PDA

View Full Version : Having trouble with Lift-off oversteer



Panjandrum
31-05-2015, 05:27
OK, so to keep it short, I'm new to pcars and loving many aspects of it, but I'm having a lot of trouble getting lift-off oversteer to initiate. I can initiate it with a brake tap, a Scandinavian flick, or even a downshift mid-corner, but what I'm use-to, and looking for, is true lift-off oversteer. I don't necessarily mean "snap oversteer", but I do mean something more than the nose simply tucking-in to the apex a very small amount. But I can go into a corner at high-speed and just yank my right foot clear off that pedal in pcars (a huge, huge NO-NO in RL in a rear-biased car), and nothing bad happens. I don't even get much turn-in, let alone anything resembling the back trying to step-out, and nothing at all resembling snap oversteer, unless I tap the brakes etc. etc. (see above).

For background, I drive in amateur motorsports frequently (autocross, ice-racing) in classic RR chassis. 80 Porsche 911, 76 Porsche 912E, and 68 VW Beetle. This means that I don't have a real-life equivalent of any of the current cars in Pcars (can't wait for the Yellowbird!). But I'm incredibly comfortable with the RR configuration. I'm one of those guys who can "lift-rotate-squeeze-go" all day long, over and over and over. So I use the weight distribution of rear-baised cars in real-life, all the time, and I love it. I'm not somebody who wishes the engine was anywhere else. I love the engine in the rear, and to me, that's just the way a car should drive.

I have all driver's aids turned off (allow = none) and and racing with two different rigs at two locations. One has a G25, the other a T500. Both behave the same way.

I've tried:

2011 Ariel Atom 300 Supercharged
2011 Ariel Atom 500 V8 2011
1981 BMW M1 Procar
2009 Ford Focus RS (FF, for reference. Actually produced more lift-off oversteer than ANY of the RR or MR cars for me)
1969 Lotus 49 Cosworth V8
1994 McLaren F1
2011 Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG (FR, for reference)
2012 Pagani Huayra
2013 RUF CTR3 Clubsport
2013 RUF CTR3 SMS-R
2013 RUF RGT-8
2014 RUF RGT-8 GT3
(actually, I only tested 3 of the RUFs, but I can’t remember which 3 off the top of my head)

Anyone have any ideas? What am I missing? I have a hard time believing than none of these cars exhibit much lift-off-oversteer; that's a basic characteristic of a rear-biased car. What kind of settings might be messing this up for me? Or do all of these cars really have almost zero lift-off-oversteer in RL?

Thanks for any help you can provide!

Alan Dallas
31-05-2015, 06:14
Umm, rear biased balanced cars have more weight over the rear which is going to keep it planted unless you decrease fast and slow bump on the front dampers to soften up the nose dive. Take a FR car with a Solid Rear Axle out like the Boss 302R. Increase Diff Decel lock % and watch how fast that rear wants to come around on decel. Most of the weight will be on the nose already.

RedDave84
31-05-2015, 07:02
Try it in a Clio with no driving aids.

MisterO
31-05-2015, 08:44
Yup, Clio was the first car that came to my mind as well.

Luke Townsend
31-05-2015, 09:13
Also maybe try Caterham 7 Classic on default tuning. Plenty of lift-off oversteer there and it's rear wheel drive. I drop front pressures to 1.20 to get more turn in as it seems to understeer by default for me.

For other cars there is a "Brake Mapping" setting in the tuning setups. It keeps some throttle on even during braking to aid stability. I've not played with this setting but might be worth trying to change that to see if you can get more lift-off oversteer.

Blanka
31-05-2015, 10:49
Are you on default setups? They can be quite "safe". As above, reduce brake mapping, or coast (decel) diff lock or play with brake balance to get more movement at the rear.

Umer Ahmad
31-05-2015, 10:55
And to actually "reduce" the engine braking you have to slide RIGHT (numbers will INCREASE!) the "brake mapping", yeah kinda weird.

And slide RIGHT (increase) DECEL diff lock. This should really take care of it.

unknwn
31-05-2015, 11:09
And to actually "reduce" the engine braking you have to slide RIGHT (numbers will INCREASE!) the "brake mapping", yeah kinda weird.

Why weird? Increasing brake mapping will apply more throttle under braking hence less engine braking and more understeer.



And slide RIGHT (increase) DECEL diff lock. This should really take care of it.
What should it take care of? Increasing decel diff lock should give more understeer under no throttle as it is written in setup screen. OP wants more oversteer not understeer. Or am I missing something?

Umer Ahmad
31-05-2015, 11:22
You're correct, i mis-read his intention. He actually wants MORE lift-off oversteer. Typically new players complain it is too much already. So he should slide LEFT (decrease) DECEL lock, ignore my earlier instructions.

The engine brake mapping is weird because if i want LESS engine braking effect I must INCREASE a value. That's counter-intuitive. Usually if i want LESS of some effect i REDUCE the value (like the wing settings, or tyre pressure)

unknwn
31-05-2015, 11:35
The engine brake mapping is weird because if i want LESS engine braking effect I must INCREASE a value. That's counter-intuitive. Usually if i want LESS of some effect i REDUCE the value (like the wing settings, or tyre pressure)
In setup screen it is fairly well written that reducing brake mapping will aid in slow corners and increasing the value will give more understeer. It's intuitive if you are thinking of this option as "more power under braking" instead of "engine braking".;)

Umer Ahmad
31-05-2015, 11:45
Be serious, no one really reads those descriptions :)

It's the only UI thing in the car setup that works in the backwards 1-n kinda way. Everything else (wings, pressure, spring rates...) is in the intuitive direction where a value increase will increase the direct effect of the label (not the description)

Or we should then change the label to "more power under braking" like you said or the "anti-engine braking" so that the values are correctly interpreted by the user.

unknwn
31-05-2015, 11:48
Be serious, no one really reads those descriptions :)
Brake mapping was the only which I haven't heard/seen before, hence I have read it:cool:

Umer Ahmad
31-05-2015, 11:59
I think in real racing it is sometimes also called "ECU mapping"

mister dog
31-05-2015, 12:03
Can someone explain how reducing/increasing engine braking affects the car in race situations? I didn't even know this could be adjusted IRL as i thought the engine would just run it's revolutions when decelerating and the only way to tamper with that, would be to adjust gear ratios and that's it.

Something new for me :)

Umer Ahmad
31-05-2015, 12:07
Is kind of the rate at which the RPMs will slow down on their own from engine load when you let go of the throttle.

HIGHER value means LESS engine braking so your RPMs will decrease more SLOWLY.

It works independent of the gear ratios. Meaning it is additional and independent effect.

mister dog
31-05-2015, 12:10
Is kind of the rate at which the RPMs will slow down on their own from engine load when you let go of the throttle.

HIGHER value means LESS engine braking so your RPMs will decrease more SLOWLY.

It works independent of the gear ratios. Meaning it is additional and independent effect.

And with rapid decrease lift off oversteer before a corner becomes more prominent. I get it now cheers!

Umer Ahmad
31-05-2015, 12:12
Yeah you got it, if the effect is strong you can get lift-off oversteer like OP wants.

mister dog
31-05-2015, 12:20
Yeah you got it, if the effect is strong you can get lift-off oversteer like OP wants.

Is this a common tuning feature on race cars? Probably achieved by hampering with the ECU no?

Umer Ahmad
31-05-2015, 12:30
I think in many series it is allowed because it does not change total/maximum power. It is something the team can customize for the driver preference, like Differential.

Panjandrum
31-05-2015, 17:00
Umm, rear biased balanced cars have more weight over the rear which is going to keep it planted unless you decrease fast and slow bump on the front dampers to soften up the nose dive. Take a FR car with a Solid Rear Axle out like the Boss 302R. Increase Diff Decel lock % and watch how fast that rear wants to come around on decel. Most of the weight will be on the nose already.

Just so you know, this is completely incorrect on both accounts. Increasing diff decel lock will stabilize a car under deceleration (how it behaves under throttle, on the other hand, is very complex. The generalization that it stabilizes a car on acceleration is not completely accurate, since the greater the diff lock the more likely you are to spin up both rears and lose ALL lateral grip - which is why cars built for modern-style drifting often have welded diffs. So on decel, high diff, generally = more stability. On accel high diff, generally = more stability and understeer under light to moderate throttle, but higher likelihood of losing all lateral grip on that end of the car by spinning up both tires on that end of the chassis. It's easy to test this in pcars in, say, the Lotus 49, which has a TON of on-throttle oversteer. Drive it stock and play with stomping the go-pedal way too hard in corners. See how easy it is to lose all control and spin. Now take the diff and reduce both the static and on-throttle diff lock to zero. Now take it back out and stomp the throttle in a turn. Notice that, counter-intuitively, the rear is more stable instead of less, because you can only spin-up the inside tire - hence the outside tire still has lateral grip).

Also, the further back the center of balance is in a car the MORE they have a natural tendency to oversteer off-throttle (and the more grip the rear tends to have grip on-throttle). There are a lot of common misconceptions about car handling, and a LOT of counter-intuitive tuning procedures (for example, when you get started, it makes zero intuitive sense that a stiffer swaybar on one end of the car makes that end LESS grippy, but that's usually the case). There are a lot of books available about racing, chassis tuning, etc., so I won't go into things in depth, but you'll want to look up what is usually called the "polar moment of inertia" to understand what is going on in car with weight biased toward the rear (for which the RR layout is most well-known).

Not coming down on you, just trying to help! It's very counter-intuitive at first and far more complex than one would think. It's also much more difficult to feel these changes in a sim, because you can't feel the entire chassis moving under you. So I think it's actually easier to learn tuning in RL than it is in simulation.

Panjandrum
31-05-2015, 17:09
Thanks for these tips! I've already played around with a few of the settings and have gotten a bit more lift-off oversteer. I'm unsure about the Brake Mapping though, since it claims to specifically apply throttle on braking, not on throttle-lift. I'll have to play with that and see. It does feel, overall, like maybe the default tunes are all setup for being relative safe and understeery? Can anyone confirm that the Brake Mapping also effects a car which is only off-throttle, not under braking?

Can't wait for the YB to become available. That's going to be the real test for me as to how well pcars is modeling lift-off oversteer and chassis balance in general, as the cars I use in RL have a nearly identical chassis.

Thanks again, I appreciate the helpful feedback!

creepyd
31-05-2015, 17:57
Try the Ford Mustang Boss - that has MASSIVE oversteer when you lift off or brake, you can literally slide around most corners - all good fun.

ibby
31-05-2015, 17:58
You can also lower the diffs pre-load if you want more lift-off oversteer.
The defaults are indeed pretty safe. Then again they also need to work once it starts raining mid-session f.e. which is hard enough for most anyway. ;)

Pretty sure the brake mapping only affects engine braking, thus also off-throttle behaviour.
At least it had a huge effect when we still had full range ( 0-12 ) adjustable during development.
A more apt description would be Engine-Braking Compensation.

MarleyMoo
31-05-2015, 18:51
Also, the further back the center of balance is in a car the MORE they have a natural tendency to oversteer off-throttle (and the more grip the rear tends to have grip on-throttle). There are a lot of common misconceptions about car handling, and a LOT of counter-intuitive tuning procedures (for example, when you get started, it makes zero intuitive sense that a stiffer swaybar on one end of the car makes that end LESS grippy, but that's usually the case). There are a lot of books available about racing, chassis tuning, etc., so I won't go into things in depth, but you'll want to look up what is usually called the "polar moment of inertia" to understand what is going on in car with weight biased toward the rear (for which the RR layout is most well-known).


Yup. I think a good mental model is imagining the front and rear are responsible for some fixed % of the total mass, where the % is the static weight distribution. So the front of a Porsche is responsible for 40% of the mass, 60% for the rear. Let's say 5% of the dynamic load shifts to the front due to engine braking, then the front gets 45% of the load, but is responsible for 40% of the mass. The rear has 55% of the load and is responsible for 60% mass. Then your steering control is 5/40 = 12.5% more effective.

Compare that to the front-heavy car, say 60% mass front. The steering only gets 5/60 = 8.3% more effective. The Porsche thus get 50% more increase in steering effectiveness compared to the front-heavy car when lifting off.

Now of course the racing tuned front-heavy car can do something else to change this, like really stiff anti-roll at the rear for hot hatches. http://www.caradvice.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/2014-Renault-Clio-RS-200-Review-72-625x416.jpg

Panjandrum
01-06-2015, 02:23
For those of you who don't know, but want to know, "what I'm bangin' on about" when I talk about Rear Engined / Rear Biased cars and needing to tune for more lift-off-oversteer: I happened to watch a great Chris Harris video today, and he tells it better than I possibly can. All I can say is that, for some people (like myself) there really is nothing quite as sublime as driving a RR layout car properly. Watch the video and you'll see that he does a ton of lift-off-oversteer (he mentions the "delicious" trailing throttle at one point), and a bunch of on-throttle oversteer (I don't get to do this in my cars unless it is wet, or if I'm on dirt, snow, or ice because I don't have enough power to initiate on-throttle oversteer on a dry surface).

But watch him use the natural rearward weight bias of that car to change attitude almost instantly. That's the joy of driving an RR platform correctly, and that's what I need, need, need to get feeling right in pcars...

Anyway, this is a really good video, and will give you a good idea of the handling characteristics I'm trying to achieve (in the cars which I think should exhibit at least some of these characteristics):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hTLk1rU_ZI

Alan Dallas
01-06-2015, 06:54
Just so you know, this is completely incorrect on both accounts. Increasing diff decel lock will stabilize a car under deceleration (how it behaves under throttle, on the other hand, is very complex. The generalization that it stabilizes a car on acceleration is not completely accurate, since the greater the diff lock the more likely you are to spin up both rears and lose ALL lateral grip - which is why cars built for modern-style drifting often have welded diffs. So on decel, high diff, generally = more stability. On accel high diff, generally = more stability and understeer under light to moderate throttle, but higher likelihood of losing all lateral grip on that end of the car by spinning up both tires on that end of the chassis. It's easy to test this in pcars in, say, the Lotus 49, which has a TON of on-throttle oversteer. Drive it stock and play with stomping the go-pedal way too hard in corners. See how easy it is to lose all control and spin. Now take the diff and reduce both the static and on-throttle diff lock to zero. Now take it back out and stomp the throttle in a turn. Notice that, counter-intuitively, the rear is more stable instead of less, because you can only spin-up the inside tire - hence the outside tire still has lateral grip).

Also, the further back the center of balance is in a car the MORE they have a natural tendency to oversteer off-throttle (and the more grip the rear tends to have grip on-throttle). There are a lot of common misconceptions about car handling, and a LOT of counter-intuitive tuning procedures (for example, when you get started, it makes zero intuitive sense that a stiffer swaybar on one end of the car makes that end LESS grippy, but that's usually the case). There are a lot of books available about racing, chassis tuning, etc., so I won't go into things in depth, but you'll want to look up what is usually called the "polar moment of inertia" to understand what is going on in car with weight biased toward the rear (for which the RR layout is most well-known).

Not coming down on you, just trying to help! It's very counter-intuitive at first and far more complex than one would think. It's also much more difficult to feel these changes in a sim, because you can't feel the entire chassis moving under you. So I think it's actually easier to learn tuning in RL than it is in simulation.

No sorry have to disagree on both your counts. Your totally backwards on how moment of inertia works. And by the way, it's Mass moment of inertia we're dealing with here. Polar moment of inertia applies to rotating shafts or their ability to resisted twisting forces as it were. Just going by memory here from my college years in Physics classes.
I've tuned more Mustang suspensions than I can remember. Slowing the rate of weight transfer(increasing the moment of inertia) and shifting ballast to the rear ALWAYS slows or cures lift off oversteer. ALWAYS. Allowing more slip in the rear diff on decel(which I suggested) will allow more coast. More coast = less weight being transferred forward OFF the rear tires. There's a reason you increase front damper rates to reduce nose dive. So your rear tires don't unload(and in turn reduce grip and make the rear loose) on decel. ARB's have no bearing on fwd/aft weight transfer, they're purely for controlling roll.

You're not going to convince me otherwise. The laws of physics don't allow it.

Panjandrum
01-06-2015, 17:04
No sorry have to disagree on both your counts. Your totally backwards on how moment of inertia works.

You're not going to convince me otherwise. The laws of physics don't allow it.

You are 100% wrong if we are still discussing my original topic. Sorry! You can believe otherwise if you so desire, but you will still be wrong.

However, we may simply be talking about two different things. You appear to be talking specifically about Mustang suspension, or more generally about suspension tuning, and using it modify the natural tendencies of the chassis. I'm was talking ONLY about the fundamental principles of weight-distribution (and also weight transfer of course) that govern lift-off oversteer. Suspensions can be tuned many ways, so you could easily be correct that you can tune Mustang suspension to have lots of lift-off oversteer, or trailing-throttle oversteer, or whatever you're personal preference of terminology is when you discuss it. Modern hot hatches, for example, are often tuned for lift-off oversteer. Heck, look at some of FF autocross cars and you'll see huge fat sticky tires on the front and skinnier or otherwise less sticky (different compound) ones on the back to get the cars to rotate off throttle. But, these are purposeful modifications to overcome the fundamental weight-distribution and get it to handle in a specific way. So, talking about, generically, about (for example) an RR car and an FF car, the RR car will have more of a tendency to lift-off oversteer. It's a fundamental principle. Don't take my word for it, you can read about it in any number of places which can describe the underlying physics more clearly than I can. Here are a couple of links that help explain things:

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-news/industry-news/the-porsche-911-the-car-that-shouldnt-work-but-does/ (Great article that summarizes very clearly why those of us who love RR cars do so.)

http://www.drivingfast.net/car-control/oversteer.htm (this one has a handy list of various attributes that, all other things being equal, apply to weight-distribution and the effects on handling).

So I do think that you've simply misunderstood which principles that I originally wanted to discuss. MarlyMoo gives a great technical explanation just a few posts up... You are correct that, for some reason, we all refer to this as the "polar moment of inertia', which I've repeatedly read is the incorrect term. It's a hard habit to break though... Since it appears that you drive performance cars in real life, I suggest you go to an event where you can safely drive a friends RR layout car, and then just play with it off-throttle. You'll immediately feel what I'm talking about. The feel is very, very different, even when compared to (for example) an FF car with a chassis tuned for lift-off-oversteer.

Panjandrum
01-06-2015, 23:05
As I play pcars more, I'm beginning to think that my issues is half FFB related, in that I'm having trouble "feeling" the oversteer through the wheel. This is something I'm very used to feeling in RL, and generally the sims I play model it well. I've tried a few sims that don't do it well, and in the end I find out that I can't play them. In RL I'm lucky enough to have "a truly great butt" when it come to feeling how a chassis behaves, but I think this is actually detrimental when it comes to sim racing, because if I don't FEEL it, I have trouble knowing what's going on.

I have played around with the "engine braking" and reducing diff settings, and that makes a big difference. I was able to get some real lift-off oversteer in the McLaren F1 (but unfortunately the changes I made, in this case the the sway-bar settings, made it too hard to catch once back on-throttle, so it really didn't work out.)

I'm going to try mucking about with the unbelievably complex FFB settings at some point I guess!

Thanks again for the feedback, it's been a big help already.

funknerraw
01-06-2015, 23:31
If you haven't tried them yet, I would suggest checking out Jack Spade's FFB Tweaker Files in this thread (http://forum.projectcarsgame.com/showthread.php?22938-Jack-Spade-FFB-Tweaker-Files) ashtye really changed the feel of my FFB so I can feel a lot more what's actually going on with the car.

spinkick
02-06-2015, 01:51
Also maybe try Caterham 7 Classic on default tuning. Plenty of lift-off oversteer there and it's rear wheel drive. I drop front pressures to 1.20 to get more turn in as it seems to understeer by default for me.

For other cars there is a "Brake Mapping" setting in the tuning setups. It keeps some throttle on even during braking to aid stability. I've not played with this setting but might be worth trying to change that to see if you can get more lift-off oversteer.

man, i hate that car lol

hkraft300
02-06-2015, 03:24
Do realise that the lengthened chassis of the 991 gen Ruf RGT that's in this game (and current gen 911s) has pushed weight distribution towards the front wheels significantly, so your "classic" rear-engine handling is almost entirely engineered out.
So your lift-off oversteer will be that little bit harder to come by.

They don't make 'em like they used to...

Luke Townsend
02-06-2015, 08:43
man, i hate that car [Caterham 7 Classic] lol

Hehe! :) Well I want to love it as I have a soft-spot for Caterham 7's! ;) And hot lapping is awesome with the back sliding on entry to a corner and getting it back underneath. But I'm finding it hard to stay on the pace and not make mistakes for a race distance! One day maybe... ;)

Luke Townsend
02-06-2015, 08:45
If you haven't tried them yet, I would suggest checking out Jack Spade's FFB Tweaker Files in this thread (http://forum.projectcarsgame.com/showthread.php?22938-Jack-Spade-FFB-Tweaker-Files) ashtye really changed the feel of my FFB so I can feel a lot more what's actually going on with the car.

+1 with this! In fact for me (T300RS wheel) I am now combining bManic's general FFB settings and Jack Spade's individual car settings (i.e. I am not using Jack Spade's "general" settings but I am using his FFB folder). That's been the best result so far, for me anyway. And it definitely feels when the car gets loose and so I'm able to catch it much of the time (despite not being that great a driver).

Panjandrum
02-06-2015, 17:31
Do realise that the lengthened chassis of the 991 gen Ruf RGT that's in this game (and current gen 911s) has pushed weight distribution towards the front wheels significantly, so your "classic" rear-engine handling is almost entirely engineered out.
So your lift-off oversteer will be that little bit harder to come by.

They don't make 'em like they used to...

Yeah, I do know that. But the new ones definitely DO still lift-off-oversteer, it's just not as pronounced (we watch the new ones spin on lift-off all the time at Autocross events, sometimes at surprisingly low speeds. Ditto with the Lotus Elise, certain models of MR2, etc. etc.). My complaint isn't that it's reduced, it's that, on pure-lift-off during a corner, I can't feel ANY oversteer many times. I'm slowly getting a handle on it. Part of the issue is that pcars isn't communicating the "feel" of the weight balance, or the feel of the weight-transfer, very well to me. Going to try the FFB tweaks listed in this thread and see how that goes! (Watch that video I posted just a few posts back if you want to see a modern RR chassis behavior both on and off throttle. That man can really, really, drive!)

Panjandrum
03-06-2015, 02:59
Thank you for recommending Jack's presets. They really do help. I still have some fundamental issues feeling things that I'm used to feeling in other sims, but that may just be a limitation of the pcars engine (I sure HOPE not though, it would be a shame).

At this point I think I'm going to call it "good enough" for now. I am impressed that the tuning seems to work well. I've been softening spring rates on both ends and almost completely disabling the limited-slip settings in a few cars to get them to rotate more easily off-throttle and less easily on-throttle, and it's working exactly as expected. That's nice! I do wish I could feel it better in the "leading up to upsetting the balance" stage instead of only after I get to the "you've upset the balance" stage. Ditto with FFB understeer. I get either zero, or so little, lightening in the wheel leading up to understeer that I have a very hard time telling when the fronts are going to really begin to slide.

But, I do understand that we can't have it all.

Luke Townsend
03-06-2015, 06:21
Thank you for recommending Jack's presets. They really do help. I still have some fundamental issues feeling things that I'm used to feeling in other sims, but that may just be a limitation of the pcars engine (I sure HOPE not though, it would be a shame).

At this point I think I'm going to call it "good enough" for now. I am impressed that the tuning seems to work well. I've been softening spring rates on both ends and almost completely disabling the limited-slip settings in a few cars to get them to rotate more easily off-throttle and less easily on-throttle, and it's working exactly as expected. That's nice! I do wish I could feel it better in the "leading up to upsetting the balance" stage instead of only after I get to the "you've upset the balance" stage. Ditto with FFB understeer. I get either zero, or so little, lightening in the wheel leading up to understeer that I have a very hard time telling when the fronts are going to really begin to slide.

But, I do understand that we can't have it all.

Good news things are getting better for you, FFB wise! I think the basic issue is that in a real car, not all that information reaches your brain through the wheel - you'll get some/most(?) through your backside. So as I've been told by the experts here on the forum, there is not one FFB setting that suits everyone. Jack does 4 versions with some that include more rear-end feel through the wheel - may be worth trying those if you haven't already (I use his first one as I think it's "weird" to feel the rear through the wheel, but just my opinion). I suspect, given the huge effort on the physics side in Project Cars and the FFB side too there will be somewhere lurking some settings that suit you really well, just they may still be hiding a bit! ;) I've also read, maybe here on the forum, maybe elsewhere, that FFB in Project Cars feels different to other racing games by design - because they wanted to get it accurate rather than feeling right to what an arcade racer is used to. Not that you are an arcade racer at all of course, just saying that other racing games may put more through the force feedback than is really there, to make it feel racy! ;) Just my thoughts and I stand to be corrected on any/all of this of course! :)

MULTIVITZ
03-06-2015, 07:25
Polar moments, like an ice lolly? The ARBs do have a lot to do with the slip angle of each axle and how much road spring energy is left avaliable for weigh transfere, the roll stiffness has to support the polar momentums or you'll be hitting the bumpstops! To initiate lift off oversteer in a car with slicks is NOT for the faint heated. I usually raise the rear a bit (until you can't slalom?)and reduce the camber on wide tyred vehicles, further control can be gained by dialling in the diffs Deccel, too high and it gets snap closed, breaking the rears grip, just keep lowering it until you yaw rate improves. Toe, don't talk to me about toe!!!
Raising the rear height can stop the diffuser working abruptly on some cars! I find reducing the rear rebound which works nice with rear ARB increase!! Then decrease it to reduce slip!! Rear bound too pushes the tyres if too high setting. A too slack front ARB can give snap oversteer, read my ARB post for more insight? Happy hooning.

mister dog
03-06-2015, 08:51
@ Panjandrum, for extra FFB so you know what the back is doing, play around with the Mz and Sop sliders in the FFB tuning menu of your car. They greatly improve that feel when turned up a bit.

Panjandrum
29-08-2015, 20:03
OK, so I decided to give PCars another try today with the Old vs. New DLC pack so that I can try the Yellowbird. Since I do motorsports in 2 cars with a chassis and suspension very nearly identical to the Yellowbird, this is chassis I know very well IRL.

And there is still almost ZERO lift-off oversteer. I can do things in the YB in PCars at that I absolutely guarantee you would get you killed - things I don't even do in my RL cars at motorsports events unless I have a huge run-off area for safety, because even though I'm VERY good at lift-off oversteer in these chassis, that one little screw-up could cost me big in the wrong place.

The YB in PCars simply feels NOTHING like it should. I don't know how else to explain it. The balance is all wrong. It refuses to oversteer off-throttle but has a very classic "light-rear-end" FR-style oversteer when you get on throttle too much. I feel nothing of the nimble front-end, nor of the massive rear-grip these cars possess IRL. Honestly, it reminds me a LOT of the crappy physics in GT5 & 6 (in which RR cars or more-or-less completely borked). I'm not a fanboy of any product, period, and even though I like a LOT of things about PCars, it's incredibly disappointing to find out that their simulated physics don't match real-life in this case at all. It's just as wrong as wrong can be.

Very, very disappointed.

(If you want to feel what a real Porsche of that chassis type feels like, try AC, which models it brilliantly, or go clear back to GT4, which actually does a very good job of it also.)

mister dog
30-08-2015, 02:32
OK, so I decided to give PCars another try today with the Old vs. New DLC pack so that I can try the Yellowbird. Since I do motorsports in 2 cars with a chassis and suspension very nearly identical to the Yellowbird, this is chassis I know very well IRL.

And there is still almost ZERO lift-off oversteer. I can do things in the YB in PCars at that I absolutely guarantee you would get you killed - things I don't even do in my RL cars at motorsports events unless I have a huge run-off area for safety, because even though I'm VERY good at lift-off oversteer in these chassis, that one little screw-up could cost me big in the wrong place.

The YB in PCars simply feels NOTHING like it should. I don't know how else to explain it. The balance is all wrong. It refuses to oversteer off-throttle but has a very classic "light-rear-end" FR-style oversteer when you get on throttle too much. I feel nothing of the nimble front-end, nor of the massive rear-grip these cars possess IRL. Honestly, it reminds me a LOT of the crappy physics in GT5 & 6 (in which RR cars or more-or-less completely borked). I'm not a fanboy of any product, period, and even though I like a LOT of things about PCars, it's incredibly disappointing to find out that their simulated physics don't match real-life in this case at all. It's just as wrong as wrong can be.

Very, very disappointed.

(If you want to feel what a real Porsche of that chassis type feels like, try AC, which models it brilliantly, or go clear back to GT4, which actually does a very good job of it also.)

I tried the YB a bit, and the car is enjoyable with a lot of oversteer on corner exit especially when applying the throttle, but it doesn't put its nose into a corner when lifting of the throttle like you say. So if the YB in real life should experience lift off oversteer when going into corners then the default setting in PCARS doesn't really replicate it.

AB_Attack
30-08-2015, 02:41
I know how it feels

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVQ-Yk0bgGY