AC RDGT4 Championship Round 1 - Silverstone - Sunday 27th February 2022

[Fiberoptix]

I set wing to 1, turned off TC and messed a little with ARBs (for me stiffer rear, left front alone). I don't have the feel or knowledge to mess with much else yet.

The lap vid I posted earlier in the thread was a 2:08.17, that was stock barring the rear wing and TC changes only, low fuel and a bit of luck.

I expected to see 2:07s from somebody on the night which felt like it would be the optimal pace if you can squeeze the extra out of setup tweaks (which I don't seem to be able to do yet) or just better driving of course!. I will give Enzo's setup a try for a laugh and see if I can drive with it.

 

[RasmusP]

Attached my setup.

Thanks a lot! It's always very interesting and a good way to learn something when you get to try the setup from a race winner.
Most of the times you quickly see why you are not the winner (yet) haha.

TC off for me. When the tires were up to temp, I couldn't get it to break traction even if I wanted to.

Oh I can show you how to break traction even with TC on, without wanting to

I also noticed that the timing of the ignition cut on upshift isn't quite right, so I was lifting manually when upshifting from 1>2 and 2>3. The autoblip for downshifts also isn't quite right, so in all of the high speed corners, I was manually blipping on downshift. (Brooklands, Copse, Maggotts-Becketts-Chapel, Stowe).

That might explain why a more aggressive setup felt so unstable for me. I didn't practice apart from half an hour via MouseSteering+ArrowKeys and the car felt a bit "weird".
Especially when turning in it felt like the brake bias would be too far back and front at the same time. But I didn't have the time to figure out when and why the car becomes unstable.

Interesting that about the blips. I noticed into Copse in particular I wanted the exit power from 4th gear put 5th was a more stable entry. Ended up just downshifting to fourth really early on the brakes and powering through the corner. Felt like i was loosing heaps of time there and into stowe.

Yep.. Same for me. These 2 corners felt awfully slow no matter what I tried.
Shifting down to 4th in the "best moment" would send me into an oversteery slide right before the apex.
Not shifting down to 4th would result in understeering towards the exit kerb.

 

[RasmusP]

Just writing down my little Setup comparison:

Enzo:

Heights: 96 / 107
ARBs: 30 / 16 (kN/m)


Brian:

Heights: 88 / 109
ARBs: 50 / 22

Rasmus:

Heights: 83 / 92
ARBs: 55 / 25

@Enzo Fazzi If you are willing to tell us:
How did you end up with stiff springs, quite a high car, softer front bump dampers and super soft ARBs, combined with massive front camber?

Comparing your setup with mine, the springs and damper mix is quite similar, although yours is a lot stiffer overall.
But then your car is a lot higher, ARBs to the minimum and that massive front camber

I did a quick test and I found your setup gives slow corner understeer, fast corner oversteer and while being quite stiff, leans a lot into "longer" corners.
Undoubtly very fast in your hands. I just have no idea how you ended up with these settings!

@Interslice How did you set up the camber? I think it's not enough, here's a Screenshot through Copse:

Clearly going red and therefore starting to slide without any warning. I find too low camber to be really critical. The grip equation in AC drops massively when going towards "positive" camber.

Apart from that our setup is quite similar with one big difference:
Your rear spring is super stiff and the rear is a lot higher!
It sure makes the car somehow controllable when the rear camber equations drops, but overall I find it to be quite unique with the springs frequency realtionship changing.

Enzo and I both run stiffer front springs than rear springs (ratio wise). 2.9/2.8 ; 2.6/2.5 while you were running 2.6/2.8.


Ofc I understand if you both don't have the time or don't want to talk about these details for whatever reasons.
I just thought I'd share what I wrote down for myself

Here's my setup:

 

[Enzo Fazzi]

@Enzo Fazzi If you are willing to tell us:
How did you end up with stiff springs, quite a high car, softer front bump dampers and super soft ARBs, combined with massive front camber? I don't think the rear ARB was particularly soft?

Comparing your setup with mine, the springs and damper mix is quite similar, although yours is a lot stiffer overall.
But then your car is a lot higher, ARBs to the minimum and that massive front camber

I did a quick test and I found your setup gives slow corner understeer, fast corner oversteer and while being quite stiff, leans a lot into "longer" corners.
Undoubtly very fast in your hands. I just have no idea how you ended up with these settings!

Car was bottoming out a lot, hence the stiff front spring and ride height. This obviously causes understeer/worse turn-in and led to the very soft front ARB.

Regarding the dampers, like I said, the car was very bouncy, so I mostly increased the rebound. I don't remember changing the bump, but if I did, I must've felt something while driving to warrant the change.

Cambers, I usually just set them up so that there's a 5°C degree difference between Outside-Middle-Inside (so a 10°C difference total). Both camber and dampers could easily be set up better by looking at telemetry, but that goes far beyond the effort I typically put in for a club race.

The slow corner understeer is not something I noticed while driving, so that may be caused by a difference in driving style.

 

[Interslice]

Just writing down my little Setup comparison:

Enzo:
View attachment 546276
View attachment 546275

Heights: 96 / 107
ARBs: 30 / 16 (kN/m)


Brian:
View attachment 546278
View attachment 546279

Heights: 88 / 109
ARBs: 50 / 22

Rasmus:
View attachment 546280
View attachment 546281

Heights: 83 / 92
ARBs: 55 / 25

@Enzo Fazzi If you are willing to tell us:
How did you end up with stiff springs, quite a high car, softer front bump dampers and super soft ARBs, combined with massive front camber?

Comparing your setup with mine, the springs and damper mix is quite similar, although yours is a lot stiffer overall.
But then your car is a lot higher, ARBs to the minimum and that massive front camber

I did a quick test and I found your setup gives slow corner understeer, fast corner oversteer and while being quite stiff, leans a lot into "longer" corners.
Undoubtly very fast in your hands. I just have no idea how you ended up with these settings!

@Interslice How did you set up the camber? I think it's not enough, here's a Screenshot through Copse:
View attachment 546286

Clearly going red and therefore starting to slide without any warning. I find too low camber to be really critical. The grip equation in AC drops massively when going towards "positive" camber.

Apart from that our setup is quite similar with one big difference:
Your rear spring is super stiff and the rear is a lot higher!
It sure makes the car somehow controllable when the rear camber equations drops, but overall I find it to be quite unique with the springs frequency realtionship changing.

Enzo and I both run stiffer front springs than rear springs (ratio wise). 2.9/2.8 ; 2.6/2.5 while you were running 2.6/2.8.


Ofc I understand if you both don't have the time or don't want to talk about these details for whatever reasons.
I just thought I'd share what I wrote down for myself

Here's my setup:

I thought my suspension was completely stock? I've just been carrying the same setup through the different events I've used the car, so may have adjusted it back last year. Maybe barbagallo with much lower loading in the corners. Not sure tbh. I'll need to look back through them.

 

[RasmusP]

Thanks for the in-depth quick reply!

Car was bottoming out a lot, hence the stiff front spring and ride height. This obviously causes understeer/worse turn-in and led to the very soft front ARB

That makes sense! Although in comparison to my setup, the relations between front/rear springs and height are similar so I didn't notice the overall understeer.
Turn-in though: yep, absolutely.

Regarding the dampers, like I said, the car was very bouncy, so I mostly increased the rebound. I don't remember changing the bump, but if I did, I must've felt something while driving to warrant the change

I didn't check the setup value compared to default so it might be that you didn't really adjust front bump. Although default = 8200 and yours = 7700.
The ratio becomes lower when you stiffen the springs though, which is the main reason for it being softer in comparison.
The soft bump probably feels pretty nice, since it counters the stiff springs a bit when braking and turning in!

Cambers, I usually just set them up so that there's a 5°C degree difference between Outside-Middle-Inside (so a 10°C difference total). Both camber and dampers could easily be set up better by looking at telemetry, but that goes far beyond the effort I typically put in for a club race.

Yeah I've read about this 10°c difference thing. From my knowledge it just doesn't apply at all for AC.
You have a not THAT complex equation with a grip multiplier as a result.
Camber Extravaganza calculates this grip multiplier basically at real time and outputs the result as graphs as you can see in my screenshots.
So maximum grip = green graph. No matter the temperature differences etc.

For the temperature grip multiplier, afaik, in AC, the tyres aren't split into the 3 sections. You only need the colour from the standard tyre app. The curve isn't that steep with a bit colder tyres but drops significantly when the tyres become too hot.

So I always do some laps, get the graphs green and then decide how to mix too much camber at turn-in with not enough camber over kerbs at the apex.
Mainly the maximum grip is achieved when lowering the camber until the rear becomes unstable over kerbs when going too far red.
Then giving it 2 clicks more to be safe and dial in the fronts so that it feels good.

Damn, I might've just got you even faster

The slow corner understeer is not something I noticed while driving, so that may be caused by a difference in driving style.

Yeah I often found that especially in AC, the mix of steering inputs and brake inputs from braking to the apex makes a massive difference.
Sometimes spinning out vs being totally fine is barely visible even in motec!

I often find myself spinning at corner entry in AC when having driven a bit more in rF2.

I thought my suspension was completely stock? I've just been carrying the same setup through the different events I've used the car, so may have adjusted it back last year. Maybe barbagallo with much lower loading in the corners. Not sure tbh. I'll need to look back through them.

Stock:

Heights: 87 / 97

So your front spring is stock, height too.
Your rear got from 2.5 Hz to 2.8 Hz though, which is a drastic difference!!

Your front camber is default too, you reduced the rear camber though.

Dampers look like full default. The rear dampers are a bit softer in relation to the springs though, due to stiffening the rear springs.

Your rear height probably comes from that stiffening too (I didn't compare the height settings).
You got "arrowing" due to that with the front being stock 87-88mm but the rear 97 -> 109

 

[Marko77]

Thank you for the tech insights everyone. Definitely going to run through this stuff again. Anything for a sore throttle leg. Lol.

 

[Interslice]

Thanks for the in-depth quick reply!

That makes sense! Although in comparison to my setup, the relations between front/rear springs and height are similar so I didn't notice the overall understeer.
Turn-in though: yep, absolutely.

I didn't check the setup value compared to default so it might be that you didn't really adjust front bump. Although default = 8200 and yours = 7700.
The ratio becomes lower when you stiffen the springs though, which is the main reason for it being softer in comparison.
The soft bump probably feels pretty nice, since it counters the stiff springs a bit when braking and turning in!

Yeah I've read about this 10°c difference thing. From my knowledge it just doesn't apply at all for AC.
You have a not THAT complex equation with a grip multiplier as a result.
Camber Extravaganza calculates this grip multiplier basically at real time and outputs the result as graphs as you can see in my screenshots.
So maximum grip = green graph. No matter the temperature differences etc.

For the temperature grip multiplier, afaik, in AC, the tyres aren't split into the 3 sections. You only need the colour from the standard tyre app. The curve isn't that steep with a bit colder tyres but drops significantly when the tyres become too hot.

So I always do some laps, get the graphs green and then decide how to mix too much camber at turn-in with not enough camber over kerbs at the apex.
Mainly the maximum grip is achieved when lowering the camber until the rear becomes unstable over kerbs when going too far red.
Then giving it 2 clicks more to be safe and dial in the fronts so that it feels good.

Damn, I might've just got you even faster

Yeah I often found that especially in AC, the mix of steering inputs and brake inputs from braking to the apex makes a massive difference.
Sometimes spinning out vs being totally fine is barely visible even in motec!

I often find myself spinning at corner entry in AC when having driven a bit more in rF2.



Stock:
View attachment 546296
View attachment 546297

Heights: 87 / 97

So your front spring is stock, height too.
Your rear got from 2.5 Hz to 2.8 Hz though, which is a drastic difference!!

Your front camber is default too, you reduced the rear camber though.

Dampers look like full default. The rear dampers are a bit softer in relation to the springs though, due to stiffening the rear springs.

Your rear height probably comes from that stiffening too (I didn't compare the height settings).
You got "arrowing" due to that with the front being stock 87-88mm but the rear 97 -> 109

I'll have a look for Spa. I need to return it to stock and go by feel, to possibly know what I was thinking there!

I suppose the takeaway point of the ginetta setups i posted is you can get at the very least to the front of the midfield/beat a 75 year old man just by dropping the wing to 2/3 and balancing the cars entry with the brake bias forward, exit's with the right foot. Good fuel and tyre pressures No dark arts needed!

For this race I had 2 x 30 minute windows to practice earlier in the week. I did try dropping the ride height and softening the springs for this race but realised after about 15 minutes I was wasting valuable practice time bottoming out and was better to just work with what was there. For me anyway I need to have that hour done and then have a spare hour or two on a saturday to tinker and test drive setup tweaks.

Myself and Han have this gt4 buzz going as an easier entry point and way to build race and championship experience. I know setups are fun to look at and interesting to mess about with if you have time. Just wanted to point that out to anyone reading this and thinking there was some dark arts in going fast in a ginetta. Basically you don't need to spend hours tinkering with these cars! Just get yourself up to speed during the week and focus on the race itself.

 

[Fiberoptix]

Just wanted to point that out to anyone reading this and thinking there was some dark arts in going fast in a ginetta. Basically you don't need to spend hours tinkering with these cars! Just get yourself up to speed during the week and focus on the race itself.

Absolutely agree. Its great detail though, thanking @RasmusP for the insight, I didn't even know half this information was even available, wish I had you as a race engineer!

From my experiences to date, I feel its better improving consistency and driving technique using mostly default setup with very few changes. I ran your first Maserati GT4 Setup from Bathhurst you shared throughout every race we did with them last year. I didn't even look at it what you did , i just tried it when you shared it, seemed ok so got used to driving it.

In the time I have been racing here at RD (coming as new to virtual racing), I would attribute less than 5% of my overall progress to getting familiar with setting the car up. So my personal opinion is you can have a lot of fun and be very competitive at this level of racing without even bothering to look at it.

Aliens, racing each other in leagues I am sure is a different story entirely of course. But here I think a lot of our races between the regulars are based on who makes less mistakes rather than who has the best setup.

 

[Enzo Fazzi]

I think something that people often forget is that setups change how the car behaves on/near the limit. If you're not near it, the effect of changes will be very limited.

 

[Fiberoptix]

I think something that people often forget is that setups change how the car behaves on/near the limit. If you're not near it, the effect of changes will be very limited.

Definitely, thats why I don't make many

 

[RasmusP]

Very true words from all of you!

And even worse, if you're 30% off the limit with the theoretically fastest setup and then change the setup to your liking and get to only 20% off the limit:
You'll think your setup would be great, since it made you faster.
But that setup might limit you to 10% off the limit and your driving style will adjust to that slower setup.

I had to learn this when I shared my setups a few years ago and while I got faster, the race winners got slower when testing it for me...

Sadly you never know what's an actually, physically fast setup and what isn't.

I'm sure Enzo would've won this race with my setup or Brian's setup anyway.