Margin for error

grandvachegrandvache Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭✭✭
hi guys, we seem to be finding a lot more measured testing results which is great, but I think it's worth having a conversation about natural variance in testing results, particularly for acceleration / speed testing.

Some of the Porsche changes posted here a week or so back are clearly significant, but reducing the 0-100 speed of a green hellcat (just for example) by one or two tenths is absolutely the sort of variation to could happen from one run to another, or because of atmospheric changes or the skill difference between one driver or another.

Do we want to think about establishing a threshold below which we don't forward reccomendations for any changes

Answers

  • grandvachegrandvache Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭✭✭
    For instance this is just over a 4% difference.  Is that sufficient for us to consider it?
     @PlantedZebra nothing personal, yours was just the first measured timing I found.

    I still think the green hellcat needs to be rq25.
  • PlantedZebraPlantedZebra Posts: 432 ✭✭✭
    @grandvache If it's just 0.1 difference, I'm totally fine with it. But it's 0.3 so that's some difference right there.

    If you used TDC's MRA calculation formula, the Hellcat with 7.3 0-100 will result in 102.78 MRA and 7.6 0-100 will result in 94.87 MRA. That little 0.3 sec difference is big imo.
  • joel24joel24 Posts: 687 ✭✭✭✭
    And also, that stupid brick is not supposed to beat supercars in a standing mile 
  • grandvachegrandvache Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @grandvache If it's just 0.1 difference, I'm totally fine with it. But it's 0.3 so that's some difference right there.

    If you used TDC's MRA calculation formula, the Hellcat with 7.3 0-100 will result in 102.78 MRA and 7.6 0-100 will result in 94.87 MRA. That little 0.3 sec difference is big imo.
    Not saying the difference is small (ok, I AM saying the difference is small but that's not my point) my concern is more that we're potentially overcorrecting.  

    A 5% difference could easily be accounted for by low atmospheric pressure, slightly worn tyres, a heavy fuel load, a fat driver an ever so slightly slipping clutch or any number of other things.  It doesn't mean that the times in game are "wrong".

    We should discuss if a single set of measured testing from a single source gis sufficient for us to request changes like this.  I'm not saying definitively that we should or shouldn't, I'm just saying we should discuss it, and discuss if we need a threshold for change requests.
  • grandvachegrandvache Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Just gonna bump this up again.  You guys are spending a lot of time verifying and collecting data, but we should at least be having a conversation about whether the data we're collecting and if the changes we're advocating are in any meaningful way "correct".

    Unless the data is collected in the same weather conditions, with the same driver & the same timing equipment (let alone fuel loads, and fuel type, standard tyres etc) comparisons on data points like 0-60 or g-force are essentially valueless.  

    I honestly think we'd be better off taking data from GT or Forza data, at least we have a CHANCE of some consistency on those variables.  

    Buffs and nerfs are always controversial and will always end up pissing someone off and my concern is that we're going to cause 
  • grandvachegrandvache Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @mikes what do you think?

    @Hutch_Matt @Hutch_Tim @Hutch_Katie some input from you would I think be very useful here.
  • mikesmikes Posts: 3,978 ✭✭✭✭✭
    We take all suggestions and post them for Hutch to review. I personally never include any that state something like 0-60 should be 6.2 seconds and not 6.3. 

    But for other borderline changes, ultimately the final decision is Hutch’s. 
  • PlantedZebraPlantedZebra Posts: 432 ✭✭✭
    would be excellent if we are allowed to take datas from those two mainstream simcade games.

    gotta get that furai buff you know 😤😤
  • grandvachegrandvache Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭✭✭
    would be excellent if we are allowed to take datas from those two mainstream simcade games.

    gotta get that furai buff you know 😤😤
    ?? Not played a GT since 4 or a Forza since 6 ... Is the furai much better in those than here??
  • PlantedZebraPlantedZebra Posts: 432 ✭✭✭
    @grandvache Never had any of the Forza titles before the 5th title, but based on the Forza wiki it has 0-60 and 0-100 time of 3.1 and 6.0 sec which is pretty good I guess.

    As for Gran Turismo I had one in the PSP title and I managed to lap a lap in Suzuka in the Furai faster than I did in the original Veyron, and that's all I can say about this car.
  • grandvachegrandvache Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭✭✭
    This article touches on some of the complications measuring BHP and might be relevant here https://www.motortrend.com/news/2020-chevrolet-corvette-c8-power-dyno/
  • CarnageCarnage Posts: 3
    What is wrong with these guys??
    Are you fckin kiding me,a car on offroad tyres beats a race car on slicks??????
    On a dry circuit?????

Sign In or Register to comment.