- 28
- United States
Hmmmm... I'm trying to come up with a way to statistically compare cars in GT5 by their handling and acceleration abilites. I'm lumping those two stats together because (I hope) they can be revealed together in the same "test". For example:
I noted the top speeds of two cars with uniform set-ups, and then recorded my best laps with those cars at the Suzuka circuit. I compared the lap times against the "ideal" time (i.e. how fast each car would go the distance of Suzuka if it was a straight line). In my head, how close to their "ideal" time the cars were in the "real" lap was an extremely crude measure of their handling and acceleration abilities. This proved to be stupid and pointless for reasons too numerous to post here.
It should be obvious by this point that I'm not a race car driver or statistician. However dubious in validity any test I could come up with might be, I still think it would be fun to try.
I've thought about ranking cars by their power-to-weight ratio, by their power-to-"footprint" ratio, and other factors and then averaging the rankings out, but I can't see an obviously logical way to do this.
Any thoughts? I like the idea of creating a list of cars which would not necessarily be weighted by their top speed, and would not include my own subjective "I'll give that a 7 out of 10 rating" type of thing. If the Lotus Elise 111R RM handles/accelerates better than my beloved Murch, the test will hopefully bear this out and I'll just have to live with it.
DISCLAIMERS
- As I stated above, I realize that no test I could come up with, however complex, could ever accurately compare these cars by any specs. This is just for fun.
- I know that the respective set-ups for the test cars will be an issue (i.e. stock vs. modified, tranny settings, etc.). I'll make sure the oil is clean and the trannies are set up in similar ratios, and the test will account for the current HP of each car, (to account for HP fluctuation).
- I did search the forms by "handling" and didn't find anything related. If there is an old thread and I missed it, I apologize.
Many thanks for reading this!
I noted the top speeds of two cars with uniform set-ups, and then recorded my best laps with those cars at the Suzuka circuit. I compared the lap times against the "ideal" time (i.e. how fast each car would go the distance of Suzuka if it was a straight line). In my head, how close to their "ideal" time the cars were in the "real" lap was an extremely crude measure of their handling and acceleration abilities. This proved to be stupid and pointless for reasons too numerous to post here.
It should be obvious by this point that I'm not a race car driver or statistician. However dubious in validity any test I could come up with might be, I still think it would be fun to try.
I've thought about ranking cars by their power-to-weight ratio, by their power-to-"footprint" ratio, and other factors and then averaging the rankings out, but I can't see an obviously logical way to do this.
Any thoughts? I like the idea of creating a list of cars which would not necessarily be weighted by their top speed, and would not include my own subjective "I'll give that a 7 out of 10 rating" type of thing. If the Lotus Elise 111R RM handles/accelerates better than my beloved Murch, the test will hopefully bear this out and I'll just have to live with it.
DISCLAIMERS
- As I stated above, I realize that no test I could come up with, however complex, could ever accurately compare these cars by any specs. This is just for fun.
- I know that the respective set-ups for the test cars will be an issue (i.e. stock vs. modified, tranny settings, etc.). I'll make sure the oil is clean and the trannies are set up in similar ratios, and the test will account for the current HP of each car, (to account for HP fluctuation).
- I did search the forms by "handling" and didn't find anything related. If there is an old thread and I missed it, I apologize.
Many thanks for reading this!