Don’t Expect Miracles From Your Setup

setup vs practice 1.jpg
A good setup in sim racing can mean a lot in the right hands, but many of us will benefit more from practice.

Most of us have seen YouTube videos with titles like “1:47.338 Ferrari 488 GT3 at Monza with Setup”. The lap time referenced is unusually fast, and many of us infer that we might be able to achieve an equal time using this setup. But this is rarely the case.

Setups aren’t meant to be a panacea. The aforementioned video probably also showcased incredibly aggressive racing lines, plus elite level throttle and brake application that most of us aren’t immediately capable of. And this is paramount; the driver factored more into that lap time than the setup.

Setups worthless?​

So does this mean setups are worthless in sim racing? Of course not. A bad setup can cause even highly skilled drivers to struggle on track, and a great setup can help the same highly skilled drivers win races. But don’t expect to jump straight to greatness if you’re not already a competent sim racer. An example of a case where a setup could make a significant impact on your driving experience is if you are consistent within a few tenths lap after lap and just out of striking distance of your competitors. But if your lap times vary significantly and you’re further down the running order, the problem may lie elsewhere.

Going from a baseline or generic setup to a setup tailored to a specific track does hold the possibility of improving your lap times. But you should consider replacing that possibility with the near certainty of benefits of practice. Especially in a case where you’re new to your car or track, spending a few hours getting a feel for the car’s tendencies and the flow of the track can have a massive effect on your lap times. And in the case where more practice is needed to learn the car and track, introducing new setups may actually hinder your learning if they are designed to produce only short-term results, like a qualifying setup.

Make your own setup​

A good strategy to employ regarding setups is to work toward building your own. This can be an intimidating prospect for many of us, but starting with even small adjustments to tire pressure, fuel load, and aero can have a positive effect immediately. These tweaks plus ample practice will have more positive effects on speed and control for new or inexperienced sim racers than choosing a random setup from the internet.

So don’t ignore your setup, but don’t expect instant greatness either. For newer or less consistent drivers, practice will have a greater effect on your average lap times than a setup you discover on the internet. Use setups as a complement your performance once you have experience with the car and track, not as a crutch for situations where you haven’t practiced enough.
About author
Mike Smith
I have been obsessed with sim racing and racing games since the 1980's. My first taste of live auto racing was in 1988, and I couldn't get enough ever since. Lead writer for RaceDepartment, and owner of SimRacing604 and its YouTube channel. Favourite sims include Assetto Corsa Competizione, Assetto Corsa, rFactor 2, Automobilista 2, DiRT Rally 2 - On Twitter as @simracing604

Comments

Increasing tyre pressures when the tyres are overheating is just plain wrong and casts doubt on the entire chart.
IRL, low TPs allow the tires to squirm which does result in more heat (cf. 'hysteresis').
 
Last edited:
@Toonces

The harder you drive, the *less* static camber you need? Because of more roll causing more camber gain? Really?

In what kind of car? Swing axle on all corners? I'm pretty sure even semi-trailing arms don't typically have >100% camber recovery, and most DWB/ML suspensions purposely aim for relatively low camber gain compared to semi-trailing arms. The harder you drive, the more static camber you need due to increasing spring deflection and also tire torques which cause positive camber gain on the outside wheel, although most sims (None of the consumer ones?) don't* support that. The main reason you even put stiff springs on your car is primarily to have better mid-corner wheel angles without running -10deg static.

Be my guest though, I'd really like to hear the reasoning and context. Did you just typo and reversed it?

EDIT: *Correction
 
Last edited:
IRL, low TPs allow the tires to squirm which does result in more heat (cf. 'hysteresis').
This should only happen with extremely low tyre pressures when the sidewall starts to sag, which is good for neither handling nor tyre wear and is likely to lead to a blowout. At near-optimal pressures, increasing the pressure will make the sidewalls stiffer which in turn makes them do more work and generate more heat.
 
Premium
No miracle expected with only the setup, that's for sure.
But modifying a good base setup ( when the default one are well done, what should be nearly mandatory for an original car in a sim ... but is not always the case in the reality ! :D ) ... in order to make the car more comfortable and adapted to your driving ... that should mostly allow to improve your lap times.
Knowing the perfect line and all particularities of a track without being able to take profit of them due to a unadequate setup is not enough to improve lap times.

No miracle OK ... but that helps for sure also.

Tutorials are sometimes useful and important to read ( and also understand ;) ) but experimenting one change at a time in a setup with a few clicks up ( testing a few laps ) then a few clicks down ( testing again ) may already give you a feeling of what it does to the car handling .... and of what it improves or .... spoils on this car handling.
That can be a way ( by self experiment if you aren't used to technical knowledge ) to learn how to adapt a setup to your liking.
Even if you're not really much quicker ... you'll be more comfortable and able to already bring the car to the finish and be consistent, endurant and regular on track.
You'll surely never be a winner but as backmarker :p.... will have the pleasure to end your races and be sometimes in the middle of the field at the end.
 
I think the thinking "you only need a setup if you're already fast to get faster" isn't true.

I've let many people (with no sim racing experience) do a few laps on my rig and even they often feel when something has become better or worse (often not telling them what I've changed for what purpose), even if they can't keep the car on the track for a full lap. If the setup gives them more confidence and increases their chances of completing a race or lap(s) in an average lowest time comfortably, that's beautiful and already almost a miracle.

It's also not just tyre/tire pressure and aero that give the grip, it's also often brake bias and differential settings that make sure you maintain grip. All of the other stuff is of course also important, but the aforementioned are often the four that I adjust first on race cars with a "decent default setup". But even with a setup for a fast-ish driver, I've had plenty of setups that other people "couldn't drive at all" where I have no problems not spinning with them, which doesn't even simply seem to depend on the general pace of a person.

In general I think most sims could benefit more from better tool tips. They often are there, just badly written and probably never tested with someone new to sim racing. Examples and ranges to start out with could be specified. The setup menu should also have some kind of notepad feature to describe what is good or bad about a setup when developing a setup, and also gives more information about a setup when downloading setups from other people. Developers could even give multiple "default" setups and show what's different.

My background: I develop fixed setups for our community races and series/championships, so 5+ years of experience developing fixed setups for an audience ranging from "I've just bought a wheel and have 20 hours on AC" to people that would likely finish podium/first in most public servers easily. It's never perfect, but apparently it works well enough.

TL;DR: setups basically matter for everyone and can be very personal. To start off with learning to create setups: do a few laps, learn what one thing does at a time, then continue.
 
Last edited:
Huh? I can't understand why that would be the case.
Generally the opposite, the stiffer sidewall should have less hysteresis generated heat. In all of the literature I've looked at, sidewall and carcass stiffness is a factor due to it flexing when rolling. Going higher in pressure will generally decrease your rolling resistance and I'd wager heat too. At least close to the operating pressure; who knows what happens at 80psi.

I'd think it's more a case of going up a bit in pressure bringing the tire actually closer to optimal pressure, which generates more grip at the contact patch (You know, where almost all of the heat is generated) which in turn heats up the tire a bit more. Going over-pressure would do the opposite.
 
Premium
Great article, could give a bit more slack to some, it is very difficult to cover every angle in a single sentence.
I quite often think of a subject and then try and be a 100% precise in my response, only to continually think of anomalies that go some way to counter what I have written.
Sometimes grey is all anyone can achieve.
I “tend” to go with the, a bad setup will make you slower, a correct setup will help to get a 100% from your, as you are now ability.
You will never beat anyone with more inherent skill and more inherent or the same knowledge.
Knowledge you can do something about, but even that will have a limit, more skill, well that is outside all of our grasp, you will just have to put in more practice, that also has its limits.
Like someone said at the beginning of these articles, there is no single answer to running at the front of the field.
Unless you can find someone to give you skill in one simple package and knowledge in another simple package. ( good luck with that )
The dice rolls and that is what you have to work with.
 
Last edited:
Generally the opposite, the stiffer sidewall should have less hysteresis generated heat. In all of the literature I've looked at, sidewall and carcass stiffness is a factor due to it flexing when rolling. Going higher in pressure will generally decrease your rolling resistance and I'd wager heat too. At least close to the operating pressure; who knows what happens at 80psi.

I'd think it's more a case of going up a bit in pressure bringing the tire actually closer to optimal pressure, which generates more grip at the contact patch (You know, where almost all of the heat is generated) which in turn heats up the tire a bit more. Going over-pressure would do the opposite.

Yes, and not only rubber hysteresis, but also friction between inner tire components. I read that was the main reason why Michelin started working on radial tires back in late 40s. Simply friction in between tire plies was cause of most tire failures and overheating.

I also find this issue of optimal pressures to be extremely interesting. Even more so as I mainly spend time in rF2, and it is famous for it's minimum pressures being optimal thing, and also brought a lot of interesting discussions.

At least currently we seem to agree that lowest pressures WILL bring most grip due to largest contact patch. We also seem to agree that lowest tire pressures issue in rF2 exists, probably mostly due to tire failures due to fatigue and overheating not being simulated. However, we also talk about lack of tire structural strength losses, contact patch pressure distribution distortions (such as pressure at contact patch being concentrated under sidewalls), and also influence to rolling resistance... Although number one thing IRL about tire pressures not being used to low on race tires at least, seems to be their durability.

It seems to be difficult to have this aspect right with physical tire model. I think some empirical elements could be added to rF2 to battle unlimited low pressures being fast, but what do I know.

Also, one interesting thing. Allison from Mercedes F1 team predicted, that 18inch wheels will make F1 about 2s slower. Obviously, it will also make cars heavier and there will be other complications. But he said they will not be able to use as low pressures with 18inch wheels, and thus will have less grip - those are his thoughts, not mine. I am sure he knows what he talks about.
 
Last edited:
a question from a utter noob trying to get into simracing hopefully within the next 2 years.....
are there any books or guidelines to understand car setup or something? coz it goes over my head.....
 
Premium
Books are really good at combining them with your simulator racing.
You can experiment with theory and simulated, not always a 100% but that is a good reason to stick with just one simulation.
It only goes over your head if you read a book in isolation.
You need to read then experiment, read then experiment.
Eventually you will get a formula going in your mind.
Real world setups are quite often a black art, sim racing less so.
Use the forums to ask specific questions, there are a lot of clever people who will answer a specific question, do not ask general questions.
 
Yes, and not only rubber hysteresis, but also friction between inner tire components. I read that was the main reason why Michelin started working on radial tires back in late 40s. Simply friction in between tire plies was cause of most tire failures and overheating.

I also find this issue of optimal pressures to be extremely interesting. Even more so as I mainly spend time in rF2, and it is famous for it's minimum pressures being optimal thing, and also brought a lot of interesting discussions.

At least currently we seem to agree that lowest pressures WILL bring most grip due to largest contact patch. We also seem to agree that lowest tire pressures issue in rF2 exists, probably mostly due to tire failures due to fatigue and overheating not being simulated. However, we also talk about lack of tire structural strength losses, contact patch pressure distribution distortions (such as pressure at contact patch being concentrated under sidewalls), and also influence to rolling resistance... Although number one thing IRL about tire pressures not being used to low on race tires at least, seems to be their durability.

It seems to be difficult to have this aspect right with physical tire model. I think some empirical elements could be added to rF2 to battle unlimited low pressures being fast, but what do I know.

Also, one interesting thing. Allison from Mercedes F1 team predicted, that 18inch wheels will make F1 about 2s slower. Obviously, it will also make cars heavier and there will be other complications. But he said they will not be able to use as low pressures with 18inch wheels, and thus will have less grip - those are his thoughts, not mine. I am sure he knows what he talks about.

The pressure thing is mostly about contact patch pressure. Sure you technically get the largest contact patch if you have 0psi and stretch out the tire (Perhaps not even true for some materials, I don't know) but the pressure will be distributed very unevenly if you mount it on a wheel. You need to have a certain amount of pressure for the tire and wheel combo to have an even pressure on the CP. This is probably also the main component for why optimal pressure changes depending on load.
I would guess perhaps it is possible that a less stretched out tire with less pressure in it will have somewhat higher CP area for the same section width if the optimal pressure is lower; I'm not sure really. However when you go to a larger wheel you typically also end up desiring a lower sidewall ratio if you're going to have the same section width, and that brings many significant issues with it if you go too far.

The physical tire model pressure issue is the same as with any other issues; you can't just decide your optimal pressure is 26psi now, at least I think you can't. You need to achieve it via the material properties and the result might not agree with your thoughts about what the slip and load characteristics should be. In an empiric model, at least you can just put in everything correctly and have your pressure/rate, load/mu curve, slip/mu curve and pressure/mu curve all align.

Books are really good at combining them with your simulator racing.
You can experiment with theory and simulated, not always a 100% but that is a good reason to stick with just one simulation.
It only goes over your head if you read a book in isolation.
You need to read then experiment, read then experiment.
Eventually you will get a formula going in your mind.
Real world setups are quite often a black art, sim racing less so.
Use the forums to ask specific questions, there are a lot of clever people who will answer a specific question, do not ask general questions.

I think I said earlier, but I suggest 'Suspension Geometry and Computation' and 'The Shock Absorber Handbook' by Dixon. After that read Milliken's 'Race Car Vehicle Dynamics' for tires. I think Fred Puhn has also made some good ones but I can't comment on those.

EDIT: Oops, I quoted the reply to the post I was going to quote. :D

@tahzib is the recipient of the above, lol.
 
Last edited:
Premium
I think that this article addresses a key truth about sim racing. Seat time is the most important thing. In terms of personal development, I don't want to get into setup (besides tire pressures) until I can consistently run laps with one of the defaults (talking ACC here where the defaults are good). Sure, a good setup might make me faster, but I need to have a basis for comparison first.

But, of course, I will try other peoples' setups too. And sometimes they really do help make the car more stable and faster. But I don't want to try anything until I have a solid baseline with the defaults.

My problem with setups is time. To do this right, the process should be something like:
  • Run laps with the default until my deltas are < 0.3s/lap or so
  • Make a change - run laps until my deltas are < 0.3s/lap or so
  • See how it feels - make another change, run laps until I'm consistent. And so on.
But the problem is that each change means 20-30 minutes or so of testing. And if it makes it worse then I have to try something else. If I'm doing a league race, I want to have all this pretty well established by 2-3 days before the race so I can put in 20 or so laps with my setup to make sure I'm consistent with it.

It really comes down to time. If I thought I could actually challenge for a win with a combination of my skill level and the right setup, I'd put more time into it. But since I know that I'll typically be lucky to be in the upper third of a 40 car field, I'm going to spend the bulk of my time on becoming consistent and really learning the track.
 
I think that this article addresses a key truth about sim racing. Seat time is the most important thing. In terms of personal development, I don't want to get into setup (besides tire pressures) until I can consistently run laps with one of the defaults (talking ACC here where the defaults are good). Sure, a good setup might make me faster, but I need to have a basis for comparison first.

But, of course, I will try other peoples' setups too. And sometimes they really do help make the car more stable and faster. But I don't want to try anything until I have a solid baseline with the defaults.

My problem with setups is time. To do this right, the process should be something like:
  • Run laps with the default until my deltas are < 0.3s/lap or so
  • Make a change - run laps until my deltas are < 0.3s/lap or so
  • See how it feels - make another change, run laps until I'm consistent. And so on.
But the problem is that each change means 20-30 minutes or so of testing. And if it makes it worse then I have to try something else. If I'm doing a league race, I want to have all this pretty well established by 2-3 days before the race so I can put in 20 or so laps with my setup to make sure I'm consistent with it.

It really comes down to time. If I thought I could actually challenge for a win with a combination of my skill level and the right setup, I'd put more time into it. But since I know that I'll typically be lucky to be in the upper third of a 40 car field, I'm going to spend the bulk of my time on becoming consistent and really learning the track.
I am not very fast at all any more (Even over 1sec from pro times so very much so out of pace) but I think this applies to the general 3-5sec off pace range the best:

You don't really need to achieve extremely high performance to start getting into setup, but I do believe you need some elementary level of performance in driving to be able to gauge suspension setup. At the very least you need to consistently bring the car to the lateral limit in corners and approach the combined limit in transient. Otherwise you're not making realistic choices because the entire car behavior will change once you get to the limit.

Once you get a more advanced handle on driving you won't need to do half an hour of testing for a setup change or even multiple unless the car really is already quite optimized and your judgment alone isn't enough any more.

That's why you really should learn the mechanics as soon as you can once you have some elementary ability in driving and can somewhat relate what happens in the cockpit to what happens in theory.
I think the worst thing someone can do is be relatively unskilled in driving and also spend countless hours testing small setup changes. You're not going to be right about what the setup change even actually did to the car unless you know the theory IMO.
 
Premium
I think the worst thing someone can do is be relatively unskilled in driving and also spend countless hours testing small setup changes. You're not going to be right about what the setup change even actually did to the car unless you know the theory IMO.
Yes. And I think that this is more or less what Mike was getting at in the original piece.

I also recognize that it takes a bit less testing as you get more experience, but you still will need at least 1 or 2 laps to warm up the tires and 3-5 laps to properly evaluate the changes. So even if that isn't 20 minutes, if you've got a 2 minute lap, you're still looking at ~12-15 minutes/change. It's definitely an iterative process.

This is also a good argument for not jumping around from car to car. At least until you're experienced, it's good to learn a car really well. Again, thinking about ACC, if you have a good setup at, say Nurburgring, you probably don't need to tweak it much for Barcelona, for example.

Again - seat time.
 
Maybe it's just because I've created the physics for and setup probably closer to a hundred sim cars by now, but I don't really see a need to fully warm up the tires nor test for more than one lap when doing setup changes, at least in the beginning. The very last few % of laptime will take you forever to achieve and the car has to be in top condition, but we're talking big strides in laptime or comfort here. In the realm of "Will braking into turn 3 shake the car off the track?" instead of "Can I gain 0.03sec if I ride that bump better?".

Although that's kind of what I mean; it really pays to have a spreadsheet and the knowledge that'll just tell you what the car is going to do before you even test it. In the long run if you're a very active player, it'll probably save time.

Honestly though if you're not skilled enough to take the racecar to the limit and not knowledgeable enough to generally know in theory what simple changes will do; don't drive the racecar and don't tinker with the setup! Find a more simple, slower roadcar that is easier to drive and play around with changing the tire pressure, camber, toe and perhaps the stabilizers. For that purpose AC1 is a bit better than ACC. :p
 
No.

I am all for as best as possible descriptions and information, but the thinking has to be done by a person, there is immense amount of variables and it would probably be a big failure if some "engineer" help would be implemented, all it would be probably bunch of preset setups, that would never fully satisfy anyone.
...

Thats it, you can be setups engineer.
I guess you do not think this through and let a bit too much on your very own way to do thing in racing sims without considering others.

I agree with Robes, racing sims evolve with years without adding more deep features, all devs team have focused their time and energy mostly on visual (which was where the biggest improvements have been made) and since GTL/GTR2/rFactor, looks like they are stuck with the same paradigm (I did not tried ACC, or others, just AC, mostly because of this).

Geoff Grammond and his teams have made and incredible job with Grand Prix series, then they all quite far behind in term of visual (no good rain have been made since, Simbin, authors of rFactor I forgot the name, and Kunos made a very poor job at this), but adding some help in the team (keyword is TEAM, not the one (wo)man team we are in the racing sim) would have been more than welcome, more than thousands of cars (with issues !) and tracks.

You're wrong on one point at least, the program can detect settings issues because it run the sim, so if the bottom hit the ground, it can suggest to increase height + stiff suspension, and using various effects accumulated and averaged in a lap, the magic engineer (technically a "mere" expert system would be enough) can suggest one or more adjustments AFTER receiving and processing our feedback and re-averaging with laptimes achieved eventually compared to some reference time(s).
So racing sim dev team, you get here the idea for free, feel free to use it.

It's quite a shame we are thrown right away in a F1 cockpit, so to speak, without any words by anyone except some kind of "do a pole laptime or you're fired". Imagine a young driver starting like this :|. They did not provide even any controller settings guidance, only relying on community. I bet racing sim world need some kick in the butt, maybe another Geoff would be needed to make the leap and break away from the current way of making things.
 

Latest News

Article information

Author
Mike Smith
Article read time
2 min read
Views
15,105
Comments
57
Last update

How long have you been simracing

  • < 1 year

    Votes: 236 14.8%
  • < 2 years

    Votes: 164 10.3%
  • < 3 years

    Votes: 159 10.0%
  • < 4 years

    Votes: 120 7.5%
  • < 5 years

    Votes: 225 14.1%
  • < 10 years

    Votes: 188 11.8%
  • < 15 years

    Votes: 124 7.8%
  • < 20 years

    Votes: 90 5.6%
  • < 25 years

    Votes: 71 4.5%
  • Ok, I am a dinosaur

    Votes: 218 13.7%
Back
Top