Choose a Game
Navigation
Latest Setups
Site Statistics


If you like this setup, vote for it by clicking the thumbs up icon below.

More information on the Setup Voting system can be found in the FAQ.
Vote for Setup 8812    New Setup for Lotus Elise 111S      
Setup ID
Tuner
Make
Car
Model Year
Track
Votes
Views
Horsepower
Best Lap
Date Entered
Last Modified
8812
2003
Autumn Ring
0
3053
 
1:20.012
09/07/2011 3:58 AM
 
Muffler Racing Suspension Racing
Racing Chip Sports Transmission Full Customize
NA Tune None Clutch Triple Plate
Front Tires S3 - Soft Flywheel Racing
Rear Tires S3 - Soft Carbon Driveshaft None
Nitrous None GT Auto - Wing Equipped
Turbine Kit Stage 3 Limited Slip Full Customize
Intercooler None AYC None
Supercharger None VCD None
Brakes Racing Weight Reduction None
Brake Controller Equipped Increase Rigidity None
Setup Item Front Rear Setup Item Front Rear
Spring Rate 6.6 8.4 Stabilizers 5 5
Ride Height 93 100 Brake Balance 5 5
Shock Absorbers Downforce 30 25
Shock Bound 5 6 LSD Init. Torque 5
Shock Rebound 5 7 LSD Acceleration 20
Camber Angle 2.7 1.5 LSD Deceleration 5
Toe Angle -2 0 Nitrous
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th Final Auto Set
3.185 2.136 1.542 1.177 0.975 4.025 7
ASM
Oversteer
ASM
Understeer
TCS Ballast
Balance
Ballast
Weight
AYC VCD
0 0 0 -37 194
This is my setup for the 2011 August GtVault tuner compeition, hosted by Brette.
http://www.gtvault.com/gt4/setup-view/s_sid::8761/S2000-Brette/
With the ballast, the car weighs in at 1000kg and with a port polish the car will have 299 hp and 303 Nm or torque.
Sadly I couldn't tune out the horrible understeer I felt at most speeds, and it was impossible to kick the tail out to make a better line when running wide, however it was still far more stable and far more consistent than my Stratos, with my best lap within 2 tenths of my combined best sectors, which is far lower than normal.
There isn't much to say other than trying to tune out the understeer, get a little more turn and being smooth and clean is the fastest way through, use all the curbs but taking it in the wrong areas will cause a huge off as you are suddenly offline with huge understeer.
In all, for a car that I felt could have delivered more, 2nd place in GT4 wasn't too bad.
StigsTC

PSN: Cuddles-X
Joined: 01/17/2009
Last on: 02/21/2014
Setups: 43
Posts: 538
Posted 09/07/2011 9:38 AM Post a reply Quote this post View Brette's info
Interesting... Understeer from an Elise. Maybe you should of run less rear downforce to let that rear end kick out more. Or even better to have stiffer rear springs.

Whats the story of the ballast balance settings?
My Cars:
- 1985 Nissan Gazelle S12 (Drift Pig),
- 1987 Nissan Be-1 w/canvas roof, and a parts car

PSN: StigsTC
Joined: 01/20/2009
Last on: 08/29/2016
Setups: 67
Posts: 1192
Posted 09/07/2011 2:40 PM Post a reply Quote this post View StigsTibecuadorianco's info
I was trying to get the weight further forward (hence lowever front ride height) to get the car to turn in better. Seeing as I had nealy 200 to play with I may was well try to use it my advantage. In theory with the weight further forward i might be able to get more turn in. I tried the lower rear downforce for better drag, but I needed the downforce in the high speed sections, however it was in the low spee understeer was far more noticeable as oppsoed to the high speed sections.
I shall try the harder rear springs and shocks and be bitterly disapointed when it does a 1'19.5.
Thanks for the tip, will try it out.
StigsTC
My full schedule B-spec guide and setups to the FGT (GT4)

100% all gold in GT4, GT5 and GT6. At last.

PSN:
Joined: 08/02/2011
Last on: 11/04/2011
Setups: 9
Posts: 6
Posted 09/09/2011 3:26 AM Post a reply Quote this post View Seaslug's info
This setup looks like it will have understeer at slow corners and oversteer at high speed corners.
Putting the weight forward in is usually not a good idea in a RWD car, it will decrease the acceleration.

Have you tried dealing with the understeer the other way around? (reduce front downforce and put the weight in the rear).

Something like 12/30 downforce and +7 ballast balance.

PSN: StigsTC
Joined: 01/20/2009
Last on: 08/29/2016
Setups: 67
Posts: 1192
Posted 09/10/2011 11:06 AM Post a reply Quote this post View StigsTibecuadorianco's info
Wouldn't reducing the front aero give you less front grip? Making the understeer in medium to high speed corners even worse?
My full schedule B-spec guide and setups to the FGT (GT4)

100% all gold in GT4, GT5 and GT6. At last.

PSN: Cuddles-X
Joined: 01/17/2009
Last on: 02/21/2014
Setups: 43
Posts: 538
Posted 09/11/2011 3:33 AM Post a reply Quote this post View Brette's info
I think so too.
My Cars:
- 1985 Nissan Gazelle S12 (Drift Pig),
- 1987 Nissan Be-1 w/canvas roof, and a parts car

PSN:
Joined: 08/02/2011
Last on: 11/04/2011
Setups: 9
Posts: 6
Posted 09/12/2011 9:12 AM Post a reply Quote this post View Seaslug's info
The weight in the front of the car is the cause of the understeer (like in FF cars).
It is countered at high speeds by the high front downforce, but downforce isn't a constant, it is proportional to speed^2 , so at low speeds it does nothing and the car understeers.

Putting the weight in the rear (not too much or the car will oversteer) will fix the understeer, and then 12/30 is a reasonable downforce setting for this car (explaining this in depth would take a lot of time).

PSN: Cuddles-X
Joined: 01/17/2009
Last on: 02/21/2014
Setups: 43
Posts: 538
Understeer & Downforce
Updated 09/18/2011 11:29 PM Post a reply Quote this post View Brette's info
Seaslug wrote:
The weight in the front of the car is the cause of the understeer (like in FF cars).

Have you tuned a FF car? Understeer isn't caused by the weight in the front of FF's, it's because the wheels have to turn and provide power at the same time. Also it could be because of how the suspension or LSD is setup. Weight in the front of FF's in fact pushes the tyres into the road, providing more grip. If understeer was caused by the weight in the front for FF's, why then do they run more downforce up front? Remember that all downforce does really is push down more weight.

Seaslug wrote:
Putting the weight forward in is usually not a good idea in a RWD car, it will decrease the acceleration.

This quote is nearly correct. Reason to have weight in the rear is to not increase acceleration, but to have better traction. I think your just getting a little bit mixed up in regards to your tuning theories.
My Cars:
- 1985 Nissan Gazelle S12 (Drift Pig),
- 1987 Nissan Be-1 w/canvas roof, and a parts car

PSN:
Joined: 08/02/2011
Last on: 11/04/2011
Setups: 9
Posts: 6
Posted 09/21/2011 9:54 AM Post a reply Quote this post View Seaslug's info
Brette wrote:
Understeer isn't caused by the weight in the front of FF's

You're forgetting centrifugal force, which pushes the car to the outside of the corner. If you have more weight in the front it will be pushed outwards more than the rear of the car, resulting in understeer.
Next time you go to the supermarket try this: put all the bags in the front of the shopping cart and try to take a corner, then repeat it with the weight distributed evenly. You'll see that the cart understeers with the bags at the front.

Everything else you said about FF's understeer is true.

Brette wrote:
why then do they run more downforce up front?

Centrifugal force isn't affected by downforce, but it is affected by weight. Like you said downforce only pushes down, but weight does more than that.

More traction means better acceleration in anything with decent HP, I just skipped one or two steps.

But anyway, just try what i said to see if it works...

PSN: StigsTC
Joined: 01/20/2009
Last on: 08/29/2016
Setups: 67
Posts: 1192
Posted 09/22/2011 4:31 AM Post a reply Quote this post View StigsTibecuadorianco's info
Righteo.
Radial acceleration = omega^2 x radius
Omega = (V/r)
Hence Radial acceleration is determined by (V/r)^2 x r --> V^2 / r
Assuming the car is not speeding up or slowing down, A total = a tangential + a radial. Therefore, A total = a radial, as a tangential is 0.
F = ma
Force required to turn the car = m x V^2 / r.
Force of turning is created by friction.
Friction = F normal X Coefficient of Friction.
Adding ballast increases F normal, hence it increase the amount of friction available.
This is matched by a 1:1 increase in Force required to turn the car.
Doubling the mass of the car gives double the Force required to turn the car, however doubling the mass also gives twice the friction, so the mass has no effect on ability to turn the car on a purely theoretical level.

Downforce on the other hand is proportional to V^2, giving more grip and more friction available to turn with, however force required is affected by V^2. So the faster you go, the more downforce you get, and the more downforce you need, meaning you can infinitely increase your cornering speed by generating more downforce... in theory.
So on a purely theoretical level, more speed gives more downforce and more grip on a 1:1 relationship, and more weight gives more grip which is baleneced out by more grip required on a 1:1 relationship.

Back on weight, in a real life trying to corner messes with the coefficient of friction, reducing it, giving less grip per grip required during cornering, so added weight slows cornering speed.
With downforce, aero never generates linearly at 100% efficiency, hence with more speed you have you don't get the 1:1 relationship for added downforce and grip.

The final point to make, is the Elise is by a long way rear heavy and front light, meaning I create a better balence by placing it on the front, in theory reducing the underster created and giving it better turn in.

So yeah, in theory my ballast positioning should only provide more grip to the front end, but in reality and GT it only serves to increase grip but require a greater increase of force required resulting in understeer, however the downforce should be maxed at the front as it has no negative effects on cornering, only positive. In addition I like my cars to be on the oversteer side of things, as it works with my driving technique, so maxing front downforce provides better results than your suggested levels, however the ballast balence could do with changing.
So can we stop argueing about it now? Adding ballast should re-distribute the balence of the car but with actual tyre physics adding weight at one end affects your car in the opposite way you would think it would.
StigsTC
My full schedule B-spec guide and setups to the FGT (GT4)

100% all gold in GT4, GT5 and GT6. At last.

PSN:
Joined: 08/02/2011
Last on: 11/04/2011
Setups: 9
Posts: 6
Posted 09/22/2011 11:51 AM Post a reply Quote this post View Seaslug's info
What I tried to do with the settings I said was to fix the inconsistent handling (understeer at low speed, oversteer at high speed). It wasn't going to handle perfectly because when you change the downforce or the weight distribution you have to change the springs (and maybe ride height and other things). If the car handled the same way in all corners but had understeer/oversteer, that can be fixed with the suspension settings (or the LSD, or with more weight in the rear..) to have it handle the way you like.
If you want oversteer suspension or LSD are better than downforce because they will generate the same amount of oversteer in every corner.

Even something like 15/30 downforce will make an elise oversteer at high speeds....

PSN: Cuddles-X
Joined: 01/17/2009
Last on: 02/21/2014
Setups: 43
Posts: 538
Posted 09/25/2011 5:17 AM Post a reply Quote this post View Brette's info
lol you sound like a professor of physics Stigs.
My Cars:
- 1985 Nissan Gazelle S12 (Drift Pig),
- 1987 Nissan Be-1 w/canvas roof, and a parts car
Member Login
Currently Online
GT Links
Auto Links