@eclip2
You drive so un-smoothly and coast a lot (Promoting engine brake oversteer) that I will have to put it down to driver issue.
@JackCY
Nearly everything on the car's either from a document or from a measurement. Barring tires. Even the unsprung is calculated from known masses down to the washer and bolt.
Do tell me what mistakes you have spotted and would change immediately. On the stock car, of course. Perhaps I've missed something drastically, but the video-comparison and user feedback shows the car to be at least "4/5" accurate at the very least.
Laptime is nearly impossible to compare unless we know the exact conditions + use the exact semislick compound that they used.
Also I don't understand what you mean with bumpstop distances are not easily calculatable. We kinda measured that, for rear at least. For front I went with anecdote. If you mean setting the susp height to neutral, you can do it with the suspension travel app.
I've checked these variants, normal, S2, S3 and here is what I mostly saw:
Insane aero lift/downforce balance to the front making the car oversteer. Something like 100%+ front balance. Even with maxed out rear wing on S3 it can still be a bit too high front balance.
The suspensions weren't always leveled out/neutral as the camber setting in setup menu was sometimes widely different from live value. If you measure everything with car on ground AC will take it and won't need adjustment/recalculation, but if you enter say suspension with car measured off ground then the camber won't be same live and in setup menu but more importantly if you enter bumpstop distances at the same time measured with car on ground then they will be widely off. You can check the bumpstops distances by making the limits rock solid. If you have it set "neutral", by that you mean that the car on ground in AC is at same height as the real car? And suspension did not move from the data you entered? Then yes the bumpstops:
Code:
BUMPSTOP_UP, BUMPSTOP_DN, PACKER_RANGE
Should work fine with real measurements. Sadly most cars always move, some by a lot (especially original AC cars) and their bumpstops have to be recalculated or suspension moved in data to a "neutral" position.
Max boost and wastegate are equal, this is not how turbos work. Max boost should be higher than wastegate. Plus there is often a turbo controller that you don't need. Lets say turbo max would be 1.0 and wastegate 0.8 normally.
Missing progressive part of springs and bumpstops. AC doesn't calculate it, the MR change gives you a progressive part even if your spring isn't progressive itself since springs in AC are defined at wheel not at spring attachment points since AC doesn't even have any spring or damper attachment points at all. It does everything at the wheel/hub.
As much as you probably wanted to improve braking with AWD system by keeping it active during braking... this does not work in AC and the cars have terrible braking performance as a result. So much so that at times it was as if someone disconnected the rear brakes altogether.
Differentials such as:
Code:
REAR_DIFF_POWER=1.00
REAR_DIFF_COAST=0.50
REAR_DIFF_PRELOAD=150
Are mental and unreal. Welded 100% on power? Not even 99% with tiny slip but 100% welded. Also very high preload, probably trying to keep the car stable due to aero oversteer?
The S3 would probably have even higher reference RPM for turbo. With power right now being that of an RB35? Or RB40? I would have to calculate but it is definitely some hell of a brutal power for RB26. 1.2bar 700+hp? Seems unreal to me. RB26 650hp 1.5bar or there about should be a well tuned engine. 700+ 1.2bar is a different motor to me. If it was 700+ at 2.0bar sure why not. There is a whole RB AU forum thread with dynos for decade+ to check power, turbo, etc.
Weight copied from stock Kunos car yet weight balance is recalcuted? Odd. And S2/3 being same weight as stock car is even more odd.
Tyres seemed to grip quite a bit compared to stock. But I could be wrong here.
AWD can't say since the cars seem so imbalanced but the way power is put down right now seemed OK though who knows how that will be when cars don't oversteer from aero etc. at any small input at any speed. Plus locked weird rear diff isn't helping either to say if the front-rear AWD power is OK or not.
On braking and coast the AWD is bad.
In reality S2/3 would likely have 4 wheel steering disabled. Probably rear active diff gone too which S1-S3 in AC don't have either so good there. Personally for low power rear active ERS+brakes hack diff in AC kind of works because it's not so invasive but at higher power levels it was always slower (lap time wise) than traditional passive LSD, the handling was worse, less predictable, steered a little different and wrong, not the way active diff should as the torques were applied differently. For GTR (R35) that has passive LSD + brakes ... AC can do that but for R34 with active rear LSD... AC can't do that correctly :/ Many R34 don't have the active rear anyway and who tunes an R34 with ALSD likely removes the active diff too and replaces with a good passive LSD.
ALSD is "nice" but sort of a gimmick for cruising that is hard to perfectly tune and use for track/race use.
To me the springs and dampers are soft, but then I'm looking at a road car stock version so that's to be expected. I wouldn't say they are stiff.
Also suspension seemed to change toe with travel even more than Kunos's R34. I thought this "new" suspension was meant to address these sort of issues not make them worse?
I didn't see that much in terms of a need for shader patch/physics hacking. What changes in the data actually require it beside: TORQUE_MODE_EX, which I would have to look up if there is where to know what it's supposed to do or fix and then check if it actually does that or not, EXTENDED_RAYTRACING same thing, not sure there are any more physics hacking extensions. Or that the way it's hacked is actually correct or more correct than default AC behavior, would have to first have access to code of both to be able to see what it's actually doing/calculating before saying one is better than the other. Some suspension things in stock AC used to be and probably still are broken/off, no doubt about that.
I don't think the car would behave drastically different without physics hacks.
The hub weights seemed fine to me.
---
Post some lap on a track, time or video, maybe you have it set for you and can drive it around fast. For me it seemed far off from what I would consider driveable and the car behaved murderous. Maybe I'm driving it wrong but considering the data I saw to me it seems the problem is mostly there not in my driving. So I would like to see a fast race lap with the S3, or any other version really (S3 seemed easiest to drive for me since I could tune it in setup menu), to see that the car is actually driveable by someone.
Nord. Tourist is easiest for me to compare on, 18C air 24C track, 100% grip, mid clear. There are 2 Jap. pack servers online with same settings too if you want to meet up online with moded R34