Hitting the triangle button to measure again does not reveal it. The figure will show up blue regardless of whether the stock suspension or custom copy is the one equipped when entering menu and your viewing a tune with the other.

I tried changing the frequency to the two extremes and it wasn’t able to replicate stock on the road. I wonder if it’s a value not within the selection range.

See Pics Below

EDIT: I’m having trouble seeing the blue in the photo on the site, it is more prominent in my screenshot. The word “Normal” under suspension is blue as is the 160 figure where the cursor is
 

Attachments

  • E8482746-191D-44FA-B648-DD6ED5AD259E.png
    E8482746-191D-44FA-B648-DD6ED5AD259E.png
    144 KB · Views: 12
  • DA2974CC-88FA-49FE-BF3A-7F32853846BB.png
    DA2974CC-88FA-49FE-BF3A-7F32853846BB.png
    143.7 KB · Views: 11
Last edited:
My basis is that there are very few cars that can actually go 259mph in street trim.
That's not very strong evidence of anything. All it really says is that there isn't evidence for one for of behavior or another.

Maybe less than a handful. Every time I watch a top speed run of these cars (Im talking real life cars), it never moves out of its lane at top speed. It's dead straight. Why aren't they weaving between lanes at this speed? My guess is that it would be too dangerous to do and could lead to the car spinning out.
If you're trying to go fast, turning doesn't help. It's not too hard to find footage of high speed turns though, just look for track footage.
Like I said in a previous post, show me video evidence of a stock Veyron changing lanes or weaving through traffic at its top speed and you have got a case for the the physics of the car in the game not matching real life.
You don't need that to get an idea of what should happen. You can make predictions based on physics, even for situations that you've never encountered. Sure there can be unknown unknowns and such, but a car traveling at speed isn't that strange from a physics standpoint. 250 mph isn't terribly different from 100 mph. A car shouldn't suddenly become unstable at that speed if it was designed for it. In fact you might expect a modern car to handle better at speed because of aerodynamics. If a car produces downforce, the force increases with speed, giving better tire grip. In Gran Turismo, where you don't always have things like rough tracks, wind, or vehicle maintenance you can probably rely on the benefits ever more than in reality.
Considering the speed the Veyron is capable of going and looking at what other dedicated race machines drive at, it seems like a really big ask for the Veyron to hit its top speed and find it to be stable changing lanes and being able to move through traffic, especially in stock form. With modifications, aero and suspension adjustments, sure I can see it being a more capable machine.
Since the car was designed for 250 mph as a luxury road vehicle, it was probably a top priority to make it stable at that speed.
 
250 mph isn't terribly different from 100 mph.
I don't know about that... I feel like it's pretty darn different. When it come to forces or energy in regards to physics don't things tend to grow exponentially? Meaning that the forces at 250 aren't just going to be 2.5 times stronger than 100 but potentially 3, 4, 5, or even 10 times stronger? If I'm correct that would mean 100 and 250 are very very different.
Since the car was designed for 250 mph as a luxury road vehicle, it was probably a top priority to make it stable at that speed.
But stable enough for any ding dong to do it half asleep? Or stable enough for a professional on a closed course, under optimal conditions. I don't know and maybe I'm just doubtful but something tells me Bugatti doesn't just let anyone buy a veyron and take it up to 250 whenever/wherever they like. I feel like several crashed veyrons with dead owners wouldn't reflect well on their PR department/brand as a whole. Don't they also need special tires to reach those speeds? Ones that are only good for one use? I might be talking out my rear here but that's what I remember hearing. I don't know.... Designed to capable of something, and designed to do something regularly are two different things.
 
Last edited:
This is turning in to the dumbest internet argument in history. Nothing but conjecture and non-evidence based arguments.

"You can make predictions based on physics". Okay, fine. Show your math. Prove your predictions.

"250mph isn't terribly different than 100mph"... I think Bugatti would beg to differ. If it were so easy, everyone could do it.

Honestly, this is turning in to trolling and I'm done dealing with anyone who can't put up fact based evidence to prove their point. The fact that this discussion has over 100 replies is ridiculous. It's 1 stupid car out of 450 in the game that has been proven to 1) be stable at top speed and 2) complete the mission on the first try with a gold medal result AND the car was stable the whole way.
 
Last edited:
This is turning in to the dumbest internet argument in history. Nothing but conjecture and non-evidence based arguments.

"You can make predictions based on physics". Okay, fine. Show your math. Prove your predictions.

"250mph isn't terribly different than 100mph"... I think Bugatti would beg to differ. If it were so easy, everyone could do it.

Honestly, this is turning in to trolling and I'm done dealing with anyone who can't put up fact based evidence to prove their point. The fact that this discussion has over 100 replies is ridiculous. It's 1 stupid car out of 450 in the game that has been proven to 1) be stable at top speed and 2) complete the mission on the first try with a gold medal result AND the car was stable the whole way.
I was hoping you'd see my reply first to save you the trouble lol. I feel your pain.
 
I don't know about that... I feel like it's pretty darn different. When it come to forces or energy in regards to physics don't things tend to grow exponentially?
It depends on the force and what's changing. That's not really what I'm talking about though, changing the exact number of pounds that a surface feels as it goes from one speed to another doesn't really constitute a change in the physics if the relationship between force and speed stays the same. For example, when it comes to aerodynamics:
3-s2.0-B0122274105009157-gr4.gif

You have changes in physics at certain Mach numbers (M). From 0-0.8M, physics remains the same (well there is a regime from 0 to 0.3M not shown here because the image I posted is related to planes and planes tend to fly faster than M 0.3, also the effects are a bit less significant).

Cars are pretty firmly in the subsonic regime, so we can reliably say that aerodynamics will behave consistently through their entire speed range.


Meaning that the forces at 250 aren't just going to be 2.5 times stronger than 100 but potentially 3, 4, 5, or even 10 times stronger? If I'm correct that would mean 100 and 250 are very very different.
If everything scales by 10 times, what changes? Things could very well end up feeling identical. If two people push against each other with 10 lbs of force, the net is zero and no one moves. If they both push 10 times harder, the net is zero and no one moves.
But stable enough for any ding dong to do it half asleep? Or stable enough for a professional on a closed course, under optimal conditions.
That's a good question, though given that this car isn't a racecar, it probably wasn't aimed at professional drivers.
I don't know and maybe I'm just doubtful but something tells me Bugatti doesn't just let anyone buy a veyron and take it up to 250 whenever/wherever they like. I feel like several crashed veyrons with dead owners wouldn't reflect well on their PR department/brand as a whole.
You can find plenty of amusing videos of supercar owners on youtube, so I don't think it's that big of a deal.
Don't they also need special tires to reach those speeds? Ones that are only good for one use? I might be talking out my rear here but that's what I remember hearing. I don't know.... Designed to capable of something, and designed to do something regularly are two different things.
Top speed in the Veyron did require some special conditions I believe. Tires may have been involved, but in GT we're dealing with very simple tires. I'll admit that I'm not super familiar with the games after GT5, but for most the series tires have been indestructible pieces of rubber with a fixed grip number. If that's not how they work in GT7, I'm happy to be corrected. Anyway the point here is, we're not dealing with a perfect simulation of the real car, so we can look over some detail and focus more on general physics.

Going fast in a sporty car tends to produce downforce which improves grip and stability. If a car moving at high speed is prone to suddenly loss of control, that's pretty odd. I'm not totally sure what the problem is with the Veyron here, but from post 55 by @Topsu it looks like it might be an aero problem. The car doesn't seem to have any rear grip, and the tiniest tap on the wheel exceeds the rear tires' ability to hold the road, which is would be extremely surprising in the real car. @Pizzapants suggested the issue is bottoming out, which I think is also a good potential explanation, especially if GT isn't modeling the suspension correctly, but from videos it doesn't look like it's the case.
"You can make predictions based on physics". Okay, fine. Show your math. Prove your predictions.

"250mph isn't terribly different than 100mph"... I think Bugatti would beg to differ. If it were so easy, everyone could do it.
OK, some quick math, (250/100)^2 = 6.25 x downforce. I don't know how much downforce is produced by this car in total, but let's say this is a two times increase in total normal force on the tires. The tires now have twice the grip capacity at 250 mph vs 100 mph. This doesn't tell us the entire story, but for one thing we know the tires have a better hold on the road the faster the car goes. Spontaneous spin outs seem a bit questionable given the above.

I didn't say that 250 mph was easy, but that kind of speed isn't exclusive to Bugatti. Wiki says we first broke that speed on land in 1932. In the air we passed that in 1923. Bugatti's achievement wasn't in challenging physics, it was achieving accessibility.
 
You did say 250 mph was easy. Unless you mean 100 mph is difficult? Seeing as they're "not terribly different" as you put it. The rear wing also retracts for top speed mode. The car purposely reduces it's downforce because it doesn't have enough horsepower to overcome the drag created by said downforce. Even at almost 1000hp. Why is this? Because downforce increases exponentially with velocity. Not linearly. Regardless I'm out now too lol.
 
You did say 250 mph was easy.
I didn't. I just said that the same general physics that applies at 100 mph applies at 250 in the case of cars.
The rear wing also retracts for top speed mode. The car purposely reduces it's downforce because it doesn't have enough horsepower to overcome the drag created by said downforce. Even at almost 1000hp. Why is this? Because downforce increases exponentially with velocity. Not linearly. Regardless I'm out now too lol.
Yes, but it's still producing downforce. Like I said, I don't have the exact figures and I don't really feel like there is a need to look them up unless the Veyron produces lift, which isn't likely. The car at speed has more grip, I showed that. This is much better evidence than "I think X", which isn't evidence at all.

Also downforce is quadratic, not exponential.
 
Back