962c a road car aaahhh! Angry

[CJ1045]

Ehm, am I missing something or are people completely unaware that there is something called BoP that's buffed up the 962?

Right now with 130% it's a bit shy of 800bhp, which isn't too bad next to the other Group Cs (in fact it has more than the Mazda 787B).

Oh and newsflash, it's the lightest as well with only 850kg.

Well, on Le Mans the 962 is getting crucified by the Mazda on straightline speed and this in the the League race where BOP is on. In fact the 962 I was driving and the AI controlled car came next to last and last respectively. Nice to drive but needs BOP adjusting still higher to make it competitive.

Am loving the flypast at the start of the race, awesome!!

CJ

 

[K32]

Well, on Le Mans the 962 is getting crucified by the Mazda on straightline speed and this in the the League race where BOP is on. In fact the 962 I was driving and the AI controlled car came next to last and last respectively. Nice to drive but needs BOP adjusting still higher to make it competitive.

Am loving the flypast at the start of the race, awesome!!

CJ

Perhaps the 962 is more corner focused?

Also you need to notice that this is one of the older Group Cs, winning back LM back in 87, while all the other cars are younger. Nissan's R92CP monster is from 92, 787B comes from 91, and the C9 is from 89.

The only car that is close to Porsche in terms of era is the Jaguar.

P.S. I love the flyby too.

EDIT: Oh and one last thing, I just saw in @Tassie_tiger 's BoP spreadsheet that actually the 787B is the lightest, albeit by 20 kgs.

962 has the best braking, cornering and stability in the spreadsheet by a considerable margin so yeah, I guess it's the best for shorter circuits?

 

[CJ1045]

Perhaps the 962 is more corner focused?

Also you need to notice that this is one of the older Group Cs, winning back LM back in 87, while all the other cars are younger. Nissan's R92CP monster is from 92, 787B comes from 91, and the C9 is from 89.

The only car that is close to Porsche in terms of era is the Jaguar.

P.S. I love the flyby too.

EDIT: Oh and one last thing, I just saw in @Tassie_tiger 's BoP spreadsheet that actually the 787B is the lightest, albeit by 20 kgs.

962 has the best braking, cornering and stability in the spreadsheet by a considerable margin so yeah, I guess it's the best for shorter circuits?

Well it does brake and handle really nicely so that may well be the case. Will have to try on a turnier (Copyright) track.

CJ

 

[K32]

Well it does brake and handle really nicely so that may well be the case. Will have to try on a turnier (Copyright) track.

CJ

*Stefan Bellof suggests the Nurburgring as a "turnier circuit"*

 

[Nielsen]

The car is kind of disappointing for not being the Le Mans winning long tail. It doesn't fill the gap everyone wanted it to.

But road car? Good one.

 

[apff]

I'm not sure how they ran parity back in the day but you kind of have to expect that maybe the 962 wont be the fastest Group C in the game.

Off the top of my head...

the Jaguar is a 6.0 n/a V12

the Nissan is a 3.5 v8 twin turbo

the Sauber is a 5.0 v8 twin turbo

the new 962 is a 3.0 flat six twin turbo

the 787b is an n/a quad rotor of about 2.6 litres

So in that regard I dont think the 962 would be the fastest?

Back in the Grp C era, there was a total amoung of fuel for the race. So a car that run 1200hp in qualifying couldn’t afford that much power in race as it would run out of the fuel allocation. That’s how all those different engine layout could race against.
I’m not sure how this rule evolved when they moved ti the 3.5 NA engine from 1991.

 

[praiano63]

In my opinion the Porsche is an excelent car , very well balanced , no surprises , easy to drive fast , good sound , perfect cockpit view that allow you to race it like this being performant .... If the stock power is a problem just raise it .
With BOP the
Porsche is 793HP and 850 kg .
Mazda 787B is 775HP and 830kg.
They are in the same second around suzuka for example. It is just too steady , like a bit anaesthetized , too much for my taste . A quick tune will resolve it.

 

[AlanH49]

Ehm, am I missing something or are people completely unaware that there is something called BoP that's buffed up the 962?

Right now with 130% it's a bit shy of 800bhp, which isn't too bad next to the other Group Cs (in fact it has more than the Mazda 787B).

Oh and newsflash, it's the lightest as well with only 850kg.

I was just going to ask has anyone checked the power level with BoP on. All the Group C cars have 100-150bhp buffs to be competitive with modern LMP1 cars.

One of the reasons the 962 remained (relatively) competitive at Le Mans into the early ‘90’s. Was the fact they could turn the turbo boost upto 800bhp in qualifying trim.

The V12 Jaguars where stuck at 650-700bhp. The Mercedes V8TT was lightly turbocharged. They could run 720bhp in the race, 800bhp plus in qualifying. It was the Nissan and Toyota that where putting out 1000bhp in qualy. But they had poor fuel consumption so where always off the pace in race spec.

 

[ShiftingGears]

Looking at 1988 World Sportscar Championship qualifying results for tracks like Silverstone and Monza doesn't suggest that the 962C was that lacking in power.

 

[Tired Tyres]

Looking at 1988 World Sportscar Championship qualifying results for tracks like Silverstone and Monza doesn't suggest that the 962C was that lacking in power.

Qualification boost setting verses race boost to get the fuel consumption. Outright speed was not the problem. Efficiency by then was.

 

[CJ1045]

It really does depend on the track. I was next to last on the Le Mans race with no real errors and was second at Monza. The long straights at Le Mans really do hamper the 962 short tail. Ironically it was one of the two tracks added to the league series this update.

CJ

 

[crooky369]

The 962 was run in 'high downforce' spec at Le Mans once the chicanes appeared in 1990.

https://www.porscheroadandrace.com/doing-things-right-le-mans-1990/

As the article explains it was controversial at the time to not run the long tail but it was the better option.

 

[mwoodski]

The short-tail with the high rear wing is gonna have more drag....I figured this would be common knowledge by a typical player on GT, but I guess not...

 

[Tired Tyres]

The 962 was run in 'high downforce' spec at Le Mans once the chicanes appeared in 1990.

https://www.porscheroadandrace.com/doing-things-right-le-mans-1990/

As the article explains it was controversial at the time to not run the long tail but it was the better option.

Joest ran their 962's with the long tail the first year with the chicanes. Never a long enough straight for them to make up for the time they lost everywhere else.

 

[JR98]

Definitely too slow for Group C

 

[AlanH49]

In standard spec the other Group C cars actually have too much power. They’re running more than BoP spec with 900bhp+. The XJR-9LM for example has 914bhp as standard and 822bhp with BoP.

The 962C has 610bhp as standard. But you can up it to a more competitive 720bhp for the GT League races. In BoP spec it has 793bhp.

 

[Disco_Volante]

All this talk of the 962 being a road car makes me really want the Dauer 962. Such an awesome car. You guys want something OP? How about "a literal Group C car in N700" levels of OPness?

Too bad it's got too much downforce to be BoPd into the N class. It'd be the most useless car in the game.

Anyway, BoP fixes any and all power problems the 962 has. Plus, the other Group Cs are the low downforce spec, this one is the high downforce spec. So it's useless at Le Mans, but theoretically better everywhere else.

 

[AlanH49]

Well, on Le Mans the 962 is getting crucified by the Mazda on straightline speed and this in the the League race where BOP is on. In fact the 962 I was driving and the AI controlled car came next to last and last respectively. Nice to drive but needs BOP adjusting still higher to make it competitive.

Am loving the flypast at the start of the race, awesome!!

CJ

In GT League events there is no BoP. So as standard the 962C has 610bhp and the XJR-9LM, C9 & R92P an unrealistic 900bhp+. The 787B has 790BHP.

Up the power of the 962C to 720bhp and you can hit the front at Le Mans by lap three. That’s with RH tyres and stock set-up. Can easily lap under 3.30. Top speed is an unassisted 210mph+ before the first chicane, 220mph+ with a slipstream.

In BoP races all the Group C cars have around 800bhp.

 

[Nielsen]

So it's useless at Le Mans, but theoretically better everywhere else.

Meaning it doesn't fit in, making it useless in general.

 

[CJ1045]

In GT League events there is no BoP. So as standard the 962C has 610bhp and the XJR-9LM, C9 & R92P an unrealistic 900bhp+. The 787B has 790BHP.

Up the power of the 962C to 720bhp and you can hit the front at Le Mans by lap three. That’s with RH tyres and stock set-up. Can easily lap under 3.30. Top speed is an unassisted 210mph+ before the first chicane, 220mph+ with a slipstream.

In BoP races all the Group C cars have around 800bhp.

Thanks, did not know that.

CJ

 

[AleksandarSRB]

In GT League events there is no BoP. So as standard the 962C has 610bhp and the XJR-9LM, C9 & R92P an unrealistic 900bhp+. The 787B has 790BHP.

Up the power of the 962C to 720bhp and you can hit the front at Le Mans by lap three. That’s with RH tyres and stock set-up. Can easily lap under 3.30. Top speed is an unassisted 210mph+ before the first chicane, 220mph+ with a slipstream.

In BoP races all the Group C cars have around 800bhp.

I won race on Le Mans with stock 962 just with short gearing (330 kmh). Its phenomenal car, slower from all group C cars but super stable in corners thanks to the low power compared to other cars.

 

[Pururut]

Upgrade the power to 940 bhp! It's a blast.

It's the fastest Gr. 1 on a time trial around SSRX and got up to 375 kmh.
It was only the 4th fastest Gr.1 on a time trial around Dragon Trail.

But great to drive, brakes well, corners well, feels planted.

Bruh who cares the 787b when Alpine vgt can reach 480 kmh at ssrx?

 

[JR98]

Meaning it doesn't fit in, making it useless in general.

Didn’t realise being “useless” at one track means it’s useless overall, especially when the version we got isn’t even the Le Mans version.

Upgraded to 720HP (still way less than the other Group C’s) with everything else stock (and RH tyres) it can easily get a 3:32 Lap time and BOP’d I’d bet a sub 3:30 is easily done.

Completely stock with just 610 BHP low 6 minutes at the Nordschleife are easily doable, I got a 6:08 on my first attempt on RH tires and the stock setup.

 

[V1LR-GUE10]

The 962 C feels like 200 Ponies escaped. Feels slow compared to the other Group C’s completely stock....

 

[JR98]

The 962 C feels like 200 Ponies escaped. Feels slow compared to the other Group C’s completely stock....

It’s only because it’s the only Group C to come with the power it raced with. The other Group C’s (like most other GT’s) have way more power than they’re supposed to. BOP does add just under 200 BHP (610-793). Even with power increased to just 720 BHP its more than capable of keeping up with the other Group 1’s at least in GT League.

 

[Furinkazen]

Why did they put a road 962 in??? I'm angry. It doesn't drive as fast as the other group C cars... Even bop doesn't match real life race bhp raaahhh

Raaaaahhhhhhhh I've no idea what i'm talking about.

It's a 962C in regular circuit trim.

It's got a power that will vary slightly year to year but is correct at 620hp. Mulsanne Corner put it at 680hp max.

You know Group C cars didn't run at 900-1000hp usually right.... as they could only take a couple laps before the engine grenaded...

It also weighs about as much as your post count so wipes the floor with many other cars....

 

[Phaceless_Ph]

Guys, done some research, it is not the 1988 version of the 962C, not sure where they got this year from.

It is most likely to be chassis 962-002 as this car raced with the #1 more times than any other 962:

1985 Mugello 1000km
1985 Monza 1000km
1985 Silverstone 1000km
1985 24hrs Le Mans
1985 Brands Hatch 1000km
1985 Fuji 1000km
1986 Fuji 1000km

It's last race week/weekend appearance was as the #19 car at the 1987 24hrs Le Mans where the car was written-off in a huge practice accident.

1988 is possibly when Porsche may have restored the car (it may have been sold to Vern Schuppan, but what I've been told says otherwise), but everything appears to be 1985 spec, hence the perceived lack of power in comparison to the other Group C cars.

The 1985 962C had 610-620BHP in race trim while quali-trim was rumoured to have around 750-800bhp, it could be possible that the other Group C cars (mainly Nissan, Mercedes and Jaguar) have been added to the game in their quali-trim as there is no way those engines would have lasted 24hrs running those numbers for an efficiency based formula in 88-91.

This car is most definitely the 1985 spec 962C, most likely 962-002.

 

[Furinkazen]

Guys, done some research, it is not the 1988 version of the 962C, not sure where they got this year from.

It is most likely to be chassis 962-002 as this car raced with the #1 more times than any other 962:

1985 Mugello 1000km
1985 Monza 1000km
1985 Silverstone 1000km
1985 24hrs Le Mans
1985 Brands Hatch 1000km
1985 Fuji 1000km
1986 Fuji 1000km

It's last race week/weekend appearance was as the #19 car at the 1987 24hrs Le Mans where the car was written-off in a huge practice accident.

1988 is possibly when Porsche may have restored the car (it may have been sold to Vern Schuppan, but what I've been told says otherwise), but everything appears to be 1985 spec, hence the perceived lack of power in comparison to the other Group C cars.

The 1985 962C had 610-620BHP in race trim while quali-trim was rumoured to have around 750-800bhp, it could be possible that the other Group C cars (mainly Nissan, Mercedes and Jaguar) have been added to the game in their quali-trim as there is no way those engines would have lasted 24hrs running those numbers for an efficiency based formula in 88-91.

This car is most definitely the 1985 spec 962C, most likely 962-002.

I thought the same, but it's actually 962-004

 

[Phaceless_Ph]

I thought the same, but it's actually 962-004

Good spot, but either way, it's not a 1988-spec car, it's quite clearly been restored to it's original 1985 spec.

 

[Furinkazen]

Good spot, but either way, it's not a 1988-spec car, it's quite clearly been restored to it's original 1985 spec.

Yes, but restored to that spec in 1988... PD seem to be using date car put into that spec rather than original year.