787b

  • Thread starter Thread starter Colinod
  • 85 comments
  • 10,390 views
C

Colinod

Messages
89
I love this car. The best sounding one in the game IMO. (The mustang is a close second, along with the nsx.) But why does it have 5 gears? Was there a regulation in lemans back then so it could only have 5 gears?
 
No, there was no rule to limit cars to 5 gears back then.
 
Sometimes, is better to use 5 gears than 6, because the car have good and linear torque, so you don't have to reduce a one more gear, it is easier to select the right gear to the corner, and you doesn't waste weight in one more gear.
 
One less thing to go wrong in the car too. A lot of time at Le Mans is spent in one gear so the benefits of having more, closely spaced gears over fewer, far apart gears are less apparent.
 
It won.

But as amp rightly said, 6 gears isn't always best, or simply not always needed. 5 speed boxes were a lot more common in higher powered sportscars at the time as well.
 
I haven't switched GT3 on in well over a year.
 
I think you'll find because of the very broad powerband of the 26B motor they used, they really didn't need a sixth gear. Driving the car in the game is sweet, because you can just wind up from 3,000 rpm to redline, and it pulls the whole way. No turbo lag (Escudo, anybody?). Plus a 9,000rpm redline gives it plenty of legs as well.

More gears in a transmission are beneficial for cars with narrower power-bands. I don't think it was really necessary for the 787B.

IIRC, wasn't it a Porsche gearbox - and a synchro one at that?
 
Oh the escudo made me know what turbo lag was. I didn't know it till it was exaggerated on that car. I never do top speeds with my 787b, I just gear it to max at 190-200 for tracks. I like the engine, how acceleration linearly increases as the revs rise.

Oh yeah. To ask 2 questions in one topic, which car has 7 gears in this game? there are accomodations in the transmission menu for it. :confused:
 
GT3 Champ
How fast does your 787B go? Because I can make it go faster.
Click to expand...
That's a pretty bold statement. This lap at midfield was done in 54.070 seconds. Its not mine, but I bet you can't make your 787 go faster.

Colinod
Oh yeah. To ask 2 questions in one topic, which car has 7 gears in this game? there are accomodations in the transmission menu for it. :confused:
Click to expand...
There are no cars with 7 gears in GT3.
 
The gear ratio adjustment screen in your 'change settings' menu does have a slider for a seventh gear, but daan is correct - there are no 7 speed cars in the game. I guess maybe they had planned to have some in the game, but didn't end up putting them in. Who knows.

I run my 787B's with a top speed of 220 - 230mph (360 - 370kph). I find it gives the car an edge against cars with a 200mph (320kph) top speed. At those settings the gears are still close enough to punt through corners pretty quick. The only time I have to use gears differently to a 6 speed car is in tight corners that would be low 2nd gear for a 6 speed, where I have to drop to 1st for engine braking. Once I apex the corner I'll shift back up to 2nd and accelerate out - it has plenty of torque all the way up to redline, so I rarely ever have a lag problem with it.

I reckon the best part about driving the 787B is top of 4th gear on a long straight, right as you crack over 9,000rpm and the thing screams like a banshee. Mmm.:drool: [Wipe up drool][/Wipe up drool]

http://www5f.biglobe.ne.jp/~ryon2/787b/suzuka/787b_002.mpg
 
No way its na, there is a boost gauge, even when you omit the stage one you can put on it. Oh yeah, the video is a new record to beat, I can beat the F090/S on laguna seca with the 787b after all.
 
Colinod
No way its na, there is a boost gauge, even when you omit the stage one you can put on it. Oh yeah, the video is a new record to beat, I can beat the F090/S on laguna seca with the 787b after all.
Click to expand...

The standard 787B is NA. There is no debate about that. If you're lapping quicker in the 787B than in an 'F1' car then you're not driving the 'F1' car properly. The F1 car should be several seconds a lap quicker on most tracks, including Laguna Seca.
 
amp88
The standard 787B is NA. There is no debate about that. If you're lapping quicker in the 787B than in an 'F1' car then you're not driving the 'F1' car properly. The F1 car should be several seconds a lap quicker on most tracks, including Laguna Seca.
Click to expand...

I didn't try that hard with the F1. But on the F090/S, I got my the /S winning by 3 seconds.

Oh yeah, I beat that midfield lap that daan posted.

daan
That's a pretty bold statement. This lap at midfield was done in 54.070 seconds. Its not mine, but I bet you can't make your 787 go faster.
Click to expand...

I can take a photo later on, I still have the race on. and paused. I think that I got around 52.2xx seconds. But I did drive way more smoothly than the fellow in that video, I had no driver "aids" (they hinder your preformance I mean.), medium tires, and I omitted the stage one turbo that you can buy.

amp88
The standard 787B is NA. There is no debate about that.
Click to expand...

Yes there is. I don't know if it is true to life 100% but the stock 787B in the game is turbocharged. you know, it DOES have a boost gauge!. the wankel rotary is high output but come on, 2.5 liter pushing out 72X hp is going beyond the NA F1 realm! ( 3.5 liter V10 with 700+ hp.)

P.S. I do love the screaming sound beyond the redline. I know when to shift (at the rev limiter) by this sound.
 
Colinod
Yes there is. I don't know if it is true to life 100% but the stock 787B in the game is turbocharged. you know, it DOES have a boost gauge!. the wankel rotary is high output but come on, 2.5 liter pushing out 72X hp is going beyond the NA F1 realm! ( 3.5 liter V10 with 700+ hp.)

P.S. I do love the screaming sound beyond the redline. I know when to shift (at the rev limiter) by this sound.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_787B

Wikipedia
The 787B's 4-rotor Wankel powerplant was specifically developed for this race and featured Peripheral Porting in order to achieve the high levels of power from a naturally aspirated motor. (Road cars utilizing two-rotor engines, such as the Mazda RX-7, more often use turbochargers to obtain a high power output.)
Click to expand...

Wikipedia
One engineer stated that the car could develop more than 930hp with a redline around 10,500rpm.
Click to expand...

It's not turbocharged. Wankel engines as a rule of thumb have a much higher specific output (power/unit displacement) than conventional internal combustion engines. For example, the Mazda RX-8 has a 1.3 litre NA engine producing 247bhp in its most powerful standard form. That's a specific output of 190 bhp/litre. For comparison, a Subaru Impreza with a standard 2 litre turbocharged internal combustion engine would be producing roughly 155 bhp/litre.

P.S. Current F1 engines are 2.4 litre V8s producing in the realm of 720bhp. That's 300 bhp/litre from a naturally aspirated V8. The 787B's power output doesn't seem so unrealistic now does it? 3.5 litre V10s were in F1 in the early '90s. The last V10s were 3.0 litres and the most powerful was the Honda which was reputed to produce 1000bhp at the end of its life. That's 333 bhp/litre.

edit: Let's see that picture of your 787B time...
 
Colinod
I can take a photo later on, I still have the race on. and paused. I think that I got around 52.2xx seconds. But I did drive way more smoothly than the fellow in that video, I had no driver "aids" (they hinder your preformance I mean.), medium tires, and I omitted the stage one turbo that you can buy.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I have a hard time believing you beat Flinx - who also had no driver aids - at all, let alone by 2 seconds (and the all-time 787B/Midfield record is a 54.0).

Going to need a video of that one.
 
I dont find it unbelievable. He even had a large adavantage on me down the straight, hitting 160-170 by the friggin bridge, and 217 near the end of the straight!!! (personally, I couldn't do that speed, even with the stage one turbo.)

I chose to leave the turbo off, to give extra driveability, something the man iin the video did not have.

Sorry all I have is pics. I got a 1:02.324 (that's probably not it, I have horrible short-term memory, I just looked at the pic.)

Honestly, if that's the record, we need more people trying the 787B at midfield.

Here you go fellas, and thanks for the correction amp88, I'm still wondering why the stock B has the gauge though, and an audible BOV sound.

http://s5.photobucket.com/albums/y1...worldrecordtime.jpg&refPage=&imgAnch=imgAnch1

EDIT: excuse the last lap time, I needed a wee bit of rest.

And I couldn't attach it to my post, too much space it needed, even though I converted it.
 
First of all, balls to your '52 second time, you haven't lapped the track in under 62 seconds. You picture proves that your not on that level with a best run time 10 seconds off what you claimed you could do.

Secondly you shouldn't be double posting, let alone triple posting, if you hit quote instead of edit by mistake just press the back button. And don't make another post to apologise, if you do make another post by mistake edit that instead.
 
Colinod
I dont find it unbelievable. He even had a large adavantage on me down the straight, hitting 160-170 by the friggin bridge, and 217 near the end of the straight!!! (personally, I couldn't do that speed, even with the stage one turbo.)

I chose to leave the turbo off, to give extra driveability, something the man iin the video did not have.

Sorry all I have is pics. I got a 1:02.324 (that's probably not it, I have horrible short-term memory, I just looked at the pic.)

Honestly, if that's the record, we need more people trying the 787B at midfield.

Here you go fellas, and thanks for the correction amp88, I'm still wondering why the stock B has the gauge though, and an audible BOV sound.

http://s5.photobucket.com/albums/y1...worldrecordtime.jpg&refPage=&imgAnch=imgAnch1
Click to expand...

That picture at best shows a 1'02.324 lap, which the last time I looked was 62.324 seconds, a good 8 seconds off the lap Amp posted up. Which lets be honest is not even close.

Additionally we have no way of knowing how clean that lap was or the exact spec of the car as it ran.

I have to say until I see a video or AR Max replay of your claimed 52 second lap that I simply will not believe you.

Regards

Scaff
 
Flinx got 54 seconds

You got 62 seconds.

You're not beating Flinx even if you install the turbo. Without the turbo, you're nowhere.
 
Oh 52 seconds, somehow I read long ago that it was 1:04. hehe time to get on the playstation I guess!
And the best I could muster out of me for today is 55. With super soft tires, which flinx probably used too.
Tomorrow I will do better, just not in the mood to really get concentration.
 
54 seconds is mad! I think the best I've ever done on Midfield with the 787B was a low 58 second lap, on soft racing tyres. Of course, my settings are about as professional and precise as trying to play sniper with a nuclear warhead... and so is my driving. :dunce: Me thinks I might have to give it another try. :sly:

As for the 787B - in real life it is/was naturally aspirated. Each rotor bank had its own intake with a variable length 'trumpet'. The four intake trumpets were controlled by cable, and varied length with engine RPM and throttle position. At low RPM the intake throats were extended full length to create a 'ram' effect of the incoming air - this helps with low rpm torque. As rpm climbed the throat length was shortened to decrease air resistance and improve intake breathing, hence increasing top end horsepower.

Boring, but this is the cable pulley for the intake system.
787_016.jpg


The intake system from one angle:
26b_large.jpg


From another angle:
26b_1.jpg


The... erm... business end:
787_20.jpg


A better view of the business end:
787_21.jpg


The office:
787b_cockpit.jpg


Without the wing, it's a damned small car:
t787_race_car_side1.jpg


And just because it's so freakin' sexy:
787.corner.large.jpg
 
Colinod
Hmm, who is this flinx and what make you guys so sure that I can't beat him?
Click to expand...

Flinx is one of the best. And Flinx is one of the best.
 
Flinx is one of the fastest, if not the fastest, GT3 drivers out there.

See how high up you can get here

Edit: I've just noticed I got a 57.9 with no turbo installed. What's your best with no turbo? 62.something seconds?
 
Colinod
Hmm, who is this flinx and what make you guys so sure that I can't beat him?
Click to expand...
Because he's consistently up there with the best if not the best, and he backs all his times up with replay files posted online. I consider myself to be pretty good, but the gulf between pretty good and damn fantastic is, as I at one time discovered, bigger than you might expect. It'd be like me coming here with no one knowing me and cliaming I'm better at basketball than Michael Jordan* ever was and providing no proof. People just won't, nor should they believe it.

*I'm not nearly as good as him at basketball btw.
 

Similar threads

NAKIDREAPER
Shifting issues with update 1.52
Replies
2
Views
2K
NAKIDREAPER
NAKIDREAPER
MIE1992
Pokemon thread, anyone?
Replies
2
Views
744
MIE1992
MIE1992
05XR8
Four on the floor
Replies
2
Views
2K
05XR8
05XR8
cleanLX
Transmission Tuning... Love it.
Replies
1
Views
2K
Meythia
Meythia
F
Endurance Races?
Replies
8
Views
2K
NAXEHT
NAXEHT

Latest Posts

Back