Car of the Week: Week 97 Ford GT '17

Discussion in 'Gran Turismo Sport' started by Racer283, Sep 4, 2018.

  1. Draggon

    Draggon

    Messages:
    2,033
    Delete, sorry.
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2020
  2. AgentBlackDog

    AgentBlackDog

    Messages:
    550
    Ah yes, one of the many cars that appeared in the first Gran Turismo (as an arcade mode exclusive vehicle) and in later titles including Sport. Really digging the silhouette and exhaust note of this v8 powered Vette. As for handling, it feels a bit boat-ish at times.
    Nostalgic Corvette.jpg
     
    ProjectF, CTznOfTime, Alex p. and 4 others like this.
  3. XSquareStickIt

    XSquareStickIt

    Messages:
    434
    The C2 Corvette Sting Ray Not A Review:

    No review from me this week, as I am horrifically culturally and historically ignorant. I therefore can't tell you how good or bad the car is for its time, but it left a rather deep impression on me, regardless, so if you'll indulge me, I would like to share my virtual experience with a 1963 C2 Corvette.

    Corvette. What a name. Even saying it to myself somehow oozes a certain sense of class and distinction, and how it always sounded so close to "covet" doesn't seem coincidental to me, even if the name is taken from a warship. Too rarely for my tastes do cars have proper names, instead of senseless clumps of letters and numbers. It really gives cars a sense of soul and identity, and the C2 is a car overflowing, exploding, with character.

    One look, and anyone who's even remotely into cars know what it is. It's exactly the sort of car, or rather, exactly the car that comes to my mind when I think of a poster car for classic American cars. The car has such a stake in its image and identity, it's almost concept car like. So obsessed with styling was the car, certain over-the-top elements, most famously the split rear window and fake hood vents, were axed within a year of production, making the 1963 example in Gran Turismo Sport a particularly noteworthy one. Have a gander at the view out the back in this thing. How anyone could've greenlit this, I'll never know.

    You could say F1 took a lot of inspiration from the '63 Corvette.
    Not only does the split in the middle of the rear window block out the most important bits, but there is a raise in the bottom of the window as well, meaning you'll probably not see a car that's right behind you until it's sniffing your chrome rear bumpers.

    While admittedly a stupid styling cue, the "spine" that bisects that rear window is such an integral part of the car's silhouette, and is such an important part of the "Sting Ray" image, this car feels visually crippled without it. You can see the rough shape of a sting ray in the raised bubble formed by the cockpit, and removing the rear window split really removes the "sting" from the sting ray.

    And gosh, I adore the interior colours this thing came with. I adore the aluminum (?) gauges with inset dials. I love the quirkiness of the headrest-less back seats. I hope you have a strong crotch, because the roller coaster like seatbelt only secures you from there. This thing has such an emphasis on class and beauty, I almost daresay it's an old, American equivalent of a Pagani. It really is one of those cars you can appreciate just staring at, or even sitting in, without ever turning the key.

    Oddly, the rear-view mirror in the game doesn't show the split in the rear window, giving you perfect visibility.
    Bonus points if you can figure out whose perspective this shot was taken from. Hint: someone very red.


    Tan interior with dials lit at night, with GTS' way overdone windshield glass reflection.

    Headrest-less back seats. My driver has been getting NO privacy lately. I put all this crap back there expecting them to NOT be seen.

    Roller coaster seatbelts!

    Also, this car has the single BEST set of headlights in the history of automotive industry. Fight me.

    [​IMG]
    (Please click on the gif to view in imgur if it doesn't autoplay. I'll figure out how to gif ONE DAY)

    Even in its second generation, the Corvette already had success and rep in motorsports. Yet, the road car doesn't respond well to being driven fast. It is a car that is spitefully lethargic to drive with modern day go-fast driving techniques. It's soft. It has drums on all four corners. It's on bias ply tyres. It has no ABS. Most glaringly, it comes with a completely open differential. All this means that the car takes a fair bit longer to stop than its 1,380kg curb mass (3,042lbs) would suggest. It may be common knowledge that a car brakes best in a straight line, but because the C2 is so soft, it's almost a caricature of this theory to show to a non-believer. This thing is so soft, there feels like there's weight over one tyre at any one time, and having to stomp on the brakes when the car is even slightly off neutral results in a severely elongated, meandering braking zone at best, and completely locking up the wheels at worst. This also means that it detests trail braking with a passion. If nudged wide or disturbed by road surface changes mid corner, the weight sloshes from left to right endlessly, there is no stopping it without assistance from a wall. Even with reasonably civil corner exit attempts, the inside tyres will spin, owing to its complete lack of a differential. This means that the car is very liable to snap on you in the blink of an eye if you were to, say, oh I dunno, use the rumble strips on the outside of a turn, as power distribution can change in an instant with zero warning as traction distribution changes (yeah, I even had to coin a new term to describe this car). Most embarrassing example of this is the second to last turn of Laguna Seca, as I spun the car in the lead for the entire field to see and overtake, and nearly lost it there again and again on subsequent laps.

    Differentials? Where we're going, we don't need differentials.

    All this means the car is very hairy on and especially past its limits. To drive this fast, the car's mechanical and physical limits are just as much a limiting factor as how much bravery and faith you have in your own skills to push it that far. It's a very, very new experience to me, as modern cars hit their mechanical limits way before my balls get called into question, and are more predictable and easier to... er-hem, retrieve, when lost.

    As mentioned earlier, this car does come with period correct bias ply tyres. What's super annoying however, is that these tyres get replaced by modern radials the moment it touches the livery editor. You could literally save a blank livery with no changes and it'd take away your bias ply tyres. No, you don't even have to change the wheels to lose your bias ply tyres. No, there is no option to get the bias ply tyres back in the livery editor or car settings. That means that you either have a totally factory fresh 'Vette, or you compromise on the integrity of the look of the thing by putting any decals on it, including something as harmless and minor as a license plate.

    Bias ply tyres, with the white bead area... ring... thing.

    Radials as the default Sports Hard tyres.

    "But, honeeeeey! You don't understand! She DOES make my car faster! AND safer!" - The manliest statement ever spoken in the entire recorded history of motorsports.
    Corvette C2 Miku by dong-chan download
    In spite of all this however, I find the C2 to be quite a predictable drive once you get to know it and get used to it. It is a car that demands a certain level of respect to drive, but it absolutely reciprocates if treated duly. The highlight of the driving experience in a C2 Corvette is, of course, its engine. Featured in the museum-worthy example found in Gran Turismo is the (then) top of the line "Small" Block V8 (5.4 litres is small?!), whose party piece isn't displacement, but rather, its fuel injection, which was immaculately advertised on the front fenders. The 360HP produced by said engine doesn't sound much on paper, but trust me, it's plenty fast enough for something that's as scary to drive as the C2. And, believe me, this is a very different 360HP from your normal, everyday sports car. Being a big NA, freedom breathing V8, torque is of course the engine's biggest draw. With only four speeds and a final gear way too short for the speeds this car is easily capable of, you need only be within roughly about the same postal code as operating range on a racetrack for the engine to deliver heapings of torque. This is absolutely a highway pulls car, and it sounds damn good while doing it.

    Given the car's immaculate, concept car like, showroom beauty and cult icon status, along with its... ahem... discouraging at the limit handling, I couldn't help but to feel like I'm driving this car all wrong in this week's meet. I couldn't help but to feel like this car just isn't meant to be raced, or even driven fast. This is a car that somehow, even through a video game, encourages a laid back, lazy type of drive. I just want to hold the thin, large steering wheel instead of my Logitech G29. I wanted to feel how this car's shifter, instead of having to use my paddles. I wanted to smell the leather and the oil. I wanted to just cruise and sightsee the entire Route 66 in this thing in one gear with Metallica blasting in the car. I want to park this thing at a rest stop along the highway and look out to it from a restaurant. I could almost envision myself time travelling back to when gas prices were dirt cheap. This thing is a time capsule that translates partially in a digital medium, yet what this medium can convey, it delivers in spades and leaves me wanting more. This thing is so chock full of character and culture, it's inexplicable. It's almost... magical.




    Sting Ray and StingRay. Yeah, they're different.
    Also, @AgentBlackDog , WHAT. A. SHOT. :bowdown: I almost gave up shooting for this post entirely because I took one look at your shot and I'm like, "yeap, nah, not gonna do better than that".

     
  4. Volksauto

    Volksauto

    Messages:
    3,963
    Awesome read! I've always loved the C2 Corvettes. And it's a real shame with the tires. The Pontiac Trans Am suffers from the same thing in the game.

    The C2 Corvette, designed by Larry Shinoda took Harley Earl's 1959 StingRay Racer's ultra futuristic design and made it into a production car. The Corvette for 1963 was heavily praised for being so futuristic looking with its sharp angles and hidden headlamps. It is believed Shinoda got the center spine idea from the Bugatti Type 57 Atlantic.
    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]
     
  5. TonyJZX

    TonyJZX

    Messages:
    3,377
    This car should work. I think its fairly light, 3,200lb and it has the classic Chevy 350 V8 w/ mechanical fuel injection. It has disc brakes and it has independent suspension and it has ok weight balance. With the aftermarket 5 spd it should work well.
     
    Alex p. likes this.
  6. JackRyanWMU

    JackRyanWMU

    Messages:
    517
    Location:
    United States
    Sometimes, things just work out. A Corvette is selected for GT Sport Car of the Week and I have an evaluation drive for another Corvette in iRacing on standby. In my case, it's the GT1 Corvette C6R that was dominating at Le Mans and IMSA just as I was beginning to branch out from NASCAR and discovering the world of sports car racing. And to evaluate the car, it seemed appropriate to take it to one of America's most iconic endurance racetracks: Sebring.


    The first thing I can say is that this GT1 Corvette immediately differentiates itself from the GT3 and GT4 cars I've driven on iRacing with the amount of power and downforce that's on offer. Once the tires are warmed up, you can seemingly throw untold lateral g-forces at it without the car breaking a sweat. But the overwhelming confidence you might get from those attributes are quickly extinguished once you get to a braking zone. The C6R Corvette has no ABS to help you; and the ideal zone between not pressing the brake pedal enough, and pushing too much and inducing lockup feels like you're playing "The Range Game" on The Price Is Right. You more or less just take your best guess and hope you got it right. And on a circuit as tough as Sebring, you're more than likely to get it wrong.

    I find myself at the same state with my Ferrari GTO review a few weeks ago. The Corvette may be above my skill level, but there's no way I can call it a Beater. Just hearing that earth-shaking rumble from a GM V-8 is enough to help me quickly forget any of the faults the C6R may have. It's an absolute legend.

    And it's not the only Chevrolet V-8 Powered Race Car I've bought recently... :sly:

     
    Draggon, AgentBlackDog and sirjim73 like this.
  7. Racer283

    Racer283

    Messages:
    457
    Location:
    United States
    One of my favorite Youtubers like to call this car the Buzz Box or it's known from the classic Initial D series. This week we are taking a look at the Mazda RX-7 GT-X 1990. This weeks car is chosen by @Vic Reign93.

    [​IMG]
     
  8. XSquareStickIt

    XSquareStickIt

    Messages:
    434
    I announce I can't race this week.

    You guys choose an RX-7

    You can't do this to me.

    YOU CAN'T DO THISSSSSS! :banghead::(
     
  9. TonyJZX

    TonyJZX

    Messages:
    3,377
    I just tried my FC3S. N400 praiano tune. Its surprisingly good. It does a job on GT4 cars around the Ring. Ludicrous corner speeds, moderate terminal speeds, I think it just bounces 280km/h however it has one vice... it has the same thing that the new Acura NSX has... the transition from gentle oversteer to unrecoverable crash in corners is quite unpleasant. The old Stratos problem but in this case I cant tell if it lacks both front and rear end grip and at what time.

    Its also a bit light so it tends to misbehave on kerbs. With a careful driver its very fast but it does require too much thought on my behalf to turn in good times let alone combat with other cars.
     
  10. Alex p.

    Alex p.

    Messages:
    5,556
    Location:
    Germany
  11. Nismonath5

    Nismonath5

    Messages:
    2,045
    Location:
    New Zealand
    4972611782815286796_0.jpg

    Handsome, refined, dependable. It's not hard to see why the Corvette marquee is one of America's top sports cars. Each generation represents the peak of style and performance from their respective eras, from the class and luxury of the mid 50's all the way up to the high tech, low drag designs of today. A Corvette is usually a force to be reckoned with at a track day or on a GT circuit!

    The C2 represents the transition from high class luxury cruiser to something a bit more racing focused. It was smaller, stiffer, more powerful, and featured the aerodynamic inspiration of a Mako Shark. And yet they called it Stingray. Despite all the "modern" equipment on it I could mention, it's ancient history now by comparison, so how does it fare up?

    Put simply, I had a blast!!

    It's got enough power to be fun, and the handling, while certainly not as tight as the Gr4 and Gr3 cars we've gotten used to in GT Sport, doesn't take long to get a feel for! It's quite satisfying being able to get around corners, inches away from rivals, with one wheel lit up. Of course, sometimes you get it wrong and end up in a fish tail, usually into a wall or way off line, but still this Corvette is a car that I'd actually quite happily drive again for fun!

    Sure, it might get left for dead by some of the other N class rivals, but if there's a classic car race, or I want to enjoy throwing something around with no modern equipment or assists, I know what car I'll be choosing.

    Sleeper!!
     
    ProjectF, Draggon, Alex p. and 5 others like this.
  12. CTznOfTime

    CTznOfTime

    Messages:
    3,599
    Location:
    France
    The car is lovely!

    I enjoyed the RX-7 on Fuji...

    It has no power.
    But it is a lot of fun.
    For these reasons, it is NOT a sleeper.
    A sleeper by definition is something deceptively fast.
    The car ain't fast.
    Therefore, IMHO, the RX-7 is a beater.

    A very fun beater:
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2020
  13. XSquareStickIt

    XSquareStickIt

    Messages:
    434
    1990 Mazda (Savanna?) RX-7 GT-X (FC3S) Review

    While last week's C2 Corvette is something I'm largely oblivious about, but know how I feel about it, this week's second generation sports car is quite the opposite: I know what it is, but I don't know how I feel about it. This week, we're taking a look at the 2nd generation Mazda RX-7, chassis code FC3S.

    I don't want this post to be 95% me telling you my entire life story and why I love the RX-7, so please just take my word for it: I love the Mazda RX-7. I've spent the vast majority of my life idolising, looking at, lusting after, and driving virtual versions of RX-7s. Yet, I've just never really gelled or jived with the FC generation.

    [​IMG]
    The first generation RX-7, chassis code SA22C and later FB3S, was just one of the few cars to capitalise on the 240Z's splash into the American market, feeding the appetite for cheap, nible sports cars from Japan. However, in comparison to its rivals, what set the RX-7 apart from day one was its compact Rotary Engine, making the RX-7 lighter and more nimble than its already bloating rivals. For the second generation, Mazda wanted to move the RX-7 more upmarket than the FB, and as a result, not only was the FC significantly more expensive, it also got chunkier and heavier. Going for a more refined, classy look, Mazda took more than heavy inspiration from the Porsche 924 in styling the FC. Mazda cars have always been known to be the lighter, better handling, and more innovative than those of its competitors, so you can imagine my disgust when the FC, like a rebellious kid, took all that philosophy and methodology, gave it the finger, and set out to do the exact opposite of what it was told to be and do.

    SIR THIS IS HIGHLY ILLEGAL YAMETE
    Is that to say that the FC handles like a pig? Well, yes and no. It's complicated. But mostly yes. The 1990 RX-7 in GT-X trim is top of the line as far as the USDM is concerned. Being a turbo model, larger 205mm tyres, lighter alloy wheels, and even *gasp* ABS came as standard on this car! In spite of all this, I feel nothing but frustration driving this try hard, granddad of a car.

    At this rate, the Red Bull Ring "Sausage Test" is going to be a staple in my reviews.
    The first thing that strikes anyone even before getting into the car is its unsportscarlike stance. Its wedge shaped, boxy and aerodynamically unstable body is stilted up on primary school eraser thin tyres and a skyscraping 150mm ride height. Behind the wheel, it is immediately clear that this car is way too soft for sporty driving. It pitches and rolls like they're going out of style, no doubt in attempt to bury its slim tyres into the ground in attempt to dig up some grip. The stratospheric ride height almost feels deliberate in facilitating all this excessive body movement. The chassis is toothpick weak in this car: you'd think that 206PS isn't even enough to carry a bag of apex seals home, but you would also be very swiftly and happily proven wrong as the chassis completely gives up on you each and every corner exit you attempt the cardinal sin of putting power down out of a corner. The differential in this car spins the outside wheel as much as the C2 Corvette with an open diff from last week spins its inside wheels. Rotary Engines are traditionally known to be top end performers, making them exceptional racing engines for the track; yet, with the way the turbo is set up, the 13B in the FC makes what little power and torque it has in the mid range, necessitating shifting at 7,000rpm like a peasant family sedan, with the last thousand revs being just for engine braking, but mostly for show.

    Even the buzzer to remind drivers to shift is annoying in this car: it sounds like a 1980s alarm clock whistling into a 3 day old soiled diaper. It also is the very same buzzer that comes on when you open the driver side door with the key in, so enjoy that. No, I don't need you to remind me to shift, car. Yes, I can tell when I need to upshift. How? Because you aren't accelerating no mo', that's how! The engine is so dead so early, it would sooner reincarnate as a range extender in an SUV than it would actually hit its rev limiter.

    Racing Beat set a BGT record with an FC at Bonneville, so it's an engine with potential, I guess.
    (Also, am I the only one super annoyed with Scapes? Like, you go ALL THE WAY to Bonneville to take photos for your game. You take ONE photo, that's NOT EVEN ON THE SALT, and with the sunlight coming from a useless position? Really PD?)


    Rating Beat RX7 by a340829161 Download Link
    The chassis of this car is so weak that the front and rear of the car feel like two distinct, unrelated halves than a singular body. With the engine and mass up front, the entire car seems centred and focused on the front end, leaving the rears of the car to simply follow along, but it doesn't work that way for a RWD sports car. Given the weak chassis, soft suspension, and front focus, the rear end abysmally lacks control, and is ultra tail happy. While the styling of the car takes heavy inspiration from the 924, the handling of the FC seems to want to emulate a 911 of that era with how incredibly tail happy it is. Every. Single. Thing you do, the rear slides out. Turn into a corner? Front tyres complain, rear starts to peek out. Corner exit? Rear goes sideways. Engine hits boost? Wheelspin. Breathe a bit heavy in the driver seat, and the car spins. Truly, the way this car swings out its rear, it's almost like an inexperienced actress giving it up way too early and easily. Look, I get it, you're a RWD sports car, calm down! All the bits before the slide are just as important as the slide itself, you know! Slowly lead me there! Let me get to know you more first! Practice due safety! Make me work for it!

    Working for it.

    Because of how slim the tyres are, there is very little in its friction circle. The car is okay at about eight tenths, but it doesn't approach its limits as linearly and predictably as one would hope a sports car would. Push these tyres too hard, and they will just throw their hands up at you and scream, "I DUNNO!" and give up instantly. Because of how soft the suspension is as well, there seems to be weight over only one tyre at any one time through a corner, which makes the car very bad at multi-tasking (look I'm a bit sick as I'm writing this, most of this probably doesn't make sense). To drive this thing at the limit, trying to set a lap time is a very, very frustrating endeavour, as you need at all times to baby the car gently into and out of corners, and its limits is very difficult to explore because of how quickly and non-linearly it transitions from grip to slip. Pushing this car at the limits constantly feels to me like trying to babysit five spoiled children at once: each "child", the tyres, the suspension, the engine, the chassis, and even the aero, all require such care and attention to detail in handling them, and each have their own personalities and tendencies, making them all come together to do ONE thing well is excruciatingly frustrating. I suppose you can make the argument that it's a very involved and analogue drive because of it, but each and every element of the car is just too awful for me to be able to wring any enjoyment out of the drive.

    Huge thanks to Vic for saving and sharing replays of this week's races, as I wasn't able to attend.
    Because of how soft the suspension is and how weight seems to exclusively be on one of four tyres, I find myself in many situations where I'm just waiting for the weight transition, waiting for the car's balance to return, before I can do anything else. Sometimes, you even get combinations of any of the aforementioned problems at once; you turn the car, the front end suddenly slips, and the rear end with no weight steps out, so you get both under and oversteer. And all you can do as a driver is wait. Wait for grip to return to the tyres. Wait for the car's balance to return. Wait, wait, wait. I don't mind if a sports car is slow, but a sports car making you wait is the second worst sin a sports car can commit, right after being boring. I don't know about you, but a sports car making a driver wait is like a horror movie asking you to scare yourself: you have ONE job. You're supposed to exhilarate me!

    Loading exhilaration...
    Much more so the lack of grip and chassis rigidity, what I think is most responsible for the car's chronic tail happiness I think can be attributed to its oh-so-clever rear wheel steering system, which Mazda calls the Dynamic Tracking Suspension System, or DTSS for short. I really don't understand why car manufacturers are so obsessed with the idea of making cars intervene with the drivers, because almost every instance of such a system ends up making a car slower and more frustrating to drive. Look, my life is in my hands. If I die, I die. Don't pretend you're smarter than me. Don't pretend you know me. If even the robotics and IT industry are struggling to get AI more lifelike and intuitive, what makes automotive companies think they can think for us? I'm not the guy that programmed and set up the systems in your factory! I don't drive like him! I don't care if I'm slower, let me have my fun! *mumble grumble*

    COTW is all fun and games until you see Vic in your mirrors.
    Anyway, I'd be lying if I told you I knew exactly what DTSS does; what little info of it that exists on the internet is mostly from owners' conjecture. But I'm adamant in blaming the DTSS for the god awful tail happiness of the FC for two reasons: the first reason being that typing "FC RX-7 DTSS" into Google gives me a vast majority of "How to delete DTSS" results, which leads me to believe that I'm not alone in thinking it's stupid and awful. The system was also axed completely for the next generation of the RX-7, the FD. The second reason I blame DTSS for the chronic tail happiness of the FC is because the driving characteristics just don't feel natural. I could be making reasonably civil turn in attempts and corner exit attempts, not even trying to go fast, and the rear just snaps out instantly without warning. There is simply not enough gs to make the rear step out so violently and suddenly like that, slim tyres or not. It really feels like all the rubber just fell off your wheel or something. Even a 930 911 lets go with more warning and linearity. Yeah, there, I said it. DTSS makes the FC more tail happy than an air cooled 911. Fight me.

    I can only conclude that, at low cornering loads, the system must think that I'm attempting to make a U-turn or something (at 80km/h, but okay, this is the early 80s, computers are allowed to be way stupider back then), and then toe-outs my rear. It's absurdly bad, and makes sure you NEVER trust the car, as it's liable to snap on you at any speed, with any load. In this week's races, many people's FCs were wriggling on corner exits, as the car was attempting to over rotate one moment, and the moment counter steering is applied, the car snaps back to understeer, all while lateral gs pull the car wider and wider off the track. This wriggling I think is a telltale sign of the DTSS working its "magic", in what little time I've spent this week trying to figure it out. It's such a stupid system, I swear. Maybe there's someone out there that can adapt to and master the DTSS to make this car perform some magic, but in the week that I've been obsessively driving it, I haven't been able to do get used to it. I'm not saying I'm a very good driver; I'm just saying DTSS really isn't for me.

    Also, can I just point out that an AERODYNAMIC DEVICE has a hole drilled into it to accommodate the radio antenna? I know most wings from the factory are only for show, but I have never seen less effort even in the game of playing pretend.

    Pictured: Aerodynamics.
    I'm sorry, but this is the top of the line, turbo model? Mazda made even less grippy versions of these with 185mm tyres? They made even weaker, heavier versions of these as convertibles? ABS wasn't standard on these death traps? You made AUTOMATIC versions of these power starved things?! Of a Rotary Engine?! How could this thing tolerate being any worse than it already is? How could lesser versions of these survive its own weight sitting in a parking lot? How have they not fallen apart with how soft and weak they are? How could the lesser versions of the FC be safe to drive at highway speeds? How could lesser versions of these things not slide its rear out at a standstill if even looked at in a funny manner?

    oH iT's A jDm It'S mEaNt To Be TuNed

    Okay, let's talk tuning this thing. It can't even put down its 206PS, so I'm guessing you're looking for any combination of fitting fatter tyres on it, putting a big wing on it, swapping out the differential, and stiffening the chassis. If lightness is the backbone of a good performing car, then chassis rigidity is the backbone of a good tuning car. The FC has already failed on that front. Good luck finding the space and money to add extra bracing and weld spots.

    [​IMG]
    Oh, you want to put an aftermarket wing on the FC? Good luck finding aftermarket wing stands that have a 90° wing stands, because there simply isn't enough room aft the rear window to mount a wing with traditional stands.


    This is truly one of the stupidest car designs I think I've ever seen.

    You want chunkier tyres? Well, I guess you now need flared fenders on it, because even the eraser thin tyres on it are pushing the Japan Class 5 body of the FC to its class limits. Oh, what's that? Flared fenders increase the width of the car, and now the car is a Japan Class 3, and you're in a legal cesspool of technicalities and increased tax? Gee, I'm so envious of you, FC Owner-san! Please, teach me how to cope with such suffering in your life!

    See, if the old Trail Mountain was in GTS, the underbody shot wouldn't have sand all over it.

    For reference, the FC's width is listed as 1,690mm (~66.5″). Class 5 limits are 1,700mm (~70″). If GTS is to be believed for its undercarriage accuracy, given its painstaking detail in the underbody of cars, then there simply is no more room for bigger tyres in the FC's body.

    I will stop myself for a bit to make excuses for this car, though. The car is very delicate, not just mechanically, but also dynamically. It not only requires very progressive, smooth (and slow) inputs from the driver, lest you upset it and it whines or even tries to kill you. Because of how delicate the driving dynamics are, the FC is also very much affected by small changes to the car, and Gran Turismo Sport hasn't been very kind to the FC with small changes here and there.

    Small changes include wiping away all stock logos on the car when you want to put a license plate on.
    The car comes default with Comfort Soft tyres in previous titles, yet all N class cars in GT Sport come with Sport Hards, which makes certain cars nigh undriveable (such as the Amemiya FD for example). You might think the FC getting a tyre upgrade is a good thing, but that isn't strictly the case. Of course it's faster with sport tyres, but as a result, it feels even more disjointed to drive. All the car's faults are highlighted and magnified, like how non linearly the tyres let go, and how much suspension travel the FC has, and so on. Swapping back to the Comfort Softs, the car feels more... natural. More communicative even, somehow. It feels almost as if you and your spouse has always been arguing for years and years, and now you suddenly have a chance to sit down and talk in a calmer, more civil manner. Yes, things are happening slower, but it also feels more fruitful, somehow.

    「人生は時にはコーヒー1杯の温かさの問題」
    "Life's problems can all be settled with the warmth of a cup of coffee"

    Gran Turismo Sport also compresses 100 litres (~26.4 gallons) of fuel into every car for every event, unless you specifically set an initial fuel load (which is only available in lobbies, that hardly anyone uses). This means that, as tested, the FC has 30 extra litres of fuel, amounting to roughly 22 kilos (~49lbs) of extra mass aft the cabin. It's a minor thing that every other road car is subject to in GTS, but the extra mass might go some ways in explaining the horrendous rear end behaviour of the FC. Yes, yes I am trying to make excuses for the car. I just want all cards on the table to be as fair as possible. And, honestly, if a car with back seats is that troubled by an extra 22kg behind the driver... what the heck is it doing with rear seats?!

    [​IMG]
    Also, while we're on the topic of PD ruining the FC, I just want to point out that the turbo gauge on this car doesn't work, AT ALL. It just sits at zero boost, almost like fitting a turbo gauge to a NA car.

    Points for making the oil pressure gauge work, I guess...
    Oddly enough, the turbo gauge on the FC doesn't work in GT6, either. Even the aftermarket turbo gauge you can put on it works, but not the OE one!

    At least this thing has a good view out of the cockpit. One advantage of having such a huge, curved greenhouse rear glass panel is that the view out of the car is almost panoramic, coupled with the toothpick weak, but also toothpick thin A pillar of cars in that era.

    As big a fan as I think I am of Mazda Rotary Sports Cars, and as much as I want to love the FC, it is so awful that I can't. It's not that it's bad because it's old, either. It's bad even in comparison to its contemporary rivals. Driving other sports cars from the 80s for comparison, both cheaper and more expensive, I came to the conclusion that the RX-7 is easily the worst to drive. The cheaper S13 is a very solid, no surprises drive, and it's a car that actually enjoys bring revved. The AE86 absolutely comes alive in the twisty mountains where the FC kicks up a fuss every corner, and made me smile, and laugh, in a way I haven't in a car in a very, very long time. Upmarket, the A70 Supra, while costing almost 50% more, has just about that much more power, and has a very pleasant demeanour about it. While European sports cars like the M3 Evo and 930 911 cost a kidney each, they still drive better than the FC while being unquestionably faster. You have so many other options in the 80s for sports cars, even within the barren car roster of GT Sport. There is no reason to bother with the FC. It drives the worst among 80s sports cars, while being near the bottom in terms of lap times.



    And guess what, that was all on-track comparisons. Off the track, none of the aforementioned cars give you the headaches of a Rotary Engine ownership. None of those cars require an engine rebuild every 150,000km. None of those cars will cook your left thigh when you drive it. None of those cars require you to mix oil into your fuel every time you fill it up. None of those cars will require you to redline it once a day as part of maintenance. None of those cars made me think, "this component is so stupid, I wish I could get rid of it". And when something does go wrong, mechanics will have a better idea on how to fix it rather than just looking into the engine bay and then shrugging.

    And so I hope you see how stupid a notion it is to me that a Rotary drives the worst among its competition, because Rotary Engine cars are meant to be track toys. They're smooth, high revving banshees. They make everything up top, they're lightweight and compact, they run extremely hot and burn oil and apex seals the way I burn through my will to live. Every characteristic about a Rotary Engine screams, "TRACK ME, I hate everything else!" So why does the FC not want to rev? Why does it have nothing up top? Why is the engine plopped into such an overweight and bulky body? Why is the suspension not set up for the track? Why does it outweigh similarly priced sports cars despite being a Rotary? Why is the base car so bad that even the Turbo and INFINI models can't salvage anything from it? Why are there convertible versions of it? Why are there automatic versions of it that redlines even lower? Surely there are much cheaper and better cars out there for these non sporty applications?

    With all the associated pains of Rotary Engine ownership, one does not simply "own" a Rotary. They adopt a lifestyle. They become part of a niche circle in their neighbourhood that understand and can service those cars. You really do have to be "all about that life" to drive a Rotary. And people don't do this to be hip and whatnot; it's because Rotary Engine cars are supposed to be flipping magical to drive. Does anyone who's never driven a Rotary before hop into an FC and go, "oh yeah, please, I want that lifestyle because of this!"? I really don't see it happening.

    The FC is well and truly the textbook definition of a beater, because it is a car that doesn't live up to lofty expectations its name begets. Granted, I will excuse the car's beater status simply because it was made out to be the car of choice of a godlike character in an anime, and garnered a bit of a following as a result. Moreover, its successor, the FD, is leaps and bounds better than the FC in every respect, objective and subjective. Yes, I know how stupid that last sentence sounds: "The FD is absolutely better in subjective areas". But I assure you, the FD is that good. It is everything the legends say it is. It elevated the standards and definition of what a sports car should be and can be, and in doing so, raises the expectations and standards to any car that would bear the "RX" name. Unfortunately and unfairly for the FC, I can't help to feel that it suffers from how damn good the FD is. But it also means I don't have to deal with the FC and how bad it is, because the FD exists.

    So, in conclusion, if I were role playing a well to do man in the 80s, I'd hold onto the money and wait for an FD. I'd even wait for a NSX if I'm gangsta enough. Or I'd just get an S13 or AE86.

    Here's a lap I did with the FC on the Nordschleife, on sport hard tyres, 100 litres of fuel with no consumption for a time attack board. It was swiftly demolised by Alex P, but hey, I have it, might as well share, right?

     
  14. ringkurier

    ringkurier

    Messages:
    1,191
    Location:
    Germany
    Have to give a comment about this interesting vehicle, too.

    Found last week my love again with it as I use it now as my methadone for the Transaxle Porsches


    I love RWD Coupés, and I love the FC. It brings together the basic joy of a sporty and dynamic 80s car with the weird but loveable Wankel engine and interesting 80s Japanese engineering.

    The handling of it is not so great, but always fun. Cause of its small tires there is such a small line of limit, even a small change of engine load on the rear tires making it unstable. Unfortunately there is not too much torque from the Wankel left in stock trim to make it look like a smooth power drift.

    So I will say: This car should be made the new standard for driving school. If you master this, you know how car physics work and you can handle your dads SUV like a champ. If not, you are either traumatised to never drive again or wait till autonomous driving is a real thing. Action for Road Safety :D
     
  15. XSquareStickIt

    XSquareStickIt

    Messages:
    434
    So I've been doing some catching up on COTW, both for GTS and GT6. I'm not sure how so ask without sounding too confrontational, but what happened to COTW? There used to be so many participants and reviews, so much banter and wit in the GT6 thread (and sexy women!). Did interest in COTW wane, or is it simply because there are fewer people playing GTS than GT6, owing to the smaller car roster and PS+ exclusivity? I'm just genuinely curious, not trying to start anything here.

    I can't believe I've been playing since GT5 and haven't even looked into a COTW thread until about two months ago. God I'm stupid.
     
    Alex p. likes this.
  16. TonyJZX

    TonyJZX

    Messages:
    3,377
    The problem with GT Sport 'partipcation' is the same problem that's been day one in comparison to GT6.

    People arent that motivated or invested in GT Sport in comparison to GT6. That's it.

    I'd also put it it like this... if someone dredges up an original day one car (like the FC3S) in a game 2.5yrs down its game life cycle then I can expect few people to be interested.

    Polyphony arent doing much to generate activity in this game so I cant expect people to be excited either.

    I would contrast to the way the GT6 Seasonals worked. They did it all the way to the end and even to the end, people were reasonable invested with GT6. When GT6 ended there was a final drive send off and people were really upset.

    I dont think we'll see that with GT Sport, at least not to that level.
     
    AgentBlackDog and XSquareStickIt like this.
  17. Racer283

    Racer283

    Messages:
    457
    Location:
    United States
    With COTW, there has been 4 different people that have taken up the mantle of running the group and each one has a different style of presenting the car. The original thread started with GT5 with someone else but each car had it's own thread but in GT6 is was consolidated to one thread with MCD running the show and he got to choose the photos for the car. By the end of the life cycle of GT6 @Nismonath5 took up the mantle and finished COTW there. For GTS, I took up the mantle to bring back the series and the regulars who would race with us.

    I know not everyone from GT6 days continued on with the group to GTS but maybe they will return for GT7 as that will be more of a traditional Gran Turismo game. Other racing games have captured the interest of some of the members or others have joined more competitive racing groups that take up their time. But as long as there is an interest we will continue doing COTW.
     
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2020
  18. TonyJZX

    TonyJZX

    Messages:
    3,377
    I think at the end of this generation and the end of these games we're just looking for a bit of fun, bit of content, trying to extend this until they kill the servers. We like to discuss cars, often cars we will never drive in real life etc.
     
  19. Nismonath5

    Nismonath5

    Messages:
    2,045
    Location:
    New Zealand
    The big appeal for COTW on GT5 and 6 was that there were so many "oddball" cars to review and race. The Audi Auto Untion C, the Mitsubishi i, the Honda Z act, the Toyota 7... all freakishly different cars, meaning the racing each week could be totally different, and that's why so many people loved it.

    Here on GT Sport, it's more or less mostly race cars or high performance road cars, there's very little in the ways of oddballs.

    Maybe GT7 will breathe new life into the group, but one thing's for certain. Even on GTS, it's great fun playing around with all the different cars on offer!
     
  20. The_Nagger187

    The_Nagger187

    Messages:
    8
    Sorry for the blasphemous paint job... figured since I have a 944 turbo I could get away with it... lol
     
  21. XSquareStickIt

    XSquareStickIt

    Messages:
    434
    Oh, please, don't get me wrong. I'm enjoying COTW as it is thoroughly. I just wish there were more reviews so that I can have more perspectives and opinions. That's a big part of it for me.

    It might be a little off topic, but I'm not sure GT7 will give us the full suite of oddball cars that GT6 had. I think it's safe to say even back in GT6, most of its oddball cars are standard carryovers from the PS2 era. I think I recall seeing an article somewhere that said that even PS3 era cars took 5 or so months to fully prepare for the game. So even though I was disgusted by Sport's car roster before launch, I also sort of understood why it's so focused and race car centric. Unless PD starts expanding or outsourcing, (and I doubt they will. They look like a close knit group of perfectionists) I really doubt the day will come where we get to race Midgets in COTW (and trust me, I want to!)

    Oh, please don't worry about it! I was pointing out your car in jest, because it fit so well with what I was trying to say in my review: that the FC took styling cues from the Porsche 924. (and by extension, the 944 as well I guess?) It's your car man, do what you want to it. Far be it from me to judge virtual cars in a game.

    It might not be a fair comparison, but do you think you can share how the 944 is to drive, and how it compares to the virtual FC RX-7? I'd really love to hear from someone who actually owned a 944. I'm not very knowledgeable about Porsches as a whole.
     
  22. Nismonath5

    Nismonath5

    Messages:
    2,045
    Location:
    New Zealand
    For me personally it's a time thing.

    Back in the GT6 days I was in high school, I had all the time in the world to do reviews, take pics, goof around, etc. Now I'm adulting (much as I hardly feel like it), so I'm juggling all of life's bits and pieces as well as my real world Motorsports activities and managing a race team, and it doesn't leave much wiggle room for writing up detailed reviews and analysises. That said, I seem to be pretty free today, so I may well try whip up something...
     
  23. ringkurier

    ringkurier

    Messages:
    1,191
    Location:
    Germany
    I owned a 924S for many years, drove about 120.000km with it. Also had a RX-8 and tested the 944 Turbo. Both cars are actually the best handling cars I head the pleasure to drive. The point of the 924 / 944 is, that they are transaxle, so weight distribution is a dream. The sisters are absolutely neutral to drive and offer a good load of traction you do not expect from a RWD car. It was easy to maintain 200km/h on a icy Autobahn. The 944 Turbo has also the most violent Turbo I have yet experienced in a stock car. I don't remember exactly but at about 4000 rpm it feels like a small car has crashed into you, something you will never see again in modern cars. About the Turbo experience @The_Nagger187 could tell you more for sure.

    The RX-7 has nothing of it. It's a oversteering disaster which could only be cured with sticky, unrealistic tires. But I still love it. Guess in real life it could be a real heartbreaker, a crazy 80s JDM pocket GT.
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2020
  24. Racer283

    Racer283

    Messages:
    457
    Location:
    United States
    We are testing one of the few track day cars in the game and first made it's appearance in GT5. This week we are taking a look at the Pagani Zonda R. This weeks car is chosen by @Baron Blitz Red

    [​IMG]
     
  25. Alex p.

    Alex p.

    Messages:
    5,556
    Location:
    Germany
    GTS Nordschleife hot lap STOCK but with sport hard tyres Pagani Zonda R '09: 06.57.846
    This car has really an insane amount of downforce and grip. The speed, with which you can take the corners, is the highest of all yet tested cars. Well, it is a race car after all. The speed to 280 km/h is crazy, from there on it's rather "tame" though. Still, this is a highly impressive piece of machinery. I love it.

     
    ProjectF likes this.
  26. The_Nagger187

    The_Nagger187

    Messages:
    8
    I've actually had 3 rx-7's 2 mk 1's and 1 mk 2. Will see if I can summon my inner writer and do up a comparison of all 3 for you.
     
    XSquareStickIt and ringkurier like this.
  27. MisterWaffles

    MisterWaffles Premium

    Messages:
    4,970
    Location:
    Canada

    I know that feel bro. Went through the same thing here personally. I was in high school during the days of GT6 but now I barely have time to follow up on anything around here anymore or to even hop on most weeks because I'll be working the morning shift at a retirement home. I also have a feeling that I'm going to get busier as the years roll on.

    I remember saying I was going to review the last two cars that were around here. I don't think those ever materialized. I'm also behind on my requests for liveries at the moment and haven't touched my PS4 in a week.
     
    Draggon and XSquareStickIt like this.
  28. Nismonath5

    Nismonath5

    Messages:
    2,045
    Location:
    New Zealand
    8215230937760301072_0.jpg 8214667989954364440_0.jpg 5980878239002787868_0.jpg
    (I thought the Jim's joke went over the heads of everyone who wasn't Aussie / Kiwi, but I thought it was funny.)

    The FC RX-7 isn't really my first choice in 90's Japanese sports cars. Like most rotaries it has little in the ways of grunt, weak torque and a loose, spongy handling character. I can see why so many kids love them as drifters, though. Easy to throw in, and even on sport tyres and lacking power it wasn't hard to break grip.

    It just doesn't excite me though. Not really much else to say about it. Hopefully the Zonda will prove more exciting to talk about.
     
  29. XSquareStickIt

    XSquareStickIt

    Messages:
    434
    I totally hear you guys. I'm only free to race (sometimes) and do these reviews only because of the "big 19". COTW races happen at 10:30am my time, so if life ever goes back to normal for me, I will never be able to race you guys again :(

    I'm glad to be here racing and reviewing as long as I can though. I'm glad too that I'm not the only one who thinks the FC isn't that good. I keep thinking maybe I'm too cynical in my reviews, or I'm too much of a spoiled brat. Glad to know I'm not completely off my rocker.

    The Zonda is a car that I've been wanting to say a few things about, from trashing it around Nurb GP in a practice session for last week's Nations race. I'll do a quick impressions of it later this week. Right now I kinda want to do a closing... sendoff... thing, for the FC. At the end of the day, it's a Rotary, and it's always going to have a special place in my heart, as evidenced by how I've two of them in the game, a white one and a red one.

    [​IMG]

    I completely forgot I edited together and uploaded a video of me lapping the Nordschleife in my white FC. The big difference here is that this lap was done without ABS, before I learned that the turbo models came standard with ABS. It was a very slow and messy lap (8:27.805, 3.9 seconds off my other video in the red FC).


    I will echo @ringkurier 's sentiment that the FC is a very good car to learn driving techniques in, albeit still not the best one. It's soft suspension is very good for understanding weight transfer. Its slim tyres makes it a good teacher for learning how a car behaves when transitioning from grip to slip, at speeds that won't immediately kill you. The lacking power curve is good for understanding and learning when to shift, as well. Most importantly, being an 80s car, when ABS wasn't that common, the FC is a car that doesn't come with unnecessarily gigantic brakes for show. It's not a car that relies on ABS to be driveable. It still has enough to cause the tyres to slip under excessive braking force if you just stomped on the brakes willy nilly, which in my very unscientific measure, is "enough" brakes.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    I wouldn't recommend driving without ABS in GTS, as I hear the tyre model simulation isn't very true to life when it comes to brakes locking. I imagine however, in real life, the FC will be a very good teacher's car, just with a DTSS delete. At the end of the day, I kinda still inexplicably like it, just for being an RX-7, in spite of all of my complaints against it. It holds a lot of sentimental value to me, as I start the PS1 era GT games with a used FC under 10k credits. It's always on top of a list of exotic supercars and fire breathing race cars because of it.

    I still respect the heck out of anyone who still drives this 40 year old granddad of a car, when *ahem* better options exist. The dedication to keep these things on the road is insane. And anyone who drives a Rotary feels like family, to me (even though I don't own one but shush you!)

     
  30. RobboGTAddict

    RobboGTAddict

    Messages:
    133



    connection issues ruined last night. Hope we can drive the Zonda tonight. Enjoy two races with the RX-7 from last week.