Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Gran Turismo Sport' started by Racer283, Sep 4, 2018.
I bet we could find some of those lost footage back on MCD's youtube page.
Since you brought that up....
an OUUoOUoouUUUOoouUUUOouUUUooooOOOuuUUU review by MisterWaffles.
Put down the phone, don't dial 911. That's right, I didn't have a stroke writing the title of this review, I was simply demonstrating the sound of an increasingly popular invention known as an electric car. Love them or hate them, I already know most of you hate them, they're going to be the future whether you like it or not. Electric cars are being increasingly pushed onto us by various car manufacturers, while pretty much every standard road car today is simultaneously being hybridized. This process is a little something the automotive industry knows as the "Electric Car Revolution" that is only increasing in speed. Pretty soon it'll even be illegal to purchase gasoline or diesel automobiles in certain countries around the world.
In other words: that's right boomer, you're dinosaur juice V8 gas-guzzling hotrods are on their way out and in their place is a new breed of quiet, refined computers on wheels which really lack any sort of emotion or character. Just about the only advantage a normal electric car has over the gasoline equivalent in terms of driving performance is 100% of the power available at all times. This interesting performance point leads into an interesting idea that Audi themselves have considered taking a look at in the world of Gran Turismo Sport.
Racing is a sport that relies on gasoline at the moment. Take our dino-juice away and all of our fun fades away as our favourite machines become inoperable. I know it sucks to hear, but racing with gasoline is simply living on borrowed time. It's not a sustainable model for the future and as much as I love a good sounding V8, there won't be enough gas around forever to keep the song going. What Audi is saying though, is what if we could keep the drama and track action going while switching to renewable energy? Unfortunately we'll be losing the engine sound along the way, but a future with electric racing is better than a future with no racing at all. In an effort to support this vision of the future, Audi have given us just that, a Vision.
Meet the Audi E-Tron VGT.
The car itself is squat, wide, has aggressive aero features modeled on the IMSA '90 Quattro GTO racing car and comes in two flavours. The first flavour is an all-electric kettle with a huge battery pack that weighs the car down with the qualities of a lead belly, while the second flavour is a machine more akin to a hybrid DTM car which can take on LMP1 prototypes and weighs much less than the electric version. Both cars come equipped with Audi's signature Quattro all-wheel drive system, and the interior looks like it's ready to blast off to Mars after a day on the track. No matter which version of the Audi you prefer (you should prefer the Hybrid), it certainly looks the business. Don't forget the fact that this car sports the world's largest NACA duct, either.
Since we looked at the all-electric version this week, that's the one I will be referring to from now on. As referenced in the title, electric cars can make a handful of funny noises and the ones that electric racing cars make are certainly the most unique. They have much louder drivetrains than their road equivalents. The Audi in-game makes an array of sounds from a soft OuouoUOUOOUOouou in the lower rev-range to a high-pitched EEEEEEEEEEEEEEE at top-speed which can get somewhat irritating down Le Sarthe with no chicanes.
Performance out of the electric version is all sorts of weird. The acceleration is explosive and is unlike most else in the game, which is a characteristic of all-electric cars, and the car is even capable of topping out at an impressive 370 clicks. So yes, straight-line performance of the Audi VGT is certainly the car's strong point, but the rest of the performance unfortunately lets the car down somewhat.
The all-electric Audi VGT suffers from weak brakes and an odd handling tendency (Neither of these are helped by the car's enormous weight penalty over the hybrid version). Stopping power is sorely lacking in this car and caused a number of funny instances in Tuesday's lobby, such as everyone collectively missing and subsequently cutting Les Combes at Spa on the first lap. The other major gripe of the Audi is the car's massive understeer through high-speed sweepers and kinks. For many high-speed corners that most cars would be able to take flat, the Audi requires the driver to lift off or even brake before some of these corners to avoid understeering off the track.
So, is the future of electric racing bright with the Audi VGT? I wouldn't say quite yet. Over time, battery tech will improve and that will in turn cut down on the massive kerb penalty that having batteries brings. One day I bet we'll see electric formula cars that far surpass the performance of current formula cars. I for one, am glad I was born in a time where I could witness the awesomeness of conventional gasoline racers and still have a long time ahead to see where the future of electric mobility takes racing, but until that day we have cars like the Audi VGT to remind us that racing isn't going anywhere.
The first model of this car came out in GT6 as a part of the Vision Gran Turismo project but here in GT Sport it gain a Gr.3 counter part. This week we are taking a look at the Peugeot Vision Gran Turismo Gr.3. This weeks car is chosen by @AgentBlackDog
LOL congrats to whoever choose the Peugeot VGT GT3.
I've only driven it during the track experience and its horrid.
I expect the $450k Gr3 car would be a lot better... dont buy it, you should have half a dozen in DWG.
This week's car announced.
Is a Gr. 3 car.
Is a fictional car for Gran Turismo
Not the RX-Vision GT3
In all seriousness though, I seem to recall the Peugeot VGT being quite good in Gr. 3. Wasn't it the meta car for Nations/ Daily Race around Dragon Trail Gardens not too long ago?
It's the one Gr.3 car that lack an interior view.
Barely ever driven it, so will be interesting to see how it handles!
(Update: Lots of vids on the way, as well as an Audi review. Work is CRAZY busy right now, barely had a moment's break to myself. Hopefully I'll have all that for you guys soon)
The Peugeot Vision is the car people flock to for the long straight at Tokyo East tracks, but not the car people choose for Monza.
Let's find out why.
Pugs of Future’s Past
A review at 88 miles per hour (and struggling for grip) by MisterWaffles.
Peugeot is a brand that makes cars. That’s true! Sometimes they even decide to make fast ones when they’re feeling like it. They have a few GTIs, a couple rally specials and some really cracking endurance race cars when they really put their collective minds to it. Some legendary machines like the 905 and 908 are hallmarks of the Prototype class and they’re even planning a return in the future, originally with Rebellion but now as a solo attempt.
It was to the great delight of many a Gran Turismo player around the world when Peugeot announced they would be partaking in the VGT programme. It was an initiative by series creator Kazunori Yamauchi that was intended to push automotive design to its limits. The original Peugeot VGT was then released in 2015. The car was a strikingly-designed hypercar that married a prototype weight with a powerful engine to deliver a perfect 1:1 power to weight ratio. The car also used technology designed for the 208 Pikes Peaks rally car, which was very impressive.
If you ever drove the original in GT6, the car was ballistic. It was easily fast enough to rival the LMP cars in the game and rested at a neat 700PP. The car was a clear contender on the race track, but of course the jump to next-gen presented some hurdles for the car. In order to remain relevant on the track in the upcoming game, this VGT would need to put on some weight, loose the rally car tech, suffer a huge loss of power and gain fixed aero work. Despite the RCZ getting a homologation as well, the Peugeot VGT was put through the Group 3 treatment and became a fully bonafide GT3 car, somehow. Now, was Group 3 the right choice? Probably not. I’d argue the car could have used a Group 1/ Le Mans Hypercar treatment instead. That would have kept the character of the original machine intact better I think. No matter, we’ll just have to see how well it works in Group 3 then. (Seeing as Peugeot also went ahead and made ANOTHER VGT for Group 1 anyways, so no point in having 3 of them I guess.)
First off are the looks. The Group 3 VGT sports a nice factory Peugeot Sport paint job and the new fixed wing complements the design well. Other than that, little has changed externally besides the addition of some series-mandated tow hooks. A bit more on the base car itself though, I think it still holds up well despite now being a bit of a look into the future from the past. Normally concept cars don’t age very well, but I can still see this being an actual car that a company would produce in the early 2020s (with the addition of some side windows). It’s always been a nice looking car with an agressive stance, but it’s not the most beautiful or distinct car to come out fo the VGT programme. (It’s actually pretty safe by comparison.)
Now, the car looks good and makes a decent noise from the Pikes Peaks sourced V6, but how does it handle? It’s... well... complicated.
I mentioned this during the racing tonight but the car has an odd tendency to be too sticky on some tracks, while it’s too slippery on other tracks. We started out at St. Croix on Tuesday and the car was entirely too prone to understeer. It felt like you had to brake extra and lift extra compared to other cars in the Group 3 class. I drove the RCZ in the lobby a little later on and it felt like a huge weight was lifted off my shoulders when I was driving it by comparison.
However, the Peugeot also has a problem with being too slippery on certain tracks. I was having trouble getting the car to grip on Monza through certain corners like the Ascari chicanes. That was probably the worst feeling sector of any track I’ve ever driven with this car. In fact, the front end felt very wobbly through any sort of corner where I wasn’t picking up enough downforce. It’s almost like the car relies entirely upon downforce to work and there’s little to no mechanical grip.
So, on some tracks it’s too grippy and understeers in strange spots, while on other tracks the car is too slippery and doesn’t feel like it’s taking full advantage of its downforce. Either way I was unable to find a groove with the car all night and as a result I trailed off into uncompetitiveness as the races piled on.
One thing that really saves the car though is it has legs on a long straight. The turbocharged V6 from the 208 T16 is putting in mad work and it really shows. The Peugeot is a great car for any high-speed tracks if you can handle the understeer. The GT-R is similar in this regard but I find the Peugeot much easier to drive than the GT-R.
Maybe it’s the car, maybe I’m just bad with it. I’m not sure, but all I know is I’d rather drive a 458 GT3 any day of the week for my MR fix. It’s unfortunately a bit of a pig in my hands but the Peugeot probably still handles better than a GT-R or Huracan. For that I will give it a neutral. Definitely in my lower-end rankings for GT3 cars but not the worst.
Peugeot VGT Gr.3
The car that can only be saved with tuning. Out of the box it's horrible, although it's one of the fastest in terms of top speed.
However, I noticed that aliens get to the Top 10 rankings with that car in a Maggiore Race B event. It must demand highly skilled hands, then.
It used to be the meta car at Tokyo East and it helped me get a couple GR3 wins there. That was a long time ago, and as I recall, some of the physics updates ruined it. I'm looking forward to some vids and commentary.
Only saved two replays this week.
Regardless on your views of electric cars and if they really are the transport pollution solution the world needs, there's no denying some of the EV performance cars we've seen recently can be brutally fast. Instant torque, mind boggling acceleration, and rapid top speeds mean you'll have the most exhilerating 20 minutes of driving in your life! The Audi E-Tron VGT is Audi's vision of all out electric performance. For the record, I'm not an electric fan. But I do quite like this car.
With 800bhp instantly on tap from the get go, it's INSANELY quick. However, due to being an EV and thus having hundreds of kilos of batteries on board, it's a bit reluctant to steer and brake. This actually isn't too hard to get a grip on, and with a bit of practise you can be demolishing lap records all over the world! I can get into the 1:40's at Bathurst, which is phenomenal given the speed required to even break the 2 minute barrier around that mountain!
Even though it feels heavy through corners, it remains very stable. I never feared oversteer, except for in extreme circumstances where I would have gone around in any car anyway. The understeer is very managable, though from the complaints I heard over the meet, that might just be me with my years of front wheel drive racing experience.
For a cool million bucks, like all Vision GT cars, it's got to be one of the best of the range as far as fun for dollar!! In fact personally, only the McLaren and Fittipaldi surpass it as far as my favourite VGT cars.
It's a sleeper, now to wait 12 hours for it to charge so I can have a play again!
(See, I'm working on catchup! Here's some vids)
Peugeot VGT Quick Impressions
The first thing I thought when I looked at this thing was, "...what the French?" And then followed by, "are we really doing this this week?"
I don't know what this thing is. I really didn't know what to make of the car before this week, or what to expect. And, you know what, even after having driven it, having formed my opinions, having all my photos, I still don't know what to make of it. Where do I even begin to describe why this car is confusing? It has no side windows. Its colour names are weird. It's one of THREE VGTs Peugeot has. Even the in-game description is weird, which can basically be summed up by, "such power, much beauty, wow". Its power is measured in ch. What even the heck is a ch?
Oh, thank you, game. You'll convert metres to metres for me, but not pounds and ch? Okay.
I've read the whole thing. I've watched the promo videos. I've done all that and I still have no idea what it is or what it's supposed to do. The Gr. 3 derivative of the car, which we're examining today, somehow manages to be even more convoluted than the original. It loses its AWD that hasn't been edited out of the copy-and-paste description. It loses a quarter of its power to slip into Gr. 3. Its "monolithic figure" that has "almost absent aerodynamics" gains a very present, towering rear wing. I don't think I've ever seen a more identity confused car in my entire life before this.
Suffice it to say then, that my first impressions of this car weren't very good. It's very difficult to take VGTs seriously in general, especially one that has no side windows and an interior. It just reeks and oozes "show over go", and I as a driver am just very put off by that. It feels more made for designers than drivers. And at this point, can it even be considered a car?
But, the specific model under the microscope this week is a Gr. 3 racing car. As a race car, looks are far more pardonable, because their sole purpose in life is to win. The question then becomes, "is it fast"?
Having read some impressions prior, I thought to myself before starting the drive, "how bad can it be? It's a Gr. 3 car. I can handle the Gr. 2 Epson NSX!". Na-uh, you don't understand, past me. This thing is so soft, it feels like a road car. It pitches. It rolls. It under and oversteers mid corner due to all the excessive body movement, and trying to correct the car's path via either steering or pedal adjustments just upsets it even more. It doesn't put down ANY power at all on corner exits, with Bruxelles of Spa being a standout example, again because this car just cannot control its own movements. It feels to me as if PD cut the power, gave this thing a huge fixed rear wing for Gr. 3, gave it more mass, deleted the AWD, but forgot to do anything to the suspension of the car. It pitches and rolls almost as though it were a road legal car, and this is on the least grippy tyres it has any business being on: Racing Hards. I'd even go as far as to say the resident brick missile of Gr. 3, the GT-R GT3, is a better drive than the Peugeot VGT. It's not bad because it's difficult to drive like the Epson NSX or Huracán GT3, like I had initially feared it to be upon reading others' impression on the car. It's bad because it doesn't even feel like a race car.
It has good top end performance, that's about it. Still not on the levels of the Supra, or the GT-R, though, meaning this car has no competitive merit whatsoever.
It's weird that this car was even converted to Gr. 3 to begin with, as Peugeot already has a Gr. 3 car in the RCZ. The RCZ is the warhorse of Peugeot in the game, with the road car being in the game, the Gr. 4 car currently dominating every Gr. 4 Race, a Gr. B rally car, and, yes, even a mid engined Gr. 3 racing car, complete with its own Gr. 3 Road Car. Does the RCZ Gr. 3 has problems? Sure. It understeers a little, and doesn't have good acceleration. But, it is at least stable. It at least has a suspension setup like a racing car. And, you know, lets you see what's beside you so you don't run opponents off the track. If you are a super hardcore Peugeot fan and have to use a Peugeot in Gr. 3 races, just go with the RCZ. There's no reason to ever bother with the VGT.
I can't get over how awful the VGT is. There is literally no reason why this thing doesn't have side windows. Even the creases suggest room for a window. And don't even give me that crap about "structural rigidity"; that thing is clearly a door.
Peugeot 905 Style livery by zxr4002158id Download Link.
The only reason I can see for this car not having side windows is to hide its shameful lack of an interior. Like a kid that's specifically told he can't have something, I wanted to see if I can take a peek into the interior of the VGT.
The car DOES have an interior... somewhat. What's interesting is that the car doesn't seem to block light at all, which means light just goes straight into the interior unhindered. In a high contrast, strong lighting situation like at night under bright lights, the interior of the car and your driver becomes very apparent:
No screen effects, no edits.
Also, can I just ask, what the heck is that nail harpoon thing sitting on the bonnet?
The lack of windows does mean however, that you get more real estate in the livery editor if you somehow feel inclined to decorate this hunk of junk.
Free real estate. Feels good.
Sakura Miku by kui2nyan Download Link
It, at best, is a good canvas for the creatively inclined. Otherwise, there's no redeeming factor about this car. There's no reason for this car to not have an interior, having made its debut in GT6. There's no reason for this car to ever have been converted into Gr. 3. There's no reason for this car to be this awful. There's no reason for anyone to ever bother with this hunk of junk in races. There's no reason for it to even have made the transition from 6 to Sport. There's no reason for this thing to even exist.
This thing is not a car. It's a drawing that feels most at home in a meeting room. And it should never leave the art studio, or meeting room.
Yeah I cant make this car do anything. Tried two tunes and the thing is just no good. The RX Vision is a lot better and even that isnt that great.
Wont ever try this one again. I wish I could get the mileage points back on it.
Testing the Peugeot VGT Gr.3 against the Mazda RX-Vision GT3 on Catalunya. I'm surprised the Mazda is barely ahead of the Peugeot. Both are all on Racing Hard Tires. I'll do more Gr.3 vehicles later.
Update: Sadly, the Peugeot isn't doing so well... I might do another run with that car and see if anything changes.
We know that the 90's NSX was one of those cars that everyone dreamed about getting or fell in love with the classic JDM cars of that time period, now some companies are bringing back those classics but giving them a breath of fresh air with newer technologies and updated designs. This week we are taking a look at the newest version of the Honda NSX. This weeks car is chosen by @TonyJZX
Nice choice! My review:
GTS Nordschleife hot lap STOCK Honda NSX '17: 07.26.834
Initially I was quite disappointed with it but once you get the hang out of it, it becomes a really fun, slidy, drifty and enjoyable drive! So yeah it's still quite fast and looks awesome.
A few pics:
The last one reminds me of the GT1 dealership:
There's a serreptitous reason I chose this car... clearly this car is a total market failure. We all love the original NSX, we would all be waxing lyrical about what an awesome car it is. But that can be quite boring.
I first came across this car in a Jay Leno video and really what can you learn from this guy? Pretty much nothing as he likes everything and buys everything... he actually owns this one:
So the car is in GT Sport and I won it so I gave it a try.
Its terrible. No one asked for a hybrid 4wd 9 spd auto that weighs as much as an SUV.
But I didnt believe that the GT Sport car was anything like the real thing. With the stock tune I couldnt win anything. With even a huge power advantage say N700 and 1,460kg I still couldnt do anything against even GT4s.
So whats wrong. Its certainly fast in a straight line. But the handling was unpredicatable. I can barely describe it. Its unstable over curbs, a no-on on the 'Ring. It has weird oversteery characteristic where you would turn and at some point like its a Gran Theft Auto car, it would hit a switch and the drift slash snap oversteer would be uncorrectable... no tune could fix this, it could be minimised but not completely. It actually drove like an overweight Lancia Stratos.
So therefore it requires a professional driver to keep the car well within its handling envelope.
This is even more strange because its a hybrid where the battery meter doesnt do anything and its also 4wd but it displays no understeer capability at all.
I dont like the 9 speed box because really its a 7 spd box with two moonshot overdrives. Your custom 7 speed is better.
HOWEVER saying that, there's one tune that fixes things to a 95% degree.
This tune almost eliminates the unpredicatable oversteer. For me I can comfortably take GT4s at N500 level. Will try N400.
Just a curio, its clear almost none were sold in this country and here's why:
2020 Honda NSX Premium Auto 4WD MY20
$430,000* Excl. Govt. Charges
This is a $150,000 usd car. For almost half a million dolloroos you could get a 911 GT3 RS or a Huracan Evo or a Performante or a 580-2 and still have change left over...
I was quite surprised at how bad this really was out of the box. I agree with your comment on @praiano63 's tune, but for me it only fixed 80% of the problems. Some of that extra 20% is probably me.....
Now I'm up to date on the video front, let's hope the NSX proves good enough for some epic racing!
Won't be there tonight, have to get up very early tomorrow. Review to come soon.
NC1 "NSX" Review Whilst I Try Very Hard Not to Puke
I'm a little overwhelmed. A little exhausted. A little exasperated, perhaps. There's so much to say, and I feel so much, too much. I don't really know where to start.
I won't spend much time going over the original NA1 and NA2 NSXes, as I think the fairy tale status of the originals is common knowledge in this industry and community. This means that its successor, the NC1 NSX, has a lot to live up to. So much so in fact, it's pretty much impossible for any machine to deliver on the unreasonable amount of hype that was placed on its double wishbone suspension at all four corners. Is it unfair? Of course. Especially because people tend to only remember and exaggerate the good bits of nostalgia, which I find nauseating.
That said, the NC1, expectations or not, is unbelievably horrible to drive.
I still have trouble wrapping my head around how bad it is. I've heard automotive journalists and celebrities rave about how good the car is, journalists I hold in very high regard and such as Matt Farah. James Martin. Harry Metcalfe, and Jay Leno. They all loved and praised the NC1 highly, almost to the same levels as one would praise the originals. But holy hell, something about it simply doesn't translate over into the game.
I can't... I wish you could see my face and hear my voice as I say this, but holy hell I can't even begin to tell you how or why it's so bad. I legit feel like puking when I think of the car's driving dynamics in the game. As with any road car in the game, it takes about twenty acres to stop. It weighs more than some SUVs. The suspension is almost luxury car levels of soft. The thing feels like it has The Leaning Tower of Pisa almost completely filled to the top with water stapled onto its roof, just so the water could slosh around in corners. Mid engined supercars are supposed to be svelte, evocative, intricate things of beauty, yet this thing looks like a hulking brick with a clown smile. Even its fictional derivative in GTA V is called the "Dinka Jester". And honestly, I think whoever designed and named the Jester was onto something; once you see that clown like smile plastered over its hulking face, there really is no unseeing it.
This car rolls so much, and feels like it has the centre of gravity set so high, I don't believe for a SECOND this thing can pass The Moose Test, a.k.a. a very dramatic slalom. Chicanes make this thing crumble and cry in a sad heap, as turning into a corner makes this thing lean so hard sideways, even a mild turn with banking on Blue Moon Bay's oval makes this thing break into a drift.
"Hey, racers! We know what you like! You like rotating your cars into turns, don't you? Here, have all the rotating in ZA WARUDO!"- someone at Acura, probably
That's just one turn. It gets exponentially worse with a chicane that requires sharp and sudden weight shifting laterally, as this car shows ZERO finesse or even interest in controlling its own body movement and weight shifting. This thing makes a MR2 blush with snap oversteer.
Chicanes! My one (of very many) weakness!
The front suspension doesn't even feel damped at all. Using full braking just dumps all the weight on the front of the car, leaving the rear tyres to reach for the sky, and break out into the aforementioned drift. This also means the car is near impossible to trail brake with, as the front tyres are always overloaded from the excessive mass and weight, and the rears are always a hair trigger from snapping out even under braking. It takes the precision of knitting with your toes and feet to trail brake this stupid thing.
"Yo, petrol heads! Yeah, we know all your cool slang! You like weight shifting, don't you? Here, have ALL the weight shifting in ZA WARUDO!"- someone at Acura, probably.
On corner exits, again, the front end doesn't feel like it has ANY damping. Any slight touch of the accelerator to try to ease the front tyres into an apex, and weight just FLIES off the front, resulting in a turning radius increase that could make it orbit Earth as its second moon. And mind you, this understeer is well before you even put any power down. Oh, you'd think a car that understeers massively on corner exits will at least put power down well, wouldn't you? Wrong. This car's IC engine powering the rear wheels will often hit a point where it overpowers the front motors powering the front wheels, resulting in a car that's chronically understeering one moment, to completely facing the wrong direction the next. You're made to fear and account for both under and oversteer on corner exit. On long sweeping turns, you're often made to shift while turning, given this thing has a 9 speed with close ratios. Shifting while turning means the front wheels' motors never stop turning, yet the rear wheels' IC engine does have to take a pause. The re-engagement of the rear wheels to the IC engine is so rough and jerky, even THAT has a very real chance of breaking this fat, fragile, hopeless lump into a spin.
As easy as it would be for every photo in this review to be the car going way too fast sideways, sometimes buried in barriers, that'd be no challenge as a photographer.
This car was so awful we actually started on Sports Medium tyres, up from the car's default Sport Hards. As the races piled on, we moved onto Sports Softs, and were even contemplating going onto Racing Hards. THAT'S how god awful this thing is. That said, at least this car's problems can mostly be solved by blind grip. The car's aghast behaviour can be, to an appreciable degree, masked by blind grip for as long as the tyres last (and they won't, given this car's near 1.8 tons kerb mass). That is not to say however, that the NC1 is good, or even an acceptable drive on softer tyres. There is still no precision. There is still no control over the car's body movements. You're just given a bigger envelope before the car bites your head off all the same. The tyres can at least wring some grip from all the unreasonable weight put on them when the car leans, instead of simply giving up instantly and exploding into a puff of smoke.
Despite being technically an AWD car, you cannot drive this like an AWD car. As the front wheels are powered only by puny 1.3kW⋅h motors, most of the car's shove comes from its 3.5L V6 engine that drives only the rear wheels. This means that, at launch, it will smoke tyres with the best of American muscle, and on corner exits, it still doesn't put down any power at all, thanks in tandem with its cotton candy suspension setup. The batteries and hybrid system is essentially hundreds of kilos of dead weight on the track. The SH-AWD system is supposed to overdrive the outside wheels and slow the inside wheels during cornering, yet as multiple different people in COTW can attest to, this thing just slides into corners instead of rotating into them in a controlled and discreet fashion. The "SH" in SH-AWD seems to stand for "Savagely Horrendous" instead of "Super Handling".
I hopped into a 2017 R35 GT-R for the race at Dragon Trail this week, as I was rapidly getting angry driving the NC1 as it's very closely comparable on paper with the NC1; power for the NC1 and R35 is 578PS and 572PS respectively, and mass, 1,780kg (3,924lbs) and 1,770kg (3,902lbs). Yeah, I said it. Burn me at the stake for being a heretic if need be, but we truly live in a world where an NSX is comparable in mass to a GT-R, and I don't want to live on this planet anymore. It seemed too perfect a comparison to pass up, however, as both the NSX and GT-R were Japanese bubble economy darlings back in the day, and both were fierce competitors both on the streets and in the racetrack.
The race at Dragon Trail was a very enlightening one for me personally, as I was in close, sparring proximity with COTW's resident Stig, Vic, for... oh, about half the race, which gave me a perfect perspective to assess the strengths and weaknesses of both cars, relative to each other. I came second, but that's because that's my first race in a GT-R, and Vic has had a few races to get used to and know the NSX (not that he needs very long to get acclimatised to any car, but just let me have my excuses in peace, okay?!).
Racing driver excuses aside, the GT-R visibly loses out on the tighter, technical sections of the track. Most egregious of this difference in cornering speed was in the complex that houses the Chicane of Death, as Vic easily pulls a gap of about 3 tenths over my GT-R each lap there, in spite of how much I whined and complained about the NSX's handling, given that the base GT-R is a rather floaty brick in its own right. In the straights, I think my GT-R might have had a very slight advantage, with my eyes glued on the deltas during the race, though this is easily offset most of the time by the NSX's better corner exit speeds. The launch between these two hulking giants is a dead heat: with launch traction control, both cars maintain their gaps and positions from a standing start. And while beating an R35 in the corners is akin to saying you outran a drunk turtle, going toe-to-toe with the GT-R in its own game is a seriously astounding feat.
(Where's our SSRX Infield Layout, PD?!)
Given the NSX's far superior cornering speeds and comparable acceleration to the GT-R, you might be wondering how in the blazes I've managed to bother Vic in the NSX for as long as I've been able to. The answer comes back to the god awful handling of the NSX. I started second last in that race, and I don't know if I made a single, legitimate overtake the whole race; the NSXes around me all just fell off and died like butterflies. Even Vic wasn't immune to a few visible, but not race ending screw ups, which kept me in stalking range for longer than I perhaps should've. Long story short, the NSX is a faster car than the GT-R in theory, but in practice, the much more predictible, easier to drive, no surprises, never worrying GT-R I daresay is just as fast as the NSX. I know, speaking for myself personally, that I set better hot lap times in the GT-R than I do in the NSX.
Off the track, the comparison doesn't look to favour the NC1 at all; it costs twice and change that of the GT-R, at 200,000 dollars Credits. For costing twice the GT-R, it certainly isn't twice the anything of the GT-R, be it in terms of practicality, lap times, or just fun behind the wheel. If I were given 200,000 dollars, I'd buy a NA2 NSX-R buy a base GT-R and use the change to tune it up to levels beyond what the NC1 can even dream of. Here's the thing: the R35 chassis is what, THIRTEEN YEARS OLD this year. It is a car renowned for its heavy tuning potential, with several well established tuning powerhouses in the aftermarket to cater for a wide market of owners. The NC1 simply can't compete on that front. And it comes across as nothing but ludicrous to me when you tell me that you spend all these years R&Ding a new sports car, with all these hybrid, AWD, cutting edge, game changing wizardry. You tell me it has three motors, a 3.5L V6, nine speeds, and the end result is something that's barely faster than a (then) ten year old granddad GT-R, with its "traditional" IC 3.8L V6 being its only power source, and "only" 6 speeds to work with. I'm sorry, but that's just bullcrap to me.
The NC1 does have some redeeming factors. I imagine it'd be easy and pleasant to drive in the city, with the IC engine only kicking in at speed, which in theory should provide for a very quiet and smooth ride. The outward vision from the driver's seat is superb. I'd even go as far as to say outward visibility is comparable to that of the original NSX, which is no mean feat given today's extra stringent rollover and crash test standards.
Because the suspension setup in this car is so soft, I find that it actually handles bumps and road imperfections really well. The standout example of this is at Red Bull Ring, where the apexes have these "Sausages of Death" to discourage corner cutting. Having no real choice but to fly right over these Sausages sometimes due to my lack of ability to control the car, the Sausages hardly registered through the car; you certainly feel them, but it never threw the car off its course or upset whatever balance it might have relatively speaking. The NC1 also has very short overhangs, which means it clears these Sausages even under full cornering loads.
Yes, okay, it does look like it's scraping a little on T1.
Lastly, it might, MIGHT, be a good drift car, seeing as it's already KANSEI DORIFUTOing (inertia drifting) into every corner even without you meaning to, anyway. With nine gears and 3 motors to supplement the engine, the car is never out of breath in any situation to keep smoking the rear tyres.
In spite of how blatantly and almost unapologetically awful the NC1 is, I actually think it's not beyond saving. I actually really love the fictional Gr. 4 and Gr. 3 NC1s in this game. I love the way they sound, I love their balance, and, yes, I even love the way they drive. With the Gr. 4 cars being especially close to the road cars they're based on, it really makes me wonder what a NC1 Type R would look, and drive, like.
If the race cars don't do certain things, neither should the road car. Take away the useless batteries that don't make the car go any faster. Stiffen it to hell and back. Bathe it in Championship White and put a red Honda badge on it or ten. Glue on carbon bits like front splitters, rear wings and diffusers, and make it rear wheel drive. I think that would satiate a lot of people if done right.
Unfortunately, a "Type R" isn't really to boost slow sales; it's usually born because of good sales. Besides, unless it's standing toe-to-toe with a 911 GT2 RS, I don't know who would pay in excess of 200,000 USD for a stripped out racing car.
Overall, as-is, the NC1 a horrible car. Take this one liner conclusion to the review if you don't want to hear an old man whine and moan for an hour with no pictures to keep you entertained for the longer conclusion.
The Rant with No Photos:
Over the course of this review, I've abstained from drawing comparisons to, or even mentioning the original NSXes. That's because I feel that no car can possibly deliver on the unrealistic, legendary and fairy tale like hype and expectations the original cars have set for the NC1. Moreover, the NC1 is such a different beast, a radically different concept from the originals, and hence why I didn't want to mention the originals too much. But, in the few days I've taken to write this review, I've also come to realise that I'm only making excuses for the car. OF COURSE it can be compared to the originals. It HAS to be. They have the same name. The NC1 is reusing the classics' colours in bid to move more units out the showroom. Promotional videos and press releases all try to rub the original in your face to make you feel like this car is just like the original, but it's just so ghastly awful it has no business being compared to any sports car, let alone one with a name as bulletproof as the original NSXes.
When you call a car an "NSX", you call to it certain expectations, certain requirements, that the NC1 blatantly ignores. While the original NSXes feel to me like the engineers wanted to push the envelope of driver engagement while offering the purest of driving experiences, the NC1 felt to me like a group of men in suits wanting to wave their... *ahem* egos, to the world. And if Acura were to let us believe that they worked closely with Honda engineers in Japan to create the NSX, then I can only be led to believe that Honda as a whole has lost the plot entirely. Honda back in the 90s were known for their absolutely stellar sports cars, flawless both in behind the wheel experiences and reliability. Cars that hardly anyone can say a bad thing about, like the S2000, the Integra Type R, even the Beat, and, of course, the NA NSXes. They were the "enthusiast's company", I would even go as far to say. But right now, seeing this... thing, the NC1, I can only conclude that they have lost that drive, that touch, that passion, entirely.
Reviewers in real life that I hold in very high regard all find the car to be underrated and brilliant, yet I found it so ghastly awful. It made me doubt myself, or the game's authenticity. "You know, maybe this game's physics is broken", I think. "That'd explain why last week's Peugeot VGT was so awful, as was the LaFerrari", I reason. "Maybe this car is just one of those cars you need to see in person to love", I'd continue. Yes, I wanted to like this car so much, I was making excuses for it post drive.
One person I've left out of that list of reviewers I hold in high regard is Tsuchiya Keiichi. And that's because he didn't like the NC1 either.
When Tsuchiya-san was driving the car and finding faults with it, I felt so, so happy, like a massive weight was lifted off my shoulders. I don't know how to describe to you that euphoric moment when you get confirmation that you're not insane, when previously, all the signs in the world and everyone you know were telling you that you are. I think the biggest difference is, of course, the roads Best Motoring were twisty mountain roads no sane person should be running a car on. While not the biggest difference, what I think the most important difference in the Best Motoring review was that those are bona fide, racing car drivers, trying their darndest to set a quick lap for review and comparison purposes. And that I think is the sort of driving that brings out the worst in a NC1. Maybe it's a brilliant car for street driving. Maybe it's a brilliant car even when driven briskly. But at the limit? By highly charged people trying to prove a point? That's the only kind of driving anyone would do in a racing game, and that's exactly the kind of driving that makes a NC1 crumble into shambles. And that's why the NC1 is, to me, more a luxury GT car than a sports car, and hence why it should never have been called a "NSX" to begin with.
Tsuchiya-san is also a very happy owner of a NA2 NSX-R. He's visibly proud and beaming whenever he mentions his old- er, I mean... more cultured NSX. After setting a sector time, he kept pushing on and on after, simply because the car was so fun to drive at the limit, he couldn't help himself.
That, in my opinion, is what makes a sports car a sports car. It's not about the power; petrolheads can entertain themselves for as long as a tank of fuel will last them in a Mazda Roadster if it comes to that. It's about that feeling of trust, that feeling of you and only you being in control of the car, nothing and no one else. It's as much about the cornering ability as it is the sound, the sensation through the steering wheel and chassis, or even how a shift knob feels. These little things that can't be quantified is exactly what the NA NSXes did so, so well, which is precisely why I believe the entire committee that was in charge of the NC1 just aren't sports car drivers, nor did they even attempt to seek any input from racing drivers. And I don't believe the NC1 was meant for track use, either. They shove all this old nostalgia NSX crap onto us, but I don't for a second believe any of them have driven the NA NSXes on the limit.
If nothing else, I want you to take a look at Tsuchiya-san throughout the whole video. Listen to him talk about and rave about his NSX-R. Can you make a sports car as inspiring as that? Can you make someone feel the things Tsuchiya-san is feeling? Can you change lives like that? Can you inspire anyone like that? That, THAT is why the NA NSXes are legendary, because everyone who drives one walks away impressed and inspired, wanting more. Gordon Murray drove one to work every day designing the McLaren F1. Someone known affectionately as the "Drift King" dailies one. Can the NC1 have this sort of impact on anyone? Was Acura building this car more for a brand image thing, or because they wanted to make the best damn sports car the world has ever seen? I highly suspect the former.
If this is the future of motoring, consider me having turned in my keys. Call me a stick in the mud. Call me a socially irresponsible ingrate. Call me a dirty old man if you must; just don't call me a fan of the NC1. The original NSXes are the sort of cars that get people of all ages into cars, and the NC1 is exactly the sort to turn those people away from it. The NC1 takes a name people instinctively associate with good experiences and good memories, and then takes a huge, steaming, unapologetic diarrhea dump all over those experiences, memories, and expectations. While I've avoided comparisons to the classic NA NSXes over the course of this review, I've also avoided calling the NC1 a "NSX", simply because, to me, it isn't an NSX. It's insulting and infuriating to me that the NC1 is called that. It is a very different machine born in a very different world to very different parents with very different goals and methods to achieve those goals. This is clearly not a sports car. This is a luxury car with some hint of eco sensibility in it at best. It'd come under less criticism if it were literally called anything else. As it is, presented to me as a super sports car, the NC1 is so bad, it's offensive. It's like telling someone their dead wife has come back to life, only to shove a completely different woman onto him with the same name. It's disrespectful, disgusting, and a farce. Like the sort of reviewer who uses other reviews to make a point.
In other news, I am basically a younger, English speaking Tsuchiya Keiichi. Someone pls hire me to do car things.
Superb write-up. Insane production value in your reviews. Chapeau!
Awesome write up, as always .
Although, all that talk of sausages has made me hungry...
The Honda NSX. It's not a car I've been overly fond of, not going to lie. Billed as Japan's first supercar (Although some may try to make the claim that the Mitsubishi GTO took that title), it boasted some pretty impressive facts and stats. The first gen benefitted from a wealth of latest and greatest Formula One know how, and input from Senna himself. This meant it was of course a very capable and well respected car.
Personally, I steered right away from it. Not because of it per se, but rather the fact that on the first game, the rear wheels clipped through the bodywork, and it looked so bad, four year old me just couldn't stand it for some reason!
Even now, I cringe! Look at it, it's just so.... this is wrong! Stop this!
Aaaaannnyways. We're not talking about the first gen car, are we? Nope, we're talking about it's successor, the reboot that, by most accounts here at least, manages to withdraw the NSX name from the realm of Japan's finest!
570bhp, 1780kgs. Why do manufacturers harp on about their use of such advanced light weight materials, aluminium, carbon fibre, composites, etc and then go and deliver a sports car that weighs about the same as a luxury coupe?! I mean I get it, at the end of the day it's a road car and creature comforts like air con and sound systems add weight, but that's still an excess number. Hell, my own real life runabout Pulsar has air con, heating, sound, etc and it tips the scales at under a ton.
At the meet, it was clear that this was a terrible car to drive. It's generous weight means it's very bulky and lethargic around corners. This isn't helped by the sport hard tyres we ran for the majority of the night. It behaves totally unlike an MR car, there's no stability through corners, and half the time you feel like you're not going to be able to pull up in time. It actually manages to feel more like a very poorly built front engined car than a race bred mid engined one.
I'm not sure what the point of the 9 speed transmission is. I can only assume it's there for fuel economy, because I was barely ever in 5th gear, let alone 6th or higher. Not that it wasn't already going fast, because obviously acceleration is still one of the big numbers auto companies like to brag about.
The Gr.4 NSX solves most of the road car's problems, being much lighter, having sharper handling while not feeling too much like a full blown racecar. Just whack some licence plates on it and call it your tuned special!
So, beater or sleeper? you bet it's a big fat beater. Just give us the HSV 010 road car already!
The past couple of weeks we've tested quite a few European and Japanese cars so for a little change of pace this week we will be going with a brand from America. This weeks car is know for the split window body style and the successor to the C1. We will be taking a look at the Corvette Stingray Sport Coupe '63. This weeks car is chosen by Racer283.
I'd be interested to see where this goes. I have used this on and off on the n300/400 type races... 5 spd box and a tune and it seems merely 'ok'... you can force it to victory however you're always aware that this car dates back to the 1960s and you're up against very new cars that have all the tech that is a result of 50yrs of innovation.
If there was a defined "classic American muscle" category that would be something else but even against 1980s cars its hard going as expected.
GTS Nordschleife hot lap STOCK Chevrolet Corvette C2 '63 08.08.903
This one is definatly not very well balanced. Drives like a bathtub too. I mean it is really so damned twichy at the limit. Not very pleasant to drive.
Thought I'd share my livery for this week. It's not something I typically do, but I think this one looks good!