Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Gran Turismo 4' started by Zardoz, Apr 17, 2005.
You can buy them from the Pescarolo dealer.
Good to see someone testing the old GT1 cars too. Id like to see this test with the race cars untuned. IMO tuning race cars is sacrelige.
I imagine the R89C would be between the R92CP and the Jag.
And the Merc isn't the CLK LM though cos its got a V12. The LM was a V8 turbo.
IMO, a draw. Toyota GT-ONE and Pescarolo Playstation C60/Judd
Maybe it has something to do with the horsepower increase from the turbo, but in my own (very unscientific) A-spec testing at El Capitan (just because it's my favorite track) in Arcade mode, the Pescarolo Judd was one of the slowest. Decent handling but not enough power. Surprisingly, my fastest lap was in the R92CP.
Could be your testing method. I don't think that arcade mode allows you to truly get the feel for a cars potential.
Proper tuning on these monster cars can really make a difference on the track no matter what their HP.
I can pull a better time in my R8 than my R92CP (Used Black) on most tracks. And the Nissan is pushing around 100 more horse.
I'd have to agree with you PARAGON. My R8 is winning the 24hr race now, and i could never do that in the Nissan. It's probably better with top end.
On a slightly different topic - why are the Hp/Kg settings of the LMP cars in the game (Arcade Mode) so very different from the real-life settings of the LMP cars? For example, according to ultimatecarpage.com and a few other sites, these were the power & weight settings for some of the C-class cars:
Peugeot 905: 650Hp/ 750 Kg
Mazda 787B: 700 Hp/ 830 Kg
Jaguar XJR-9: 750 Hp/ 881 Kg
Sauber Mercedes C9: 720 Hp/ 905 Kg
I'm trying to compare these cars, and others within the C-class, but the game's Hp and Kg settings are not at all in line with the above settings. Again, according to a couple of web sites. Would anyone know why the settings are so very different from the real life settings? What am I missing here?
Well, if you look at the cars at the dealers, they'll be a bit different. The Mazda said 690hp for one example. It's just one of few bad aspects of the game.
I believe that the numbers listed in the Garage and race are the power/torque figures for the cars in qualifying trim. I believe that the dealership numbers are actual race trim, slightly de-tuned to complete the full 24hrs (given that power and reliability/durability share an inverse relationship). For example, one of the Sauber Mercedes C9 prototypes came close to the speed record in 1989 at 400km/h in qualifying trim, but that was with closed-off air ducts (to improve aero).
Unfortunately, this is all just a "best guess" on my part. I have no proof...
Cool, this is packed with info.
The GT40 does spin out quite a lot. The newer GT road car can even do better when it has R1's all around.
Really useful info there. Now i know which cars to use and not to use. (Was about to use 900hp Camaro race car, but changed my mind and used the rest of my credits to buy the Bimmer)
I know it's not a Le mans car but I wish the Chaparral 2J had been tested, it handles horribly but is ridiculously fast in a straight line and Le Mans would probably be the best track for it because of that.
I tried B-Spec Bob for the 150 mile enduro, but he kept hitting the ing wall at the end of turn 1! Needless to say, he was crap. They say things are much more satisfying when you do it yourself.
You might want to reconsider some of your childish opinions, the '04 Pescarolo isn't fast just because Polyphony saw fit to, in '04 it genuinely was the nearest competitor to the Audi R8's on raw pace along with the Dome S101, unless you mean the lacklustre '03 car which suffered from a rubbish engine.
Do not be surprised with your top two, they may be down on power but they've got the legs on the Group C cars in the corners in real life and in the game. If you don't believe me, refer to the grid positions of the cars at Le Mans when they competed here:
The real inaccuracies on here are:
The performance of the R92CP, this is an unknown at Le Mans because it never raced there, it stayed in the JSPC due to the ACO's antics changing the rules to benifit Peugeot(i.e. = cutting places for the C1 category). Although I do think it is the R90CP mis-labeled, in which case it would be on par with the Sauber, if not quicker as it beat the Sauber to pole one year.
Also I think you must be one of those who think Mazda's victory in 1991 was a big fluke, because that's a car which had pace on par with the Saubers, Jaguars and Peugeots that year.
The performance of the Bentley Speed 8 should be either on par with or quicker than the Audi R8 and the '04 Pescarolo, let's not forget that it WON the Le Mans 24hrs BEATING the R8 in its prime.
Your right, the Peugeot 905 should be the fastest here because during its active years, along with the Sauber C11(not the C9) & C291, Jaguar XJ-R 14 & Toyota TS010 where FASTER THAN F1 in it's prime, so its definately the fastest.
The reason why the Sauber C9 was hyped up was because it was the fastest car outright when it won at Le Mans (lap time pace, long run pace and speed trap), It clocked the fastest speed ever clocked during the race one year (don't get confused with the WM's 250+mph record in qualifying).
There is also no way in HELL the Minolta 89CV(it is actually the 89 car) should be that quick, it was completely useless at Le Mans, even the C2 class cars were quicker!
Sorry I had to correct your opinions in relation to the real life and game performances of the cars but I find that the way you opinionated your write up was quite narrow minded and almost fanboy-esque, come now, accusing Polyphony of tailoring the performance of the cars to their liking? Thats something I'd expect from a Forza fanboy on youtube, suggestions and opinions like this I find purely ridiculous as someone who's been to Le Mans every year since the age of 6.
But, I admire your thinking in pulling off an experiment like this, hopefully you'll do an ammended one for GT5 use the link I've given to look into the relative performances of the cars at Le Mans.
It's listed as a '89 car, yes, but it's an 88C-V. Which didn't actually run at Le Mans (though they ran an '89 model 88C in 1989).
GT4 - Toyota 88C-V; Note the blunt nose and pinched tail, side ducts, low oval exhaust...
Reality - Toyota 88C-V; Same as above
Reality - Toyota 89C-V; Note the pointy noise and extra bodywork behind the rear wheels, flat sides, mid-level circular exhaust...
(images from www.racingsportscars.com)
That's actually reasonably true. Take the 88C-V which was by all accounts a complete dog. Fastest car in GT4, even above cars it should have directly competed against but didn't because it was crap. 3.3s a lap of Fuji slower than a Sauber C9 (1988 Fuji 1000km, qualifying)...
There's examples all over the game of an ever-so-slight Japanese bias.
It was potentially fast, I remember them being faster than the Saubers the year before at Suzuka, I think the problem was setting the car up, the R92CP and the R89C were both genuinely fast in the right hands mind.
And kind of scary at 230mph down the mulsanne straight!!!!!!!!
They were actually barely able to touch 210mph, in the race no car went over 225mph, but obviously the superchipped qualifying cars were a different story.
It's worth noting that in real life the cars barely even hit 200mph between the chicanes but this is mainly due to the air restrictors.
Toyota's own 88C was faster than the 88C-V and, where the 88C-V was canned at the end of the year, the 88C was campaigned through 1989 as well.
Bit of a mystery why the 88C-V is the fastest car in GT4 beside the FGT really
Thought i'd add something on the Nissan R89C.
I noticed that in some endurance races,the Nissan R89C has much better tyre life than the R92CP(not on sarthe 2 though).However,it seems to be overall slightly slower than the R92CP.
That's because it is slower, the R92CP came in 1992 and the R89C came in 1989, so logic tells you that unless theres a significant rule change its is going to be faster.
i thought la sarthe 2 was the one without chicanes because if it wasnt i meant on the version without chicanes!!
Weird though since it is supposed to have great maneuverability (wikipedia )
because it had 2 snowmobile engines, that sucked air from from under the car, so they literally sucked the car onto the road.
Yes I know, I have speed trap data from the group C and recent years given by a friend.
They show that when the chicanes were first added(1990), the top speed in practice was up to 226.9MPH (Nissan R90CP) and in the race 218.9MPH (Jaguar XJR-12). b
Before this top speeds were: 248.0MPH (Sauber C9 1989, so yes, it should be fast than it actually is) in practice and 251.1MPH (W.M.P 88 1988) but in respect to cars in the game its 241.2MPH (Jaguar XJR-9 1989).
The current generation of Le Mans car will barely touch 210MPH in practice and race due to silly air restrictor rules, before the air restrictors the highest speed seen in the non-Group C era was 217.6MPH (Toyota TS020 GT1 1999).
The speeds from 1990 onwards are taken from the Hunaudires Restraunt (before the 1st chicane), the fastest point on the circuit.
its the same with any other lemans car i.e the r390 toyota gtone and a few others