Released GTE and Oreca 07 New Tyre Update

So, is it an error or is the car like that? Because if I activate that spring there seems to be a limiting factor, I don't know if it's aerodynamic or motor or what, but it doesn't seem normal to me.

 

I learned before that the third spring in the front is a very important thing to set above 0 so the car in more stable on braking and corner entry as it is not pitching forward too much. But from the comments here, I just want to give it a try to turn it off and gain some time.

Anyway, I also don't understand the ride height with the Oreca 07. I get higher top speed with 4,5cm - 7cm ride height, than with like 7cm - 8cm. I couldn't find the logic here. For now I feel that I need to have a high rake angle to have top speed and I need to run the car low on the front to have top speed. I don't know whats happening, I learned differently from the setup guides. Am I the stupid here or the physics is completely bugged?

 

I think if you neutralising the rake by raising the front ride height, you will increase drag.
this is why even raked but lower front is faster
you should neutralise rake by lowering both front and rear , make both of them run as low as possible where they are rarely scraping on straight sections.
Watch car from outside cameras, now that sparks are visually shows ....helps a ton with setup

 

Ride height will work hand in hand with suspension, so I would imagine - I am just thinking out loud - that, if the car is nearly flat and there is more downforce at the back due to the wing, the front might be pointing up and the bottom of splitter may be facing the front, generating drag.

So, you might need to also work on the suspension to keep the car from lifting the front.

Thoughts?

 

I thought when you setup the car for a higher rake the drag increases. Because the car is becoming "taller", I mean that a larger surface meets the air. But correct me If I am wrong.

Anyway, If I remember correctly even raising the ride heights with keeping the rake angle has dropped the top speed by a little. But I will do some more test tonight or tomorrow.

 

Apparently its a common problem
https://forum.studio-397.com/index....ntly-higher-with-max-rake.72168/#post-1100829

 

the third pier

 

After a few days frustration, looking for those few lost seconds on Le mans, I found a balance in my Oreca race setup last night, where I could do 3.30s-3.31s with reasonable consistency. I know its not high level but for me its an achievement.
Top speed about 322 km/t on the first strait. On softs it was still drivable after 8 laps at 75%.
3rd front spring is N/A, and I didn't feel much difference between 1400 vs N/A.
I really like these new tires, it's much easier to catch before it goes sideways.
I recorded a video of it, which I plan to upload tonight (with setup), had a blast for 70 minutes with AI at 102%.
will put a link here when its done.

Here's the link to the video (70 minutes) Setup in the last 30sec or so.

 

One thing is the ride height with the car stopped, very different when car goes at high speed. Then, your wing and the downforce of car moves down your rear height, so at maximum speed maybe your rake is so different, and obviosly your drag. It depends a lot of your rear suspension, softer the downforce moves more the car down.

 

In your setup higher rake should be still better than neutralising rake by raising front, here you are doing it the wrong way.
Ok, if you are gaining top speed by raising rear ride height ONLY and keeping front same then its a problem with physics.
Higher rake will result in more drag compared to setup where both front and rear at their lowest.

P.S > just my thought, in LMP cars the rear wing gets clean air regardless of rake , so rake itself probably doesn't make rear wing more "angled" like in a GT car.
idk if rf2 can simulate such effects tho.
i.e raising rear > make wing stronger > shifts aero balance rearward instead of front

 

Depends on the bumpers or packers

 

I drove the last weeks only the new BMW M4 GT3 with the new tire model too. I drove this car cause it drives very good for me on the limit for shure but you have to be careful of the tires too. the grip is better and the stock-setup of this car is very good.
So this wheel update is now copared in the GTE's, my first test in the C8 Vette is very nice to drive but ! No drift ! or slide you have to drive clean on the limit and look at the tire temps. Much fun for me and a great Update from Studio 397 in my opinion. They rule!

 

The M4 Gt3 has the old tyres

 

Correct.

The full GT3 pack offering will be updated with the newest tech in the future, it's actually one of our (big grouping) items next on the list following the recent GTE update.

 

+1111111111!!!!!!!!!

 

along with lamborghini , 991.2 porsche gt3 ?

 

I haven't been following the news lately... Are the GTE's finally fully 'PBR' with this update?... or it's just a BOP...?

 

https://www.studio-397.com/2022/07/released-oreca-07-and-gte-new-tyre-update/

 

Hello,
Thank you for the update of the GTE's and of the Oreca07. There seems to be something odd with the bumpstop on the third springs of the Oreca. Indeed, I made the test of driving with 0mm of packers on the third springs (which means that, with proper heave stiffnesses, they shouldn't be engaged), and with the minimum gaps available for each third spring, keeping everything else constant between the two runs, and there is absolutely no effect visible on data:
There is absolutely no difference on ride heights versus speed plots, while I should expect ride heights to be higher at high speeds with the smaller bumpstop gaps configuration (the black ones).

I couldn't find any difference when plotting the sum of the suspension force versus the average suspension position for the front axle either, while I should expect an increase of the slope of the sum of the axle force versus the average suspension position when the bumpstops are engaged.

All this makes me believe that third spring bumpstops are either never engaged whatever gap they are given, or that the bumpstops do not apply any force, even when they are engaged.

Would you mind checking that they are actually working ? Third element bumpstops being such powerful tools to control ride heights at high speed, it would be nice to have them ingame if they are present on the real car, which the ability to tune bumpstop gaps seems to suggest.

I attached the two setups that I used for my comparison if you want to reproduce my issue.

Best regards

 

This is why a separate bumpstop engagement channel along with bumpstop force channels should be made available as telemetry output.
like in ACC motec.