(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Looking into the WRX I decided to try a mathematical route using an Algorithm that is quite suitable for GT6 and the perfect conditions of the game.

Algorithm:

AirDensity=0.0228645 * baro/(0.5555* (temp - 32) + 273.15)

AeroDragFactor = 1.07556 * AirDensity * cd * f-area

AeroHP = (AeroDragFactor * mph3)/375.0


Assuming the Tire Pressure is at 32psi, Barometric Pressure in Inches 30Hg & no need to use the in Game temperatures as that's for the track temp not air density (IMO). I will run my test with a constant 70f (25c) to keep testing consistent at SSRX.

I will use the in game height and width to estimate the frontal area

combined with the reported Coefficient of drag found for the car (the Subaru WRX I found has a 0.33 Coefficient of drag) I will calculate how much hp is required to hit the cars in game top speed whatever it may be.

Example Subaru WRX

Coefficient of drag: 0.33
Frontal Area (Square Feet): 28.5
Test Temperature in Degrees F: 70
Test Barometric Pressure in Inches Hg: 30
Vehicle Miles Per Hour (MPH): 150
Vehicle Weight in Lbs: 3267
Tire Inflation Pressure in psi: 32

Give us a result of 212hp being required to hit 150mph

Looks like my math is correct I believe the WRX is good for something like 220whp, now to STi this Bitch & recalculate with the weight and top speed of the WRX STi to see how things line up in the game. I believe the WRX Stis make around 250whp. Remember Im only trying to Ballpark this to see if the in game top speeds work with the specs in the game taking into consideration drivetrain loss (that I have already calculated a long time ago when I built the Gear Tuner ) but thats not needed here

I will try to match the in game top speeds to the cars real world whp numbers.

Dyno Tested: 2015 Subaru WRX vs. 2015 Subaru STI

You must login or register to view this content.

Looking at their Dyno sheet 247whp to 250whp are the right numbers so I will take this to a new WRX STi in GT6

Subaru WRX STi '10

Top Speed Testing churns a 174mph top speed and the car should require 273hp to get it. Not unreasonable.

Speaking to owners who say around 170mph can be seen and not much more. The car is said to be drag limited to 159mph by Subaru. This is a subject with pretty much only grey data.

I left SSRX for some Virtual Real World Test going from the fantasy tack to some real tracks. First Up the Nurb, where going backwards down the straight I was able to hit 161mph, then turned around went the correct way and got 154mph (there's a hill at the end of the straight) I then went to La Sarthe with the chicanes removed and topped off at 164mph in both directions and taking up most of the bumpy road to get there. I only got to 144mph on the fuji straight, top speed at High Speed Ring is 146mph

I have to ask, Where can I get my cars up to the fastest speeds outside of SSRX because SSRX is the only track so far I can break 164mph with my WRX STi.

My Conclusion On Top Speed in GT6

Its looking to me as though PD uses the cars specs (power, weight, drag coefficient, frontal area etc) to arrive at its top speed and doesn't manipulate the performance to achieve any theoretical or even somewhat proven top speed. I figure it wouldn't make sense to manipulate after the fact, that pulls away from the simulation, and is IMO arcade. It would be manipulation after the fact & the numbers they would have to go on for that manipulation would either have to rely on the crappy sources Ive had researching top speeds and with 1200 cars all that data as precise as needed is just not available or they need to do in house top speed testing of all car, something I just don't think is feasible if even possible realistically.

Even in GT6 SSRX is a far fetched Track and there is no real world place like it, once I took the WRX STI onto real world track locations I wasn't able to go more than 5mph faster than the Man Spec Drag Limitation that is still 5mph short of what owners claim the cars is capable of & 10mph shy of the cars SSRX abilities.

Even if there is an issue, I don't see where its going to be an issue outside SSRX.

Are the results 100% accurate with all the real world data we will find for these cars?

No, and to be honest, its probably impossible, and I don't believe any game will get the numbers all 100% matching. How could they & with GT6 already at the limit, yikes, to get that little bit more authenticity we are going to need wind simulations, air pressure simulations and a whole lot more and what that will do is generate results that basically vary with the situation as in real life. I bet GT7 will bring us closer, but the closer it gets to that mythological perfect sim the more varying the results will be. Wind direction, air temp, altitude will all be causing different results per run depending on the situation.

For me Im putting the Top Speed Issue to Bed, If your doing laps in the car and want to line up times without hitting speeds the car cant, lay off at the top speed you think is correct during those very very few moments on a track it will matter if at all. Whatever you feel the car should max at, let off there, presto, problem solved, but it wont be often as most tracks don't have a straight like SSRX lol.

I am curious about rev governor accuracy so I will still look into the governors, but Im at the point where the "Top Speed Issus" is just looking like such a non issue. I will also try to find a track location aside from SSRX I can get the WRX STi to top off at just to see if there is such a place in GT6.

I will test the impacts of changing any of the prime factors, power weight, and downforce setting (drag) on cars to see if they do have the proper outcome as at least these aspects can be tested and the data useful.

Astom Martin Vanquish V12 04 at least confirms clearly that GT6 weight is Curb weight, so a driver and gas is included in the vehicle weight and weight balance.

GT6 is as close as you can probably get with the hardware limitations of the PS3. Something that I don't think you discussed as a real world variable affecting top speed results would also be altitude as well as humidity, temp, and barometric pressure in relation to affecting the power output of any specific engine. Varying atmospheric conditions and altitude obviously affect engine output and that can also account for varying real world top speed testing results. NA engines suffer more power loss than forced induction engines do as air density decreases also which will make real world testing of NA vehicles vary more greatly. You also have variables such as the fuel composition and infinite variations in tire compound and construction within any tire category that aren't accounted for. Engine condition and chassis conditions are simulated in the game but even those factors are based on simple calculations and cannot be completely duplicated. Even in the real world two identical engines taken directly off of the assembly line can and do vary slightly in power output. The same holds true for complete vehicles. So, in line with your theory, to take into account all of these variables would require an extremely complex set of algorithms within the game as well as a very powerful console to calculate these factors as you drive. GT6 comes as close as you can get IMHO especially with the limitations of the hardware. GT7 will probably take a big step forward given the fact that it will be developed for a more powerful console, but you will never get close to 100% authentic with a gaming console intended to be sold for a few hundred dollars. When you look at simulators built for training pilots and similar types of simulators, these machines cost millions of dollars and still aren't 100% accurate all of the time although they are extremely close the majority of the time. Some of these simulators are built specifically for one type of "vehicle" instead of over 1000. This is also something that many people do not consider.

SiNiST3R, check your inbox. Santa made a jump start this year

Booyah come back from dinner and I got a present Much thanks Bro, going through it all now

You are very much right on, but I did touch on it



I didnt get into it too deep, because we have constant conditions in GT6. This is also how I made my WRX calculations







You are right on Brother, I touch on it a bit here



I dont go into as much depth as you, thanks for adding some depth and clarify my ramblings lol



I agree, and GT7 should IMO bring us closer and in doing so add some variation to runs. The gauges and stuff added looks like they intend to implement usable factors here even more stuff like air temp is in there. The coding has channels for many things even though not all are "active". It also has more data for GT6 cars than GT5 or GT4, they seem to be collecting a larger number of parameters when collecting car data than previously.


Ive got a incredible amount of raw data to go though ATM (Thanks again Bro) that Ive got to make sense of. leverage factors, unsprung weight actual ARB strength being split into 7 adjustment range castor angles and so much more. While GT6 does work on a sort of fixed world environment (not much environmental simulations effecting the car dynamically, like wind) they seem to have every thing in place for it and still use these elements albeit with sort of fixed values. Its like there is air, just no wind if you get what I mean. However this all seems like its practically ready to go if the elements began to become dynamical (wind is introduced) that could mean its in the plans for GT7 but yah never really can tell.

1.14 physics change debate

I originally didnt feel any change but Ive tried drifting once again and there is a change in the way cars break out. When I say I tried drifting, I mean getting cars to drift outside of drift mode without changing to comfort tires, and power drifting out of corners. The cars don't snap (as much) pushing throttle through can get you straight and even if you release there is not as much weight shift snap forward tossing you in the other direction you can correct better with Both steering and throttle. Its hard to show in a lap, because it basically means a mistake can be more realistically corrected but a mistake is a mistake and the lap without the mistake will be faser. HOWEVER on those crazy laps where the whole lap is driven on the line those lil errors that used to cost the lap can be corrected and the lap can be held.

I have an example on the way

Game Data Analysis

Looking at the spring rates, weight, weight split & F/R leverage factors I can confirm my theory on spring rates.

Keeping the slider equal full gives a balanced set of springs front and rear taking into consideration the amount of weight supported at each end and the leverage factor of each end. PD has made it very simple and easy to keep the spring rates balanced.

The balanced and equal slider is a balanced set up we can account for adding and removing or moving around weight with percentages, example reducing the weight but keeping the weight split identical, we can reduce the spring rates F/R by an equal percentage lets say if we dropped the weight from 1000kg to 750kg thats a 25% drop, we can then reduce a 10.00kg/mm spring rate to 7.50 (25%) both front and rear and keep the same balance, then if we move the weight from lets say 54/46 to 50/50 we can keep things balance by reducing the front spring rate by 4% and increasing the rear spring rate by 4%.

Adding downforce adds the weight as a total but has a weight split f/r
125/125 has a 250 total with a 50/50 weight split
65/195 has a 260 total with a 25/75 weight split

We account for the weight with the weight split as a percentage of increase

a 50/50 car of 750kg with 125df front and 125df rear has a total weight of 1000kg with 50/50 weight

But if the were to take a 750kg car and add 65df front and 195df rear, our car now has a 1010kg total weight & the wight split is now gone from 375/375 to 440/570 our weight balance has shifted from 50/50 to 43.6/56.4

at slow speeds with mechanical grip the car will feel balanced, but the car will feel like the front end is light when the car gets up to sspeed and aerodynamic grip takes over. Theoretically close to neutral at low speeds but understeering at high speeds.


It is set up so everything is very easy to keep balanced with each other. When PD deals with a car with downforce like racing cars the amount of setting is registered as 1 to 1 with kg 250 df setting equals 250kg and PD adjust the spring rates as if the downforce is added to the total weight.


I can confirm suspicions that default stock suspension have different suspensions vs the adjustable EVEN when the settings are matched. Stock, Racing Soft Racing hard & Rally suspensions all have different dampers that are matched to the spring rates. The adjustable dampers have a range the dampers work in all set also are equal front to rear except the adjustable set.. The same with anti roll bars. Each car has a different set of antiroll bars and most are different front to rear. when in stock, racing soft/hard or rally the ARB are all the same with a fixed range, but the adjustable ARB have a min and max range of resistance and the setting the stock racing soft/hard and rally suspensions use is unobtainable, usually slightly stiffer than a 1 setting but much softer than a 2 setting on the adjustable set..

GT6 uses a Kurb weight as the weight split. It uses the dry weight and split adds its own driver weight and fuel weight along with positioning the weight. The amount of fuel and the weight of the GT6 driver MAY account for curb weights in the game not lining up with what people find online from various sources, I will look into this a bit and compare numbers.


All of this made possible by a Master he knows who he is





Much more to come, Im just getting started