Car of the Week: Week 139 McLaren 650S Gr4

  • Thread starter Racer283
  • 2,306 comments
  • 272,198 views
2,176
Canada
Canada
BaronBlitzRed
Hey hey people! It's been a long time since I've posted anything (far too long, and I'm sorry for that), but this week's pick has brought back some fond memories about COTW of yesteryear, as I mentioned in the lobby this week.

Way back in June 2012, I was allowed to pick my very first Car of the Week... yes, 2012, as in back in the days of Gran Turismo 5!!!

Here's a link to travel back in time... enjoy!

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/car-of-the-week-friday-15-06-12.256311/#post-7226252

Cheers
 
Last edited:
601
Singapore
Singapore
XSquareStickIt
Car of the Week — Week 128: SLS AMG & Week 130: 911 Carrera RS Club Sport


"But XSquare", I hear you exclaim before I've even typed the first word of the first paragraph. "Why are these two cars being lumped together in the same review? One's a luxury GT cruiser, and the other's a stripped out track toy! These are two very different cars from very different companies from very different time periods at very different price points that are engineered to do very different things!" And you'd be right about that. Because I made you say that in my writing and how could I possibly be wrong about anything? "Surely there must be more similarities between these two cars than the fact that they're German NA 2 door performance cars that you've been wanting to test in Car of the Week, right?"

Not really, no.


If I were writing a story, maybe I could make some cheap excuse like a rich tycoon named Pelax or something sponsoring me an all expenses paid trip to Germany for a Very Serious SLS AMG Review of the Car of the Week N Stuff, possibly with women too scantily clad to post here on GTPlanet posing next to the cars to waste all the money we spent on photographers, all of whom may or may not also be on recreational drugs. You make up your own narrative on this one; I'm too lazy to make German license plates because they're such an unholy pain in the butt, I'd sooner do my own prostate screening by sticking my head up there. See? My narratives are horrible. You're better off imagining your own scenario — or hiring someone named Brad or something to come up with one for you — as to why I'm lumping these two cars together in one review.


After being surprisingly smitten by the SLR McLaren, and already having heard rave reviews for the AMG GT, I was very, very curious about the middle child that is the SLS AMG. Losing the McLaren badges on the car shed about three fifths of the cost and a commendable 148kg (327lbs) in comparison to the SLR, while still retaining the use of a "sledgehammer" V8 up front, mated to an actual gearbox this time around. Rectifying the SLR's most glaring flaws, the SLS AMG represents huge steps in the right direction to course correct from its older sister, which had a lukewarm reception at best, both in the market and here in COTW. Backed by a winning recipe, the SLS unquestionably runs circles the size of the Nordschleife around the SLR, and was highly successful in sanctioned motorsports as well, but I'll cover the racecar versions of the SLS another day (maybe...).


The fabled M159 6208cc NA V8 engine that is used in the SLS GT3, and continues to see use today in the highly successful AMG GT3, first appeared here in the SLS road car, and yes, it's shamelessly marketed as a 6.3L, because who doesn't love exaggerating about the size of their girth if they didn't have to stick it up to a ruler under public scrutiny? All it takes is to gently roll on the gas pedal, and you'll immediately understand why this engine is so revered, and why Mercedes makes you jump through convoluted hoops and hurdles to turn off traction control; this thing has EV-esque torque from idle — so much so that doing doughnuts in second gear on uprated Sport Soft tyres is a breeze for this thing. While engines are traditionally lubricated with oil, I refuse to believe the SLS' engine is lubricated by anything other than butter, because this thing revs so deliciously s i l k y s m o o t h , it's hard to believe this engine even has a redline, because all it seems to want to do is to rev, rev, rev! I smack the limiter on the SLS almost as often as I shift correctly because of how alluring and addictive it is. If there's any car that needs a factory beeper fitted as standard to come on at 500rpm before redline, it's not an RX-7; it's this. It is everything anyone can want from a big engine: V8, big displacement, gobs of torque down below, healthy power up top, delicious butter smoothness, effortless doughnuts, all while sounding like the burliest and angriest of bakers in the world. In an industry that's being rapidly electrified, the fuel eviscerating M159 engine feels like an unapologetic, steadfast celebration of the internal combustion engine, and it was love at first rev for me.


Cheaper, lighter and faster than an SLR, with a bigger engine mated to a lightning quick 7 speed DCT sending power only to the rear, colour choices that extend beyond black and silver, an interior that still stands adamant and elegant to the test of time, handsome looks, gullwing doors... what's not to love about the SLS?

Even though it's less powerful and lighter than an SLR, I wouldn't have guessed either fact if I hadn't seen Alex P's timed run of the Nordschleife in both cars. The 7 speed DCT gearbox in the SLS compensates greatly for the power deficit if the lightened mass doesn't do enough of a job for it already, and the end result is that the SLS outruns the SLR in the corners and straights, though the SLR does rein back in its younger sibling on tracks with long straights, such as Bathurst and the already mentioned Nordschleife, partly with its 46HP (34.3kW) power advantage on tracks with long straights, and partly also, ironically, with the mechanical advantage of taller gearing at speed; curiously, 6th in the SLS is already geared taller than 5th in the SLR, resulting in the SLS losing out past 300km/h (186mph) to the SLR, and consequently, lap time gaps at these high speed circuits that vastly undersell how much faster the SLS is most of the time.


And although markedly lighter than the battleship that is the SLR, the SLS certainly doesn't feel lighter in the corners; while the suspension in the SLS is amply set up for its own size and mass when driven on its own, in direct comparison to its heavier, yet tauter sister, I find that the SLS exhibits way more body movements in comparison to the SLR, most notably roll. This is reflected in the spec sheets: the SLR has natural frequencies of 2.25Hz front and rear, in comparison to the SLS's 1.60Hz on both ends. As a result of this, the SLS feels wholly incapable of utilising any of its lessened 570HP (425kW) and mechanical advantage offered by the first 6 speeds of the DCT gearbox it has, and is so liable to snap oversteer on you mid corner you come to expect it and actively work to be gentle on the car to avoid it rather than it being an exception you attempt to correct when it happens. While the SLR was more than happy to wear uprated Sport Soft tyres, the SLS feels completely thrown for a Südschleife by the same compound we ran on race day for both cars. The SLR felt like a luxury GT cruiser role playing a sports car for fun, while the SLS is a luxury GT cruiser that seems to do the sporty bits only begrudgingly, like a kid who's had to score straight As so as not to disappoint their parents or fall behind their siblings. You can tell the same willingness and enthusiasm isn't present in the younger sibling, even though it does the job all the same.


What this results in is a car that seemingly combines the worst of both the FR and MR worlds, being a FR car with a rear mass bias of 47:53 according to the game's description. Trail brake into a corner, and you immediately feel the inertia of the long nose refusing to comply, while the rear end simultaneously wants to swing out as though a comically sized sledgehammer was rear-mid mounted in the car, not at all helped by how the track of the car is mysteriously set up to be 31mm narrower in the rear, resulting in both under and oversteer at the same time on corner entry and being more than a handful on exits, and the suspension setup of the car is ill-equipped to handle the sashaying tendencies of a 1,620kg (3,571lbs) car with a 2,680mm (105.5in) wheelbase. Couple this behaviour with with gobs of torque the 6.2L engine is capable of, and you have a car that seemingly rejects societal norms and pronouns, and would much prefer if you referred to it as a car with a track of 2,680mm and an "average wheelbase" of 1,666.5mm, because it feels happier going sideways than it is going forwards. Tackling corners in the SLS, especially downhill ones, require careful tiptoeing around the car's ill temper and prerequisite knowledge of its tantrums. Because of the softer suspension setup, and also how ridiculously quickly it will burn through fuel and chew through tyres, I find it very difficult to set lap times with any consistency in the SLS, and it ironically makes for a fantastic car to KANSEI DORIFUTO in, because half the time you're trying to take corners "properly", it's already inertia drifting anyway, which may well be the fastest way to get the SLS' nose to hit an apex, and it's so adept at doughnuts that I uncharacteristically gave up on a race after a spin, and just kept doing doughnuts on the track, which the SLS felt more comfortable and built to do than actual cornering. For some context, this didn't even happen when we raced the Charger Hellcat (review coming soon, I promise... probably... hopefully... possibly).


On more subjective fronts, the SLS simply doesn't hold a candle to the SLR in my mind. The styling, for a start, looks a lot more serious, more sedated, and more of a grandfather clock than the more daring and unique looking SLR. In a Mercedes showroom or parking lot, I'd probably lose an SLS in the crowd, but I sure as hell wouldn't miss an SLR, if that makes sense. And while the M159 engine in the younger car is, in every aspect, a fantastic engine, I... kinda miss the supercharger whine of the old M156, not to mention the hysterical KA-CHUNK KA-CHUNK noises the shift buttons make.


Please don't get me wrong, though: even though I prefer the SLR to it, the SLS is a fantastic car by its own merits. It's just a little disappointing for me personally, someone who had been pleasantly surprised by the sportiness of the SLR, and had looked for an improvement of the recipe in the SLS, only to find that it seemingly doesn't share that same track focus and dedication to sensation as the SLR. If I were to hop into the SLS without prior experience of the SLR, I wouldn't be able to say a bad thing about it. I could more than excuse any perceived sloppiness of the SLS by saying it handles brilliantly for its size and mass, which it absolutely does. Objectively speaking, the SLS is a better car than the SLR, not just in all aspects, but also with huge steps in each area. I greatly respect and like the SLS, and even though I prefer the SLR to it, I wouldn't feel like I was being shortchanged at all if I were offered an SLS in its stead.


I feel like the SLS is the kind of car that's just lost in translation to the digital format, especially into a competition centric game such as Gran Turismo Sport. I would love to take in its leather interior and beautiful stitching in real life, and cruise along the highways with its monstrous torque and soundtrack. Despite it not being as track focused as the SLR, the SLS can be driven hard, and much fun will be had from behind the wheel if you do decide to beat on it, especially if lap times and making use of every millimeter of the track aren't your thing, and you just want to rip off your necktie, throw away your blazer, and for however briefly they will last you, vapourise some tyres and fuel in the noisiest and most childish of fashions.


In a way, the SLS feels like a kid born to successful parents: it's dressed up to look dignified and sophisticated, but it's uncertain and playful at heart, who punches way harder than it perhaps realises, with an unhealthy appetite for doughnuts and energy drinks. It's unencumbered and undiluted by the evils of the world that is hybrids, EVs, and turbos, and its innocence and purity is worthy to behold, protect, and even be unknowingly proud of, because I think we all wish we could have retained more of that purity and innocence, both in our personal lives and in our cars. We know this purity will disappear one day in the future, but just being able to see and experience it now is a treat that will make the future a little more bittersweet in reminisce. Someone at Stuttgart tried to give this innocence form. Tried to hold it. Tried to preserve, immortalise it. Made it into an art form, made it a way of expressing one's desires. And the end result is that, for almost a quarter of a million USD, you too, can have a physical object that you can hold, own, preserve, that lets you relive that experience as and when you please. Even if the car isn't your cup of tea, the notion that you can capture childlike tendencies and call upon that experience as and when you please is quite simply priceless, especially for someone who's worked their way to be in a position to be able to afford an SLS and not worry about its running costs.


Looking at it this way, the SLS is the perfect cover car for a Gran Turismo game, a series that has started off purely as an arcade, caRPG and slowly started taking itself too seriously, disappointing and alienating most of its loyal fanbase, while it tries to figure out what it wants to be. For me personally, I'm more of a Viper or a Hellcat kinda guy than an SLS, but if the day ever comes when I get the chance to loosen the undergarment straps of someone who's a little more sophisticated, or even just reasonably sane, while still appreciating the 10 year old kid inside me, the SLS would be nigh unrivaled as an avatar to represent myself.

And speaking of a car that is nigh unrivaled...


Spanning eight distinct generations of cars over nearly 60 years, while dominating seemingly every category and discipline of motorsports it participated in, the name "Porsche 911" brings to mind many wildly varying images the more people you ask what first comes to mind at the mention of the household name. Some will envision a successful rally car, others will see a moody widowmaker. Some will buy a 911 because it is an excellent all rounder that can ferry their family around when they need to, and offer an exhilarating driving experience when they don't. For some, maybe the outlandish 911 GT1 and the 1998 24 Hours of Le Mans come to mind, and for others, perhaps the Nürburgring and Sabine Schmitz. To some, the 911 represents the peak of laziness in car design, ostensibly changing so little that no one but the most obsessive and die hard of fans can tell the subtle differences between the generations and trims of cars, but to its fans who do obsess over it, the 911 represents the peak of driver focused technologies in a sports car, offering the purest and most exhilarating of driving experiences of their respective eras. Some will buy a 911 simply as a status symbol, wanting a sophisticated car without standing out in a crowd or appearing too outlandish; others will take them and turn them into bespoke flame spitting monsters for only the most discerning (and insane) of automotive enthusiasts.


The crazy part about every single dichotomy I've listed about the 911 is that the cars absolutely do live up to each and every contrasting description of them. So then, what exactly should come to mind at the mention of the middle child of middle children, the 4th generation 911, internally named the 993?


To get the best of the 993, one must first spec their car in Speed Yellow, then rip out and toss away anything in the car that isn't a strict requirement for it to function on a racetrack, such as carpets, air conditioners, and stereos, such that when, and not if, you spray yourself silly in the car, the mess is somewhat better camouflaged, and because there's no upholstery in the cabin, you can simply hose away the mess afterwards to retain some resale value in the car. I suppose Indischrot works too, if you don't plan on surviving the quintessential 911 experience. But what's a car, if not an avatar, an expression of self, right? That's why, in order to match the masochistic tendencies of your 993, colour coordinating roll cages and sadistic looking Schroth harnesses are a must, to keep you securely controlled and pinned to your thin, barely padded coff- I mean, Recaro Bucket seats. Finally, bolt on bespoke, glistening RS five spoke alloy wheels and a yellow wing big enough to make gas station attendants question if you're a driver or a pilot to really draw attention to yourself, because if a clown performs and no one is there to watch it, had there really been a show? To close out the performance, make sure the engine is air cooled, free breathing, and of course, mounted aft the rear axle, powering only the rear wheels, so that no one can see nor hear your less than manly screams in a smokescreen of (hopefully only) tyre smoke.


But fret not — not all is doom and gloom in the ultimate 993: to help counterbalance all that mechanical weight behind the rear wheels, along with whatever aerodynamic weight you might convince yourself is there in a road legal car, Porsche has thoughtfully added a sliiiightly more aggressive lip spoiler over the "typical" Carrera RS', because, come on, we don't want to go too overboard here, now do we? The end result of all this is a car packing "only" a modest 295HP (220kW), hauling around an even more conservative 1,235kg (2,723lbs), most of which concentrated aft the rear axle, to create what is called the "911 Carrera RS Club Sport", and what is quite possibly, the purest of the 911 experience that will ever be made publicly available. Well, "available" is kind of a subjective term here, because with only 227 ever made and virtual ones coming with an asking price of half a million credits, you can't exactly just walk into Uncle Ferdinand's North City Used Car Dealer and expect to be able to buy one, either virtually or in reality.


However you beg, rob, steal, or do things that GTPlanet's AUP won't let me suggest to find your way into one of these though, hot damn does it deliver.

Yes, it's an old 911. Yes, it's RR. Yes, it's softer than my reproductive organs in a sweltering sausage fest deep in a jungle. Yes, it will attempt to kill you if you give it the slightest of chances to. But then, a lot of that can be said about the NA1 NSX-R, which this 993 immediately reminded me of because of how it made me feel behind the wheel. You're snapped straight to attention the moment you turn the wheel of this thing, because there is so much going on with the car, and it's an absolute darling communicator. You always have to be cognizant of where the weight is on the car, how much grip each tyre has, how hard you feed in the steering angle, how much revs the engine is doing, where the powerband is, which gear to be in, etc.. The 993 gave me that sense of immediate awe and stunned me into silence even in my own hyperactive head the moment I drove it, and like my first drive of the NSX-R in Gran Turismo Sport, cleansed my mind and my world. My thoughts, my worries, my goals in my life were brought down and simplified to: throttle, brakes, revs, shifts, apexes, turns, weight, rotation, power. That's how immersive an experience it provides, even through the lens of a TV screen and a couch, and I instantly clicked with it.


What truly separates the 993 from its younger siblings is that... it has less of everything. Less power. Less tyres. Less technology. And this I feel works to the benefit of the 993, because you still get the thrills of driving a car on its knife edge, but at speeds that won't immediately kill you if you muck something up. There feels to be little to no aero despite appearances, no blind grip, no rear steer systems, no traction control, no nothing to mask the car's true tendencies, and nothing to save you, nothing else but yourself to blame if you spin and bin it. You don't get the sense at all that the car is hiding anything from you, with which to stab you in the back when the time is most opportune. It lays all its cards out on the table on the outset, and you play with the unspoken agreement that you either step up to the challenge and learn to do well, or get spat out a million pieces, and the 911 namesake has stuck around long enough and earned every bad rep and accolade to make its death threats more than well founded and common knowledge. But while that may be a demerit with other cars, every driver who steps through the doors and roll cages of a hardcore, track focused 911 does so not just knowingly consenting to that unspoken agreement, but also with a promise of greatness in equal, if not greater measure.


Despite this however, I find the 993 to be not nearly as scary or moody as everyone seems to make it sound on this thread. It certainly isn't as god-awful as some of the bollocks bin beaters we've tested here in COTW, like the Beat and A110. In comparison to those older clunkers, the 993 I feel actually wants to work with you, and is a sheer pleasure to work with in return, if you commit the time and dedication to learn its ins and outs. It's not unreasonable or moody at all, like a 356 or a Yellowbird, in which there is no gratifying sense of reward; only fleeting relief of narrowly escaping death before approaching another corner. The rear end of a 993 will swing out, obviously, but it lets go with such linearity and with such ample, early, and tactile warnings that you can often afford to play with it as it starts to slip, instead of having to panic and correct immediately like you would in a 930 or a 991. Even if you do get it wrong, like I have in every single race that week, I've never had more than slight fender benders; I've never really felt like my life was ever at risk because of how approachable, and to some extent even forgiving, the 993 is, especially with the context of its bloodthirsty lineage (never mind that I got Rick killed, heh).

When it rains, however, it pours hard on your rear engine parade. You'll start to wonder if that certain gas station attendant is secretly a driving god with psychic powers, because YOU'LL start to wonder if you are a driver or a pilot when operating a 993 in wet conditions. It was already slightly difficult to get weight over the front tyres in the dry with a full tank of fuel, but in the wet? Your front tyres are basically like those of an aircraft's: rarely ever in contact with the road, and even when they are in contact, never really seem to do anything other than keeping the nose of your vehicle from dragging across the asphalt. It's so bad that you get understeer rattle through the steering wheel common in FF cars, just by BRAKING IN A STRAIGHT LINE. What feels like an overly safe braking distance suddenly turns out to be a recklessly late one as the 993 refuses to either stop or turn, and the car feels less responsive under braking in the wet than if you were to simply shut the car off mid corner. And if the corner has adverse camber as well? You might as well put the car into neutral, open the door, and stick your foot out to drag and pedal along the asphalt for better stopping and turning performance than the front tyres will provide. But don't worry: you can then brag about it at the bar afterwards wrapped in casts about how your 993 gives you such a raw and pure driving experience, you truly feel as one with the car and road, and how it makes you intimately aware of the finest detail of the road surfaces like no other car lets you.


And seriously, half a mill for an interior that looks and feels like a jail cell, what with its roll cages and lack of creature comforts? Sure, one could argue that it makes the car a "no compromise driver's car", but would adding a few grams with some sun visors really destroy the driving dynamics of the 911 that much? Because the tinting on the top of the windshield barely has any opacity, and when the sun hits juuuust right, it's pretty blinding, even in the game. I guess that's why Porsche will sell you £760.00 sunglasses with their name on it, with the lenses actually mounted up front where they should be.

McPhillamy Park, the highest point of Bathurst at 0800h, clear.

The biggest one-two knockout combo against the 911 Carrera RS CS is its complete lack of creature comforts, plus the fact that, in the 90s, cars that can offer the thrills and exhilaration it can abound aplenty, with way less of a bite. During race day, I brought out my beloved FD RX-7 and NA1 NSX-R, both of which will give the 911 a run for its way too high a asking price, despite them both weighing more and having less power; a testament to how stupid a concept an RR car is. Not to mention, the only way this yellow bird with a paralysed wing won't lose to either car in the wet is if it crashed into them, after which you as the driver of the 911 can just say, "I'm so sorry, it got away from me", and elicit a response from people more filled with understanding and pity than if you were to tell them your children spontaneously combusted. The FD and NA1 both even have — or at least can be optioned with — sun visors, upholstery, and air con. Imagine that! And it's not like either car is any less fun to drive than the 993, either. Looking at the 911 Carrera RS CS from an objective standpoint, it's very, VERY difficult to make a case for it, if at all even possible.


So in conclusion, what's my verdict on the 993 Carrera RS Club Sport? What comes to my mind at the mention of the middle child of middle children?

I picture the purest, rawest, most fun, and most rewarding 911 to ever come from Stuttgart, at least until I somehow get to sample a 911 R. I see a car that is chock full of character and personality, a great teacher you can't help but to both like and respect. While the 991 GT3 RS earned my respect for the 911 name, the 993 Club Sport is the one that earned my affection, and got me to understand why exactly Porsche purists hold this car in such high regard, and compare its younger siblings to it. I see a car so at ease with itself, so proud to be what it is and not a number chaser like its turbo or younger siblings, and a car that's so much better for it. I see a car that just looks so right, so natural, so much so that seeing a 993 without the Club Sport's bespoke aero parts, wheels, and gutted interior makes me feel like the car has been amputated. I see a car that ticks all the right boy racer boxes while somehow also retaining a gentlemanly appreciation for the old school. I see my favourite 911 ever.


In other words, I love it. Immensely. Achingly. And if I have to be a masochistic clown to be shamed and ridiculed for driving one in the public, then so be it. It certainly is less of a price to pay than half a million and however much the stupid sunglasses are worth.

So, what more similarities do the SLS AMG and 993 Club Sport share aside from being German NA 2 door performance cars that I had been wanting to test in Car of the Week? Well, both are expensive toys that are rather softly sprung, really love to KANSEI DORIFUTO, and are powered by amazingly smooth engines that love to have their piston rings wrung out of them. But more than that, both cars made me think: is newer necessarily better? And if not, what is it about the older cars I prefer, that the new cars lack?

A question Vic posed in his review of the Taycan Turbo Sutututu (how's that for angering fans? 😂) goes, "I’ll concede that’s something that no amount of Stuttgart Space Magic (can't) recreate ( at least not right now). But as a racer at what point do you draw the line on that? At what point does the whole ‘Soul, feeling and feedback’ enthusiasts arguments start being outweighed by genuinely better all round performance and capability?"

To which I reply: never.

Giving the 993 a thorough going-over in COTW and finally understanding what Porsche purists are yakking about, I see that this argument has been around for decades by now, first with the 996 being water cooled, to Porsche making SUVs to survive. I don't care how fast a car goes. I don't care how fast it laps any given racetrack around the world. I'm no Tsuchiya Keiichi. No Lewis Hamilton. No Igor Fraga. I'm not even a Vic_Reign93. Someone out there can and will make whatever car I get my hands on go faster than I could. Hell, machine learning might just start to outperform actual human drivers if given enough time.

Time and technology will keep marching on and provide us with faster and faster cars. Yet, why is it that older cars, like the RX-7, like the NSX, like the Elise, like the 993, remain so sought after and valuable even today? Because they provide an experience and sensation unique to themselves, to their driver. They communicate their stories, personalities, likes, and dislikes so well. One can almost personify and humanise the cars. At what point does the whole "soul, feeling and feedback" start being outweighed by better all round performance and capability? I counter that question with a one of my own: what's the point of going faster than anyone else around a racetrack if you don't enjoy it? What does going faster than someone else's Honda Civic from light to light prove?

If lap times are all that matter, then no production car other than the Mercedes-AMG GT Black Series currently matter. No driver aside from Miyazono matters in this game. I'm no Miyazono. I'm no Vic. And I probably never will be, with my crappy, improvised setup, bad reflexes, and sporadic schedule. But I try to compensate for that in other areas. I take photos. I write. LIGHTNING doesn't do that, does he? That makes me feel like I've some value and worth in the world. But how do you quantify the quality of photos and reviews? Just by the number of likes they receive? I'm no good with that, either. Should I stop writing and shooting, then, because I'll never be the best at either? Is there no value elsewhere to be had, including for simply trying, for simply existing? To only see lap times in a car I think is a pretty cruel and overgeneralising way to think (wow, that got way too bleak way too quickly, almost like my emotions are ferried by a Turbo Taycan).

Of course, there is value and merit in lap times. It's how we test cars. I cite lap times in my reviews as well. As long as a record of any kind exists, people will see it as a challenge and try to break it. That in itself is a pretty beautiful thing, but lap times are only one of the many factors in a car. I'm not advocating for carburetors or bias ply tyres, nor do I wish for ABS you can turn off in cars. I'm not against technology. I only start to take issue with it when it is used to rob me of the joys and sensation of driving a car, because of course machines can drive better than I can. That was never in question in my mind. What I'm concerned with is how does it make me feel? As a toy, is it fun? Can it make me forget my life's problems for just a few minutes? Can it inspire me? Does it make me ponder and think? Can I even form a perceived emotional bond with it? Does it make me happy?

But who knows? Maybe the generations older than me will insist on the mechanical sound and the techniques of fine tuning carburetors, and enlighten me about how bias ply tyres are more communicative or better in other ways that I never knew about. Maybe someone out there will claim that ABS robs you of sensations, and a skilled driver can stop quicker without it. Maybe future generations will see the same soul in EV SUVs as I see in an FD and NSX, and similarly resist change. I'm not smart, rich, or charismatic enough to change the world. I'm a nobody. I just like to think there's value and merit in a unique opinion and experience, that's all. Does it have to be well written or well liked? Do cars need to achieve better numbers than what precedes them? Who knows?

Maybe the 993 and SLR do objectively suck as cars. Maybe it's only possible to enjoy them by making excuses for them through rose tinted lenses of nostalgia. Maybe I'd have a lot more fun with more modern machinery if I stopped expecting of them all of what technology allows them to be, while comparing the sensations they give to older clunker cars. But is having low to no standards really the way to live? I'm not sure. Now, if I were to drive a 911 R and it handled exactly like the 993, I'd immediately think, "this sucks, what the eff?", and write it off, listing the other things I could buy with less money. I understand that standards have moved on. But then, I can't deny nor explain the giggles and smiles I had when sliding the 993 around the track. I'm genuinely torn on this. Maybe something like a GT86 or a Cayman GT4 could answer these questions for me. Maybe they'd make everything make sense. Maybe it's possible to make raw, exhilarating sports cars that hold up to modern scrutiny, but manufacturers just don't want to.

As cars get better and better, they start to lose a bit of personality. They start to feel less like dance partners we need to be aware about and sensitive towards, and more like weapons. But does anyone really love a tool, a weapon, like they could a dance partner? How does one engineer a heart, soul, personality, and even endearing flaws into a pile of nuts, bolts, and oil? Into a product to be mass produced and sold? There was a time when simply making a car fast also meant making it fun. Now, there seems to me to be a bit of a divorce between fast and fun in cars, simply because of how stupidly fast they've become. Cars simply don't have flaws and distinct personalities anymore; a 911 can grip and be as stable as a GT-R today. We seem to have everything figured out, to a point where a 2.3 ton tank electric SUV monstrosity can be marketed as a sporty vehicle, and people lap it up. And it makes me sad.

Okay XSquare. Stop writing and making people scroll through your crap. You're not actually a clown; you don't even have a 911. Stop acting like one talking about philosophy and crap and finish up this post already. It's been two whole weeks.
 
534
United States
Golden
racer2833
Nissan has had some very interesting concepts for cars to compete at Le Mans such as the Nissan Sponsored Delta Wing and the IZOD but imagine them bringing a front engined LMP1 to Le Mans whereas their competitors were all running mid-engine. Suffice to say the Nissan GT-R LM only compete in one season before getting canned.

This week we are taking a look at the Nissan GT-R LM. This weeks car is chosen by @Nismonath5

Nissan_Motorsports_-_Nissan_GT-R_LM_Nismo_-23_%2818860958202%29.jpg
 
Last edited:
5,761
Germany
Hanover/Germany
alexpkas
A current list of all not yet used cars for COTW:

ABARTH (1)
1500 Biposto Bertone B.A.T 1 1952 (N100)

ALFA ROMEO (4)
4C Gr.4 (Gr.4)
4C Launch Edition 2014 (N200)
Giulia TZ2 Carrozzata da Zagato CN.AR750106 1965 (Gr.X)
MiTo 1.4 T Sport 2009 (N200)

Alpine (3)
Vision Gran Turismo 2017 (Gr.1)
Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)
Vision Gran Turismo Race Mode (Gr.X)

ASTON MARTIN (5)
DB3S CN.1 1953 (Gr.X)
DB11 2016 (N600)
DP-100 Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)
Vantage Gr.4 (Gr.4)
Vulcan 2016 (N800)

AUDI (10)
R8 4.2 FSI R Tronic 2007 (N400)
R8 LMS Audi Team Sport WRT 2015 (Gr.3)
R18 TDI Audi Team Sport Joest 2011 (Gr.1)
R18 TDI Le Mans 2011 (Gr.1)
R18 e-tron 2016 (Gr.1)
Sport quattro S1 Pikes Peak 1987 (Gr.B)
TT Coupe 3.2 quattro 2003 (N200)
TT Cup 2016 (Gr.4)
TTS Coupe 2014 (N300)
Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.1)

BMW (7)
M4 Coupe 2014 (N400)
M4 Safety Car (Gr.X)
M6 GT3 Walkenhorst Motorsport 2016 (Gr.3)
M6 GT3 M Power Livery 2016 (Gr.3)
Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)
Z4 GT3 2011 (Gr.3)
Z8 2001 (N400)

BUGATTI (3)
Veyron Gr.4 (Gr.4)
Vision Gran Turismo Gr.1 (Gr.1)
Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)

CHEVROLET (2)
Camaro SS 2016 (N500)
Corvette Stingray Race Concept (C2) 1959 (Gr.X)

CITROËN (1)
GT by Citroen Gr.4 (Gr.4)

DODGE (9)
Charger SRT Hellcat Safety Car (N700)
SRT Tomahawk VGT Gr.1 (Gr.1)
SRT Tomahawk VGT Racing (Gr.X)
SRT Tomahawk VGT Street (Gr.X)
SRT Tomahawk VGT Technology (Gr.X)
Superbee 1970 (N300)
Viper Gr.4 (Gr.4)
Viper SRT10 Coupe 2006 (N500)
Viper SRT GT3-R 2015 (Gr.3)

FERRARI (5)
250 GT Berlinetta passo corto CN.2521 1961 (N300)
250 GTO CN.3729GT 1962 (Gr.X)
458 Italia 2009 (N600)
458 Italia GT3 2013 (Gr.3)
Dino 246GT 1971 (N200)

FIAT (2)
500 F 1968 (N100)
500 1.2 8v Lounge SS 2008 (N100)

FORD (7)
Focus Gr.B Rally Car (Gr.B)
GT 2006 (N600)
GT LM Spec II Test Car (Gr.3)
Mustang Gr.3 Road Car (N500)
Mustang Gr.B Rally Car (Gr.B)
Mustang GT Premium Fastback 2015 (N400)
Mustang Mach 1 1971 (N300)

GRAN TURISMO (6)
Amuse S2000 GT1 Turbo (N600)
Chris Holstrom Concepts 1967 Chevy Nova 2013 (N700)
Racing Kart 125 Shifter (Gr.X)
Red Bull X2014 Standard 2014 (Gr.X)
Red Bull X2014 Junior 2014 (Gr.X)
Red Bull X2019 Competition (Gr.X)

HONDA (7)
Fit Hybrid 2014 (N100)
NSX Concept-GT Raybrig 2016 (Gr.2)
NSX Gr.3 (Gr.3)
NSX Gr.4 (Gr.4)
S660 2015 (N100)
S800 1966 (N100)
Sports Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)

HYUNDAI (5)
Genesis Gr.3 (Gr.3)
Genesis Gr.4 (Gr.4)
Genesis Gr.B Rally Car (Gr.B)
N 2025 Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.1)
N 2025 Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)

INFINITI (1)
Concept Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)

JAGUAR (7)
D-Type 1954 (Gr.X)
E-Type Coupe 1961 (N300)
F-Type Gr.3 (Gr.3)
F-Type Gr.4 (Gr.4)
XJ13 1966 (Gr.X)
XJR-9 1988 (Gr.1)
Vision Gran Turismo Coupe (Gr.X)

KTM (1)
X-BOW R 2012 (N300)

LAMBORGHINI (7)
Aventador LP700-4 2011 (N700)
Aventador LP750-4 Superveloce 2015 (N800)
Countach LP400 1974 (N400)
Huracan Gr.4 (Gr.4)
Huracan LP610-4 2015 (N600)
Miura P400 Bertone Prototype CN.0706 1967 (N400)
Veneno 2014 (N800)

LANCIA (1)
Stratos 1973 (N200)

LEXUS (4)
LC500 2017 (N500)
LF-LC GT Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)
RC F au Tom's 2016 (Gr.2)
RC F Gr.4 (Gr.4)

MAZDA (10)
Atenza Gr.3 Road Car (N500)
Atenza Gr.4 (Gr.4)
Atenza Sedan XD L Package 2015 (N200)
Demio XD Touring 2015 (N100)
LM55 Vision Gran Turismo Gr.1 (Gr.1)
LM55 Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)
Roadster Touring Car (N200)
Roadster S 2015 (N100)
RX500 1970 (N300)
RX-Vision GT3 Concept 2020 (Gr.3)

MCLAREN (7)
650S Gr.4 (Gr.4)
650S GT3 2015 (Gr.3)
F1 GTR BMW Kokusai Kaihatsu UK Racing 1995 (Gr.3)
MP4-12c 2010 (N600)
P1 GTR 2016 (Gr.X)
Ultimate Vision Gran Turismo Gr.1 (Gr.1)
Ultimate Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)

MERCEDES-BENZ (7)
A45 AMG 4MATIC 2013 (N400)
AMG F1 W08 EQ Power+ (Gr.X)
AMG F1 W08 EQ Power+ Color Variation (Gr.X)
AMG Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)
AMG Vision Gran Turismo LH Edition (Gr.X)
AMG Vision Gran Turismo Racing Series (Gr.X)
Sauber C9 1989 (Gr.1)

MINI (2)
Cooper S 2005 (N200)
Clubman Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)

MITSUBISHI (4)
Lancer Evolution IV GSR 1996 (N300)
Lancer Evolution Final Edition Gr.3 (Gr.3)
Lancer Evolution Final Edition Gr.B Rally Car (Gr.B)
Lancer Evolution Final Edition Gr.B Road Car (N500)

NISSAN (11)
Concept 2020 Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)
Fairlady Z Version S 2007 (N300)
GT-R Gr.4 (Gr.4)
GT-R Gr.B Rally Car (Gr.B)
GT-R Motul Autech 2016 (Gr.2)
GT-R Premium Edition 2017 (N600)
GT-R Safety Car (Gr.X)
GT-R Xanavi Nismo (Gr.2)
R92CP 1992 (Gr.1)
Skyline GT-R V-spec (R33) 1997 (N300)
Skyline GT-R V-spec II Nür (R34) 2002 (N300)

PEUGEOT (9)
208 GTI by Peugeot Sport 2014 (N200)
908 HDI FAP Team Peugeot Total 2010 (Gr.1)
RCZ Gr.3 (Gr.3)
RCZ Gr.3 Road Car (N500)
RCZ Gr.4 (Gr.4)
RCZ Gr.B Rally Car (Gr.B)
L500R Hybrid Vision Gran Turismo 2017 (Gr.X)
L750R Hybrid Vision Gran Turismo 2017 (Gr.1)
Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)

PORSCHE (3)
911 GT3 (997) 2008 (N400)
911 GT3 RS 2016 (N600)
962C 1988 (Gr.1)

RENAULT SPORT (4)
Clio RS 220 EDC Trophy 2015 (N200)
Clio RS 220 EDC Trophy 2016 (N200)
Megane RS Trophy 2011 Safety Car (N300)
R.S.01 GT3 2016 (Gr.3)

SHELBY (1)
Cobra Daytona Coupe 1964 (Gr.X)

SUBARU (6)
BRZ S 2015 (N200)
BRZ Falken Tire/Turn 14 Distribution 2017 (Gr.X)
Impreza Coupe WRX Type R STi Version VI 1999 (N300)
WRX Gr.3 (Gr.3)
WRX Gr.B (Gr.B)
WRX STI Type S 2014 (N300)

TESLA (1)
Model S Signature Performance 2012 (Gr.X)

TOYOTA (17)
86 Gr.4 (Gr.4)
86 Gr.B Rally Car (Gr.B)
86 GRMN 2016 (N200)
86 GT 2015 (N200)
86 GT Limited 2016 (N200)
Corolla Levin 3door 1600GT APEX (AE86) 1983 (N100)
Crown Athlete G Safety Car (N300)
FT-1 (Gr.X)
FT-1 Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)
FT-1 Vision Gran Turismo Gr.3 (Gr.3)
GR Supra Racing Concept (Gr.3)
GR Supra RZ 2020 (N400)
S-FR 2015 (N100)
Sprinter Trueno 3door 1600GT APEX (AE86) 1983 (N100)
TS030 Hybrid 2012 (Gr.1)
TS050 Hybrid Toyota Gazoo Racing 2016 (Gr.1)
Tundra TRD Pro 2019 (N400)

VOLKSWAGEN (7)
1200 1966 (N100)
Scirocco Gr.4 (Gr.4)
Golf VII GTI 2014 (N200)
GTI Roadster Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)
GTI Supersport Vision Gran Turismo (Gr.X)
GTI Vision Gran Turismo Gr.3 (Gr.3)
Samba Bus Type 2 (T1) 1962 (N100)

ZAGATO (1)
IsoRivolta Vision GT 2017 (Gr.X)
 

Vic Reign93

Tricky Vic
Premium
2,500
United Kingdom
Lincoln
Victory_Reign93
Linthium Reign
So it’s time to try and chip away at the growing list of cars i’ve not reviewed, might as well start with the recent ‘LongBoi’ Nismo LM. 😛

Dreamt up by the same guy who also brought what was originally an Indycar replacement concept, to the world of endurance racing in the form of the Deltawing.

The notable difference this time was the lack of lawsuits. 😂

The other notable difference was this wasn’t gonna be another Garage 56 entry, the GTR LM was going right into the deep end that was LMP1.

The only design rule? Don’t copy the others.

So for starters it was front engined, last car in the top Le Mans class to be front engined was the Panoz LMP1 Evo. (Side note: It was Don Panoz who was part of the previously mentioned lawsuit regarding the Deltawing.)

Funny how those 2 manufacturers can’t keep away from each other. 😁

But unlike the Panoz which was a traditional FR layout, Nissan decided on a radical FF layout with the hybrid kinetic flywheels sending the hybrid to the skinny rear wheels(230MM rear tyres and 360MM’s up front.) while the front tyres were powered by the ICE.

Said engine was a 3.0 Twin turbo V6 with direct injection which was good for roughly 500hp(604hp in GTS so I’m guessing fuel flow restrictions were in play.) and was backed up by roughly 750hp from the hybrid system giving it a combined output of over 1250hp.🤤

For reference, The Toyota TS040 had 986hp combined and the Porsche 919 had around 900hp combined, so the Nismo was coming loaded for bear at 1250hp.

Of course as we now know, the hybrid system wasn’t finished due to numerous issues so it’s outing at Le Mans in 2015 was tragic to say the least. :indiff:

It sadly never got a chance to try again after that, but it now lives on in games like GT Sport where muppets like us try not to understeer it into the nearest wall. 😂

Now it’s hybrid system works, but it ALL goes through the front wheels so throttle management is critical, but on fast flowing tracks like Tokyo East Outer Loop it comes into its own as compared to its fellow LMP1 counterparts its the quickest stock on the straights.

Tuned however..

It just takes off like a jet by comparison to its counterparts. 😛

For example, the R18 ‘16 and the TSO50 Hybrid make only 526hp and 506hp respectively from their engines, the 919’s can be slightly upped to 535hp from 500 and the TS030 can be upped to 641hp from 529hp.

The Nismo? From 604hp to 936hp. 😲

Combined with the 750hp from the hybrid system means a combined output of nearly 1700hp. 🤤

Now of course putting such power through the front tyres requires some delicate footwork which’ll no doubt be noticed from watching back the races. ;)

Yes the tyre wear will be horrid compared to other cars, yes it requires a driving style tweak to get the most out of it and yes, standing starts will be hell for this thing. 😏

But this real world failure has great potential to be a virtual world success. 👍

Verdict: Meme machine 😂👍
 
3,762
Australia
Australia
Good lord I hate this car. I didnt like the way Nissan said to "not make an Audi R18 copy" and "do your own thing" and then not fund it after a a bad intro race.

lLbXRYD.jpg


I tried it at 936hp 800kg with a tune and max 400km/h final drive... on Le Mans w/ chicanes. Of course. It's hard to be fair to the car outside of its intended purpose on other tracks.

And it isnt slow by any means. I mean I got a 3'30" without too much hard work except for the fact the car has a lot of vices that you have to work around.

I use TCS5 and its still spinning up to 3rd given sufficient battery power. It all goes to the front.

It has the top end. I'm hitting 375km/h no draft.

However I did get blasted by a Porsche 919 and a Audi R18 2016 simply because those cars can actually handle in corners AND they can put down that power out of corners.

Sure I overtake them on the straights but their cornering means I not often in a position to overtake anyway.

When you accelerate be sure the car is pointed in the direction you want to go. This car cannot accelerate and steer. It can barely accelerate in fact.

Braking I found to be very strong but it does not like any steering angle at all when braking. I cant get it to brake in corners well.

The car is fast in corners as long as you place the car correctly going in otherwise you get understeer. The car has no capability to oversteer. And cornering speed isnt too good anyway. The TS050 P919 etc. will out corner you easy.

On Le mans the battery regen is ok. You seem to get decent battery on just about every corner but battery means wheelspin.

I cannot imagine any sort of endurance, not even the 1hr Gr.1 endurances GT Sport has in this car.

I've done endurances in all the modern LMP-H cars like the TS050, P919 and the Audi R18 2016 but those cars are comfortable confident handling cars with unimpressive top ends.

The GTR Nismo LM has great top end but nothing else.
 
601
Singapore
Singapore
XSquareStickIt
It's a well known and indisputable fact by this point in the game's 3 year and counting life cycle that Group 1 is quite simply the most whack category in Gran Turismo Sport. Consisting of wildly varying machines built with different rules and aims in mind that really should have no business racing each other, Gr.1 represents machinery from Group C monsters, break room VGT creations, and highly advanced LMP1 Hybrid wizardry. Gr.1 is also the only category aside from Gr.4 to feature different driven wheel layouts, with a mix of full time AWD, part time hybrid AWD, RWD, and FWD.

...wait, FWD?

Enter: The Nissan GT-R LM Nismo '15, a.k.a. "Longboi", a brilliant machine with no faults whatsoever that hadn't seen success in Gran Turismo Sport only because Gr.1 is a load of nonsense.


Also well known by this point is how the real car... didn't do as hoped, in the one racing event it was specifically made to run in: the 2015 24 Hours of Le Mans, due to faults in its hybrid systems and debris, which are entirely out of the drivers' and engineers' hands, and therefore shouldn't be indicative at all of the car's merits. Because of its lack of results in both the real world and here in Gran Turismo Sport, it's difficult to even remember sometimes that the beloved "Longboi" is even in the game when lumped into Gr.TS050. With its three Achilles' Heels, parts failure, debris, and torque steer conveniently not being simulated in Gran Turismo Sport, is there a hidden gemstone buried deep in the shadows of the TS050 and 919, just waiting to be found six years after its initial debut? Had it been too quickly written off by fans and even its own manufacturer due to unfortunate circumstances? Is there a winning wolf sleeping underneath the stretched out sheep cloth-


...okay, maybe not.

I may say this in every racing car review: "It's very easy to judge a racing car. If it wins, it's good. If not, it's bad. Quite literally nothing else matters in a racing car." *Takes quick glances around* But, with the GT-R LM Nismo, we KNOW it's horrible. It's proven that in real life by getting out-qualified by an LMP2 and not even covering 70% of the race winner's distance, thereby scoring a grand total of zero points. And if you need more evidence of its suckage, all you have to do is to shell out a million credits to buy one and drive it for yourself, preferably not into the pit wall as you wheelspin and understeer trying to navigate out of the pits. To review this car listing its faults would be as big a waste of everyone's time as trying to review a 3D Sonic game; We know it's bad. And so instead of a review this week, I thought we might just chill out in an air conditioned room with a cup of Starbucks coffee and talk in a very civilised and relaxing manner about our experiences in and feelings towards the GT-R LM Nismo.

Somewhere like... here, for example. Please visit soon with a team of friends. Atmosphere is amazing, cars are menacing, comes with Starbucks and lots of pretty OLs!

To drive, the Nismo certainly requires a lot of driver adjustment and getting used to, not just because it's almost literally a one legged man in an butt kicking contest, but also because you'll need to decide on what little settings you can change in the game prior to driving it: For starters, you'll want to knock your brake bias far enough backwards to get lapped 159 times by the Porsche 919, a common trick in this game with hybrid cars to harvest more regen charge under braking. While this turns your typical MR LMP1 into a snappy tightrope balancing act with the rear, the Nismo remains true, straight, and stable under trail braking — almost too much so for your typical racetrack not named la Sarthe, thanks to its long wheelbase. And speaking of hybrid systems, the one in the Nismo works in mysterious ways; while other LMP1s can charge their batteries by holding a smidge of brakes at full throttle, converting fuel into electricity, the Nismo won't charge its batteries like that. The only way I've found to charge the battery for a hot qualifying lap is to use about, say, half throttle up to redline such that you aren't using battery power, mash the brake pedal, harvesting some charge in the process, then half throttle up to redline again. It takes about twenty millenniums to fully charge the battery as a result, and it discharges very quickly as well; you'll be lucky to have any charge left past mid fourth gear.


Once you get your brake bias and charging sorted, you'll then want to decide on whether or not to use Traction Control, and how much of it. While TCS is almost always going to slow you down in this game, I find it worth considering in the LM Nismo to save your tyre and battery life by preventing wheelspin, because the latter is unavoidable even with the full strength of TCS on at 5, not to mention it somewhat helps with power understeer out of tighter corners as well. However, it utterly cripples the car in high speed sweepers, where the car is more than capable of negotiating a bend with its tyre-crushing downforce, but TCS simply goes, "DAME DA NE!", and cuts power to the wheels like an idiot. Other oddities include a complete inability to cut any kerbs on a racing track, regardless of TCS settings, because the stiff as bricks suspension and the combined 1,354HP make the inside wheels spin up to the speed of sound and spontaneously combust the moment you give uneven traction to either front tyre, engaging the diff and ensuring it also brings the other tyre with it, resulting in a sense of paralysis from behind the wheel until you wait and wake from the nightmare, which is, needless to say, a very slow, odd, and jarring experience, especially when you're doing LMP1-H speeds with LMP1 mass and LMP1 gearb-


...actually, the gearbox in this thing is a five speed, for whatever reason I'm sure is only known to Prince, making the GT-R LM Nismo feel more alike a Nismo GT-R LM to drive than a LMP1 that requires frantic paddle work. To stretch five gears from 0 to 382km/h (237mph), the ratios each have to be longer than the wheelbase, not to mention wider apart than the distance between it and the 919. First gear is good for a whopping 150km/h (93mph), and that means you'll negotiate most corners with it — and be forced to deal with the Godzillian wheelspin being in first beckons. Despite the engine's generous looking tabletop like torque curve, the ratios are so widespread that you really do have to shift near redline and downshift almost as soon as you can without blowing up the engine, simply because you'll need all of the powerband to ensure the Nismo has the acceleration and top speed it needs with only a five speed box, giving you little to no leeway in shifting, and a top speed that only just nudges out a 919's despite the Porsche literally dividing its engine power to propel the car and charge its batteries at those speeds. While Nissan can justify the FF layout, citing aerodynamic efficiency and exploiting loopholes in the rulebook, I really cannot fathom the sheer amount of stupidity that is required to elect a five speed when everyone else is running seven — at least. While not employed in the 24 Hours of Le Mans, or even most of this game's Sport Mode races, the 5 speed means there is simply no good way for the Nismo to launch from a standing start: traction control bogs the car and drops the engine well below boost for almost 3.5 seconds before you get up to operating range, which means that the fastest way to get it off the line is to balance the throttle manually and keep an ear out for the tyres and revs to gauge for yourself how much wheelspin you want off the line without falling out of boost or taking off half the front tyres' lives at launch. It's not exactly intuitive, fun, or fast, needless to say.

Something tells me no one at Nissan considered it might rain on June 13-14, 2015.

Oh! I thought I wasn't going to poop all over the car today! もーもちろん!今すぐいいことを書く!いいことばっかりじゃないのほうが信じられるですから!はい!英語の読者はそういうものです!本当です!

Once you get going physically and mentally though, the GT-R LM Nismo is actually pretty pleasant to drive, especially if you're already accustomed to the grossly overpowered FF cars of Gr.4, which feel sloppier than melting French cheese on a hot pavement in comparison to the Nismo's composure and immediacy. As one can expect from a LMP1 prototype, the suspension is set up to be stiff as bricks, and as such there is none of that horrendous nose lifting on power that plagues the overly powerful FF cars in Gr.4. There is no perceptible delay between input and result from behind the wheel, and the gs this car can pull are nothing short of savage; on the default Racing Hard tyres and 0 Brake Balance, this car will go from its drag limited top speed of 342km/h (211mph) to zero in roughly 4.8 seconds, which I'm sure is a faster way to stop than plowing through one of the poor chaps' houses on Le Mans. Nissan proudly boasts the aerodynamic efficiency of the car in comparison to its contemporaries, and for good reason: where this car really comes alive and shines is at tracks with several high speed sweepers, such as Toukyo East, where the amount of grip on offer feels enough to dislodge my brain through a TV screen, as there was no comprehending the limits of the car at high speed corners. On the Racing Medium tyres we were running on race day, one barely even has to lift for the tight infield chicane with the bridge sheltering the connection between the two turns, with only one other slight braking zone off the main expressway. I personally feel that this thing generates more downforce in dirty air than a 919 does in clean air. It's mind bogging enough to drive high downforce racing machines wherein more speed gives the car more grip, but that go kart like immediacy at prototype speeds in an FF of all things is, quite simply, entirely unique to the GT-R LM Nismo.


So, we know that the car is rubbish in real life and in Sport Mode. *OOF!* But maybe, just maybe, with a car that's so out of the box, perhaps it might be prudent to look elsewhere out of our usual box for an area where the Nismo can shine. Just like the road going GT-Rs, the Longboi secretly begs to be tuned to bring out its true potential Nissan won't give you upfront. The GT-R LM Nismo is already the single most powerful FF in the series' history even when just considering its ICE output alone, but as Vic has already alluded to in his review, Godzilla LM Nismo can be tuned to achieve nuclear power, all of which shoved through the front tyres, because, you know, why not? What could possibly go wrong?

I highly recommend you give this excellent video by Jay Leno's Garage a watch, as Jay shares a very compelling and infectious appreciation of the car as he interviews the chief engineer of the project, Zack Eakin. At about 10:16 in that video, Jay poses a question to Zack, which prompts the latter to reveal that the hybrid system in the Nismo can actually drive the rear wheels, and that they were (then) currently debating whether to drive the front or rear wheels with the hybrid system, as they could do away with a lot of drive lines and complications if they went with a pure FWD layout. Of course, we all know that the Nismo is FF in this game, with no way of changing the drivetrain layout. But here's hoping that, when if GT7 arrives, we can change the drivetrain layout à la Forza within Extreme Modifications, and perhaps even give it a 7 speed sequential, which should make the GT-R LM Nismo a true force to be reckoned with, especially considering its already obscene power in comparison to its rivals straight out of the box.

Not even the Loudboi 787B could save me from the Longboi when tuned!

Until then, I thought I'd try a quick retune of the 5 speed box to cruise to hilarious victories in Campaign Mode's Gr.1 Monza race, where this car will very quickly earn you back the credits and mileage points you spend on it. Because come on, can you look me in the eyes and tell me you don't want a 936+750HP FF car in your garage?

Max power, min mass.
Brake Balance: +5 (rear bias)
Tyres: Racing Hard / Racing Hard
Suspension: stock, lol, why would you waste time meddling with the suspension when adding 55% more power to a car? We're trying to GO FAST here!
Diff: As shown. Very mildly loosened from default for placebo effect.
Gearbox: This is the important bit: pay attention! These steps have to be done in this very specific order!

1) Choose the full custom gearbox.
2) Set the Top Speed to minimum (200km/h)
3) Set the Final Gear to maximum (5.000)
4) Set the Top Speed to maximum (400km/h)
5) Set the Final Gear to 4.580
6) Set the individual gears as shown.

1st: 1.160 / 176km/h (110.6mph)
2nd: 0.815 / 250km/h (155.3mph)
3rd: 0.653 / 313km/h (194.4mph)
4th: 0.555 / 368km/h (228.6mph)
5th: 0.487 / 450km/h (279.6mph)

Even on Racing Hard tyres, you can take the first chicane of Monza no chicane (:indiff:) at high 90s km/h, which should still keep the engine on boost in first. It'll do around 375km/h on the home straight of Monza off hybrid assist in clean air, and will nudge 400 on Route X.

Also, you can't tell me this isn't the coolest exhaust backfire in motorsport history! I can only imagine what they must look like in real life in the dead of night from the cockpit!

Almost as if I wanted it, the GT-R LM Nismo comes up in Car of the Week just as I wrap up a way-too-long philosophical ramble about how results and lap times aren't everything, and that there is merit and value in cars that don't necessarily put down the best numbers. All the more ironic it is then, that the GT-R LM Nismo, a prototype racing car built only with the most objective of goals: to win, and nothing else, is perhaps the best car to exemplify that belief. Sure, it didn't win. It did embarrassingly, in fact. But look at the journey Nissan took with this car: it sought talent from unconventional channels, namely the GT Academy, to drive a multi million dollar machine. While other manufacturers keep their prototypes closely guarded secrets, Nissan was more than welcoming to the press, allowing photos of the car without its shell on and entertaining several interviews about the car. You can tell they were confident. You can tell they were excited. You can tell they love racing, new ideas, fostering new talent, exploring new possibilities. Don't we all wish our workplaces could be a lot more like that? Other manufacturers always love to claim how they're so different and unique from others (I'm a fanboy of one, but Hiroshima's a looong way from here), but Nissan not only talks the talk, but runs the race as well. Even after the cars' embarrassing results in the 24 Hours of Le Mans, Nissan still continues to allow it to appear in games, which tells me that they are proud and unashamed of taking a risk that didn't pay off. And really, just because it lost horribly in a race due to debris and electrical failure, does that mean that their idea and interpretation of the rules had no merit? That new, possibly better ways to achieve the same result are not worth exploring? That courage, and the people at Nissan who engineered and greenlit this financial risk, aren't worth celebrating? I have a very distinct feeling Nissan would've been on the top of the world if they actually managed to win 2015's 24 Hours of Le Mans, and that we'd still be buzzing about it to this day. It really just goes to show that the line between genius and insanity is simply down to something as binary and barbaric as results.

And that I feel is a fault of us as humans, not the cars.


Yeah, don't review a car; review an entire species! Way to go, me! How much sugar did they put in this coffee?!

The GT-R LM Nismo may not have won 2015's 24 Hours of Le Mans. It certainly isn't going to win Car of the Year awards from us. But there is one thing it has won very convincingly: my utmost respect for the brand.

いいえ、ちゃんと褒めていますよ!悪いことなんて考えられない!何?「助けて!」って書いてない!本当だ!ま…まさか!このコーヒーに…!アアアァァァ!
 

Vic Reign93

Tricky Vic
Premium
2,500
United Kingdom
Lincoln
Victory_Reign93
Linthium Reign
You mentioned something near the end about Nissan being proud of the Nismo LM despite its not so great outage at Le Mans and Nissan letting us race it in games.

It reminded me of another established name in Le Mans who’s attempt in 2011 in LMP1 was considerably worse despite great success in the same class in the 2009 LMS championship.

The manufacturer in question?

Aston Martin and the car they ran for the 2011 Le Mans?

The AMR One.

Like the Nismo, it got a video game debut, in Forza Motorsports 4 in its April car pack.

And promptly covered more mileage on release day than it ever covered at Le Mans, though admittedly that was a bar so low it didn’t even require the effort of jumping. 😂
 
288
Greece
Crete
The LOLBus, the Longboi, however you call it, the GT-R LM NISMO is a truly unique machine
Gran Turismo's car roster is no stranger to crazy Nissan prototypes. Even as far back as Gran Turismo 4, the R92CP, a longtail Group C monster with almost 1200 horsepower was already lapping the Nordschleife putting sub 5-minite laps, that puts modern LMP1's speed to shame. The DeltaWing, the spiritual child of an Indycar concept, looked like nothing else on the grid back then and even to this day, its bodyshape remains iconic. The GT-R LM NISMO combines the endless amounts of horsepower of the Group C car with a chassis as equally bizzare as the DeltaWing's, to make a car that would go down in motorsport history...for all the wrong reasons.

Staying true to its name, the GT-R LM NISMO retains some visual aspects of the road car, giving it an concept car-esque look
Looking at the specs of this car, you can tell immediately that this is no ordinary ride. Weighting only 800 kilograms, it is powered by a combination of a 600 horsepower 3-liter V6 and a battery system, to produce a total of around 1200 horsepower. They may seem like your run-of-the-mill LMP1 specs but if you have at least taken a glance at this thing you may have already guessed that there's a catch. Indeed, all this horsepower (yes, both the ICU AND the battery power) is transmitted through the front-wheels and if you've driven any front-wheel drive car in this game (if you didn't it's ok, they do suck) you know putting that much power to the front is a BAD idea in every way...

...or is it? Nissan wouldn't make a front-wheel drive LMP1 just for the lols, so it must have some advantages compared to a conventional mid-engined layout.

Naturally, as an LMP1, the GT-R LM NISMO fells right at home here at Le Mans
Obviously, a front-wheel drive car is relatively easier to drive than a rear-wheel drive one. Of course, endurance prototypes are easy to drive by nature, so a front-wheel drive layout wouldn't make much difference in that regard, but it's easier nonetheless to save the front from understeering to the nearest tyre wall than the rear oversteering to the nearest graveltrap. Plus, having that extra weight to the front of the car make slower corners a breeze compared to an mid-engined car, since you will have inherently more grip to work with, while in the second case you risk understeer.

The extra weight to the front of the car helps to keep it from understeering while tackilng slower corners. It is the opposite for mid-engined layouts: you don't have any weight at the front, meaning that handling the weight transfer wrong can really slow you down with understeer
Yeah, an easy ride is a life-improvement, but if you are driving a 1200 HP LMP1 car in the first place, you probably know already what you're doing and the car being FF or MR wouldn't make that much difference to you when it comes to driving difficulty. Speedwise however, it is an entirely different story. The way Nissan engineered the GT-R LM NISMO gives it a very low profile compared to other LMP1s. You probably noticed it too-the car is slicker and lower to the ground compared to, for example, the one-year younger TS050, which is as standard of an LMP1 design as you can get. This has an effect on the speed of the car: whereas the other hybrids in the game barely reach 320 km/h on the Mulsanne straight, the Nissan easily reaches 340, coming short only to the non-hybrids Audi and Peugeot. And we are talking about the layout with the chicanes, so it's not like it took it years to reach the speed, it also has the top-end acceleration to boot.

An LMP1 tackling the Porsche curves is a sight to behold
And it may look like a brick, but the lack of aerodynamic elements doesn't mean that it's a slouch in faster corners. With a front splitter that you can land an Airbus on and an equally large rear-wing, you will find yourself barely lifting off while taking the Porsche curves at Le Mans.

So, in summary, the GT-R LM NISMO is one of the most powerful LMP1 cars, giving even Group Cs a run for their money, has the most top speed out of any hybrid while also retaining their insane acceleration and can take corners just as fast, if not even faster. A car like that should dominate in its class in every track and be a no-brainer pick for anyone who's taking the game a tad bit more than seriously. But the reality is, you never see this present in races, daily or lobbies, apart from the occasional new player. Why is that?

Prototypes would probably be designed differently today if this car had succeded
An unconventional car such as the GT-R LM NISMO requires an equally unconventional driving style to push it to the limit. And what an unconventional car it is. Unlike the other hybrid cars in Gr.1, the GT-R puts all of its horsepower on the front wheels, meaning that up to 3rd gear, you have to deal with insane amounts of wheelspin and consequently, understeer, even with traction control. To counter that you need extremely precise throttle control that not even the Group C cars require to be driven, and in some high-speed corners where other LMP's just take full-throttle, you need to either let of the throttle completely, or moderately control it, and failure to do so will send you understeering off the track. Plus, an extremely heavy front end results in an equally heavy steering, thus requiring more steering lock than other LMPs to take the same corners.

Full of potential and yet doomed from the start, the GT-R LM NISMO's story is full of what ifs
These quirks require alot of time to get used to, and it doesn't help that they end up making driving the LM NISMO feel more of a choir than anything. And even when you get used to it, you are left with a big "so what" feeling. The thing is, the LM NISMO may have some considerate advantages compared to the other hybrids, that doesn't mean however that the other options are any slower. And they don't require the same adjustment time as the NISMO. What you struggled to get from it, you could get it from any other LMP1-not just the hybrids-for much less effort.

So, in the end, why isn't this car taken seriously? Because it's slow? No, the GT-R LM NISMO isn't the slowest Gr.1 car by a long shot. It's just the concept it's based on is so radical and extreme, that it is in a way daunting to most drivers, in the same way you think twice about taking a Group B car for a drive in a rally sim. You can't deny that it's an interesting concept and you might drive it in time trial out of curiosity, but in a serious race? The risk and adjustment is too much for a reward that you can get from any other car in its class.

So in a way, the Nissan GT-R LM NISMO isn't a bad car. It's just that the world wasn't ready for it yet when it first came out and it isn't ready six-years later as of writing this review. Who knows, maybe in 6 years from now, we might see another front-wheel drive beast take on the unforgiving nature of the 24 Hours of Le Mans.

So overall, this car is a Beater.
 
Last edited:
3,762
Australia
Australia
I tried it out on a few tracks that suit it. I'm at n300 std. weight, BMB tune + 300km/h final drive.

Around tracks like Laguna Seca its a shoe in against N400 and GT4 cars.

The top end is woeful at something like 220km/h but you should be getting sub 1'35" times easily.

The handling is wonderful. It feels like it has no vices. The steering is perfect, it has all the good bits of an MR design with no downsides. When it breaks it does so gently and you can mitigate it.

Its easy on tyres and fuel given it seems to use 2 stroke oil mix. The engine note is super annoying. It has good mid range from say 50-150km/h but its slow going above that.


42790101_10160933977215048_3854315496950202368_n.jpg


Even around some power circuits like Bathurst it does ok given that the main straight is downhill so you get a boost to like 275km/h.

Its ok around the "Ring but you need to get a gap before you enter the straight lest you be overwhelmed at the top end. I would not try Le Mans or the Tokyo tracks.
 
601
Singapore
Singapore
XSquareStickIt
Just a reminder to update your games before race day/ night. It's a chunky one at nearly 3.3 gigs.

...and also to plug my RX500 review, which is more or less done. I just need to find the time to shoot the thing.
 
3,762
Australia
Australia
I have a real hard time with the Group B cars... firstly PD dont really give them any opportunity to run.

2ndly their dirt drive model tends to alienate some people... I'm ok with it.

Lastly I just dont have enough mileage on them to compare.

My most used Gr.B car is the Pikes Peak Audi which *I think* is the fastest of the lot but also the hardest to drive.

The only other car I've driven to any degree is the Subaru WRX which I found to be MUCH more stable than the Audi but if you can master the Audi then use that.

I blame PDs short shrift on this more than anything else and the fact that the Gr.B leagues stuff is absolultey shockingly bad.
 
Last edited:
601
Singapore
Singapore
XSquareStickIt
The Mazda RX500. What is it, and why is it in this game?

Hell if I know.


If you know me, you probably know I'm a big fan of Mazdas, especially their Rotary Powered sports cars. Yet, here's a Rotary Powered one-off concept car painstakingly preserved and restored by Mazda, and faithfully recreated in Gran Turismo Sport, literally with "Powered By ROTARY" scrawled across the wedge shaped back of this thing, and I really don't have much of anything to say about it. Because, for starters, what even the heck is it?


Hell if I know.

Is it a mind blowing concept car that puts down insane numbers unheard of during its time, or look so instantly radical that it becomes a poster car for 8 year old kids who know nothing about cars? The NA "982"cc 10A Inline 2 Rotor in this door wedge shaped car produces a respectable 247HP (184kW), but the folks over at Mercedes were making 4 Rotors producing upwards of 350HP from their Wankel Engine concepts. Does it showcase the different thinking of idiosyncratic engineers to offer a peek at how different a future we could've had, then? The RX500 is supposedly a showcase of road safety technology that might have become as commonplace, or even required, as Volvo's 3 point seatbelts, but if asked to name what those safety features are, I, and I suspect many others as well, would be hard pressed to name more than just a pair of stupid green lights atop the brake lights, to confuse the poor bloke unfortunate enough to be behind you approaching a red light. I mean... if you want to make a light that lets others know when a car is accelerating, shouldn't those be in the front? The aforementioned brake lights by the way, are the exact same lights as the turn signals, so your car literally will give no indication of its brakes being applied if you turn your hazards on. This thing literally has six, count them, SIX, lights on each side of the car, and the design team had to share a light for the hazards and brakes?


So what exactly makes this car safe? Does it have ABS? Does it come equipped as a standard with a hammer in the glovebox? Lane departure warning? A choker to strangle a stupid millennial for texting and driving? Cruise control? A loaded and cocked shotgun aimed to blast the intoxicated brain out of anyone that attempts to drive under the influence? Crumple zones? A Traffic Safety Amulet from Take Shrine? Rollover protection? A speaker that blasts, "DOKE, BAKA YAROU!" to pedestrians who don't hear it coming? Blind spot monitoring? Does it insure itself? Does it even have airbags?

Hell if I know.


Yes, of course it's unfair to apply modern safety standards and technology to a car in the 70s. Nonetheless, it's just difficult for me, a stupid millennial, to really appreciate the RX500's supposed safety features when I can't see any. This car is just so insignificant that I don't think I'd even know it existed at all had it not been for Gran Turismo, the shining beacon of safe and sensible driving. It really does feel to me like PD flew over to Hiroshima to scan and record some Mazda cars, like the ND Roadster and Atenza, and Mazda just happened to have the RX500 in the same room and said to PD, "we'll throw this in too to sweeten the deal", sort of like the cheap toy you didn't want that comes bundled with breakfast cereal that immediately ends up in the trash bin the moment you consume your cereal. I mean, logically speaking, there must've been better reasons as to why PD would put in the 6 months of work to get this car into the game, but hell if I know what the reasons were.


I mean, if PD had plane tickets to Hiroshima and Mazda's cooperation, you'd think they might have tried to get the R360 in the game. Or the Carol. Or the Cosmo Sport... or a SA RX-7... or a Eunos Cosmo 20B... or an AZ-1... or did a better job with the 787B. Or an EV Demio, or dual fuel RX-8. Or any RX-8. I know my doctor is right in saying that I need to watch my salt intake, and I'm not sure how true the argument of, "it's not a this or that scenario, it's either having this or not having this at all" that has been had many times over on GTPlanet is. Whatever the cases may be though, I just find it exceptionally hard to take a look at the RX500 and think anything else other than, "why are you here in this game? In N300? What do you even do? What are you even supposed to be? What's the 500 in your name supposed to mean? Why isn't there a hyphen between the 'RX' and the numbers in your name?"


Because hell if I know the answers to any of the above.

Ahh, but it's a Rotary Powered sports car by Mazda, and excruciatingly rarely for the manufacturer that prides itself on doing things differently all the time, is rear mid-engined! Maybe, as per Mazda's M.O. with their best drivers' cars such as the RX-7, RX-8, and Roadster, the RX500 might not be something that makes sense simply by looking at a spec sheet. And so the question is begged more than usual this time: how does it drive?

Hell if I k-nah, just kidding. It drives bad.


It's an old clunker on bias ply tyres and soft suspension hooked up to an open diff. Need I say more? Sure, the car is light, and therefore very agile through corners, but the complete letdown of a suspension and open diff somehow imbue an agile car with a belying sense of sloppiness and lethargy, distilling away any and all fun from the experience. The front end is so stupidly light that you have to brake hard and brake early for any corner just to get weight over the front tyres, which don't feel like they have any bite in them whatsoever, making the car feel slow to drive even though it's cornering fast. Because of the soft front end, attempting to take a corner without the stronger engine braking of 2nd brings you on an express, non stop trip to understeer city, population: you and a wall that will become your impromptu, makeshift gravestone. And if one of your rear wheels run over rumble strips or grass? Prepare to fishtail and spin like a 70s MR Corvette. The gearbox is widely spread 4 speed, and the synchros need to do so much work during each upshift that I think I'd sooner get an RX-9 than 4th gear. The choice of a 4 speed is not only unfortunate, but also perplexing, seeing as the 1967 Toyota 2000GT we tested just two weeks ago had already set the precedent for 5 speeds in performance cars, a memo the Cosmo Sport got as soon as 1968. First gear in the RX500 feels specifically made for hill starts with a Rotary Engine that needs defibrillation from idle, resulting in wheelspin city up to about 60km/h, which you'll hit and shift out of first in just about two seconds, and promptly never see again outside of the pits or digging yourself out of a trackside wall. To its credit, 4th gear still pulls strong — almost too strong, because this thing is gear limited to 259km/h (161mph) and drag/ powerband limited to 244km/h (152mph), when Rotary Engines thrive on the top end, and you really get the sense that the 10A in the RX500 desperately wants to do and give more with a fifth forward cog.


Of course, no dialogue about a Rotary powered sports car is complete without discussing... the Rotary power. Just like the utterly horrible digital depiction of the 787B in Gran Turismo Sport, the one good takeaway from the RX500 experience is its engine, a "491x2"cc Inline 2 Rotor that's naturally aspirated and carbureted, both traits being excruciating rarities among Rotary Engines represented in the Gran Turismo series, let alone when put together. Fire it up, and the car immediately makes a strong impression even before the gearbox is engaged, as the car vigorously inhales with a vengeance through carburetors to make the infamous Rotary "brap brap brap" at idle, and hot damn it is loud even at an otherwise peaceful standstill. Being an NA Rotary, it is naturally peaky and begs to be wrung and kept near to its sportbike-like 8,500rpm redline, which is done via a proper manual gearbox. And because the car was never designed for a consumer, there is nothing aside from a thin transparent plastic piece separating the engine compartment from the cockpit. It certainly doesn't sound like there's any sound deadening, engine covers, heat shielding, etc. in the car, because there is an unparalleled rawness and pureness of the sound in the cockpit that's more readily associated to a motorcycle experience than a car. Not only is it loud, pure, and proud, but unlike the digital 787B, the digital RX500 sounds utterly glorious and genuine.



The moment you start to get moving is the moment when the flame spitting engine really starts to show its true songstress talents. As with all Rotary Engines, there is an alluring and addictive smoothness to the way it revs that somehow permeates even through a TV screen and speakers, and it's hard to not be lulled by its furious lullaby into thinking that it can keep on revving higher and higher forever. If you'll forgive my bad writing and lack of more apt analogies, listening to a Rotary Engine rev is almost like watching an attractive person strip. Yeah, they look amazing now, but encourage them more and more, and they somehow find a way to give you a better and better experience, creating a positive feedback loop in your brain in and of itself, so much so that every time I smack the rev limiter on the 10A Rotary, I'm utterly dumbfounded at the notion that something so magical and trance inducing could have a physical limit. This thing has a redline? Hell if I knew from watching the rev counter rise, or feeling the engine beg for more abuse. Mated to the aforementioned 4 speed manual, each gear has to cover a wide speed range, enticingly drawing out the procedure of watching, hearing, feeling, experiencing this thing's dramatically slow and sure approach to its climatic 8.5k redline. On downshifts, not only will it spit flames as any good Rotary should, but like most Rotaries, is oddly receptive to being revved past its redline on heel toe downshifts, just as extra icing on the feedback loop cake.


As per Mazda methodology, their cars are "more than just a car with a good engine in it". (Yes Vic, the only reason why I keep bugging you to write reviews is so I can rip them off, because if I can't slipstream you in a race, I'll slipstream you in writing!) The RX500 is still a serious performer as far as lap times are concerned. I might dislike its typical old car handling traits, but on tracks where its 244km/h top speed doesn't come into play, the RX500 will more than put up a fight with a better balanced, tauter, more powerful, and much more revered younger sibling, the RX-7 Spirit R. Back in Gran Turismo 6, this car was an absolute rocket for its PP rating as well. Needless to say, its performance is respectable even by today's standards, and one can only imagine how mind blowing it must've been back in the 70s if anyone outside Mazda was allowed to sample it and give an unbiased account of it. I'm sure it is spaceship fast in the appendages of a proper alien, but me personally, I just don't click with the car, and it has spat me out either face first or butt backwards in nearly every race I've attempted with it. If you're not a freakishly adaptive alien, some chemistry with the car may be required for you to be effective in it; it's not a car for everyone.


Unfortunately, while the RX500's on track prowess is very in-character of a Mazda Rotary sports car, the same cannot be said for its utter mess of an interior. As previously mentioned, the RX500 was never meant to be put into production, and it becomes immediately clear the moment you look past its awe-inspiring butterfly doors into its cockpit. Aside from the lack of insulation between the cockpit and engine compartment, the steering wheel is oddly offset from the centre of the driver's seat, the A pillars and curved windshield make for a very odd perspective from the car, the rear view out the cockpit mirror is questionable at best, and the side mirrors are in the perfect position to be blocked by the A pillars. Safety! Mazda as a manufacturer today prides itself on driving ergonomics, ease and intuition of use, and cars that handle as though an extension of the drivers' bodies. To these ends, they produce cars whose selling points are that they are more fun to drive than those of their rivals, and that adamantly refuse to have touchscreens in them, which is grounds enough to marry a person for in my book, if Mazda was a person and not a company. And so to see a car that has its driving position, ergonomics, driving dynamics, and even doors as whack as a Countach's is beyond bizarre, and a strong testament to how far Mazda as a company has moved on in the fifty years since the RX500, and in turn, how utterly irrelevant it is.


Apparently it was originally supposed to be fitted with another Rotary Engine of some sort that revs to 15k rpm, according to Vic. I don't know how true that is, because I personally can't find anything to that effect in my extensive two seconds on Google, which is more time than one would spend in first on a track in this thing. Lending credence to Vic's claims, the tach reads up to said 15k rpm, when the engine redlines at 8.5k, meaning that the car barely uses half of its tachometer. In fact, the whole car seemingly promises an amazing showcase of technology and fun, and even offers peeks at moments of sheer brilliance in areas that no one else can do better than it, but those strengths just somehow feel out of place in a totally disjointed product. Its stated purpose feels like nothing more than a cheap, transparent excuse to show off the one thing it does well. But that doesn't stop its creators from promptly writing cheques the vertically sliced off butt can't cash, resulting in a product that not only feels markedly lacking, but is also marred by a lot of confusion from its consumers who don't understand its true purpose due to poor marketing. As a result of all this, the product feels almost literally half butted.

......

I think I understand perfectly why the RX500 is in Gran Turismo Sport now.

 

Vic Reign93

Tricky Vic
Premium
2,500
United Kingdom
Lincoln
Victory_Reign93
Linthium Reign
The Mazda RX500. What is it, and why is it in this game?

Hell if I know.


If you know me, you probably know I'm a big fan of Mazdas, especially their Rotary Powered sports cars. Yet, here's a Rotary Powered one-off concept car painstakingly preserved and restored by Mazda, and faithfully recreated in Gran Turismo Sport, literally with "Powered By ROTARY" scrawled across the wedge shaped back of this thing, and I really don't have much of anything to say about it. Because, for starters, what even the heck is it?


Hell if I know.

Is it a mind blowing concept car that puts down insane numbers unheard of during its time, or look so instantly radical that it becomes a poster car for 8 year old kids who know nothing about cars? The NA "982"cc 10A Inline 2 Rotor in this door wedge shaped car produces a respectable 247HP (184kW), but the folks over at Mercedes were making 4 Rotors producing upwards of 350HP from their Wankel Engine concepts. Does it showcase the different thinking of idiosyncratic engineers to offer a peek at how different a future we could've had, then? The RX500 is supposedly a showcase of road safety technology that might have become as commonplace, or even required, as Volvo's 3 point seatbelts, but if asked to name what those safety features are, I, and I suspect many others as well, would be hard pressed to name more than just a pair of stupid green lights atop the brake lights, to confuse the poor bloke unfortunate enough to be behind you approaching a red light. I mean... if you want to make a light that lets others know when a car is accelerating, shouldn't those be in the front? The aforementioned brake lights by the way, are the exact same lights as the turn signals, so your car literally will give no indication of its brakes being applied if you turn your hazards on. This thing literally has six, count them, SIX, lights on each side of the car, and the design team had to share a light for the hazards and brakes?


So what exactly makes this car safe? Does it have ABS? Does it come equipped as a standard with a hammer in the glovebox? Lane departure warning? A choker to strangle a stupid millennial for texting and driving? Cruise control? A loaded and cocked shotgun aimed to blast the intoxicated brain out of anyone that attempts to drive under the influence? Crumple zones? A Traffic Safety Amulet from Take Shrine? Rollover protection? A speaker that blasts, "DOKE, BAKA YAROU!" to pedestrians who don't hear it coming? Blind spot monitoring? Does it insure itself? Does it even have airbags?

Hell if I know.


Yes, of course it's unfair to apply modern safety standards and technology to a car in the 70s. Nonetheless, it's just difficult for me, a stupid millennial, to really appreciate the RX500's supposed safety features when I can't see any. This car is just so insignificant that I don't think I'd even know it existed at all had it not been for Gran Turismo, the shining beacon of safe and sensible driving. It really does feel to me like PD flew over to Hiroshima to scan and record some Mazda cars, like the ND Roadster and Atenza, and Mazda just happened to have the RX500 in the same room and said to PD, "we'll throw this in too to sweeten the deal", sort of like the cheap toy you didn't want that comes bundled with breakfast cereal that immediately ends up in the trash bin the moment you consume your cereal. I mean, logically speaking, there must've been better reasons as to why PD would put in the 6 months of work to get this car into the game, but hell if I know what the reasons were.


I mean, if PD had plane tickets to Hiroshima and Mazda's cooperation, you'd think they might have tried to get the R360 in the game. Or the Carol. Or the Cosmo Sport... or a SA RX-7... or a Eunos Cosmo 20B... or an AZ-1... or did a better job with the 787B. Or an EV Demio, or dual fuel RX-8. Or any RX-8. I know my doctor is right in saying that I need to watch my salt intake, and I'm not sure how true the argument of, "it's not a this or that scenario, it's either having this or not having this at all" that has been had many times over on GTPlanet is. Whatever the cases may be though, I just find it exceptionally hard to take a look at the RX500 and think anything else other than, "why are you here in this game? In N300? What do you even do? What are you even supposed to be? What's the 500 in your name supposed to mean? Why isn't there a hyphen between the 'RX' and the numbers in your name?"


Because hell if I know the answers to any of the above.

Ahh, but it's a Rotary Powered sports car by Mazda, and excruciatingly rarely for the manufacturer that prides itself on doing things differently all the time, is rear mid-engined! Maybe, as per Mazda's M.O. with their best drivers' cars such as the RX-7, RX-8, and Roadster, the RX500 might not be something that makes sense simply by looking at a spec sheet. And so the question is begged more than usual this time: how does it drive?

Hell if I k-nah, just kidding. It drives bad.


It's an old clunker on bias ply tyres and soft suspension hooked up to an open diff. Need I say more? Sure, the car is light, and therefore very agile through corners, but the complete letdown of a suspension and open diff somehow imbue an agile car with a belying sense of sloppiness and lethargy, distilling away any and all fun from the experience. The front end is so stupidly light that you have to brake hard and brake early for any corner just to get weight over the front tyres, which don't feel like they have any bite in them whatsoever, making the car feel slow to drive even though it's cornering fast. Because of the soft front end, attempting to take a corner without the stronger engine braking of 2nd brings you on an express, non stop trip to understeer city, population: you and a wall that will become your impromptu, makeshift gravestone. And if one of your rear wheels run over rumble strips or grass? Prepare to fishtail and spin like a 70s MR Corvette. The gearbox is widely spread 4 speed, and the synchros need to do so much work during each upshift that I think I'd sooner get an RX-9 than 4th gear. The choice of a 4 speed is not only unfortunate, but also perplexing, seeing as the 1967 Toyota 2000GT we tested just two weeks ago had already set the precedent for 5 speeds in performance cars, a memo the Cosmo Sport got as soon as 1968. First gear in the RX500 feels specifically made for hill starts with a Rotary Engine that needs defibrillation from idle, resulting in wheelspin city up to about 60km/h, which you'll hit and shift out of first in just about two seconds, and promptly never see again outside of the pits or digging yourself out of a trackside wall. To its credit, 4th gear still pulls strong — almost too strong, because this thing is gear limited to 259km/h (161mph) and drag/ powerband limited to 244km/h (152mph), when Rotary Engines thrive on the top end, and you really get the sense that the 10A in the RX500 desperately wants to do and give more with a fifth forward cog.


Of course, no dialogue about a Rotary powered sports car is complete without discussing... the Rotary power. Just like the utterly horrible digital depiction of the 787B in Gran Turismo Sport, the one good takeaway from the RX500 experience is its engine, a "491x2"cc Inline 2 Rotor that's naturally aspirated and carbureted, both traits being excruciating rarities among Rotary Engines represented in the Gran Turismo series, let alone when put together. Fire it up, and the car immediately makes a strong impression even before the gearbox is engaged, as the car vigorously inhales with a vengeance through carburetors to make the infamous Rotary "brap brap brap" at idle, and hot damn it is loud even at an otherwise peaceful standstill. Being an NA Rotary, it is naturally peaky and begs to be wrung and kept near to its sportbike-like 8,500rpm redline, which is done via a proper manual gearbox. And because the car was never designed for a consumer, there is nothing aside from a thin transparent plastic piece separating the engine compartment from the cockpit. It certainly doesn't sound like there's any sound deadening, engine covers, heat shielding, etc. in the car, because there is an unparalleled rawness and pureness of the sound in the cockpit that's more readily associated to a motorcycle experience than a car. Not only is it loud, pure, and proud, but unlike the digital 787B, the digital RX500 sounds utterly glorious and genuine.



The moment you start to get moving is the moment when the flame spitting engine really starts to show its true songstress talents. As with all Rotary Engines, there is an alluring and addictive smoothness to the way it revs that somehow permeates even through a TV screen and speakers, and it's hard to not be lulled by its furious lullaby into thinking that it can keep on revving higher and higher forever. If you'll forgive my bad writing and lack of more apt analogies, listening to a Rotary Engine rev is almost like watching an attractive person strip. Yeah, they look amazing now, but encourage them more and more, and they somehow find a way to give you a better and better experience, creating a positive feedback loop in your brain in and of itself, so much so that every time I smack the rev limiter on the 10A Rotary, I'm utterly dumbfounded at the notion that something so magical and trance inducing could have a physical limit. This thing has a redline? Hell if I knew from watching the rev counter rise, or feeling the engine beg for more abuse. Mated to the aforementioned 4 speed manual, each gear has to cover a wide speed range, enticingly drawing out the procedure of watching, hearing, feeling, experiencing this thing's dramatically slow and sure approach to its climatic 8.5k redline. On downshifts, not only will it spit flames as any good Rotary should, but like most Rotaries, is oddly receptive to being revved past its redline on heel toe downshifts, just as extra icing on the feedback loop cake.


As per Mazda methodology, their cars are "more than just a car with a good engine in it". (Yes Vic, the only reason why I keep bugging you to write reviews is so I can rip them off, because if I can't slipstream you in a race, I'll slipstream you in writing!) The RX500 is still a serious performer as far as lap times are concerned. I might dislike its typical old car handling traits, but on tracks where its 244km/h top speed doesn't come into play, the RX500 will more than put up a fight with a better balanced, tauter, more powerful, and much more revered younger sibling, the RX-7 Spirit R. Back in Gran Turismo 6, this car was an absolute rocket for its PP rating as well. Needless to say, its performance is respectable even by today's standards, and one can only imagine how mind blowing it must've been back in the 70s if anyone outside Mazda was allowed to sample it and give an unbiased account of it. I'm sure it is spaceship fast in the appendages of a proper alien, but me personally, I just don't click with the car, and it has spat me out either face first or butt backwards in nearly every race I've attempted with it. If you're not a freakishly adaptive alien, some chemistry with the car may be required for you to be effective in it; it's not a car for everyone.


Unfortunately, while the RX500's on track prowess is very in-character of a Mazda Rotary sports car, the same cannot be said for its utter mess of an interior. As previously mentioned, the RX500 was never meant to be put into production, and it becomes immediately clear the moment you look past its awe-inspiring butterfly doors into its cockpit. Aside from the lack of insulation between the cockpit and engine compartment, the steering wheel is oddly offset from the centre of the driver's seat, the A pillars and curved windshield make for a very odd perspective from the car, the rear view out the cockpit mirror is questionable at best, and the side mirrors are in the perfect position to be blocked by the A pillars. Safety! Mazda as a manufacturer today prides itself on driving ergonomics, ease and intuition of use, and cars that handle as though an extension of the drivers' bodies. To these ends, they produce cars whose selling points are that they are more fun to drive than those of their rivals, and that adamantly refuse to have touchscreens in them, which is grounds enough to marry a person for in my book, if Mazda was a person and not a company. And so to see a car that has its driving position, ergonomics, driving dynamics, and even doors as whack as a Countach's is beyond bizarre, and a strong testament to how far Mazda as a company has moved on in the fifty years since the RX500, and in turn, how utterly irrelevant it is.


Apparently it was originally supposed to be fitted with another Rotary Engine of some sort that revs to 15k rpm, according to Vic. I don't know how true that is, because I personally can't find anything to that effect in my extensive two seconds on Google, which is more time than one would spend in first on a track in this thing. Lending credence to Vic's claims, the tach reads up to said 15k rpm, when the engine redlines at 8.5k, meaning that the car barely uses half of its tachometer. In fact, the whole car seemingly promises an amazing showcase of technology and fun, and even offers peeks at moments of sheer brilliance in areas that no one else can do better than it, but those strengths just somehow feel out of place in a totally disjointed product. Its stated purpose feels like nothing more than a cheap, transparent excuse to show off the one thing it does well. But that doesn't stop its creators from promptly writing cheques the vertically sliced off butt can't cash, resulting in a product that not only feels markedly lacking, but is also marred by a lot of confusion from its consumers who don't understand its true purpose due to poor marketing. As a result of all this, the product feels almost literally half butted.

......

I think I understand perfectly why the RX500 is in Gran Turismo Sport now.


I’ve been on a slight internet trek down the rabbit hole to try figure out the story behind the RX500’s engine and I’m running into varying accounts of it.

Some say it was the 2 Rotor we have that was capable of 15k rpm, others say it was a single 491cc Rotor that did it.

Personally I think a single 491cc Rotor could possibly make that power and rev that high IF it was essentially a race engine, which given it was a concept car and not a road car meant it wouldn’t need to worry about emissions and such.

But at the end of the day, Like I mentioned before, IF it never did have an engine that could rev that high, why put a rev counter in that goes to 15k? 😕

Hopefully at some point that there’s proper clarity shed on the mystery and the record set straight. 🙂

But engine mystery aside, it’s quite the piece from Mazda’s history, 850kgs, Breadvan style rear profile and low drag design.

If/When it comes back in GT7, i’ll happily throw a turbo on it like on GT6 and send it past the 400kph barrier. 😛

Personally, It’s a Sleeper. 👍
 
601
Singapore
Singapore
XSquareStickIt
The Genesis of Betraying Expectations: When RXGT Meets COTW

Genesis Coupé w/ Korean plate by P1etro_Almeida Livery Link

I'm going to make one thing clear in the very first sentence of this review: I don't even feel remotely qualified to talk about Group B, its history, rallying in general, and the game's physics on dirt tracks. But, I can't exactly go around bugging people to write reviews if I start slacking off, and besides, this gorgeous HYUNDAI WRC 2019 press livery by monde_fenrir made me shoot the car before I realised it, and since I had the photos, I figure, you know... I might as well write something. Besides, the Genesis Gr. B rally car gives me a chance to bash you over the head with unsolicited, uninformed opinions about the Genesis road car, and the brand in general. What else is the internet for, if not unsolicited porn and opinions?


As the sole representative of Korean carmakers in Gran Turismo Sport, Hyundai is symbolic and indicative of how criminally underappreciated the country's automotive advancements are digitally. For some context, they've been in the game since launch, and didn't even get a single new car since then! The Genesis Gr. 4 and Gr. 3 racing cars have never been "meta", or even been bad enough to gain any notoriety. For crying out loud, there aren't even any Korean Scape locations in the game!

(Not) Pictured: An Actual Hyundai N Car

Genesis Coupe N '13 by Niko_Nfs018 Livery Link

And what a shame it is, because Hyundai has been on fire in the real world, offering performance rivaling those of established German brands at a fraction of the cost, with none of the awful elitism and well earned prejudices against their drivers said brands bring. With the establishment of their "N" division, I hesitate to even consider them an underdog; they're legitimate competition to established brands, from Japanese econoboxes to German luxury, and I just find it criminal that a brand that has made such consistently big strides is so neglected in Sport, and, if I'm to be brutally honest, a little bit miffed that it got the dubious distinction of "Beater of the Year 2018" here in COTW, because I don't think the Genesis was all that bad.


While Gran Turismo Sport's numerous game updates didn't bring us any new Korean content, it has brought along many physics tweaks. And those I think have ironed out most, if not all of the faults of the Genesis, because I really struggle to find any major issues with it. The shortened silhouette of the 2 door coupé barely shrouds the top of the line 3.8L V6 engine and its burly soundtrack. Naturally aspirated and sending 343HP (256kW) to the rear wheels through a 2 door chassis via a proper 6 speed stick, it ticks all the right petrolhead boxes. Despite the concessions of sharing a platform with a 4 door sedan like the R34 GT-R and E46 M3, the Genesis I find is a similarly well balanced machine to dance with at its limits. The suspension may be way too soft for those looking for a GT3 RS-esque hardcore track experience, but it absorbs and smooths out bumps and other road imperfections astonishingly well to create a drama free drive, while clearly abstaining from being sloppy — again, just like the R34 and E46. It's wonderfully cooperative under trail braking, with strikingly linear response when called into action by either the steering wheel and brake pedal, allowing the driver to stay right at the crystal clear edges of the friction circle in this car. The rear end will rarely, if ever, peek out under braking, and on corner exits, it will similarly provide a drama free, calm, composed, and linear acceleration out of any corner, but if you want to get busy with the steering wheel without making a phone call with the wheel mounted buttons, the Genesis is also one of the most surefooted machines to powerslide and drift. It has a wonderful sense of chassis rigidity and assuredness from the linearity and immediacy of a NA engine, which by the way has a healthy powerband, and loves to be revved nonetheless.


So, why doesn't this car get more love?

It's not perfect, obviously. The softer suspension and rather heavy mass of 1,557kg (3,433lbs) create a rather muted and insulated experience from the road, and as such, you aren't going to be coaxing anyone out of their Elises or Evos with this thing. Despite "only" being a 3.8L and "only" being a V6, it's still notably nose heavy, and you'll need to brake early and heel toe aggressively to get it to take corners properly, though it's a groove that I think is easy to find and fit into. It's... also rather slow, despite being the top of the line model. Even an E46 M3 ten years older than it would run circles around this thing, while being a lot more playful and engaging, and that's not exactly the Rey Mysterio of the car world either. But I think the main problem the Genesis has is its brand image. A BMW or a Merc proclaims a level of affluence for its driver. A certain sense of class. When you buy a Japanese sports car, you're such a hardcore track aficionado. You're such a nerd. You're such a man of culture. But what does buying a Hyundai say about you? That you're cheap? That you recognise the value in value for money? That you're a hipster, perhaps? It's not exactly "swag", and I think we all want a certain level of that in our sports cars, via whichever means.


Would I buy one if I had the means to? Hell nah. To me, Korean cars are all over stylised, just like their pop. Have you seen the latest Avante? It looks like a sedan Lamborghini would design if you added its badge and their patented arrow lights at the back of it. The Veloster is as puke inducing as a Juke to look at, and even the Stinger can't escape the need for frivolous, disingenuine aesthetics like fake vents. The Genesis is a bit too loud stylistically for me. It has a shouty, "look at me! I am serious! Take me seriously!" tantrum-like aura all Korean cars seem to exude, and I don't really like that. It feels a little insecure about itself and its image. Have you seen all the different badges Kia and Hyundai have thrown around, because they know their badges have no "swag"? The Genesis badge, the Forte Koup badge. They're literally saying that a badge no one recognises has more credibility and "swag" than a Kia or a Hyundai badge. And that sucks. I don't want to be associated with that. Even if the cars might be good.


The Genesis doesn't excel in any single particular area, but what it does is perform well above average on several fronts, and the resulting package, especially for its price, makes it hard to objectively dismiss. It might not have set my heart on fire, but I'd take it over a fat and sloppy Z32 or a 2 speed Plymouth any week of the year, no hesitation. Maybe if we put more respect and validation to their name, Korean carmakers would stop trying so hard to be taken seriously, find some real confidence, and in turn, come up with something that I would genuinely want and not have to explain to others, or make excuses for.

So how does this impressive all rounder translate over a dirt surface, where you have to do everything well?


Rallying in Gran Turismo Sport is as neglected as Hyundai as a whole, also having zero updates catered to it since launch. Fittingly I guess, I'm also an expert on neither. The loud and excessively fussy styling of the road car lends itself perfectly to a spunky, fire breathing racecar design, fully enjoying the complement of bombastic flares, vents, and rear wing, all of which assuredly functional. Group B can be accused of and for many things, but one thing no one can accuse Group B of is lack of power and the excitement it brings. The burly sounding V6 in the road car now produces 499HP (447kW), while somehow retaining its natural aspiration, which is shockingly rare for a Group B car, both fictional and real. In the rally car however, it sounds a lot more frantic and peppy, while fittingly retaining and enhancing the generous powerband of the road car, no doubt helped by the 1,000rpm redline hike to 8,500 accompanied by a close ratio sequential gearbox and the constant, dramatic whining of the straight cut gears. The car retains its wonderful balance from the road car, and on the default Racing Hard tyres and 40:60 F:R torque distribution, its handling is "vice free", as someone else is wont to say on this thread. Just like the road car on which it's based, the Genesis Gr. B Rally Car is a predictable, drama free, reliable machine to drive. Thumbs up from me. Just don't put street legal road tyres on it like those crazy people over at Rallycross GT.

 

Vic Reign93

Tricky Vic
Premium
2,500
United Kingdom
Lincoln
Victory_Reign93
Linthium Reign
The Genesis of Betraying Expectations: When RXGT Meets COTW

Genesis Coupé w/ Korean plate by P1etro_Almeida Livery Link

I'm going to make one thing clear in the very first sentence of this review: I don't even feel remotely qualified to talk about Group B, its history, rallying in general, and the game's physics on dirt tracks. But, I can't exactly go around bugging people to write reviews if I start slacking off, and besides, this gorgeous HYUNDAI WRC 2019 press livery by monde_fenrir made me shoot the car before I realised it, and since I had the photos, I figure, you know... I might as well write something. Besides, the Genesis Gr. B rally car gives me a chance to bash you over the head with unsolicited, uninformed opinions about the Genesis road car, and the brand in general. What else is the internet for, if not unsolicited porn and opinions?


As the sole representative of Korean carmakers in Gran Turismo Sport, Hyundai is symbolic and indicative of how criminally underappreciated the country's automotive advancements are digitally. For some context, they've been in the game since launch, and didn't even get a single new car since then! The Genesis Gr. 4 and Gr. 3 racing cars have never been "meta", or even been bad enough to gain any notoriety. For crying out loud, there aren't even any Korean Scape locations in the game!

(Not) Pictured: An Actual Hyundai N Car

Genesis Coupe N '13 by Niko_Nfs018 Livery Link

And what a shame it is, because Hyundai has been on fire in the real world, offering performance rivaling those of established German brands at a fraction of the cost, with none of the awful elitism and well earned prejudices against their drivers said brands bring. With the establishment of their "N" division, I hesitate to even consider them an underdog; they're legitimate competition to established brands, from Japanese econoboxes to German luxury, and I just find it criminal that a brand that has made such consistently big strides is so neglected in Sport, and, if I'm to be brutally honest, a little bit miffed that it got the dubious distinction of "Beater of the Year 2018" here in COTW, because I don't think the Genesis was all that bad.


While Gran Turismo Sport's numerous game updates didn't bring us any new Korean content, it has brought along many physics tweaks. And those I think have ironed out most, if not all of the faults of the Genesis, because I really struggle to find any major issues with it. The shortened silhouette of the 2 door coupé barely shrouds the top of the line 3.8L V6 engine and its burly soundtrack. Naturally aspirated and sending 343HP (256kW) to the rear wheels through a 2 door chassis via a proper 6 speed stick, it ticks all the right petrolhead boxes. Despite the concessions of sharing a platform with a 4 door sedan like the R34 GT-R and E46 M3, the Genesis I find is a similarly well balanced machine to dance with at its limits. The suspension may be way too soft for those looking for a GT3 RS-esque hardcore track experience, but it absorbs and smooths out bumps and other road imperfections astonishingly well to create a drama free drive, while clearly abstaining from being sloppy — again, just like the R34 and E46. It's wonderfully cooperative under trail braking, with strikingly linear response when called into action by either the steering wheel and brake pedal, allowing the driver to stay right at the crystal clear edges of the friction circle in this car. The rear end will rarely, if ever, peek out under braking, and on corner exits, it will similarly provide a drama free, calm, composed, and linear acceleration out of any corner, but if you want to get busy with the steering wheel without making a phone call with the wheel mounted buttons, the Genesis is also one of the most surefooted machines to powerslide and drift. It has a wonderful sense of chassis rigidity and assuredness from the linearity and immediacy of a NA engine, which by the way has a healthy powerband, and loves to be revved nonetheless.


So, why doesn't this car get more love?

It's not perfect, obviously. The softer suspension and rather heavy mass of 1,557kg (3,433lbs) create a rather muted and insulated experience from the road, and as such, you aren't going to be coaxing anyone out of their Elises or Evos with this thing. Despite "only" being a 3.8L and "only" being a V6, it's still notably nose heavy, and you'll need to brake early and heel toe aggressively to get it to take corners properly, though it's a groove that I think is easy to find and fit into. It's... also rather slow, despite being the top of the line model. Even an E46 M3 ten years older than it would run circles around this thing, while being a lot more playful and engaging, and that's not exactly the Rey Mysterio of the car world either. But I think the main problem the Genesis has is its brand image. A BMW or a Merc proclaims a level of affluence for its driver. A certain sense of class. When you buy a Japanese sports car, you're such a hardcore track aficionado. You're such a nerd. You're such a man of culture. But what does buying a Hyundai say about you? That you're cheap? That you recognise the value in value for money? That you're a hipster, perhaps? It's not exactly "swag", and I think we all want a certain level of that in our sports cars, via whichever means.


Would I buy one if I had the means to? Hell nah. To me, Korean cars are all over stylised, just like their pop. Have you seen the latest Avante? It looks like a sedan Lamborghini would design if you added its badge and their patented arrow lights at the back of it. The Veloster is as puke inducing as a Juke to look at, and even the Stinger can't escape the need for frivolous, disingenuine aesthetics like fake vents. The Genesis is a bit too loud stylistically for me. It has a shouty, "look at me! I am serious! Take me seriously!" tantrum-like aura all Korean cars seem to exude, and I don't really like that. It feels a little insecure about itself and its image. Have you seen all the different badges Kia and Hyundai have thrown around, because they know their badges have no "swag"? The Genesis badge, the Forte Koup badge. They're literally saying that a badge no one recognises has more credibility and "swag" than a Kia or a Hyundai badge. And that sucks. I don't want to be associated with that. Even if the cars might be good.


The Genesis doesn't excel in any single particular area, but what it does is perform well above average on several fronts, and the resulting package, especially for its price, makes it hard to objectively dismiss. It might not have set my heart on fire, but I'd take it over a fat and sloppy Z32 or a 2 speed Plymouth any week of the year, no hesitation. Maybe if we put more respect and validation to their name, Korean carmakers would stop trying so hard to be taken seriously, find some real confidence, and in turn, come up with something that I would genuinely want and not have to explain to others, or make excuses for.

So how does this impressive all rounder translate over a dirt surface, where you have to do everything well?


Rallying in Gran Turismo Sport is as neglected as Hyundai as a whole, also having zero updates catered to it since launch. Fittingly I guess, I'm also an expert on neither. The loud and excessively fussy styling of the road car lends itself perfectly to a spunky, fire breathing racecar design, fully enjoying the complement of bombastic flares, vents, and rear wing, all of which assuredly functional. Group B can be accused of and for many things, but one thing no one can accuse Group B of is lack of power and the excitement it brings. The burly sounding V6 in the road car now produces 499HP (447kW), while somehow retaining its natural aspiration, which is shockingly rare for a Group B car, both fictional and real. In the rally car however, it sounds a lot more frantic and peppy, while fittingly retaining and enhancing the generous powerband of the road car, no doubt helped by the 1,000rpm redline hike to 8,500 accompanied by a close ratio sequential gearbox and the constant, dramatic whining of the straight cut gears. The car retains its wonderful balance from the road car, and on the default Racing Hard tyres and 40:60 F:R torque distribution, its handling is "vice free", as someone else is wont to say on this thread. Just like the road car on which it's based, the Genesis Gr. B Rally Car is a predictable, drama free, reliable machine to drive. Thumbs up from me. Just don't put street legal road tyres on it like those crazy people over at Rallycross GT.


It’s partly why I picked the Genesis for RXGT, I like the instant throttle response of an N/A engine although the extra low down torque of the turbos does go against it. 😛

Interestingly only 3 cars in GrB are non turbo, the V6 Genesis, the V8 Ford Mustang and the Toyota GT86 with a non turbo 2.0 4 banger, all equally capable of the GrB maximum of over 640hp fully upgraded. 🤤

Kinda a shame that Hyundai is kinda short on different models in GTS as it’s just the VGT and the Genesis covering all categories from N300 through to GrX and everything in between.

Nevertheless, a solid choice for those who want something reliable, but also good for when you do go crazy and throw on some Sports tyres. 😏😂

Verdict: Sleeper 👍
 
39
Canada
New Brunswick
It’s partly why I picked the Genesis for RXGT, I like the instant throttle response of an N/A engine although the extra low down torque of the turbos does go against it. 😛

Interestingly only 3 cars in GrB are non turbo, the V6 Genesis, the V8 Ford Mustang and the Toyota GT86 with a non turbo 2.0 4 banger, all equally capable of the GrB maximum of over 640hp fully upgraded. 🤤

Kinda a shame that Hyundai is kinda short on different models in GTS as it’s just the VGT and the Genesis covering all categories from N300 through to GrX and everything in between.

Nevertheless, a solid choice for those who want something reliable, but also good for when you do go crazy and throw on some Sports tyres. 😏😂

Verdict: Sleeper 👍
I will be joining team Hyundai this season of RXGT. I really enjoyed the ballance of the car and the smooth as silk power delivery. I didn't even own one until I had to buy one to do that livery for you. Very glad you picked it for COTW.
My daily irl is a hyundai as well, so I guess it only makes sense. And yes, I own one because I wanted a cheap reliable car. I have a 951 for fun.