|
Post by Viper on Apr 28, 2006 9:50:50 GMT -5
Surely, using ready made setups is not a problem Just gotta make sure they work alright
|
|
|
Post by Senna on Apr 28, 2006 10:24:47 GMT -5
Surely, using ready made setups is not a problem Just gotta make sure they work alright and be aware of your plank wear. some of them are made for hotlapping competitions with low ride height...
|
|
|
Post by zeppelin101 on Apr 28, 2006 14:34:48 GMT -5
You'll be surprised how forgiving these physics are with ride heights. A setup I made for the default physics at some random track had 1mm plank wear after 3 laps, but with these physics, I had almost none, which is odd I think...
|
|
|
Post by Senna on May 8, 2006 11:03:49 GMT -5
reading saturdays post in page 1, i thought that wings should be classified in this way...
High Downforce: 20 - 12 Medium Downforce: 12 - 6 Low Downforce: 6 - 1
What yours think? It is difficult to classify because its valued between 1 - 20, and theres only 3 downforce types... i decided to go for 1 - 18 and add the other 2 to High Downforce, which made the things easy to classify...
EDIT : Other way around:
High Downforce: 20 - 14 Medium Downforce: 14 - 8 Low Downforce: 8 - 1
|
|
|
Post by Viper on May 8, 2006 12:28:24 GMT -5
Downforce levels is something very personal. I've noticed each driver here chooses a different wing setup for the races. I tend to like lower downforce levels so that I have more straight line top speed. Sometimes that ain't very good though, like in Spain. Anyway, while those values can be a good guideline, nothing beats a bit of experimenting.
|
|
|
Post by zeppelin101 on May 8, 2006 12:34:35 GMT -5
Definitely hit the nail on the head there mate
|
|
|
Post by Senna on May 8, 2006 12:55:10 GMT -5
Downforce levels is something very personal. I've noticed each driver here chooses a different wing setup for the races. I tend to like lower downforce levels so that I have more straight line top speed. Sometimes that ain't very good though, like in Spain. Anyway, while those values can be a good guideline, nothing beats a bit of experimenting. I agree, but its just an attempt to create a small guideline to work on wings... and after some experiencies we can create our own personal wing downforce guidelines I've tried to run a wing downforce lower than I am using through this season, but I always ended up out of the track in every attempt. So I experimented increasing it a bit and things seem to work better for me, the car was more stable... oh well... looks like some drivers here has a preference for more responsible cars because of their aggresive driving styles while i prefer to set-up a stable, less responsible car although it could cost some tenths of a second through the circuit, but this was the best way i found to complete my laps... and ended up overdriving the car to recover the time i've lost with it... EDIT: actually reading every single line of doug arnao's excellent text at the top of the page 1, some things seem to be more clear for me but tuning a car is still a cloudy area for me
|
|
|
Post by zeppelin101 on May 8, 2006 14:15:28 GMT -5
Just out little thing at a time. Once you know what a param does, you can tweak it accordingly. For example, the car has really low grip, but only under braking, then you'd perhaps soften the ARB (most likely rear) and perhaps shift the brake balance back a touch. But, you could also tweak the springs a small amount to combat it too
|
|
|
Post by Senna on May 8, 2006 14:49:25 GMT -5
Just out little thing at a time. Once you know what a param does, you can tweak it accordingly. For example, the car has really low grip, but only under braking, then you'd perhaps soften the ARB (most likely rear) and perhaps shift the brake balance back a touch. But, you could also tweak the springs a small amount to combat it too Yeah, thats what i've read in that text... The most confusing thing here is the dampers... Oh well... if someone wants to talk about it and other things just pm me or call me at MSN... i'll put it in my profile so we can stay in touch (mjf already has my msn )
|
|
|
Post by Mαττ on May 8, 2006 19:18:41 GMT -5
i still dont agreen with their write-up concering gears i think. for me it works so much better if the first few gears are really close together as the drive out of the corner is much quicker than if they were further apart, and i think that's what had me in such a good position at monaco. i could just bang it thru the gears up the hill, etc, but when it came to braking, i could pretty well choose whatever gear i wanted because the ratios were so small, which allowed better turn-in (critical at a place such as massanet and casino) control.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on May 8, 2006 21:53:01 GMT -5
I normally adjust my gears so that I make the least shifting possible. Maybe I should try a 6 gear setup to see how it works for me
|
|