0-100 times wrong?
- Thread starter blkvzgo
- 71 comments
- 7,361 views
- 298
- Ghost_Drift1
The world of timing cars and how they compare to magazines is a huge debate.
0-60mph (0-100kph) are officially timed by magazines in the UK and US to compare the off-line performance, some go further and test the far more useful 0-100mph (0-160kph) and standing 1/4mile times. 0-60mph's are not that important these days, they don't show the true performance of a car, modern heavy cars can stuggle off line but their serious power can come back into it after 60mph and leave a car standing that was quicker upto this speed. Always better to look at the 0-100mph (0-160pkh), 1/4mile, 60-100 or in gear times to compare cars.
All require perfect weather conditions (dry, temps etc), perfect optinum revs, brutal gearbox and clutch (side stepping, serious gear snapping - i.e. trying to brake the damn car!) abuse and a perfect running car (i.e. some are not always supplied with the best tyres after other magazines have tested beforehand!). Thats before you look at the condition of the tarmac/concrete (where most test) and factors of the test itself, for example, a lot of UK magazines always test with 2 people (i.e. passenger).
Testing cars at propper drag stips with sticky surfaces, and with just the driver, will obviously give much quicker times again.
Also some manufacturers in the past have supplied tuned/remapped (eg Skoda, VW) or blueprinted cars (eg TVR's) to magazines to test (Autocar here in the UK) and the magazine fell for it, testing the car much quicker than the factory figures and publishing them.
Its not rocket science to look at a cars power, weight and drivetrain and roughly work out what it should be doing (there are loads of other factors of course... torque, gear ratios, areodynamics but you can still see rough figures). See my website.
Testing your own car can only be done with official equipement, or at a drag strip where you compare those figures. You certainly can't just look at your speedo and time it with a stop watch, speedos are always (unless calibrated off gearbox, factory cars certainly arn't) 10% out, so timing to say a speedo showing 100mph is really only about 90mph and seconds off depending on the car.
Now re GT5P, I don't believe even the recommended stock tyres are giving the correct acceleration. A friend of mine thought GT5P was really really slow (even using GT LM etc) becuase he was so use to games exagerating the sense of speed. Also some cars are tested with traction control, some not, so maybe you need to put the (much disliked) TC on in the game to reduce the wheelspin (then switch off).
I wouldn't worry about it, its not that important, just work out the best way to launch (what gear, revs, TC on then remove) with the particular car and tyres your using before you enter standing start events.
0-60mph (0-100kph) are officially timed by magazines in the UK and US to compare the off-line performance, some go further and test the far more useful 0-100mph (0-160kph) and standing 1/4mile times. 0-60mph's are not that important these days, they don't show the true performance of a car, modern heavy cars can stuggle off line but their serious power can come back into it after 60mph and leave a car standing that was quicker upto this speed. Always better to look at the 0-100mph (0-160pkh), 1/4mile, 60-100 or in gear times to compare cars.
All require perfect weather conditions (dry, temps etc), perfect optinum revs, brutal gearbox and clutch (side stepping, serious gear snapping - i.e. trying to brake the damn car!) abuse and a perfect running car (i.e. some are not always supplied with the best tyres after other magazines have tested beforehand!). Thats before you look at the condition of the tarmac/concrete (where most test) and factors of the test itself, for example, a lot of UK magazines always test with 2 people (i.e. passenger).
Testing cars at propper drag stips with sticky surfaces, and with just the driver, will obviously give much quicker times again.
Also some manufacturers in the past have supplied tuned/remapped (eg Skoda, VW) or blueprinted cars (eg TVR's) to magazines to test (Autocar here in the UK) and the magazine fell for it, testing the car much quicker than the factory figures and publishing them.
Its not rocket science to look at a cars power, weight and drivetrain and roughly work out what it should be doing (there are loads of other factors of course... torque, gear ratios, areodynamics but you can still see rough figures). See my website.
Testing your own car can only be done with official equipement, or at a drag strip where you compare those figures. You certainly can't just look at your speedo and time it with a stop watch, speedos are always (unless calibrated off gearbox, factory cars certainly arn't) 10% out, so timing to say a speedo showing 100mph is really only about 90mph and seconds off depending on the car.
Now re GT5P, I don't believe even the recommended stock tyres are giving the correct acceleration. A friend of mine thought GT5P was really really slow (even using GT LM etc) becuase he was so use to games exagerating the sense of speed. Also some cars are tested with traction control, some not, so maybe you need to put the (much disliked) TC on in the game to reduce the wheelspin (then switch off).
I wouldn't worry about it, its not that important, just work out the best way to launch (what gear, revs, TC on then remove) with the particular car and tyres your using before you enter standing start events.
- 133
- GTP_blkvzgo
I tested the Ford GT with S1 tyres (which represent freshly-fitted tyres for that car) and the time I got matched the official one. Knowing that Kaz owns one (or two) I figured maybe they had more time to test that specific car than the others. By the way, turning the traction control on didn't give any noticable imrovement for me. I figured with cars like the 599 that have sophisticated traction control systems I'd match the factory time my turning the TCS on, but I was wrong. On the other hand, it's unlikely that GT's TCS works in the same way like the Ferrari's.
- 7,666
- Exorcet
- OE Exorcet
Yeah, TC and LC are totally different. TC tries to reduce all wheelspin, while LC allows whatever is necessary to accelerate ASAP.
On the GT, more time to test a car should hardly matter in a proper simulator. You don't build a simulation by creating individual representation of all of its elements (cars in this case), but rather create a general set of rules (physics) and subject everything to those rules.
Not necessarily true. When you're talking less than 700 hp (typically; power/weight counts far more), a car can lay down a lot of power before 60 mph, it's not just futile tire spinning.
On the GT, more time to test a car should hardly matter in a proper simulator. You don't build a simulation by creating individual representation of all of its elements (cars in this case), but rather create a general set of rules (physics) and subject everything to those rules.
Not necessarily true. When you're talking less than 700 hp (typically; power/weight counts far more), a car can lay down a lot of power before 60 mph, it's not just futile tire spinning.
- 298
- Ghost_Drift1
- 2,073
- Newcastle, NSW, Australia
- mrvajj
The GTR? Wheelspin? Erm, nup - have another look.
- 298
- Ghost_Drift1
- 2,073
- Newcastle, NSW, Australia
- mrvajj
Oh come on, you made it sound like it was scrabbling its way past 60, not a bit of a chirp off the mark.
- 23,800
- Philippines
One other issue between US and UK times is that 0-100 km/h times are a few tenths slower than 0-60 mph times. That extra 2 mph may not sound like much, but for a 7 second car, that's around 3-4 tenths, and for a car with a shift at 60-62, it could be as much as half-a-second's difference.
Another issue is the track. I wasn't kidding about 60 foot times. Americans test on sticky roadways... US times are always faster than UK times or Australian times, which, even given the adjustments for the difference between 0-60 and 0-62, are about a few tenths to half a second slower due to the nature of testing surfaces and conditions (Australia is pretty damn hot). I can never match a US time. Hot weather saps power, and the tarmac conditions here don't really give you the extra grip you get from a hot drag-strip in the US.
Americans don't test on the racetrack? I know that Edmund's, RoadandTrack, Car And Driver and Motortrend test on a dragstrip... I'm not sure which one it was, but one magazine fried an Evo's clutch in just one day of drag-racing. That's not something you can do on the street... not legally. Nobody tests on the street. And nobody closes off the back straight of Daytona for 0-60 testing (though some magazine "races" happen on ovals... though these are tests of highly modified cars).
I can always match Australian/UK times. Even exceed a few. Still trying to figure out what quirk of physics allows US testers to cut sub-7 times in the NC Miata... possibly a very sticky launch pad and a catastrophic 7000 rpm launch (on normal roads, you can't use any more than 4500 rpms... too much wheelspin).
---
I'm not sure which mags test two-up... but in my experience it's worth anywhere from a half-second to whole seconds (on slower cars). Fun fact: An 800cc Suzuki Alto takes 16 seconds to get to 100 km/h. With two people on board? Over 20.
---
And... the tire recommendation for the Ford GT in Gran Turismo 5 Prologue is off. We've discussed this elsewhere, and those recommendations were put in the manual before the last round of updates, which gives you more traction on S-tires than before. The correct tire is N3s.
---
Unless you can do a test back-to-back on Daytona's back straight with the same car, same tires and same conditions (I'm assuming Turismo's Daytona is warm, not hot), with the same launch technique... there's no way of verifying the accuracy of Turismo's acceleration numbers. The best you can do is, as suggested by scleeve, is compare 60-100 mph times, as these more accurately translate, since wheelspin hardly ever comes into play there, and it's a more accurate model of pure acceleration and power.
---
Expecting a video game to give you anything like realistic times for anything is a futile endeavor. Drag times have so many variables, from air pressure to humidity to heat to the millions of things affecting traction that it's not always possible to get the exact same time out of the same car on different days... especially if it's powerful. And lap times? If you were suicidal enough to drive as fast in real life as you can in a video game, then you ought to be a professional touring car driver. And even then, the little quirks... cold tires, hot tires, tires with too many heat cycles, patches of dust here, traces of oil there, the variations in the layer of rubber on the racing line, marbles(!) almost ensure that you will have a spectacular off if you try to drive in real life exactly as you do in-game.
Another issue is the track. I wasn't kidding about 60 foot times. Americans test on sticky roadways... US times are always faster than UK times or Australian times, which, even given the adjustments for the difference between 0-60 and 0-62, are about a few tenths to half a second slower due to the nature of testing surfaces and conditions (Australia is pretty damn hot). I can never match a US time. Hot weather saps power, and the tarmac conditions here don't really give you the extra grip you get from a hot drag-strip in the US.
Americans don't test on the racetrack? I know that Edmund's, RoadandTrack, Car And Driver and Motortrend test on a dragstrip... I'm not sure which one it was, but one magazine fried an Evo's clutch in just one day of drag-racing. That's not something you can do on the street... not legally. Nobody tests on the street. And nobody closes off the back straight of Daytona for 0-60 testing (though some magazine "races" happen on ovals... though these are tests of highly modified cars).
I can always match Australian/UK times. Even exceed a few. Still trying to figure out what quirk of physics allows US testers to cut sub-7 times in the NC Miata... possibly a very sticky launch pad and a catastrophic 7000 rpm launch (on normal roads, you can't use any more than 4500 rpms... too much wheelspin).
---
I'm not sure which mags test two-up... but in my experience it's worth anywhere from a half-second to whole seconds (on slower cars). Fun fact: An 800cc Suzuki Alto takes 16 seconds to get to 100 km/h. With two people on board? Over 20.
---
And... the tire recommendation for the Ford GT in Gran Turismo 5 Prologue is off. We've discussed this elsewhere, and those recommendations were put in the manual before the last round of updates, which gives you more traction on S-tires than before. The correct tire is N3s.
---
Unless you can do a test back-to-back on Daytona's back straight with the same car, same tires and same conditions (I'm assuming Turismo's Daytona is warm, not hot), with the same launch technique... there's no way of verifying the accuracy of Turismo's acceleration numbers. The best you can do is, as suggested by scleeve, is compare 60-100 mph times, as these more accurately translate, since wheelspin hardly ever comes into play there, and it's a more accurate model of pure acceleration and power.
---
Expecting a video game to give you anything like realistic times for anything is a futile endeavor. Drag times have so many variables, from air pressure to humidity to heat to the millions of things affecting traction that it's not always possible to get the exact same time out of the same car on different days... especially if it's powerful. And lap times? If you were suicidal enough to drive as fast in real life as you can in a video game, then you ought to be a professional touring car driver. And even then, the little quirks... cold tires, hot tires, tires with too many heat cycles, patches of dust here, traces of oil there, the variations in the layer of rubber on the racing line, marbles(!) almost ensure that you will have a spectacular off if you try to drive in real life exactly as you do in-game.
- 4,555
- Australia
I saw this Kaz topic come up in a debate about the SL55 (which he also owns). This fact doesn't really come into the debate because he would use another GT instead of one of his ones because he probably would not be willing to fork out his own money for a new clutch, set of tires ect. that would come about after a period of hight performance testing---just so you know.
I'm glad that you got the right times with the freshly fitted times though....good work 👍
- 454
- Australia
true , but i wouldnt mind if say an automatic version of a car with traction on the good side could be replicated (time wise) in the game. And if say a ZO6 ran a real time of say 3.9secs, you should with after 10 try's, get close enough to this number....say 4.1.....4.2......and just maybe even crack 3.9 after dedicating an hour to perfect launch and shifting:tup:
loll some of you guys really have no clue what you're talking about. Manufacturers don't test 0-60 times on a dyno. If that were true, the cars would be at least twice as fast. As for manufacturers posting numbers that are off, it's true with some and false with others. BMW says the 335i does 0-100kph in 5.3 seconds but ive gotten my car to do 4.7 very easly. So i think the best way to measure is have a real world number, and try to replicate it in the game.
One thing you guys should keep in mind is that at the end of the day, GT is still a game.. so don't compare it to real life because it will never be 100% accurate.
One thing you guys should keep in mind is that at the end of the day, GT is still a game.. so don't compare it to real life because it will never be 100% accurate.
- 133
- GTP_blkvzgo
Ok guys I decided to do 0-100 km/h comparison tests between GT5
and Forza 2. In Forza 2, I used the Sunset Peninsula track in Free Ride, all aids off except for ABS, held the throttle and e-brake together, and released the e-brake when I started the stopwatch. In GT5, I used High Speed Ring in Time Trial, again all aids off except for ABS, Pro physics, but this time for FWD cars I had to use the brake instead of the e-brake, because the game, unlike Forza, engaged the clutch when I pressed the throttle and the e-brake at the same time while stopped, but a little experimenting showed no noticable difference between using the brake or the e-brake. By the way, before someone tells me this, I know that my methodology isn't perfect.
Car (x~y) - GT time, normal tyres - GT time, freshly-fitted tyres - Forza 2 time
Aston Martin DB9 (N3~S1) - 6.20 - 5.22 - 5.45
MINI Cooper S (N2~N3) - 8.50 - 8.65 - 8.30
Honda NSX Type-R (S1~S2) - 5.35 - 5.30 - 5.65
Golf V GTI (N2~N3) - 8.00 - 7.90 - 8.30
Ferrari F430 (N3~S1) - 5.30 - 4.60 - 4.70
Here's one more test, only GT5 this time, car - BMW M3
N1 - 6.45
N2 - 6.35
N3 - 6.25
S1 - 5.62
S2 - 5.40
Notice the huge gap between N3 and S1 tyres? You can also see it in the DB9 and F430 times of the previous test. If you ask me, it's wrong to specify a car's stock tyres as N3~S1, it's awfully different from N1~N2, N2~N3 and S1~S2. Although I think they'll get rid of this system in GT5, because there won't be any need to specify normal and freshly-fitted tyres for each car when we get real-time tyre wear.
and Forza 2. In Forza 2, I used the Sunset Peninsula track in Free Ride, all aids off except for ABS, held the throttle and e-brake together, and released the e-brake when I started the stopwatch. In GT5, I used High Speed Ring in Time Trial, again all aids off except for ABS, Pro physics, but this time for FWD cars I had to use the brake instead of the e-brake, because the game, unlike Forza, engaged the clutch when I pressed the throttle and the e-brake at the same time while stopped, but a little experimenting showed no noticable difference between using the brake or the e-brake. By the way, before someone tells me this, I know that my methodology isn't perfect.Car (x~y) - GT time, normal tyres - GT time, freshly-fitted tyres - Forza 2 time
Aston Martin DB9 (N3~S1) - 6.20 - 5.22 - 5.45
MINI Cooper S (N2~N3) - 8.50 - 8.65 - 8.30
Honda NSX Type-R (S1~S2) - 5.35 - 5.30 - 5.65
Golf V GTI (N2~N3) - 8.00 - 7.90 - 8.30
Ferrari F430 (N3~S1) - 5.30 - 4.60 - 4.70
Here's one more test, only GT5
this time, car - BMW M3N1 - 6.45
N2 - 6.35
N3 - 6.25
S1 - 5.62
S2 - 5.40
Notice the huge gap between N3 and S1 tyres? You can also see it in the DB9 and F430 times of the previous test. If you ask me, it's wrong to specify a car's stock tyres as N3~S1, it's awfully different from N1~N2, N2~N3 and S1~S2. Although I think they'll get rid of this system in GT5, because there won't be any need to specify normal and freshly-fitted tyres for each car when we get real-time tyre wear.
It should be 6.0 for DC5-R, and 5.96 for the spec without air-condition in Japan.
- 924
With the 0-60mph times, it's all about the launch. GT5P can't simulate launch control and/or wheelspin, which is why your times are off. But the whole tire experiment makes complete sense. Obviously, faster cars will have better tires in real life. By putting N tires on something like a Corvette or an F430, you are going to get less grip, worse acceleration and a seriously low top speed. The race tires in GT5P are similar to slick Y tires, which have amazing grip and a high speed rating. GT5P is a very good simulator, but it lacks some of the components of real life cars.
- 454
- Australia
I dont get why you wouldnt acheive the full top speed with a standard tyre???
In my younger more foolish days we maxed out (indicated 105mph) a 1969 ZC Ford Fairlane on the freeways around Sydney many times......on re-tread (re-capped) tyres !!!!!. Besides top speeds got nothing to do with tyres (maybe rolling resistance and the whole aerodynamics of having superwide tyres etc) unless your talkin Quarter mile terminal speeds, in which case the more grip the lower the terminal speed in most cases.
- 133
- GTP_blkvzgo
Ok guys I did another test, but I'll give the explanations after we see the results. Car - Lotus Elise 111R, track - Eiger Nordwand, Pro physics, aids off, ABS=1. I decided to do time trials to see my laptimes with different tyres, ranging from N1 to S2, I did 3 laps with each, then one more final lap. Ok, the results:
N1 1'25.308
N2 1'23.504
N3 1'22.317
S1 1'18.432
S2 1'17.420
And the differences between the laptimes:
N1 - 1.8sec - N2 - 1.2sec - N3 - 3.8sec - S1 - 1sec - S2
As I already observed after the first test, there is a HUGE gap between N3 and S1 tyres, but since no one paid much attention to that part, I decided to make a test dedicated to just that. First of all, I'm not saying this is unrealistic, because it's not easy to judge the level of grip of a fictional tyre in a videogame. But we have to remember that this game's manual has a list of optimal tyres for each car, which are supposed to represent the factory-fitted tyres. And we all know that for each car we get 2 tyre choices - normal tyres and freshly-fitted tyres. Now I believe that by saying "normal tyres" the developers meant factory tyres with some mileage on them, thus they're not "freshly-fitted tyres" anymore, and since they have worn out a little, they have a little less grip. Now this is entirely true if a car's optimal tyres are listed as N1~N2, N2~N3 or S1~S2, because as we can see from the test, the laptime difference between tires of the same class (N or S) is minimal. But what if some car's optimal tyres are given as N3~S1, as it is for cars like BMW M3, Ferrari F430, 599, Corvette Z06 and many others. Is it realistic that there should be a nearly 4 second difference between the laptimes of the same car on a short track like Eiger? Believe me, the difference on Suzuka will be much higher. Also, even if we do acknowledge that cars like the Evo and the GT-R come with grippier tyres than ordinary cars, are they THAT much grippier that the ones that the F430 has? I don't think so. Solution? Lessen the difference between N and S class, or enlarge the N class by adding N4 and N5, or just implement a new system similar to Forza and GT2 - Normal, Sport, Racing Hard, Racing Medium, Racing Soft, where Normal will represent each car's stock tyre, with it's own parameters, without any need for a list. Now I'd like to hear your opinions.
N1 1'25.308
N2 1'23.504
N3 1'22.317
S1 1'18.432
S2 1'17.420
And the differences between the laptimes:
N1 - 1.8sec - N2 - 1.2sec - N3 - 3.8sec - S1 - 1sec - S2
As I already observed after the first test, there is a HUGE gap between N3 and S1 tyres, but since no one paid much attention to that part, I decided to make a test dedicated to just that. First of all, I'm not saying this is unrealistic, because it's not easy to judge the level of grip of a fictional tyre in a videogame. But we have to remember that this game's manual has a list of optimal tyres for each car, which are supposed to represent the factory-fitted tyres. And we all know that for each car we get 2 tyre choices - normal tyres and freshly-fitted tyres. Now I believe that by saying "normal tyres" the developers meant factory tyres with some mileage on them, thus they're not "freshly-fitted tyres" anymore, and since they have worn out a little, they have a little less grip. Now this is entirely true if a car's optimal tyres are listed as N1~N2, N2~N3 or S1~S2, because as we can see from the test, the laptime difference between tires of the same class (N or S) is minimal. But what if some car's optimal tyres are given as N3~S1, as it is for cars like BMW M3, Ferrari F430, 599, Corvette Z06 and many others. Is it realistic that there should be a nearly 4 second difference between the laptimes of the same car on a short track like Eiger? Believe me, the difference on Suzuka will be much higher. Also, even if we do acknowledge that cars like the Evo and the GT-R come with grippier tyres than ordinary cars, are they THAT much grippier that the ones that the F430 has? I don't think so. Solution? Lessen the difference between N and S class, or enlarge the N class by adding N4 and N5, or just implement a new system similar to Forza and GT2 - Normal, Sport, Racing Hard, Racing Medium, Racing Soft, where Normal will represent each car's stock tyre, with it's own parameters, without any need for a list. Now I'd like to hear your opinions.
- 23,800
- Philippines
The tire recommendations were made in an earlier spec of GT5P... when Sports tires had less grip.
Sports tires have much more grip in Spec III. In fact, the difference between N and S became quite pronounced, as did the difference between R and S. Which means staggering between classes doesn't quite work, anymore.
I sincerely hope they rectify this by adding more intermediate tire types in the final game.
Sports tires have much more grip in Spec III. In fact, the difference between N and S became quite pronounced, as did the difference between R and S. Which means staggering between classes doesn't quite work, anymore.
I sincerely hope they rectify this by adding more intermediate tire types in the final game.
- 20,145
- Australia
- VIPERGTS01
The Sports tyres got so much extra grip August 1st (thats when S tyres got the boost, still during spec II) that checking some of my recorded fast laps on Eiger the DC5 Type R got a 2 second gain in the hot lap (using S2's for both tests) after the update.
The N3-S1 gap is much larger now than it used to be, the manuals recommended tyre choice for each car is clearly wrong now, it was never updated.
I really hope they sort the tyre issue out for GT5.
The N3-S1 gap is much larger now than it used to be, the manuals recommended tyre choice for each car is clearly wrong now, it was never updated.
I really hope they sort the tyre issue out for GT5.
- 924
Different tires have different speed ratings. You can break the speed ratings in real life, but with potentially disastrous consequences. True: better tires = more grip = better handling, and higher-rated tires tend to have better grip as well. for example, you would never put cheap michelins on your porsche 911 turbo (always pilot sport ps2 or cup). However, in simulators, like GT, tires come pre-programmed with some sort of code telling you the speed rating, and it's harder to accelerate at high speeds with worse tires. If only they put the VW test track in GT5P, then you could see what i'm talking about.
If you're talking acceleration, then it's all about the launch. As i said earlier, there is no launch control in GT5P. There is no wheelspin. You will always get relatively constant 0-60 times, but demontrated by the tests, you will get quicker times with better tires. Now, this still doesn't explain why the times are a full second behind reported real life times...
