Just did the Peak Porsche daily Forzathon. Here’s what I found with my 914/6 builds;
I started out with the stock 2l and built the car up with rally tires, a race transmission and rearend, and all the engine parts to level up to B700.
In this configuration the max speed was 140mph and the max distance from the runway danger sign was around 600 feet.
I went back to the shop and did an engine swap to the 4l f6. Had to go back to stock tires. Left all other parts the same. Maxed all the engine parts but could only get to B638 max.
In this “lesser” configuration the top speed is now 202mph and the jump distance is over 1200 feet.
Seems odd, as I stated, all things being equal, that a lesser PI car (same car) would have so much better performance.
As it clearly illustrates, all things are not equal. And definitely points to shortcomings in the PI algorithms within the game programming.
As I look at many other aspects of shortcomings in the building of engines and chassis I find it hard to delineate between buggy programming or programmers who just don’t really understand the science of building performance vehicles.
Yeah valid question. Actually the (going from memory here) B700 car was 256hp about 2200lbs. The B638 car was 750some hp and 2300lbs. I don’t remember weight exactly but it was around 100lb difference.
I’ve built a lot of high performance engines and given these two engines were comparable in build. That is, both taken to full race specs (according to the game limits). And taking into account the PI difference, the 2l engine should have had a hp rating of nothing less than 375+hp. That is, if all things were equal.
And, a 2l Porsche engine fully tuned for racing with a racing manifold and triple throat webers with the proper cam, head work, and the rest. Is easily capable of 300+hp. Without a turbo.
Regarding your builds one has rally tires and the other has tires simulating 1970 tire technology. The PI calculation takes this into regard.
The PI system has it’s inequities.
I wouldn’t try to compare it or upgrades to reality. The game is a game not a sim.
Edit: one other thing with the PI calculation is that the tires can limit the max number. The calculation reaches an engine power limit that it decides is all the tires can handle. At that point you can keep adding power and the PI doesn’t change because it sees the tires as the limit of performance. It’s possible with the stock tires you had this happen.
When you think about it, creating a rating system designed to universally rate all vehicles across multiple surfaces is kind of an impossible task. A drag build, a drift build, a cross country build, and a high aero grip build aren’t really things you can build an apples to apples rating system to compare. Perfection is impossible. Stuff is going to slip through the cracks, especially with such an expansive (and expanding) car list.
Yes, there are some obvious, egregious errors with the system. Tire width is vastly undervalued. There needs to be more restrictions, especially at the higher level, as S2 and S1 represent way too wide of performance gaps. Building your car with sports tires is throwing. There’s a lot more, but even if all the issues were fixed, there would still be problems and there would still be a meta.
The system has to be flexible, accounting for all kinds of situations and surfaces. That flexibility comes at the cost of accuracy. That’s a fundamental problem that cannot be fixed. The system can only ever be “good enough”.
And if we take all factors presented out and just look at the horsepower equation alone. The discrepancy in builds is still highly unbalanced.
But if we want to talk tires, the rally tires which we assume to be the higher performance tires, were installed on the B700 build which was the slower build. The stock tires, if they are indeed modeled on 70’s era bias ply tires should have been a speed detriment to the PI of the B638 build.
I don’t have FH4 installed anymore but if I recall, the build on FH4 was much more balanced. I don’t recall race sway bars reducing handing as they do in FH5. Which personally, I find totally confusing especially when they reduce weight.
Just seems to be more inconsistencies in FH5 than there were in FH4 and they just seem to be rather unexplainable.
My experience as well. Physics allowing that kind of difference results in the weird tunes that do well. Absolutely contrary to 1:1 tune. I have similar B700 tune on my 914/6, relate directly.
Messed with stock M2 and Audi Quattro today, tire pressures don’t respond to my 1:1 experiences either.
So I would take your 638 build and drop the engine back to stock. Then and the same engine swap back in and watch the PI as you add each component. I’m curious if you get to the 638 and then can add more power with it staying the same PI.
PI wise, the race sway bars seem close to fh4 in that they occasionally will increase PI by a point when both are added. I haven’t ever watched the handling number when they’re added. I never really put much emphasis on those rankings. If I’m being lazy and comparing tunes to download I might just to get a general idea of the tune. They’re based on parts rather than the setup.
5 does seem to have more or different inconsistencies than 4. They can’t change it now without invalidating nearly every tune so I’ve been taking it as it is and working within it.
Also, there’s no tire speed rating in game and I don’t think simulation damage would implement it but I’ve never tested that. IRL the bias ply tires would shred. It’s an example of where I wouldn’t compare the game to reality.
I’m not trying to tie the game to reality because it isn’t a sim. Just looking at the various inconsistencies within the game itself.
As far as the buildd and tires, I think you’re looking at the builds and tires backwards. Yes if the tires were modeled on 70’s bias ply tires they would shred. Even if they were modeled on 70’s radials. Given the build they were on was the B638 build that toped out at 202mph.
But we have no idea (unless you’re one of the developers) how the PI works mathematically with the different features.
It’s just sad they would put out a game so screwed up in so many areas as this game is.
untrue. Two engines can have the exact same stats. Same weight, same HP, same torque, but if one engine is only hitting peak torque for a short time while the other is maintaining peak torque throughout the gear, the two engines are not equal.
Same with tires. Two different sets of tires might have the same lateral G stats, but one set might have a harder time maintaining those lateral Gs when overheating and under pressure, but perform better on rougher surfaces.
Chassis can also have similar stats but vary widely. Similar profiles, drag numbers, and stiffness can still handle very differently depending on airflow, footprint, or avenues to transfer weight through the car.
Simple stats are not enough to rate a car on. Cars can’t be summed up so easily with simple numbers. People often forget that reported stats are peak numbers. Peak HP, Peak Torque, Peak Lateral Gs. Even with damage turned off, tires still take in heat throughout a race, at very different rates depending on the compound, changing effective lateral Gs. Cars are a dynamic mechanical system that change dramatically depending on the environment they’re interacting with. Simple stats are not enough to sum up the total of a cars ability.
And even if they were, how would you weigh those stats? Whose to say that braking is worth x and power is worth y when the impact of those stats change dramatically based on the race, the surface, and even the conditions being driven in.
Yes but your talking as though they were real vehicles when in fact they are just computer data. If you only look at the computer data for the final stats they can be programmed equally. So Speed 10 would be top speed for that car. Handling 10 would be top grip for that car… etc. You would need Offroad 10 for mud handling, and suspension.
In a racing situation your power build wouldn’t stand a chance against the Rallye tires one.
Thus, the PI calculation seems broken for the danger sign but said danger sign only reflects a part of car performance (power) while the PI system has to reflect every aspect.
There are many issues with the system but this case only scratches one issue (overloading cars with power does not increase PI) remotely.
Tire modeling. Engine modeling. Problem with any arguments here is this game is just simple mathematical equations. The tire modeling, if thats what you want to call it, for stock (?) tires is nothing more than one simple equation for 500+ cars. You get an off road vehicle with stock tires and have an option to put on offroad tires. They cost 10k credits but nothing changes in PI levels. So the stock tire equation and the offroad tire equation are the same equation.
And another thing that proves the tire modeling is not actual tire modeling. You can take a dedicated race car, I did this in the jag barn find, with race tires, and go straight ip the side of a volcano. Those tires are definitely not modeled on racing slicks.
I’m not arguing the theoretical mechanics of vehicle performance. Or the difference in engine performance curves.
The mathematical equations they apply to the performance aspects of this game are all screwed up. Just look at how the tire friction coefficients react with different tires on different surfaces. I mean, if we want to be real about it, race slicks shouldn’t even function on anything other than asphalt or concrete surfaces.
There’s only a few select options of engines to swap so I’m figuring there’s only a few actually mathematical representations of engine models within the game and they just fit the model as closely as it can fit to any specific vehicle.
All this creates a big issue for this game. Where I would have put FH4 into a category maybe as a simcade, this game drops down a level do to all the kinks in the programming to just being a simple arcade game. And the problem with that is I don’t believe the developers have any intention to change the direction of the game.
