the gt1 flip had nothing to do with downforce, it was a flaw in the wheel well design. thats why they all have vents or are just open and cut out now over the front tire arches. the gt1 created plenty of df. the rear created so much more that it could lift the front under heavy acceleration, coupled with the hill at that moment, the air had no where to go from under the car and it created lift, its interesting how we pride ourselves on the shape of the wing and dependence of it to fly but are using it to create the opposite affect. the standard wing is flatter on the bottom and longer and rounder at the top creating lift. we limit the amount of air traveling under the car to reverse this. but once you lose that vacuum and the difference in masses of air traveling under and over the car equalize, it creates lift when the body is solid and streamed like that the car is more of a glider once it loses all that ground effect. so the cuts in the arches were designed to provide an outlet for the air up front to flow the air over the tires but out over the body nullifying any chance of lift. when you consider it, aren't we using a wing backwards? put a wing on wheels, and the earth limiting the air pushed under it. the lift created otherwise becomes downforce. in all, to create lift, the dependence is heavily on the mass of air being pushed. low drag cars scoot under the atmosphere splitting it as minimally as possibly creating little friction, without ground effect , or atmospheric difference between the top and bottom of the car, it would have to rely on drag or friction to create downforce rather than physics. in all, sure the air can be less on bottom than the top and said to have less pressure to flow quicker, but is the car creating downforce because air is passing quicker under than over? the air isn't really passing quicker though as the car is moving through the air. so when the car creates less pressure below itself, more pressure above the car as the atmosphere tries to equalize itself. pushes down on the top of the car without drag. downforce is a friction based form of a lift directed at the earth with limits on the structural integrity of the suspension. it disrupts drag, and ground effect if used improperly. the limits of the car's mechanical grip should be offset by the cars drag coefficient and the desired speed for the circumstance of driving. aero then adds weight to the tires creating friction for turning at higher speeds than what mechanical grip can handle. the top speed isn't just limited because there is weight added to the car, but also because the drag coefficient is ruined. but if we can created motion, or force without newton's law of matter acting on matter, or conservation of energy. moving atmosphere to create different energies in space, the matter adjusting itself then creates the force without energy directly being applied to it. in a way, similar to the warp drive theory that shortens space in front of you and lengthens it behind you. turn that on its axis and you have atmospheric pressure a car and ground effect. even though, of course, energy is being applied to displace the atmosphere in space around the car.
yes you are right, you can design a tune for a car that incorporates the mechanical grip limits with the drag coefficient and top speed of the car for the circumstance. if its a track per say, and the downforce applied to the car is based around the limits demanded to achieve the top speed desired. this method isn't necessarily faster in racer terms, but utilizes the car's more abilities and limits in an more averaged sort of way. its just that you won't have the added ground effect with weight from downforce translating to sprung weight on the tires. like he says in the video a lighter car is affected more by downforce, and thats because weight translates to grip. and since the car is technically made heavier by downforce, looking at the 458 you can clearly see the difference between the two approaches and strategies of friction vs averaging a car's capabilities. overall it depends on the power plant. if the torque isn't there how can you expect it to move all that weight?! ferrari clearly uses this to their advantage. the more horsepower the more acceleration, they rely on balance and tune to get grip in the corners and without the added weight, or need for torque, achieve massive acceleration. their approach is for balance, and that is why you see little change in their approach with downforce to drag. by the time the car is creating an overbearing load for the engine. the car's light weight and extra torque has allowed for the head room necessary for the car to breath and stretch it's legs. a brilliant compensation only trumped by driving styles.
Another factor is that the team would adjust the gear ratios too. Short tracks would mean maximum downforce with high acceleration with low top speed. Because on a short track (like Tsuba in Gran Turismo has a straight that is only like .4 miles long) you are never going to get a car to do 200 MPH so why gear it to do that speed when you can gear it to be 140 which is just over what the car can achieve on such a track? So that's something to consider as well.
Adrians - if wings have little impact on top speed a: why do F1 teams not always use full wing and b: why is DRS to effective? The wing makes a significant difference to top speed. You can have a moderately effective wing which doesn't affect top speed much. But a fully effective wing will affect top speed.
Gareth, what I mean is that the downforce on it's own doesn't decrease max speed. It's the increased drag. Some wings can indeed increase drag a lot(both by shape and increased frontal area) while others can have very minimal drag increase with huge downforce increase. To get a downforce of around 3-4 Gs (like F1 cars), you will most likely have to drop quite a lot of speed as such high downforce wings usually have very "draggy" shape and they also are kind of huge, increasing frontal area. But smaller downforce wings can have extremely minimal impact on drag. It's even possible that you add wing on car that has inefficient aerodynamical shape, ending up with both increased downforce and reduced drag. My point is that assuming that increasing downforce linearily increases drag is not right.
I usually don't care about the background music on any TH-cam video. But this videos are so tastefully made, the music is so organic. Good stuff Viper.
you can adjust the spoiler to minimize the downforce to only 40 kg for example. So what he means with no downforce is "very low amount of downforce". It's a game. Sometimes you can't just remove carparts :)
they only need to change the angle of attack of the spoiler. without removing any part. also, in games they don't simulate any particle of air there, they only put some formula including the speed,weight distribution , total downforce, Etc and there they calculate the max speed that the car can turn without slipping
Yes, I know it. Translating verbs in present perfect it's typical of italian people (like me) because we wrong translate our "passato prossimo" and "congiuntivo passato" in present perfect that sounds similar to them. But in this case it was right even if I know in everyday english the simple past is the right choice.
I was like on bonus fact 1 (flying cars) I was like "wtf cars can't fly with out wings" *sees a car's front lifting* " that's a wheely" *sees car fully lift off the ground* "what happened to physics!"
@@NicoNice24 no they had plenty of downforce it was the angle of the car when going of the bump, the lemans car of that era had a lower angle ( nose was higher up and the rear was lower) so they could achieve higher topspeed. in testing it was fine nothing wrong but in the race they had dirty air and the bump caused the air to flow underneath the car and lift up. after that race they made the bump lower and the cars had to have an open wheel arch so the wake of the tire could escape
Downforce. Something i never increased in Forza, until yesterday. Im amazed of how much stability, cornering ability, traction, e.t.c. more downforce gives me.
Tip: instead of increasing downforce you can also raise the rear ride height and soften the rear suspension. as result you have a lot of downforce when braking and cornering due to ground effect but when you start to increase your speed the aero will push down the rear of the car and thus decreasing the angle of attack and give you a higher topspeed. this is very effective on a track like modern monza in pc2
HAHA!!! this is like Bill Nye the science guy but just for down force science! Great video explaining it all. I learned a lot and will be looking at my tuning the next time I'm in my sim.
The Mark Webber accident didn't happen because the lack of downforce on the front, but because the nose or the overhang in front of the front wheels was to big. When in dirty air and a circuit that is bouncy this is the result. I had a lecture from the designer of the Porsche 911 GT1 and they made the nose shorter after the accident of their car.
LOVE your video. If I may criticize, you could choose better sentence for some explanation. For example, heavier cars aren't influenced less, but there's bigger ratio between frictional force and centrifugal, thus the extra friction less significant, but doesn't mean the downforce is weaker...
Muhammad Fikri Kawakibi Huda Not all of those watching are expert in English... He is Italian as well. You are right, it would be better, but only top those who understand what that means. Maybe if he said it both ways.
Thanks a lot! I don't have this game so I try it on NFS SHIFT 1 On that fully upgraded Lamborghini LP640, which I had never touch downforce setting (F:6 R:6) I change it to F:12 R:14, and this car fast 1 second at Nurburging (maybe it will be better after practice) Whole car become more easier to drive, and slide problem improved too.
viperconcept ehi viperconcept great videos! I discovered you just some days ago... i read you're italian but now live in France! same story than me! and same passion :) can i ask you in which city you are?
you also have to take into consideration which wheels drive the vehicle. a FR will need more help in the front than in the rear as opposed to all other drives. FWD or 4WD or 4x4 require a different set up too.
Obviously less downforce has less grip, less grip means more slip angle, more slip angle means more tyre wear. I don't see how the "logic answer" was logical.
It was based on the friction. If the car is being "pushed" into the track then that increases the amount of tire that is present on the track. But if you spin more than you do actually driving, then you are just removing rubber for no reason.
I think what he means is that people that don't know shit about cars could have guessed that answer. It's because that makes sense, but not enough sense.
Obi-Wan Kannabis I don’t think you know what tyre wear is. You don’t fuck em up by sliding or oversteering. It’s the shear g-force put on the tyres when entering a corner that shoots peices of rubber off
@@mon0522 bruv, no. Slip wears out the tires. What you mentioned is tire and car specific and depends on the heat of the tire surface. Otherwsie the higher Downforce car would wear the tire out more, since there is a higher load on the tires. But it doesnt. It got nothing to do with drifting in this cae, slip is always there even at low speeds or high downforce and G-forces with any car. But if you're over optimal slip angle you both, lose grip and wear out the tire. faster.
Personal preference: I prefer slight oversteer to slight understeer in track racing. But in rally, I prefer getting (big, even massive) oversteer. Sadly, not many rally games let you fine tune downforces (that I know of)
My understanding: 1) downforce benift: stable, easy to control,faster time lap 2)down force disadvantages:need more gas and need new tires for every lap (Logic answer:we need to find the right radios for down force for control and effective less go to pits stop
It's actually that a heavier car needs less downforce and anyway the proportions are smaller. The downforce generated by the aereodynamics do not change.
the gt1 flip had nothing to do with downforce, it was a flaw in the wheel well design. thats why they all have vents or are just open and cut out now over the front tire arches. the gt1 created plenty of df. the rear created so much more that it could lift the front under heavy acceleration, coupled with the hill at that moment, the air had no where to go from under the car and it created lift, its interesting how we pride ourselves on the shape of the wing and dependence of it to fly but are using it to create the opposite affect. the standard wing is flatter on the bottom and longer and rounder at the top creating lift. we limit the amount of air traveling under the car to reverse this. but once you lose that vacuum and the difference in masses of air traveling under and over the car equalize, it creates lift when the body is solid and streamed like that the car is more of a glider once it loses all that ground effect. so the cuts in the arches were designed to provide an outlet for the air up front to flow the air over the tires but out over the body nullifying any chance of lift. when you consider it, aren't we using a wing backwards? put a wing on wheels, and the earth limiting the air pushed under it. the lift created otherwise becomes downforce. in all, to create lift, the dependence is heavily on the mass of air being pushed. low drag cars scoot under the atmosphere splitting it as minimally as possibly creating little friction, without ground effect , or atmospheric difference between the top and bottom of the car, it would have to rely on drag or friction to create downforce rather than physics. in all, sure the air can be less on bottom than the top and said to have less pressure to flow quicker, but is the car creating downforce because air is passing quicker under than over? the air isn't really passing quicker though as the car is moving through the air. so when the car creates less pressure below itself, more pressure above the car as the atmosphere tries to equalize itself. pushes down on the top of the car without drag. downforce is a friction based form of a lift directed at the earth with limits on the structural integrity of the suspension. it disrupts drag, and ground effect if used improperly. the limits of the car's mechanical grip should be offset by the cars drag coefficient and the desired speed for the circumstance of driving. aero then adds weight to the tires creating friction for turning at higher speeds than what mechanical grip can handle. the top speed isn't just limited because there is weight added to the car, but also because the drag coefficient is ruined. but if we can created motion, or force without newton's law of matter acting on matter, or conservation of energy. moving atmosphere to create different energies in space, the matter adjusting itself then creates the force without energy directly being applied to it. in a way, similar to the warp drive theory that shortens space in front of you and lengthens it behind you. turn that on its axis and you have atmospheric pressure a car and ground effect. even though, of course, energy is being applied to displace the atmosphere in space around the car.
Downforce don't make you consume more fuel in the case of race, the basic idea is here, we consume more fuel but the reason are elsewhere. On cruising situation it will increase fuel consumption because it create more drag and to maintain the speed we need to compensate with higher engine power output. But on a track, we are mostly at full throttle except while turning, and here is the key difference, with less downforce we can't accelerate as much without loosing control, so we press less on the throttle, making the car having less fuel consumption, but when we are at full throttle, it don't matter how aerodynamic the car is, in fact we can even attach a parachute to it, it will just get slower but the consumption will be the same. Another difference is the high speed acceleration, at higher speed, with less downforce on a straight line, we can reach faster the top speed and faster top speed, which mean less fuel to reach it and less time on the part of a track, but it self compensate itself with cornering, there is tons of variable, including earlier braking which is pushed even more because of higher speed, which mean less consumption because we can't press the throttle as long since we need to brake sooner, but most of the things balance themselves, there is just more things that make you consume less fuel on lower downforce, but the downforce itself don't affect directly fuel consumption since the fuel flow don't change, also it depend of the track, on a track with tons of corner, the higher downforce will consume more and have a better time, but with a really straight track it might be the opposite for track time, and really close consumption.
19:50 You may have picked the wrong car to call oversteery due to tge lack of downforce. The 98T in PCARS is tremendously unstable on full turbo, even on full downforce. Literally the most unforgiving car, right on par with the Radbull.
The Lotus F1 car has more rear-biased downforce compared to the modern Gt2 car which should be why it affects the car more as the GT2 car balances it better
Question: Does this mean that having less down force will be more beneficial on drifts or you still need even at least a little bit of downforce thanks for the response
you need a little bit of downforce, he explained in the video that rear downforce gives you stability and with front downforce you can steer better, if you have more downforce in the rear and lesser in the front, it gives you understear, and if you turn that around it creates oversteer
So, for a drag racing car, or just a track without many corners, if I want more stability, is it better to have full rear AND front downforce or just the rear one. I'm wondering because I know that it may have an influence on a car's tendency to oversteer or understeer. If it's the case, I think I can assume that rear downforce increases understeer (or reduces oversteer). But what about front downforce? It increases the front wheel's grip, but does it also mean your car will tend to be more aggressive on corners?
In 95% of cases it's better to have more rear downforce than front downforce. Then, full rear downforce may be excessive: it increases the understeer but also it decreases the top speed! The front downforce increases the grip on the front wheels. I don't know what you mean with "aggressivity" on corners. The front wheels will be more reactive when you steer (you'll note the difference especially at high speeds).
viperconcept First of all thanks for such a quick answer :). This said, I meant oversteer, sorry for being unclear. I just didn't want to repeat myself.
Great video and explanation. I have a question though. I do not have Project Cars, instead i have the free Pagani Edition. I have put Stability and Traction Control to OFF and only kept ABS On. The thing is, that i cant realy drive those cars, except the Huayra. Ive played before Shift 2 Unleashed but his is totaly unplayable. Cars tend to slide even with by touching the throttle button. So, whats the problem? Paganis have bad Traction all in all (i remember they had in Shift 2 as well)? The thing that i cant Tune them (the game does not give you that option)? Shift 2 physics suck (i think its the same studio that made Project Cars) All cars in PC are that hard to drive?
Keyboard and i believe its a major problem as with a keyboard you cant measure the gas pedal pressure. You press the button and it give you full throttle.
Very real issue, try controller. It's less expensive compared to a wheel and still very playable. Saves you from buying a several hundred dollar/pound steering wheel. At least until you work out which game is for you
Seriously why are people still trying to play sims and arcade-sims on keyboard... This isn't Need for Speed. Throttle control is the least of your problems lol. Every time you try to adjust a tiny bit on the steering you'll be doing something along the lines of turning the wheel multiple times in a split second. How do you think a real car would handle if all you could do was full lock to either side with only a split second to switch between them?
Now that I learned the advantages of the downforce, but what downforce value should I apply to my cars? I'm sure the value wouldn't be just 0 or 1, as any values in between could make a huge difference in each individual cars, thanks
I have a question about shifting. Specifically, when is the best point to shift? I drive without clutch and currently stay a little bit away from the red line when I can.
Or, you know, you could just learn a bit about aerodynamics... or ask someone who knows... The problem with trying to learn something from a video game is the implication that whomever came up with said game got it right. 9 times out of 10 they didn't. These things usually miss out a lot of fine detail that makes a significant difference (such as type of spoiler, etc.) and their drag models aren't always 100% either. For example for twice the df you get 4 times the spoiler drag, but if that's not a lot of overall drag to begin with - it won't do much either way. Also I'd withold on the "theory" and "logic" explanations, there's a pretty good theoretical basis out there which supports the observations (even using video game grade aero models). One's intuitive answer is not necessarily logical, nor in agreement with aerodynamic theory, but is always a good point of comparison nonetheless.
.... that's why I called my video *"racing games - 5 facts about downforce"*, and not *"racing - 5 facts about downforce"*. Do you see the difference? btw, nowadays good simulations respect a lot the physics laws IMO and they are a good instrument to learn this kind of things. So, don't worry: np need to ask to someone who knows because he will just confirm at least 95% what I said in this video. ;-)
one random question. I played rFactor weeks ago. I put my car on oversteer setup (more downforce on front). On long straight, I got more speed than I set on understeer (more downforce on rear). can you explain why please?
Because in almost all cars the rear wing generates more downforce than the front. So, if you put 100% downforce on the front with 0% downforce on the rear *VS* 100% downforce on the rear with 0% downforce on the front, the car will be faster with the 1st configuration.
A lighter car will gain more benefit from downforce than a heavier car :p and that's for equilivant downforce levels per car ( say in total at maximum downforce your double static weight ) In most tracks you will see a overall increase in track speed and top speed from higher downforce because of higher cornering speed:p
I prefer always a little bit oversteer because that gives me the feeling that i can get all the power and grip out of the car in corners please dont judge me.
In GT Sport the front end my Porsche RSR wanted to take of some times and i did make the springs in the back harder so the wing can not push the back down so much and now i don't have a flying front end but still have more grip in the back because of the wing. Could you explain that pls?
The formula 1 have this difference because all the aerodynamics are based on downforce, they have an aerodynamic coeficient of about 0.7 compared to that ferrari who is more aerodynamic at about 0.3 coeficient, thats why u get so much more performance on formula 1 with downforce than the ferrari or anything else
The simulator software have very limited to the fact, (I been argue with one of the sim racer fb group members )the different between a racing game and driving sim.... I guess we never know the power of nature until one day the powerful physics successful created for regular PC system...
Which is interesting considering he won't do project cars anymore as he finds this AC to be a better simulation in general. So your comment is just shitty bait
Just wondering, absolutely not hate for Project Cars, because it's too is fun in its own way... but why don't you feature more Assetto Corsa on the channel?
downforce vs weight is bull... the lap time improvement is within 0.1s difference, that sounds like within human error to me. as with the top speed difference, the cars have different HP, so the difference in drag caused by downforce will affect the speed, it has nothing to do with the weight. if you do the same experiment with 2 of the exact same car, but one is modded to be slightly lighter, ill believe you. yes, wind affects the lighter cars more, but only because they have less inertia. that means its easier to accelerate the object which is lighter. but downforce does not accelerate the car, downforce increases friction between the tires and the road. say you have 200kN of downforce on both cars at some speed, then the extra force between the tires and the road will be 200kN for both of them.
I wanted to note that the >>downforce doesn't decrease maximum speed
the gt1 flip had nothing to do with downforce, it was a flaw in the wheel well design. thats why they all have vents or are just open and cut out now over the front tire arches. the gt1 created plenty of df. the rear created so much more that it could lift the front under heavy acceleration, coupled with the hill at that moment, the air had no where to go from under the car and it created lift, its interesting how we pride ourselves on the shape of the wing and dependence of it to fly but are using it to create the opposite affect. the standard wing is flatter on the bottom and longer and rounder at the top creating lift. we limit the amount of air traveling under the car to reverse this. but once you lose that vacuum and the difference in masses of air traveling under and over the car equalize, it creates lift when the body is solid and streamed like that the car is more of a glider once it loses all that ground effect. so the cuts in the arches were designed to provide an outlet for the air up front to flow the air over the tires but out over the body nullifying any chance of lift. when you consider it, aren't we using a wing backwards? put a wing on wheels, and the earth limiting the air pushed under it. the lift created otherwise becomes downforce. in all, to create lift, the dependence is heavily on the mass of air being pushed. low drag cars scoot under the atmosphere splitting it as minimally as possibly creating little friction, without ground effect , or atmospheric difference between the top and bottom of the car, it would have to rely on drag or friction to create downforce rather than physics. in all, sure the air can be less on bottom than the top and said to have less pressure to flow quicker, but is the car creating downforce because air is passing quicker under than over? the air isn't really passing quicker though as the car is moving through the air. so when the car creates less pressure below itself, more pressure above the car as the atmosphere tries to equalize itself. pushes down on the top of the car without drag. downforce is a friction based form of a lift directed at the earth with limits on the structural integrity of the suspension. it disrupts drag, and ground effect if used improperly. the limits of the car's mechanical grip should be offset by the cars drag coefficient and the desired speed for the circumstance of driving. aero then adds weight to the tires creating friction for turning at higher speeds than what mechanical grip can handle. the top speed isn't just limited because there is weight added to the car, but also because the drag coefficient is ruined. but if we can created motion, or force without newton's law of matter acting on matter, or conservation of energy. moving atmosphere to create different energies in space, the matter adjusting itself then creates the force without energy directly being applied to it. in a way, similar to the warp drive theory that shortens space in front of you and lengthens it behind you. turn that on its axis and you have atmospheric pressure a car and ground effect. even though, of course, energy is being applied to displace the atmosphere in space around the car.
yes you are right, you can design a tune for a car that incorporates the mechanical grip limits with the drag coefficient and top speed of the car for the circumstance. if its a track per say, and the downforce applied to the car is based around the limits demanded to achieve the top speed desired. this method isn't necessarily faster in racer terms, but utilizes the car's more abilities and limits in an more averaged sort of way. its just that you won't have the added ground effect with weight from downforce translating to sprung weight on the tires. like he says in the video a lighter car is affected more by downforce, and thats because weight translates to grip. and since the car is technically made heavier by downforce, looking at the 458 you can clearly see the difference between the two approaches and strategies of friction vs averaging a car's capabilities. overall it depends on the power plant. if the torque isn't there how can you expect it to move all that weight?! ferrari clearly uses this to their advantage. the more horsepower the more acceleration, they rely on balance and tune to get grip in the corners and without the added weight, or need for torque, achieve massive acceleration. their approach is for balance, and that is why you see little change in their approach with downforce to drag. by the time the car is creating an overbearing load for the engine. the car's light weight and extra torque has allowed for the head room necessary for the car to breath and stretch it's legs. a brilliant compensation only trumped by driving styles.
Another factor is that the team would adjust the gear ratios too. Short tracks would mean maximum downforce with high acceleration with low top speed. Because on a short track (like Tsuba in Gran Turismo has a straight that is only like .4 miles long) you are never going to get a car to do 200 MPH so why gear it to do that speed when you can gear it to be 140 which is just over what the car can achieve on such a track? So that's something to consider as well.
Adrians - if wings have little impact on top speed a: why do F1 teams not always use full wing and b: why is DRS to effective? The wing makes a significant difference to top speed. You can have a moderately effective wing which doesn't affect top speed much. But a fully effective wing will affect top speed.
Gareth, what I mean is that the downforce on it's own doesn't decrease max speed. It's the increased drag. Some wings can indeed increase drag a lot(both by shape and increased frontal area) while others can have very minimal drag increase with huge downforce increase. To get a downforce of around 3-4 Gs (like F1 cars), you will most likely have to drop quite a lot of speed as such high downforce wings usually have very "draggy" shape and they also are kind of huge, increasing frontal area. But smaller downforce wings can have extremely minimal impact on drag. It's even possible that you add wing on car that has inefficient aerodynamical shape, ending up with both increased downforce and reduced drag. My point is that assuming that increasing downforce linearily increases drag is not right.
I usually don't care about the background music on any TH-cam video. But this videos are so tastefully made, the music is so organic. Good stuff Viper.
I think this is the best racing games channel ever. It has a lot of info and lessons. Very good job dude, keep it going!!
+100 cool points for briefly using a song from Burnout 2's OST!
"No rear downforce"
Soooo what is that big spoiler at the rear end of the car then?
you can adjust the spoiler to minimize the downforce to only 40 kg for example. So what he means with no downforce is "very low amount of downforce". It's a game. Sometimes you can't just remove carparts :)
they only need to change the angle of attack of the spoiler. without removing any part. also, in games they don't simulate any particle of air there, they only put some formula including the speed,weight distribution , total downforce, Etc and there they calculate the max speed that the car can turn without slipping
*Wing
Rice
"Hope you enjoyed this video" not "you have enjoyed this video" ;) very nice video
oups! Sorry! XD
Present perfect. It's right "you have enjoined this video" because, as my grammar book says, it's a just happened action.
Yes maybe this case match with this grammar point but in everyday english the past simple willl be used here. ;)
I think this situation match with "a complete action in the past" wich require the past simple
P.S. I'm not a grammar nazi apart from that xD
Yes, I know it. Translating verbs in present perfect it's typical of italian people (like me) because we wrong translate our "passato prossimo" and "congiuntivo passato" in present perfect that sounds similar to them. But in this case it was right even if I know in everyday english the simple past is the right choice.
I was like on bonus fact 1 (flying cars) I was like "wtf cars can't fly with out wings" *sees a car's front lifting* " that's a wheely" *sees car fully lift off the ground* "what happened to physics!"
yes, it's the result of a combination of not enough front downforce, too much rear downforce and driving over a crest. Really scary shit.
Lol they flew with wings
@@NicoNice24 no they had plenty of downforce it was the angle of the car when going of the bump, the lemans car of that era had a lower angle ( nose was higher up and the rear was lower) so they could achieve higher topspeed. in testing it was fine nothing wrong but in the race they had dirty air and the bump caused the air to flow underneath the car and lift up. after that race they made the bump lower and the cars had to have an open wheel arch so the wake of the tire could escape
Downforce. Something i never increased in Forza, until yesterday. Im amazed of how much stability, cornering ability, traction, e.t.c. more downforce gives me.
Tip: instead of increasing downforce you can also raise the rear ride height and soften the rear suspension. as result you have a lot of downforce when braking and cornering due to ground effect but when you start to increase your speed the aero will push down the rear of the car and thus decreasing the angle of attack and give you a higher topspeed. this is very effective on a track like modern monza in pc2
HAHA!!! this is like Bill Nye the science guy but just for down force science! Great video explaining it all. I learned a lot and will be looking at my tuning the next time I'm in my sim.
The Mark Webber accident didn't happen because the lack of downforce on the front, but because the nose or the overhang in front of the front wheels was to big. When in dirty air and a circuit that is bouncy this is the result. I had a lecture from the designer of the Porsche 911 GT1 and they made the nose shorter after the accident of their car.
James also the pressure builds up on top of the wheel... So thats why most racecars have holes or vents on top of the wheels
also too stiff of a suspension setup over a high speed bump can jar the car off the ground far enough to negate ground-effect
LOVE your video. If I may criticize, you could choose better sentence for some explanation. For example, heavier cars aren't influenced less, but there's bigger ratio between frictional force and centrifugal, thus the extra friction less significant, but doesn't mean the downforce is weaker...
Muhammad Fikri Kawakibi Huda He said they aren't influenced as much if they're heavier. He didn't say weaker.
Muhammad Fikri Kawakibi Huda Not all of those watching are expert in English... He is Italian as well. You are right, it would be better, but only top those who understand what that means. Maybe if he said it both ways.
haven't uploaded in a while... Very happy you have :-D
aahh... i miss you played project cars
Nice vídeo, and that Mercedes at le mans was nuts...
i always thought over and under steer were affected by only the suspension. Thanks for the vid!
Really enjoy your videos - learned a lot from it - thanks ! Keep up the great work
Excellent video. Really enjoyed it
Missed your old educational videos :D make moar dude :D
Thanks a lot! I don't have this game so I try it on NFS SHIFT 1
On that fully upgraded Lamborghini LP640, which I had never touch downforce setting (F:6 R:6)
I change it to F:12 R:14, and this car fast 1 second at Nurburging (maybe it will be better after practice)
Whole car become more easier to drive, and slide problem improved too.
Wow, can remember watching those cars flip over live! 👍🍻
I learned so much that I was not sure about, now its for sure that I was right about 90% of stuff about downforce.
I wish that flying car get back on track after that sick back flip
Very interesting!
P.S. I love your TH-cam avatar!🔝👍
Subscribing to this channel has been one of my best decisions ever
Great video Viper! Very helpful as usual, and i love your new intro. Just a quick question: do you like rally games?
Thank you! ^^
Yes, but on single player only.
viperconcept ehi viperconcept great videos! I discovered you just some days ago... i read you're italian but now live in France! same story than me! and same passion :) can i ask you in which city you are?
***** Nice
Very helpful, I've learnt so much. Thanks
another great video. Your channel is awesome!
you also have to take into consideration which wheels drive the vehicle. a FR will need more help in the front than in the rear as opposed to all other drives. FWD or 4WD or 4x4 require a different set up too.
you can add that at high speed the rear of the car tend to lift up if there is not enough down force applied
best analyze i ever seen, thanks dude
Obviously less downforce has less grip, less grip means more slip angle, more slip angle means more tyre wear. I don't see how the "logic answer" was logical.
It was based on the friction. If the car is being "pushed" into the track then that increases the amount of tire that is present on the track. But if you spin more than you do actually driving, then you are just removing rubber for no reason.
I think what he means is that people that don't know shit about cars could have guessed that answer. It's because that makes sense, but not enough sense.
Obi-Wan Kannabis I don’t think you know what tyre wear is. You don’t fuck em up by sliding or oversteering. It’s the shear g-force put on the tyres when entering a corner that shoots peices of rubber off
the logic that he explain in the video is referring to normal driving condition. Nobody will drift every day
@@mon0522 bruv, no. Slip wears out the tires. What you mentioned is tire and car specific and depends on the heat of the tire surface. Otherwsie the higher Downforce car would wear the tire out more, since there is a higher load on the tires. But it doesnt.
It got nothing to do with drifting in this cae, slip is always there even at low speeds or high downforce and G-forces with any car. But if you're over optimal slip angle you both, lose grip and wear out the tire. faster.
Personal preference: I prefer slight oversteer to slight understeer in track racing. But in rally, I prefer getting (big, even massive) oversteer. Sadly, not many rally games let you fine tune downforces (that I know of)
Très bonne vidéo comme toujours ! Continue comme ça :D
Great vid! Can you give us some facts on other parts too? :) f.e differential.
DRS. Max Force.
Beauty Mate!
Absolutely awesome video, didn't like the music but it was so informative I easily got past that
Have fun using this info to ruin your tunes xD Or god help you, in real life lol.
i like that new intro
13:02 scoped that Burnout 2 music
Great video, very informative. Thank you :D
on any other racing game than project cars, you could correct that slide with the zakspeed capri
My understanding: 1) downforce benift: stable, easy to control,faster time lap
2)down force disadvantages:need more gas and need new tires for every lap
(Logic answer:we need to find the right radios for down force for control and effective less go to pits stop
It's actually that a heavier car needs less downforce and anyway the proportions are smaller. The downforce generated by the aereodynamics do not change.
I know I'm fucked up, I cracked up at the flying cars
It's like the Astin Martin Vulcan it has the same amount of enough downforce to support its' weight so it can technically drive upside down
the gt1 flip had nothing to do with downforce, it was a flaw in the wheel well design. thats why they all have vents or are just open and cut out now over the front tire arches. the gt1 created plenty of df. the rear created so much more that it could lift the front under heavy acceleration, coupled with the hill at that moment, the air had no where to go from under the car and it created lift, its interesting how we pride ourselves on the shape of the wing and dependence of it to fly but are using it to create the opposite affect. the standard wing is flatter on the bottom and longer and rounder at the top creating lift. we limit the amount of air traveling under the car to reverse this. but once you lose that vacuum and the difference in masses of air traveling under and over the car equalize, it creates lift when the body is solid and streamed like that the car is more of a glider once it loses all that ground effect. so the cuts in the arches were designed to provide an outlet for the air up front to flow the air over the tires but out over the body nullifying any chance of lift. when you consider it, aren't we using a wing backwards? put a wing on wheels, and the earth limiting the air pushed under it. the lift created otherwise becomes downforce. in all, to create lift, the dependence is heavily on the mass of air being pushed. low drag cars scoot under the atmosphere splitting it as minimally as possibly creating little friction, without ground effect , or atmospheric difference between the top and bottom of the car, it would have to rely on drag or friction to create downforce rather than physics. in all, sure the air can be less on bottom than the top and said to have less pressure to flow quicker, but is the car creating downforce because air is passing quicker under than over? the air isn't really passing quicker though as the car is moving through the air. so when the car creates less pressure below itself, more pressure above the car as the atmosphere tries to equalize itself. pushes down on the top of the car without drag. downforce is a friction based form of a lift directed at the earth with limits on the structural integrity of the suspension. it disrupts drag, and ground effect if used improperly. the limits of the car's mechanical grip should be offset by the cars drag coefficient and the desired speed for the circumstance of driving. aero then adds weight to the tires creating friction for turning at higher speeds than what mechanical grip can handle. the top speed isn't just limited because there is weight added to the car, but also because the drag coefficient is ruined. but if we can created motion, or force without newton's law of matter acting on matter, or conservation of energy. moving atmosphere to create different energies in space, the matter adjusting itself then creates the force without energy directly being applied to it. in a way, similar to the warp drive theory that shortens space in front of you and lengthens it behind you. turn that on its axis and you have atmospheric pressure a car and ground effect. even though, of course, energy is being applied to displace the atmosphere in space around the car.
hmmmm, love your videos!
what is the music playing during fact 5 and beyond? super nice video, thanks!
Downforce don't make you consume more fuel in the case of race, the basic idea is here, we consume more fuel but the reason are elsewhere.
On cruising situation it will increase fuel consumption because it create more drag and to maintain the speed we need to compensate with higher engine power output.
But on a track, we are mostly at full throttle except while turning, and here is the key difference, with less downforce we can't accelerate as much without loosing control, so we press less on the throttle, making the car having less fuel consumption, but when we are at full throttle, it don't matter how aerodynamic the car is, in fact we can even attach a parachute to it, it will just get slower but the consumption will be the same.
Another difference is the high speed acceleration, at higher speed, with less downforce on a straight line, we can reach faster the top speed and faster top speed, which mean less fuel to reach it and less time on the part of a track, but it self compensate itself with cornering, there is tons of variable, including earlier braking which is pushed even more because of higher speed, which mean less consumption because we can't press the throttle as long since we need to brake sooner, but most of the things balance themselves, there is just more things that make you consume less fuel on lower downforce, but the downforce itself don't affect directly fuel consumption since the fuel flow don't change, also it depend of the track, on a track with tons of corner, the higher downforce will consume more and have a better time, but with a really straight track it might be the opposite for track time, and really close consumption.
19:50 You may have picked the wrong car to call oversteery due to tge lack of downforce. The 98T in PCARS is tremendously unstable on full turbo, even on full downforce. Literally the most unforgiving car, right on par with the Radbull.
i have one Question. do you have to drive faster thru the Corner with LMP and Formula cars in assetto Corsa, in order to get enough downforce?
Thanks for this videos, I am very noob and I try to learn.
Whats the track at 11:43? Great channel/videos btw!
Monza 1966 version :-)
The Lotus F1 car has more rear-biased downforce compared to the modern Gt2 car which should be why it affects the car more as the GT2 car balances it better
nice video! can you make a vídeo explaining the wings angle?? thanks
You made me buy Project Cars :P
Question: Does this mean that having less down force will be more beneficial on drifts or you still need even at least a little bit of downforce thanks for the response
you need a little bit of downforce, he explained in the video that rear downforce gives you stability and with front downforce you can steer better, if you have more downforce in the rear and lesser in the front, it gives you understear, and if you turn that around it creates oversteer
will you do the same type of video with tires facts ?
6:13
>Guy in the car is Mark Webber
>Webber is also was in the Redbull F1 Team
Redbull does give you wings does it?!
This guy isn't Mark lol
It's just a matter of adaptation. There's not "the best" setup. The best setup is the one that fits to your driving style.
So, for a drag racing car, or just a track without many corners, if I want more stability, is it better to have full rear AND front downforce or just the rear one. I'm wondering because I know that it may have an influence on a car's tendency to oversteer or understeer. If it's the case, I think I can assume that rear downforce increases understeer (or reduces oversteer). But what about front downforce? It increases the front wheel's grip, but does it also mean your car will tend to be more aggressive on corners?
In 95% of cases it's better to have more rear downforce than front downforce.
Then, full rear downforce may be excessive: it increases the understeer but also it decreases the top speed!
The front downforce increases the grip on the front wheels. I don't know what you mean with "aggressivity" on corners. The front wheels will be more reactive when you steer (you'll note the difference especially at high speeds).
viperconcept First of all thanks for such a quick answer :). This said, I meant oversteer, sorry for being unclear. I just didn't want to repeat myself.
Of course, the front downforce increases the oversteer. For that reason you have to find the perfect balance between front and rear downforce.
so much i learning today. tq
Great video and explanation. I have a question though.
I do not have Project Cars, instead i have the free Pagani Edition. I have put Stability and Traction Control to OFF and only kept ABS On. The thing is, that i cant realy drive those cars, except the Huayra. Ive played before Shift 2 Unleashed but his is totaly unplayable. Cars tend to slide even with by touching the throttle button.
So, whats the problem? Paganis have bad Traction all in all (i remember they had in Shift 2 as well)?
The thing that i cant Tune them (the game does not give you that option)?
Shift 2 physics suck (i think its the same studio that made Project Cars)
All cars in PC are that hard to drive?
Are you playing with controller, steering wheel or keyboard?
Keyboard and i believe its a major problem as with a keyboard you cant measure the gas pedal pressure. You press the button and it give you full throttle.
thats the thing
Very real issue, try controller. It's less expensive compared to a wheel and still very playable. Saves you from buying a several hundred dollar/pound steering wheel. At least until you work out which game is for you
Seriously why are people still trying to play sims and arcade-sims on keyboard... This isn't Need for Speed.
Throttle control is the least of your problems lol. Every time you try to adjust a tiny bit on the steering you'll be doing something along the lines of turning the wheel multiple times in a split second. How do you think a real car would handle if all you could do was full lock to either side with only a split second to switch between them?
Now that I learned the advantages of the downforce, but what downforce value should I apply to my cars? I'm sure the value wouldn't be just 0 or 1, as any values in between could make a huge difference in each individual cars, thanks
I have a question about shifting. Specifically, when is the best point to shift? I drive without clutch and currently stay a little bit away from the red line when I can.
@acktually aintaddingup time has changed lol I didn’t have a wheel when I made this comment now I’ve been sim racing for about 2 years now
Or, you know, you could just learn a bit about aerodynamics... or ask someone who knows...
The problem with trying to learn something from a video game is the implication that whomever came up with said game got it right. 9 times out of 10 they didn't. These things usually miss out a lot of fine detail that makes a significant difference (such as type of spoiler, etc.) and their drag models aren't always 100% either. For example for twice the df you get 4 times the spoiler drag, but if that's not a lot of overall drag to begin with - it won't do much either way.
Also I'd withold on the "theory" and "logic" explanations, there's a pretty good theoretical basis out there which supports the observations (even using video game grade aero models). One's intuitive answer is not necessarily logical, nor in agreement with aerodynamic theory, but is always a good point of comparison nonetheless.
.... that's why I called my video *"racing games - 5 facts about downforce"*, and not *"racing - 5 facts about downforce"*. Do you see the difference?
btw, nowadays good simulations respect a lot the physics laws IMO and they are a good instrument to learn this kind of things. So, don't worry: np need to ask to someone who knows because he will just confirm at least 95% what I said in this video. ;-)
Thanks, & keep going!
one random question. I played rFactor weeks ago. I put my car on oversteer setup (more downforce on front). On long straight, I got more speed than I set on understeer (more downforce on rear). can you explain why please?
Because in almost all cars the rear wing generates more downforce than the front.
So, if you put 100% downforce on the front with 0% downforce on the rear *VS* 100% downforce on the rear with 0% downforce on the front, the car will be faster with the 1st configuration.
Got it. Now I understand why. Thanks for explanation.
I thought that because more effective slipstream or similar like that. I mean still got the slipstream effect although the car still far ahead.
Hendro Prasetyo To make it even simpler:
More downforce = More grip = More friction = More DRAG.
Got it?
You mean wind resistance? That's what I suspected.
Can you explain too how to setup transmission gear too, because I confuse how to setup that thank you.
A lighter car will gain more benefit from downforce than a heavier car :p and that's for equilivant downforce levels per car ( say in total at maximum downforce your double static weight )
In most tracks you will see a overall increase in track speed and top speed from higher downforce because of higher cornering speed:p
I prefer always a little bit oversteer because that gives me the feeling that i can get all the power and grip out of the car in corners please dont judge me.
How can anyone dislike this video?
Bonus Fact #2 Is that a ittaguB? xD
very useful!
really nice video dude, very helpful, thanks
In GT Sport the front end my Porsche RSR wanted to take of some times and i did make the springs in the back harder so the wing can not push the back down so much and now i don't have a flying front end but still have more grip in the back because of the wing. Could you explain that pls?
The formula 1 have this difference because all the aerodynamics are based on downforce, they have an aerodynamic coeficient of about 0.7 compared to that ferrari who is more aerodynamic at about 0.3 coeficient, thats why u get so much more performance on formula 1 with downforce than the ferrari or anything else
Thanks for the vid
Blue 312T doesn't exist, he can't hurt you
blue 312T: 10:23
I need that soundtrack! lol
i just foudn your channel, great videos very interesting/ just wondering what experience you have sir>?
The simulator software have very limited to the fact, (I been argue with one of the sim racer fb group members )the different between a racing game and driving sim.... I guess we never know the power of nature until one day the powerful physics successful created for regular PC system...
Yeah, you're right!
But at least I think we can still learn the basics with these games. :-)
How are you getting the cars to produce zero downforce ?
3:27 Which one gives you top speed if reduced?
I like ur videos
what was the first game u used with the 458 gt2? cus there arent ferarris in PC
Assetto Corsa
What am I doing here? I can only play NFS Most Wanted 2012 with barely FPS.... yet I watch a tuneable car game....
Play race driver grid or nfs SHIFT,trust me it's work
Where did you get the cool dials for assetto corsa?
Do you mean the HUD? It's standard for the console version of Assetto Corsa.
oh angrycrap corsa fanboys rage cause he used pcars to simulate advanced efects. hahah, nice video viper!!
Which is interesting considering he won't do project cars anymore as he finds this AC to be a better
simulation in general. So your comment is just shitty bait
ahahah man a f1 car or the lotus without downforce would be undriveable and not just 0.2 sec slower :p
can you do the same video with tires facts ?
let's say, you can tune your downforce 100 Front, 200 rear, is it better to go full downforce or 100/100?
nice vid
Just wondering, absolutely not hate for Project Cars, because it's too is fun in its own way... but why don't you feature more Assetto Corsa on the channel?
Because Assetto Corsa was released for PS4 only 5 months ago.
I dont know if someone answer me but to fact #3: if i will get used to car and don't slide with it on track it will not destroy my tires right?
Wait a minute. Cars with the same downforce, CX and power will have the same maximum speed regardless of weight!
thanks vipes :D
downforce vs weight is bull... the lap time improvement is within 0.1s difference, that sounds like within human error to me. as with the top speed difference, the cars have different HP, so the difference in drag caused by downforce will affect the speed, it has nothing to do with the weight. if you do the same experiment with 2 of the exact same car, but one is modded to be slightly lighter, ill believe you.
yes, wind affects the lighter cars more, but only because they have less inertia. that means its easier to accelerate the object which is lighter. but downforce does not accelerate the car, downforce increases friction between the tires and the road. say you have 200kN of downforce on both cars at some speed, then the extra force between the tires and the road will be 200kN for both of them.
what name is the track for the mclaren f1 videos?
what does the green bars of the tyres mean
It shows their lifetime: Full green = brand new; full grey = dead tyre.