Fastest Car on GT4?

[EXODUS]

Which car is the fastest over all?

 

[Cosmic]

I don't care. I'm not a fan of high-speed racing at the time but it's probably the Minolta.

 

[A_JKOS]

For cornering ability i'd say the formula gran turismo.

but for high speed i'd say the nissan r92cp.

 

[Max Powers]

Let me congratulate you for asking a very intelligent, well thought out question that hasn't already been asked a million times.

 

[Sti04]

Which car is the fastest over all?

I'd say it depends on which track you are racing on. But overall I'd say F1 cars are the most powerful cars.

 

[bennyboypolo]

I don't care. I'm not a fan of high-speed racing at the time but it's probably the Minolta.

he was asking what the fastest car was, not for your opinion 👎

 

[EXODUS]

Well I cant win some races because my F1 isnt fast enough on the straight aways. So which car would be the best?

 

[Famine]

he was asking what the fastest car was, not for your opinion 👎

Define fastest.

Fastest around an oval? Fastest around a track? Fastest down the drag strip? Fastest on ice? Fastest on dirt? Fastest on the wet track?

That's the problem you encounter with this question. That's why this thread wouldn't have made it through when moderator approval was on either.


EXODUS - More power generally = more speed. An F1 car doesn't excel in straight lines because it's 300hp down on the most powerful cars in the game - and at speed weight isn't an important factor compared to power and aerodynamics (which are lousy on an open-wheel, winged F1 car). But an F1 car will kill everything else in the corners. Try to make your time up there. On Super Speedway and the Test Course, if you MUST use an F1, run it low to the ground and take ALL the downforce off.

 

[Sti04]

Well I cant win some races because my F1 isnt fast enough on the straight aways. So which car would be the best?

Like I said, OVERALL F1 is the fastest. But of course you will lose on Test Course, High Speed Ring which Top speed is a dominate factor.

 

[EXODUS]

ok, so which car is best for the oval tracks?

 

[Sti04]

ok, so which car is best for the oval tracks?

Ok Buddy. In that case I'd say go with Nissan R92P or Toyota Minolta 88C. Upgrade a stage4 turbo. You shouldn't have any problems on the oval course. I am not good with tuning gearbox, but you can stretch the 6th and final gear to increase your top speed.

 

[Zardoz]

To my great shock, I hit 274 MPH on the Sarthe II straight with the Chapparal 2D during my Le Mans car test. That's 11 MPH faster than the second-fastest GT-One. I was stunned. I had no idea it would do that.

That was with Stage 4 power and full downforce. Ease the DF and it will be even faster, of course.

 

[Sti04]

To my great shock, I hit 274 MPH on the Sarthe II straight with the Chapparal 2D during my Le Mans car test. That's 11 MPH faster than the second-fastest GT-One. I was stunned. I had no idea it would do that.


That was with Stage 4 power and full downforce. Ease the DF and it will be even faster, of course.

"I have managed 518km/h in the minolta toyota with nos, that's about 321mph", this is copy and pasted from thread "Post your top speed and wheelie tricks. If you want find out more about top speed, go there, there are plenty. If I dont remember wrong, the fastest is about 388mph. (Minolta)

 

[slipknot10wa123]

Define fastest.

Fastest around an oval? Fastest around a track? Fastest down the drag strip? Fastest on ice? Fastest on dirt? Fastest on the wet track?

That's the problem you encounter with this question. That's why this thread wouldn't have made it through when moderator approval was on either.


EXODUS - More power generally = more speed. An F1 car doesn't excel in straight lines because it's 300hp down on the most powerful cars in the game - and at speed weight isn't an important factor compared to power and aerodynamics (which are lousy on an open-wheel, winged F1 car). But an F1 car will kill everything else in the corners. Try to make your time up there. On Super Speedway and the Test Course, if you MUST use an F1, run it low to the ground and take ALL the downforce off.

I would say that the F1 hasthe best aero, too good in fact, more downforce = more drag

 

[Zardoz]

Just tried the 2D on the Test Course for the first time:

No wheelie trick, no NOS, Stage 4, 2.500 final, 0.790 third gear, minimum downforce, R1 fronts, R4 rears - 288.66 MPH.

Pretty good for an antique. Makes you wonder what the speed specialists could do with it...

 

[CMcMahon]

Without cheating (ex: wheelies), the TVR Cerbera Speed 12 seems to go really fast (well, on the test course). I don't have one, but my brother's one got about 290mph, if I remember correctly.

 

[The Greatest]

Tune The GT one it will go to speeds up to 380+mph... i think its 383 mph to be precise... the minolta i got went only to 336.89 mph...

 

[Mt. Lynx]

Ok Buddy. In that case I'd say go with Nissan R92P or Toyota Minolta 88C. Upgrade a stage4 turbo. You shouldn't have any problems on the oval course. I am not good with tuning gearbox, but you can stretch the 6th and final gear to increase your top speed.

I´d say the TVR speed 12 is faster, since it does´nt have any downforce at all. I have´nt tried this out though...

 

[Famine]

I would say that the F1 hasthe best aero, too good in fact, more downforce = more drag

That'll be the WORST aerodynamics then?

 

[Jacks]

if you MUST use an F1, run it low to the ground and take ALL the downforce off.

To go faster (in a striaght line or on an oval for top speed) you run it higher from the ground not lower 👍

 

[xXSilencerXx]

No u run it lower to create less drag.

 

[KaffeinE 86]

I always run it low. Sometimes on city courses I raise it a bit so it's more controllable.

 

[Event]

To go faster (in a striaght line or on an oval for top speed) you run it higher from the ground not lower 👍

Oh, no, you did NOT just contradict Famine! You gonna get it!

 

[Jacks]

Oh, no, you did NOT just contradict Famine! You gonna get it!

Yeah i know i'm off to try and find proof and quick.

I'm sure i heard it somewhere but i fear i may be wrong.

OK i'm wrong .

 

[zoxxy]

I found 100 threads about this. https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/search.php?searchid=359730

 

[Jacks]

I found 100 threads about this. https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/search.php?searchid=359730

I agree that we didn't need this thread, as it has been done before but have you read the titles of some of those threads in your search. How is "Most realistic picture u ever taken !~" or "Your Favorite 90's drift car" anything to do with the fastest car on the game. So i think the number is slightly less than 100, although granted there are at least 10 and i'm not defending this guy.

 

[zoxxy]

I agree that we didn't need this thread, as it has been done before but have you read the titles of some of those threads in your search. How is "Most realistic picture u ever taken !~" or "Your Favorite 90's drift car" anything to do with the fastest car on the game. So i think the number is slightly less than 100, although granted there are at least 10 and i'm not defending this guy.

"Showing results 1 to 25 of 100
Search took 1.38 seconds. Search: Key Word(s): fastest ; Forum: Gran Turismo 4 and child forums"

 

[Famine]

Yeah i know i'm off to try and find proof and quick.

I'm sure i heard it somewhere but i fear i may be wrong.

OK i'm wrong .

There we go. THAT'S how a debate should go. Guy disagrees, doubts own statement and retracts in ONE post...

Dropping the car nearer to the deck means that any air which would naturally be diverted under the car by the shape must travel faster since it's moving through a compressed space, reducing, by a small fraction, air resistance. This also has the benefit that the faster moving air under the car counteracts the natural tendency of the car to lift at speed (the Bernoulli effect). When the car runs too low and bottoms out, you get a sudden lift since no air is going all the way under the car, "blowing" it upwards and there is no counter to the Bernoulli effect. See Senna, Ayrton.

Reducing air resistance by fractions may not sound much, but air resistance is the major component in top speed capability. As you increase speed, air resistance increases proportionally by a cube. The mathematics goes like this:

Rolling Resistance = Weight (lbs) x 0.0135. This remains, more-or-less, constant on flat, level road.
Air Resistance = Frontal Area (sq.ft.) x Coefficient of Drag x 0.00256 (this is the factor you can change by altering ride height, but not by much) x Speed x Speed
Totoal Resistance = Air resistance + Rolling resistance
Power required to beat total resistance = (Total Resistance x Speed (the same one as in the air resistance calculation))/375


So, let's say we've got a Cd of 0.45 and a frontal area of 22 square feet in a 1190lb F1 car. To do 220mph we need *calculates* 729hp at the wheels (840 at the crank, according to "typical" RR calcs - which probably don't apply on efficient F1 drivetrains). Drop the car a little and alter the fudge factor to 0.00255 - a very small alteration indeed - and we need *calculate* 726hp at the wheels (835 at the crank). That microscopic alteration is the difference between a Minardi reaching 220mph and not.

Note that by dropping a Civic from 5 inches to 4 inches off the ground won't have as much of an effect as this. We're talking <2 inches of ground clearance...

 

[daan]

There we go. THAT'S how a debate should go. Guy disagrees, doubts own statement and retracts in ONE post...

Well, that's how a debate against you usually goes. 💡

 

[Weezhard]

There we go. THAT'S how a debate should go. Guy disagrees, doubts own statement and retracts in ONE post...

Dropping the car nearer to the deck means that any air which would naturally be diverted under the car by the shape must travel faster since it's moving through a compressed space, reducing, by a small fraction, air resistance. This also has the benefit that the faster moving air under the car counteracts the natural tendency of the car to lift at speed (the Bernoulli effect). When the car runs too low and bottoms out, you get a sudden lift since no air is going all the way under the car, "blowing" it upwards and there is no counter to the Bernoulli effect. See Senna, Ayrton.

Reducing air resistance by fractions may not sound much, but air resistance is the major component in top speed capability. As you increase speed, air resistance increases proportionally by a cube. The mathematics goes like this:

Rolling Resistance = Weight (lbs) x 0.0135. This remains, more-or-less, constant on flat, level road.
Air Resistance = Frontal Area (sq.ft.) x Coefficient of Drag x 0.00256 (this is the factor you can change by altering ride height, but not by much) x Speed x Speed
Totoal Resistance = Air resistance + Rolling resistance
Power required to beat total resistance = (Total Resistance x Speed (the same one as in the air resistance calculation))/375


So, let's say we've got a Cd of 0.45 and a frontal area of 22 square feet in a 1190lb F1 car. To do 220mph we need *calculates* 729hp at the wheels (840 at the crank, according to "typical" RR calcs - which probably don't apply on efficient F1 drivetrains). Drop the car a little and alter the fudge factor to 0.00255 - a very small alteration indeed - and we need *calculate* 726hp at the wheels (835 at the crank). That microscopic alteration is the difference between a Minardi reaching 220mph and not.

Note that by dropping a Civic from 5 inches to 4 inches off the ground won't have as much of an effect as this. We're talking <2 inches of ground clearance...

Google

search

Cut, Paste

GT4 does not take this level of detail into account unless you screw the suspension to the floor on bumpy circuits (e.g 'Ring, Seattle etc). Lowering the suspension will increase top speed due to "ground effects" but will not increase drag. Want to try it, take a car to the drag strip/oval and run with NO downforce and vary the ride height.