Forza Horizon 5: General Discussion

  • Thread starter Northstar
  • 17,559 comments
  • 1,667,660 views
How rapid is the AMR Pro in S2, has it started taking over the Rivals Leaderboards yet?

Specifically, how good is it at my test tracks :) :

  • Horizon Mexico Circuit (Road)
  • Jungle Descent (Street)
 
Just to check, when you say 4-wheeled G63 AMG from around the same time, do you mean the second-gen G63 AMG that came out around that time?
...
As I think this is the first time we are hearing about it being modeled back in the day, unless my Dory-like memory is forgetting something here :lol:

It's listed as a 2018 model, so not the second-gen car. It's a bit superfluous since the 6-wheeled G63 and the 4-wheeled G65 are already in, which is probably why it's never seen a release. Like most unreleased cars, there's no guarantee it was actually modelled, but it was planned to some degree.

There are plenty of minor variants that don't get used or get replaced by something newer, like the 2016 LC500 and 2018 RS3 saloon, so the G63 is probably one of them.
 
Same as the Jesko in FH4, where it was pegged back to 1280hp for S2 998, with the full 1600hp just a 100Cr upgrade away. They kept it that way for FH5 though for some reason, don't know if it gives any flexibility in other upgrades while staying under 998 that the full power wouldn't.

I suspect they've actually used the same 1000hp Valkyrie AMR engine data from FM8, and just made the 'stock' restrictor part multiply power by 0.8x. Normally all stock parts have a 1.0x power multiplier then upgrades (including 'restrictor removals') have multipliers higher than 1 to increase power, but there's no technical reason why it wouldn't work if done this way.
Speaking of which, the Saleen S7 LM which has 1300hp irl only has 1000hp in the game, it requires the race turbo upgrade to get close to the real car's figure (1290hp). But I don't see the point to nerf the stock performance since the car's PI rating after the race turbo upgrade (S2 935) is still nowhere close to the S2 Max (S2 998), which will not make the car too op by any means.
 
Speaking of which, the Saleen S7 LM which has 1300hp irl only has 1000hp in the game, it requires the race turbo upgrade to get close to the real car's figure (1290hp). But I don't see the point to nerf the stock performance since the car's PI rating after the race turbo upgrade (S2 935) is still nowhere close to the S2 Max (S2 998), which will not make the car too op by any means.
I think you are mistaking a single example of S7 LM which was taken to 1300hp.

The actual S7 upgrade kit to reach LM spec only brought it to 1000hp, which is as PG modelled:
 
Last edited:
It's listed as a 2018 model, so not the second-gen car. It's a bit superfluous since the 6-wheeled G63 and the 4-wheeled G65 are already in, which is probably why it's never seen a release. Like most unreleased cars, there's no guarantee it was actually modelled, but it was planned to some degree.

There are plenty of minor variants that don't get used or get replaced by something newer, like the 2016 LC500 and 2018 RS3 saloon, so the G63 is probably one of them.
It's possible a lot of these are superseded by newer models their marketing partners want to push instead. Automotive design moves fast; you could model one car thinking it'll be the baseline for how that car will look by your next game or by the time you finish it up, only for its next generation to come out and its manufacturer to essentially tell you 'put this one in instead'. Or, you could model that same car, only to be told you can't put it in the game because its manufacturer struck an exclusivity deal with another game at the eleventh hour, meaning it has to sit in game files for a long, long time, presumably like what happened to the new Supra and possibly the MC20, depending on what happens next.

Honestly, cars like the Hammer Wagon feel like they're genuinely the result of a need to have cars at the ready in the event of stuff like this happening. We might be out of the realm of truly huge car updates now, and more into the realm of 'whatever's ready'.
 
Happy to have the DS23, but I’m surprised it’s listed as a DS, rather than a Citroën.
584a8942-758a-4410-979f-1f7cc797d6de.png
 
Same here. Feels like they're opening the door to future DS cars, since that's its own marque now.
I get that DS is their new division, and it's named after the DS itself, but assigning the DS to a marque that wouldn't exist for another 40+ years is questionable. And kind of an insult to the actual manufacturer that created the iconic DS in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Well I enjoyed both of this week's Eventlabs. Especially the first one, a track built on Eventlab Island with sweeping banked curves - it was a lot of fun.
 
That being said, if this were the ONLY DS they wanted to add, then why not just add it under Citroen and pave the way for returning Citroen models, which would be the easy way out? This way, they can start looking into the newer DS cars and maybe add them in with either the new Race-Off update or even a car pack later on.
 
I'm going to go there.......it's spelt COLOURS

Throws grammar grenade and runs away
Not if you want your code to work it isn't.

Also it's spelled "spelled". Spelt is a type of wheat.

Actually "spelt" is also deemed acceptable, I just hate consonant-t formations for past tense - except in the same sort of poetry that also allows for consonant-d formations for past tense.
 
It's spelt colores.
We are in Mexico.
Rebrand Citroën models into DS may be at the request of Citroën itself to give greater visibility to the actual DS brand.

Or it's just me that I have too much imagination.
 
It's spelt colores.
We are in Mexico.
Rebrand Citroën models into DS may be at the request of Citroën itself to give greater visibility to the actual DS brand.

Or it's just me that I have too much imagination.
What's the spelling of Citroën anyways? Because we Mexicans can´t figure what the "ë" is all about!
 
¨ tréma in French.

I don't know how to explain it well.

Separate two vowels from a syllable.

It would be so that when pronouncing the word, it is taken into account that it must be done by pronouncing the second vowel separated from the first one.
So: See-thro-en? That's how I spell it!
 
Back