Do the new GT3 tires hurt the slider exploit drivers?

D

davehenrie

Registered
I will be the first to FREELY admit I'm not a good driver. I cannot push tires to get the most out of them either through lack of pace or lack of understanding. So I am certainly not qualified to answer this question, but I ask it due to several first impression posts by experienced racers who claim the tire temps are exploding.
I'm not seeing that, pretty much the temps stay about the same as before with my driving style. So I'm asking the guys who KNOW what the 'disconnect the rear ARB' exploit is and who can really push a car.
Why are some users seeing high temps immediately while others are not?
Is it because they are going all out before the tires are up to temp?
Is it because their driving style uses a lot of sliding?
Just curious.
 
The higher inertia allows to overdrive the cars in another way without losing it in hectic reactions because now everything is more sluggish and easy controllable like in ACC so that the tyres can be abused in another way. This is a big step in a wrong direction compared to the GTE
 
Andregee said:
The higher inertia allows to overdrive the cars in another way without losing it in hectic reactions because now everything is more sluggish and easy controllable like in ACC so that the tyres can be abused in another way. This is a big step in a wrong direction compared to the GTE
Click to expand...
except in ACC the moment of non return where u truly lose the car is much tighter/smaller than in rf2, i still think tyres could use more twitchy behavior. cars in rf2 still bit too controllable when u are slightly losing rear.
I don't know why but i feel like rf2 engine or S397 devs are better at creating open wheel race cars, those car always seem "realistically" challenging, i get much more tank slapper, spin out etc on open wheel cars.
GT cars on other hand feel like historic slidey race cars with aero.
 
The old Gt cars made by Michael Borda had a very good quality. Since S397 other took over, the quality went down and the physics are more a try and error game with broken suspension geometrys, not correctly working dampers, and so on . Since today it's impossible to make a burnout with more than 500hp with the GT cars from S397 with the old Corvette c6 g2 or the Chevrolet Camaro there is no problem to do it.
 
Last edited:
Andregee said:
The old Gt cars made by Michael Borda had a very good quality. Since S397 other took over, the quality went down and the physics are more a try and error game. Since today it's impossible to make a burnout with more than 500hp with the GT cars from S397 with the old Corvette c6 g2 or the Chevrolet Camaro there is no problem to do it.
Click to expand...
that bit is debatable, i can do burnout just fine in 488 GTE and AMG gt3....in 1st gear ofcourse by dumping the clutch. some cars like RSR just dies which is definitely unrealistic ....but i heard that is related to engine inertia issue than tyres.
 
I think that's engine inertia related too but it integrated since the first Gt3 pack from 2017 and even with the cars you named it's not like in reality
and it shows me that they don't know what they do in some parts
 
Andregee said:
I think that's engine inertia related too but it integrated since the first Gt3 pack from 2017 and even with the cars you named it's not like in reality
and it shows me that they don't know what they do in some parts
Click to expand...
yea RSR can do nothing like that in rf2 as shown in video. some are do acceptable burnout imo. there should be further tweaks needed indeed, but thats the problem of sims like rf2. too much content not enough staff to handle, just like AMS 2.
This is why i prefer ACC like focused approach, they get tiniest of details correct that way , its not perfect ofcourse but for GT3 sim its the best and thats is exactly what they set out to do.
that being said i still enjoy rf2 GT3 cars but if i have to pick one for GT3 only then im going to ACC.
 
The sudden snatch regain of traction seems to be less with the new GT3 tyres. But this whole exploit thing, I'm yet to see a good example. People on reddit were saying how rF2 is broken because you can win eSports while doing 45 degree drifts. I said really, can you show me? Then got sent examples of what looks to be normal driving. The whole drifitng thing looked to be unsupportable (at least from what I've seen), but the focus was then on steering angle. Like Alonso steering.

Was given this link as an example of ridiculous steering angle:

Didn't look massively out of the ordinary for me, but I went and found a real life onboard to compare:

If the unrealistic thing is turning the wheel beyond 90 degrees, then it looks like people do that in real life too. Obviously steering ratio would come into it, but that's a little beyond the depth these discussions go. I even found this video comparing 4 sims and the steering input is really similar in all of them.

So what's the deal with the broken physics in rF2? Is it just a meme or is it as broken as people say?
 
@Owen Pyrah the first 2 videos are really nothing alike. The maximum angle is fairly close to the same, but the manner is totally different.

The GT3 update just done should have largely addressed the ability of the tyres to hold on (and keep providing good grip) at high slip angles. There was no doubt quite a recognizable exploit there, hopefully less now, but as Rudy recently said in an interview they (sims) all have their own tricks. So I doubt the new tyres are perfect either. That's just how it is to some extent.

There were tens and tens of pages dedicated to slip angles, please don't start that up again. Yes, there was a pretty big issue with many of the tyres (at least; aero probably also played a part), it's been addressed to some extent. It's not about a switch between broken or perfect.
 
Lazza said:
the first 2 videos are really nothing alike. The maximum angle is fairly close to the same, but the manner is totally different.
Click to expand...

Looking again it looks like in rF2 he just gets to that angle and holds it, while in real life there's a bit of sawing back and forth while at midcorner. So the steering input in rF2 is a bit like clipped FFM output. Is that the exploit? Or is it leaving time on the table?

Lazza said:
There were tens and tens of pages dedicated to slip angles, please don't start that up again. Yes, there was a pretty big issue with many of the tyres (at least; aero probably also played a part), it's been addressed to some extent. It's not about a switch between broken or perfect.
Click to expand...

Ha ok then I'll search instead. Yeah in this update the biggest thing I've noticed is in the aero. Or at least the aero has attracted some attention as suddenly we're finding the cars really front heavy on aero balance. Wonder if it was the old tyres that allowed that, or was it the aero itself that changed. Definitely a step in the right direction I think. Even if it was a bit more forgiving before. Feels a bit more right now.
 
@Owen Pyrah you are comparing aston martin gt race car with completely different 992 cup, that is very wrong comparison will never lead to factually correct conclusion.
The physics were problematic for sure otherwise there wouldn't be massive updates to tyres. aero was also wrong (bias too forward) , yaw sensitivity on gt3 cars iirc got tweaked twice now.
this should all be fixed for most part , along with other things which is always nice.
 
That might explain why it's a step closer to the feel of ACC. People criticise it for being a tyre pressure simulator, but in my opinion it's more a 'keep the damn aero platform stable' simulator. Which is why there's often more coasting at midcorner, because you can carry more speed when the car is flat and gaining more downforce. In our case we're seeing the rear end disappear from under us with the base setups because we've grown use to being able to kick it out a bit without much loss in downforce. Like downforce is a bit more conditional now and less constant. Or I could be making all this up as I'm far too slow to really know what I'm feeling.
 
Owen Pyrah said:
That might explain why it's a step closer to the feel of ACC. People criticise it for being a tyre pressure simulator, but in my opinion it's more a 'keep the damn aero platform stable' simulator. Which is why there's often more coasting at midcorner, because you can carry more speed when the car is flat and gaining more downforce. In our case we're seeing the rear end disappear from under us with the base setups because we've grown use to being able to kick it out a bit without much loss in downforce. Like downforce is a bit more conditional now and less constant. Or I could be making all this up as I'm far too slow to really know what I'm feeling.
Click to expand...

Old base setup will not work with such massive physics changes , I think why you are having problem with rear is yaw sensitivity tweaks, paired with tyres that are slightly more punishing at limit. the coasting thing , keeping the underbody aero flat ....its bit wrong imo.
hotlaps of porsche gt3 R in ACC are best example, you will see they use slight throttle to control the car throughout the corner in med to high speed corners.....meaning that much amount of front end grip they are running.
point is simple run the car as aggressive as you can, with as front grip as possible until rear can't handle it......it works for ACC,RF2 and ofcourse IRL too. very fast hotlaps IRL are on the ragged edge of losing the rear.
 
Yeah I found with the GT3 R I had to raise the front 5 clicks from baseline. 60mm front, 62mm rear. I'm sure you need the agility to get the fastest laps, but for me I was tip toeing around the track. I'd rather have a stable car I can push. Then when I get to the point that I'm wanting extra rotation I can then start to add some more rake again.

I heard someone say (excellent source I know ) in ACC they will often go negative rake. Because they want to go low rear wing for speed, the front deflector then brings the balance too far forward. So they go negative rake to make it controllable, while still having the top speed from the low wing. Plus use a little throttle to stop it spinning out it seems.
 
Owen Pyrah said:
Didn't look massively out of the ordinary for me, but I went and found a real life onboard to compare:
Click to expand...
There are parts of that video that look freakisly like rF2 behaviour. Particularly at 1:42 he does a little slide on corner entry, quick correction, and then instantly back hard on the throttle without a fuss. At "Bruxelles" he gets on the throttle pretty hard mid corner and kind of sling-shots around the corner on-throttle.

Sorry @davehenrie I don't know the answer to your question. All that I know is that when I'm "feeling it" I can push the cars very hard and they go faster when I do that. Apparently that means physics broken :p
 
I think the tires are great and S397 is going in the right direction, now we only need more "adjustable" tire pressures depending on track and ambient temperatures to extract the maximum grip from them...
 
Owen Pyrah said:
Yeah I found with the GT3 R I had to raise the front 5 clicks from baseline. 60mm front, 62mm rear. I'm sure you need the agility to get the fastest laps, but for me I was tip toeing around the track. I'd rather have a stable car I can push. Then when I get to the point that I'm wanting extra rotation I can then start to add some more rake again.

I heard someone say (excellent source I know ) in ACC they will often go negative rake. Because they want to go low rear wing for speed, the front deflector then brings the balance too far forward. So they go negative rake to make it controllable, while still having the top speed from the low wing. Plus use a little throttle to stop it spinning out it seems.
Click to expand...
yea more positive rake paired with less wing is valid setup for low drag circuit, but tbh for most of time you should just add wing instead of increasing front ride height , this way you don't lose overall grip and downforce. more rake is always more downforce
 
I am not one of those competitive GT3 guys either, but I think we should see more convincing onboards from top drivers. I am looking forward to see them.

In my perception physics of GT3 cars or tires, aren't totally redone, in my opinion they still have some legacy doubts of old ones, but they seem to be massively updated and improved. IDK, they might be good enough. To my own perception GT3 cars are still a bit on tame side when flooring accelerator early and out of slower turns, and there might still be two or four degrees too much where car still feels safe to yaw even at high speed. There seems to be proper realistic punishment after those "safe" degrees are exceeded and at that point tires seems to start grip on/off with tarmac rapidly and hard to predict quickly, tankslappers happen, spinning off or just loosing lots of speed.


Just looks to me like tires are forgiving like 3-4 degs of slip too much.


But when driving like this it looks pretty good, perhaps still little bit safe
.
 
Owen Pyrah said:
Yeah I found with the GT3 R I had to raise the front 5 clicks from baseline. 60mm front, 62mm rear. I'm sure you need the agility to get the fastest laps, but for me I was tip toeing around the track. I'd rather have a stable car I can push. Then when I get to the point that I'm wanting extra rotation I can then start to add some more rake again.

I heard someone say (excellent source I know ) in ACC they will often go negative rake. Because they want to go low rear wing for speed, the front deflector then brings the balance too far forward. So they go negative rake to make it controllable, while still having the top speed from the low wing. Plus use a little throttle to stop it spinning out it seems.
Click to expand...

The default setups will be revised soon by s397, they didn't do it since the last bop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top