Racing Games - 5 facts about downforce 

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.

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

@@Law0fRevenge 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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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

Have fun using this info to ruin your tunes xD Or god help you, in real life lol.

.... 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. ;-)

This guy isn't Mark lol

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

Play race driver grid or nfs SHIFT,trust me it's work

Yeah, you're right! But at least I think we can still learn the basics with these games. :-)

@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

Monza 1966 version :-)

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.

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.