Suspension setting, do they actually do that much?

[RobtheFiend]

Tried to have a bit of fun today, testing the max/min settings on the suspension, and see what happend.

Used one of the largest coupe's, put in a 5.4 I6 467hp engine, single clutch, 6 speed gearbox RWD. Top speed 306 km/h. Weight dist. 50.1/49.9. 265/335 Sport compound tyres.

Fastest time around Automation Test Track: 141.87s. Slowest time: 143.95s.
Both set with the settings at the front all at max, rear at min. Fast time lowest Ride Height (198mm). Slow time highest Ride Height (258mm).

Whatever i tried, the times ended between these numbers. Tried all numbers starting with 1,2,3,4,5 or 6 ..... all times between 141.96 (2, 258rh) and 142.4 (6, 198rh).

The camber was at front -2.0, rear -1.0.
Downforce between -10.4 and -34.5. (min and max Ride Height)

I also noticed that the speed of the gear change is that of a double clutch auto (DSG). There is no way to shift that fast with a normal gearbox and clutch. Only with a racing sequential gearbox can you shift that fast.

[Jakgoe]

Those are interesting findings. Can you post the car files so I can try this, using your times as a benchmark?

I also noticed that the speed of the gear change is that of a double clutch auto (DSG). There is no way to shift that fast with a normal gearbox and clutch. Only with a racing sequential gearbox can you shift that fast.

In the sim, I don't think what you see is a fully accurate representation of what goes on in the calculations.

[RobtheFiend]

Easiest way to post the files?

[Jakgoe]

Put the platform file, the model file, and the engine file into a .zip. Post it using the attachment feature.

[RobtheFiend]

Hope this will work.

The platform is intended to cope with 2000+ hp engines, thus the many vents.

[strop]

I do find that changing the absolute values of each parameter (that is to say, the sway bars, dampers and springs) don't make as significant a difference as the balance between the front and rear for one thing, but the second thing is that changing the balance of the cambers does drastically change the character of the handling, at least if the times are anything to go by. Changing the balance of cambering requires significant changing the balance of the suspension in order to attain equivalent results, if even possible. Nonetheless I'm still not entirely sure what all the numbers correspond to with regards to calculations, only what they theoretically represent, so I'm not sure how helpful this is.

[RobtheFiend]

The reason for my posting this topic is that, setting a suspension to: American -70's luxury barge or "Crack your spine" European Nurburgring Tested, the time difference was less than .5 sec.

[strop]

Well, I honestly don't know what the real life difference between uniformly stiffening the springs, sway bars and dampers is actually going to do to a car, given everything else equal. I do remember Der Bayer mentioning that suspensions soft enough to bottom out are perhaps penalised insufficiently because the bump test is currently very mild, and I do get away with generally much softer setups than one would expect in a sports car.

But what I do know is that changing the relative settings between front and rear makes a huge difference, and that part seems legit to me. The reason for my posting my reply to your topic was to point that out.

[RAHayesJ]

With fine tuning I've managed to cut ten seconds from my track times. Maybe the course you've chosen to test with isn't appropriate to reflect the changes?

Try Green Hell or Akina(?) Downhill, it makes a huge difference.

[RobtheFiend]

Camber -2.0/-1.0 (same as before)
Ride Height 228mm

Same setting front and rear for the suspension.

Airfield track:
Stock suspension : 83.47 (24000 spring, 2400 shock, 1200 sway bar)
Hard suspension : 83.55 (all maxed = 60000 spring, 6000 shock and sway bar)
Soft suspension : 84.00 ( all minimum = 10000 spring, 1000 shock, 0 sway bar)

Haruna downhill:
Stock suspension : 300.61
Hard suspension : 301.17
Soft suspension : 303.79


Is the tyre size overwhelming the suspension settings?

[RobtheFiend]

Added AWD to see if that made a difference.(+73.7kg)
50.9/49.1 balance front/rear.(1500 kg, previous 1426.3kg, 50.1/49.9)

Same camber and Ride Height.(-2.0/-1.0, 228mm)

Stock suspension settings.
Automation Track : 142.08 (no previous time with stock setting)
Airfield Track : 83.59 (+0.12s)
Haruna Downhill : 300.13 (-0.48s)

The extra grip seems to be eaten upp by the extra weight.

[Killrob]

I don't think it makes sense comparing the performance of all-bad suspension settings. You need to properly set it up depending on various parameters and understand their dependencies. The bump graph and the yaw-rate graph are essential to that understanding. If at all, you need to compare a good soft setup with a good hard setup.

[strop]

Exactly... But even that said, you may find that a well balanced soft and well balanced firm suspension setup yields similar times. In perspective, "time taken to go around a track" is not a sufficient measure of the character of even a "good" suspension setup. That's why the simulation calculates sportiness, tameness and comfort.

If you really wanted to test what each suspension parameter really did, you'd go through every single permutation of every single value possible for all given setups, and you may be surprised to discover that there's quite a bit of variability you didn't initially find.

[RobtheFiend]

Did a little testing on the Airfield Track.
Camber as before, same with Ride Height.
The best time i got was 83.38(83.47 stock).

I ran different settings, only keeping the adjustments that gave some improvements.

Spring: 30000/48000
Shocks: 3000/4200
Swaybar: 1200/2000

Compared with stock settings this improved the numbers thus:
Tameness: 57.6(56.6)
Sportiness: 47.6(45.7)
Comfort: 26.8(27.1)
Prestige: 43.4(43.4)
Safety: 31.8(31.8)

Also tried everything i could to get the yaw-graph to go up toward the top, (oversteer?) but it changed very little.

Is there any way to see the previous graphs when a change has been made? Without that it is very difficult to use the various graphs. Maybe similar to what you get with the engine dyno. (Previous in a darker color)

[JussiE]

Is there any way to see the previous graphs when a change has been made? Without that it is very difficult to use the various graphs. Maybe similar to what you get with the engine dyno. (Previous in a darker color)

Good suggestion. It's hard to find from graphs what has actually changed and how much or into which direction...