GT6 Duel of the Week #70: The Grand Finale (well, not really)
- Thread starter Cowboy
- 1,338 comments
- 185,615 views
- 1,512
- Pacific NW
- ThrasherDBS
- ThrasherDBS
Alfa Romeo is a manufacturer that, while it seems to have quite a bit of appeal for many other car enthusiasts, it does almost nothing for me. TVR however is one of my favorite sports car manufacturers, especially for the cars it made in the 90's. If I were to place a verdict without doing any testing, my vote would immediately go to the Cerbera. However, that's not how I do things. They need to at least go around the Rotenboden and SSR5 a few times.
I will say that the best laps on these two cars were insanely close. Like, seriously, the widest gap was 1/10th of a second. These cars certainly are competitive.
Mountain Trial:
8C - 1:47.318
Cerbera - 1:47.215
City Trial:
8C - 1:34.391
Cerbera - 1:34.380
You saw that right, 11/100ths of a second between both cars in the city trial. The 8C seems like it's capable of surpassing the Cerbera, but unfortunately, the behavior of the car makes it very difficult to do so. The car feels like it has too much understeer on long corners and too much snap oversteer in technical sections. The Cerbera feels a lot more composed, slight understeer on longer corners, and it also has controllable oversteer. The Cerbera honestly feels like a more refined 8C, and it's 11 years older!
The 8C can be a fearsome competitor in the right hands, but due to the Cerbera's accessibility, the Blackpool sports car takes the duel and wins my vote.
I will say that the best laps on these two cars were insanely close. Like, seriously, the widest gap was 1/10th of a second. These cars certainly are competitive.
Mountain Trial:
8C - 1:47.318
Cerbera - 1:47.215
City Trial:
8C - 1:34.391
Cerbera - 1:34.380
You saw that right, 11/100ths of a second between both cars in the city trial. The 8C seems like it's capable of surpassing the Cerbera, but unfortunately, the behavior of the car makes it very difficult to do so. The car feels like it has too much understeer on long corners and too much snap oversteer in technical sections. The Cerbera feels a lot more composed, slight understeer on longer corners, and it also has controllable oversteer. The Cerbera honestly feels like a more refined 8C, and it's 11 years older!
The 8C can be a fearsome competitor in the right hands, but due to the Cerbera's accessibility, the Blackpool sports car takes the duel and wins my vote.
- 6,226
- Ottawa
- Pyano1132
I'm up to the task early this week! better get it out of the way. Here's my new look, it's a bit tidier.
1997 TVR Cerbera Speed 6 vs 2008 Alfa Romeo 8c Competizione Review/Comparison
"Can the TVR take the triple victory for it's brothers, or will the 8c show it it's place?"
Two Similar, yet entirely different cars. One was an art project built by Alfa and it's name pays homage to a legendary engine with "8 cylinders" used in older cars like the Touring Spider from 1937. The TVR was a unique car built in a shed in Guilford, England just like other classic British cars. This doesn't necessarily guarantee reliability, but it does mean the car will be quirky non-the-less. Both of these cars in short are great, so let's start the review.
The usual course of action from my previous reviews. I take both cars down to the "Eifel Field to Hill Sprint" track to see who can hammer down the fastest lap time. I also provide commentary on both car's performance and feel.
The 8c has a very punchy engine, Ferrari did a great job on the F136 V8. But it does weigh considerably more than the TVR. You definitely feel the car through the corners. The understeer just kills all the joy of going through the tight bends and using the engine (Shared with other cars such as the 458, 430, Gillet Vertigo and GranTurismo) to it's fullest potential. The TVR is a different story. It shows up with less power, which makes the competition get cocky, then it drifts circles around even the most powerfull cars. It's an amazing feeling nailing the chicanes with a TVR.
The times are in!
Cerbera: 2:19.464
8c: 2:20.342
The TVR was faster and more fun to drive, so it gets the point here...
The drag race was odd, neither car pulled significantly away from the other, so it seems to come down to which driver is faster off the line and shifting.
Results are inconclusive.
The TVR blows the 8c out of the water. It has all the famous chameleon colours while the 8c only has 2 reds, 1 yellow and 1 black. The 8c wins points for originality here...
Point goes to the TVR Cerbera
The TVR is a standard, so it looses in aero parts, where the 8c has a front lip and two wings. The TVR also has two more wheel sizes though. So a point goes to each car for wining on one area over the other.
Both cars have equal tuning, but I predict the 8c will have a harder time with 500pp racing because the TVR has a little more wiggle room with 496pp
Point goes to the TVR Cerbera
The 8c's sound is very weak for a V8. The TVR has these amazing devilish upshifts that give the sound a uniqueness and originality.
Point to the TVR
For design, I judge both cars as if they were in real life, no Premium>Standard stuff here. The TVR looks very simple and clean, while looking sporty enough to carry the nameplate. It just doesn't satisfy the eyes as much as it's younger siblings. The 8c was meant to be a rolling piece of art. It satisfies the eyes, but looks too busy for me in some places.
Point to the TVR
Well, I think I've seen the TVR a lot in seasonals and 500pp races, but I rarely ever seen it drifted before. The 8c is drifted much more, and I honestly don't know why.
So points go to both...
Now it's time for the...
I think the 8c is a good car, but it costs 220,000 over the TVR's 79,880 price. So really, which is the obvious choice?
THE VOTE IS AWARDED TO THE TVR CERBERA 6
And the verdict is...
Buy the Tuscan Speed 6.
Why not man?
See you next week for another review!
"Can the TVR take the triple victory for it's brothers, or will the 8c show it it's place?"
Two Similar, yet entirely different cars. One was an art project built by Alfa and it's name pays homage to a legendary engine with "8 cylinders" used in older cars like the Touring Spider from 1937. The TVR was a unique car built in a shed in Guilford, England just like other classic British cars. This doesn't necessarily guarantee reliability, but it does mean the car will be quirky non-the-less. Both of these cars in short are great, so let's start the review.
The usual course of action from my previous reviews. I take both cars down to the "Eifel Field to Hill Sprint" track to see who can hammer down the fastest lap time. I also provide commentary on both car's performance and feel.
The 8c has a very punchy engine, Ferrari did a great job on the F136 V8. But it does weigh considerably more than the TVR. You definitely feel the car through the corners. The understeer just kills all the joy of going through the tight bends and using the engine (Shared with other cars such as the 458, 430, Gillet Vertigo and GranTurismo) to it's fullest potential. The TVR is a different story. It shows up with less power, which makes the competition get cocky, then it drifts circles around even the most powerfull cars. It's an amazing feeling nailing the chicanes with a TVR.
The times are in!
Cerbera: 2:19.464
8c: 2:20.342
The TVR was faster and more fun to drive, so it gets the point here...
The drag race was odd, neither car pulled significantly away from the other, so it seems to come down to which driver is faster off the line and shifting.
Results are inconclusive.
The TVR blows the 8c out of the water. It has all the famous chameleon colours while the 8c only has 2 reds, 1 yellow and 1 black. The 8c wins points for originality here...
Point goes to the TVR Cerbera
The TVR is a standard, so it looses in aero parts, where the 8c has a front lip and two wings. The TVR also has two more wheel sizes though. So a point goes to each car for wining on one area over the other.
Both cars have equal tuning, but I predict the 8c will have a harder time with 500pp racing because the TVR has a little more wiggle room with 496pp
Point goes to the TVR Cerbera
The 8c's sound is very weak for a V8. The TVR has these amazing devilish upshifts that give the sound a uniqueness and originality.
Point to the TVR
For design, I judge both cars as if they were in real life, no Premium>Standard stuff here. The TVR looks very simple and clean, while looking sporty enough to carry the nameplate. It just doesn't satisfy the eyes as much as it's younger siblings. The 8c was meant to be a rolling piece of art. It satisfies the eyes, but looks too busy for me in some places.
Point to the TVR
Well, I think I've seen the TVR a lot in seasonals and 500pp races, but I rarely ever seen it drifted before. The 8c is drifted much more, and I honestly don't know why.
So points go to both...
Now it's time for the...
I think the 8c is a good car, but it costs 220,000 over the TVR's 79,880 price. So really, which is the obvious choice?
THE VOTE IS AWARDED TO THE TVR CERBERA 6
And the verdict is...
Buy the Tuscan Speed 6.
Why not man?
See you next week for another review!
- 5,636
- North Dakota
- RacingCowboy570
- RacingCowboy570
Great new look to your reviewI'm up to the task early this week! better get it out of the way. Here's my new look, it's a bit tidier.
View attachment 489975
1997 TVR Cerbera Speed 6 vs 2008 Alfa Romeo 8c Competizione Review/Comparison
"Can the TVR take the triple victory for it's brothers, or will the 8c show it it's place?"
View attachment 490018
Two Similar, yet entirely different cars. One was an art project built by Alfa and it's name pays homage to a legendary engine with "8 cylinders" used in older cars like the Touring Spider from 1937. The TVR was a unique car built in a shed in Guilford, England just like other classic British cars. This doesn't necessarily guarantee reliability, but it does mean the car will be quirky non-the-less. Both of these cars in short are great, so let's start the review.
View attachment 489977
The usual course of action from my previous reviews. I take both cars down to the "Eifel Field to Hill Sprint" track to see who can hammer down the fastest lap time. I also provide commentary on both car's performance and feel.
The 8c has a very punchy engine, Ferrari did a great job on the F136 V8. But it does weigh considerably more than the TVR. You definitely feel the car through the corners. The understeer just kills all the joy of going through the tight bends and using the engine (Shared with other cars such as the 458, 430, Gillet Vertigo and GranTurismo) to it's fullest potential. The TVR is a different story. It shows up with less power, which makes the competition get cocky, then it drifts circles around even the most powerfull cars. It's an amazing feeling nailing the chicanes with a TVR.
The times are in!
Cerbera: 2:19.464
8c: 2:20.342
The TVR was faster and more fun to drive, so it gets the point here...
View attachment 489991
The drag race was odd, neither car pulled significantly away from the other, so it seems to come down to which driver is faster off the line and shifting.
Results are inconclusive.
View attachment 490001
The TVR blows the 8c out of the water. It has all the famous chameleon colours while the 8c only has 2 reds, 1 yellow and 1 black. The 8c wins points for originality here...
Point goes to the TVR Cerbera
View attachment 490007
The TVR is a standard, so it looses in aero parts, where the 8c has a front lip and two wings. The TVR also has two more wheel sizes though. So a point goes to each car for wining on one area over the other.
View attachment 490008
Both cars have equal tuning, but I predict the 8c will have a harder time with 500pp racing because the TVR has a little more wiggle room with 496pp
Point goes to the TVR Cerbera
View attachment 490009
The 8c's sound is very weak for a V8. The TVR has these amazing devilish upshifts that give the sound a uniqueness and originality.
Point to the TVR
View attachment 490011
For design, I judge both cars as if they were in real life, no Premium>Standard stuff here. The TVR looks very simple and clean, while looking sporty enough to carry the nameplate. It just doesn't satisfy the eyes as much as it's younger siblings. The 8c was meant to be a rolling piece of art. It satisfies the eyes, but looks too busy for me in some places.
Point to the TVR
View attachment 490012
Well, I think I've seen the TVR a lot in seasonals and 500pp races, but I rarely ever seen it drifted before. The 8c is drifted much more, and I honestly don't know why.
So points go to both...
Now it's time for the...
View attachment 490014
I think the 8c is a good car, but it costs 220,000 over the TVR's 79,880 price. So really, which is the obvious choice?
THE VOTE IS AWARDED TO THE TVR CERBERA 6
And the verdict is...
Buy the Tuscan Speed 6.
Why not man?
See you next week for another review!
- 1,512
- Pacific NW
- ThrasherDBS
- ThrasherDBS
Personally, I'd take the Cerbera over the Tuscan. I really did not care for the Tuscan when we tested it.
- 337
- Italy
- Il_Conte_Sky
My all time favourite streetlegal car is not getting any votes? 
Take my vote my beloved 8C
Take my vote my beloved 8C
- 5,636
- North Dakota
- RacingCowboy570
- RacingCowboy570
Let's start with the 8C. A very artistic looking car that is quite attractive. When I drove this though, it felt like a little too much to handle. Oversteer comes in shorter corners while understeer comes in the long curves. I don't hate the car though, it's just that it seems as though the looks were more important than performance to Alfa.
The Cerbera. Coming straight out of Blackpool, this car isn't that much different than the 8C. The main difference is performance. It felt more controllable in any situation, and it costs a bunch less than the Alfa. Plus, it's one of my favorite cars of the '90s. So my vote as you probably can tell by now, goes to the Cerbera Speed 6.
Both cars were tested on Midfield, no aids other than ABS 1.
8C: 1:21.361
Cerbera Speed 6: 1:21.192
And your guy's votes:
8C: 1
Cerbera Speed 6: 5
And the winner is.....
The '97 Cerbera Speed 6!!!
Blackpool does it again. But hey, the 8C has its own fans too, so let your hopes get down for all you Alfa lovers out there. Be sure to stop back here tomorrow for the next duel of the week!
The Cerbera. Coming straight out of Blackpool, this car isn't that much different than the 8C. The main difference is performance. It felt more controllable in any situation, and it costs a bunch less than the Alfa. Plus, it's one of my favorite cars of the '90s. So my vote as you probably can tell by now, goes to the Cerbera Speed 6.
Both cars were tested on Midfield, no aids other than ABS 1.
8C: 1:21.361
Cerbera Speed 6: 1:21.192
And your guy's votes:
8C: 1
Cerbera Speed 6: 5
And the winner is.....
The '97 Cerbera Speed 6!!!
Blackpool does it again. But hey, the 8C has its own fans too, so let your hopes get down for all you Alfa lovers out there. Be sure to stop back here tomorrow for the next duel of the week!
Last edited:
- 3,144
- Lancashire
- Ryk_BRM
Dash too late - I'd have gone Cerbera as well.
***Looks***
The Cerbera always compares to the Griffith in my eyes, As in, The Cerbera isn't as Good as the Griffith.
The 8C is honed excellence. The sweeping lines the subtle use of chrome to highlight the windows and the lamps. Yet it is subtle without many overt Bulges, Vents and Scoops. It was also the touchstone design cue for many Alfa Romeo's to follow.
The Cerbera has a simple classic "Jaguar" feel to it... a Bit of XKE alot of XJS (Long low lean)
The 8C has a delicious style behind the doors and the rear window with the curved glasswork the reminds me of an Old Celica by Toyota... ST165 (Model numbers are not my Forte.)
These are both good cars. The 8C is stunning. You can tell Alfa had alot of time to make a really pretty car after years of normal production cars. The Cerbera is simple in its lines, Long low and lean. Looks like a Rail thin Catwalk Model
The 8C has a bit more meat on it... nice subtle use of chrome little angular vents behind the front wheels.
The Cerbera was integral to the Original Gran Tursimo - it is the younger sibling to the Awesumtacular Cerbera Speed 12. The Alfa is good but the styling isn't quite perfect - The Cerbera looks great because it is so low. It is actually 4 inches shorter than the Alfa yet the Cerbera looks long and lean, the Alfa somehow looks squat and tubby (But in a gloriously curvy way)
***Head to Head ***
Alfa Romeo 8C Competizione '08
Birthplace: Milan, Italy
500pp
4 Paint Chips 4 - (Black, Yellow, red and red metallic)
1585kg
443bhp
49 torques
4.7l V8
7500red line
Sports Hard Tyres
FR/NA
4381x1894x1341
220,000cr
I bought mine in Black to get the Tan leather interior and to let the subtle Chrome bits highlight the lines. And you can really see the Lucky Cloverleaf Quatrefoil behind the front wheels
TVR Cerbera Speed 6 '97
Birthplace: Bispham, Great Britain (Not Guildford!)
496pp
22 paint chips...
1130kg
350bhp
46torques
4 litre Straight 6
5 speed gearbox
7000red line
Sports Hard tyres
FR/NA
4280x1865x1220mm
79,880cr
I bought my new Cerbera in ... Chameleon Blue (You have to get all the paint chips)
----
Comparisons
Firstly how fat is That Italian? An extra 455kg...1000lbs! - That's a lot of Pasta.
Engine Bigger V8 vs. a Puny Straight 6. The entry level TVR is giving up almost 100 Brake Horsepower and is 11 creaky years older.
Test race 1 - Brands Hatch - 4 laps (Just last lap time.)
Cerbera 1m52.5 (B-Spec)(2nd place)
Cerbera 1m40.2 (A-Spec)
8C - 1m51.3 (B-Spec)(3rd place)
8C - 1m39.9 (A-Spec)
***Handling***
The TVR felt like the brakes were not fitted and really took much longer to slow the car down considering how light it was. The Alfa was interesting to drive, a bit vague at times but the weight and the power and the layout makes things very easy to understand. The Back end will break away at times - but a "dab of oppo" and all is good, as the car was dancing for me in the corners - Not in a bad way but in a balance the car with your fingertips find of way. The Cerbera wasn't bad either but it felt like the "Hardcore" opposed piston brake callipers were not modelled in GT6.
***Engine Notes***
Big let down from Milano - In fact if you look at the Alfa Romeo Badge you can see what happened to the GT6 sound Engineer (On the right in the green serpent's mouth!) The V8 in the Alfa is very bland and muted, the Straight 6 in the TVR is more evocative and "crunchy".
***Test Race Part Deux - Matterhorn Dritz doh doodah. ***
Seasonal stuff, a full grid of top flight drivers given a 40 second head start and only 4 laps to beat them. I am Happy to report these two cars both managed that task with stock settings stock tyres and No corner cutting, car impacts, ABS or Traction Control -
Both give you a fun time, lots of power oversteer out of corners. And the crests and bumps also make the good bits extra nice. The Cerbera being much much lighter skips over the crests like a three headed dog. The 8C felt good considering it's weight The Brakes felt extra nice but the car was a bit loose in corners, But I enjoy that. The Cerbera is a bit more neutral but the bad bit was the brakes - which felt very weak indeed.
Times
1m11.4 - 5m35.4 - TVR Cerbera Speed Six
1m11.2 - 5m35.7 - Alfa Romeo C8 Competizione
Extremely competitive times, The TVR felt a bit feeble under power at times, just a bit low in the rev range up the hill and as I have said a few times now felt very absentminded under heavy brakes - Maybe it was just going faster? The Alfa was a much more solid under brakes but i think that was about it, in the tighter corners it felt a bit sluggish not helped when you try to put down the power and end up lighting up the rear tyres... I actually noticed the back end would leave a smoke tell tale of how little rear end grip the car has in medium fast corners - But the car isn't a nightmare to drive but a bit more touchy than the Cerbera.
Right enough waffle...
Cost
TVR butchers the Alfa
Paint Chips
TVR butchers the Alfa
Sound
The Straight Six is just crackling with raw energy. the Alfa's V8 felt desperately restricted.
Looks
I love TVR's but I'd have to give the Alfa the Nod in terms of looks. It is the best looking Alfa for a long time the Cerbera is a step down form the TVR S series in my eyes. Close maybe a draw, but I have to step back to the Cerbera is not the best looking TVR but the 8C is much better looking than anything from Milan for decades.
Track times
Pretty even - B-Spec says the Alfa is faster - I'd say the Alfa can get a faster time, but the Cerbera will get you a faster race time (Once you accept it won't slow down into corners as well as it should do.)
Final pick.
Close thing. My initial thought was TVR all the way. Testing and kicking them about a bit let me enjoy the 8C - but The Simple pleasures of the Light nimble English car kept it ahead in my heart.
I Pick the Cerbera
***Looks***
The Cerbera always compares to the Griffith in my eyes, As in, The Cerbera isn't as Good as the Griffith.
The 8C is honed excellence. The sweeping lines the subtle use of chrome to highlight the windows and the lamps. Yet it is subtle without many overt Bulges, Vents and Scoops. It was also the touchstone design cue for many Alfa Romeo's to follow.
The Cerbera has a simple classic "Jaguar" feel to it... a Bit of XKE alot of XJS (Long low lean)
The 8C has a delicious style behind the doors and the rear window with the curved glasswork the reminds me of an Old Celica by Toyota... ST165 (Model numbers are not my Forte.)
These are both good cars. The 8C is stunning. You can tell Alfa had alot of time to make a really pretty car after years of normal production cars. The Cerbera is simple in its lines, Long low and lean. Looks like a Rail thin Catwalk Model
The 8C has a bit more meat on it... nice subtle use of chrome little angular vents behind the front wheels.
The Cerbera was integral to the Original Gran Tursimo - it is the younger sibling to the Awesumtacular Cerbera Speed 12. The Alfa is good but the styling isn't quite perfect - The Cerbera looks great because it is so low. It is actually 4 inches shorter than the Alfa yet the Cerbera looks long and lean, the Alfa somehow looks squat and tubby (But in a gloriously curvy way)
***Head to Head ***
Alfa Romeo 8C Competizione '08
Birthplace: Milan, Italy
500pp
4 Paint Chips 4 - (Black, Yellow, red and red metallic)
1585kg
443bhp
49 torques
4.7l V8
7500red line
Sports Hard Tyres
FR/NA
4381x1894x1341
220,000cr
I bought mine in Black to get the Tan leather interior and to let the subtle Chrome bits highlight the lines. And you can really see the Lucky Cloverleaf Quatrefoil behind the front wheels
TVR Cerbera Speed 6 '97
Birthplace: Bispham, Great Britain (Not Guildford!)
496pp
22 paint chips...
1130kg
350bhp
46torques
4 litre Straight 6
5 speed gearbox
7000red line
Sports Hard tyres
FR/NA
4280x1865x1220mm
79,880cr
I bought my new Cerbera in ... Chameleon Blue (You have to get all the paint chips)
----
Comparisons
Firstly how fat is That Italian? An extra 455kg...1000lbs! - That's a lot of Pasta.
Engine Bigger V8 vs. a Puny Straight 6. The entry level TVR is giving up almost 100 Brake Horsepower and is 11 creaky years older.
Test race 1 - Brands Hatch - 4 laps (Just last lap time.)
Cerbera 1m52.5 (B-Spec)(2nd place)
Cerbera 1m40.2 (A-Spec)
8C - 1m51.3 (B-Spec)(3rd place)
8C - 1m39.9 (A-Spec)
***Handling***
The TVR felt like the brakes were not fitted and really took much longer to slow the car down considering how light it was. The Alfa was interesting to drive, a bit vague at times but the weight and the power and the layout makes things very easy to understand. The Back end will break away at times - but a "dab of oppo" and all is good, as the car was dancing for me in the corners - Not in a bad way but in a balance the car with your fingertips find of way. The Cerbera wasn't bad either but it felt like the "Hardcore" opposed piston brake callipers were not modelled in GT6.
***Engine Notes***
Big let down from Milano - In fact if you look at the Alfa Romeo Badge you can see what happened to the GT6 sound Engineer (On the right in the green serpent's mouth!) The V8 in the Alfa is very bland and muted, the Straight 6 in the TVR is more evocative and "crunchy".
***Test Race Part Deux - Matterhorn Dritz doh doodah. ***
Seasonal stuff, a full grid of top flight drivers given a 40 second head start and only 4 laps to beat them. I am Happy to report these two cars both managed that task with stock settings stock tyres and No corner cutting, car impacts, ABS or Traction Control -
Both give you a fun time, lots of power oversteer out of corners. And the crests and bumps also make the good bits extra nice. The Cerbera being much much lighter skips over the crests like a three headed dog. The 8C felt good considering it's weight The Brakes felt extra nice but the car was a bit loose in corners, But I enjoy that. The Cerbera is a bit more neutral but the bad bit was the brakes - which felt very weak indeed.
Times
1m11.4 - 5m35.4 - TVR Cerbera Speed Six
1m11.2 - 5m35.7 - Alfa Romeo C8 Competizione
Extremely competitive times, The TVR felt a bit feeble under power at times, just a bit low in the rev range up the hill and as I have said a few times now felt very absentminded under heavy brakes - Maybe it was just going faster? The Alfa was a much more solid under brakes but i think that was about it, in the tighter corners it felt a bit sluggish not helped when you try to put down the power and end up lighting up the rear tyres... I actually noticed the back end would leave a smoke tell tale of how little rear end grip the car has in medium fast corners - But the car isn't a nightmare to drive but a bit more touchy than the Cerbera.
Right enough waffle...
Cost
TVR butchers the Alfa
Paint Chips
TVR butchers the Alfa
Sound
The Straight Six is just crackling with raw energy. the Alfa's V8 felt desperately restricted.
Looks
I love TVR's but I'd have to give the Alfa the Nod in terms of looks. It is the best looking Alfa for a long time the Cerbera is a step down form the TVR S series in my eyes. Close maybe a draw, but I have to step back to the Cerbera is not the best looking TVR but the 8C is much better looking than anything from Milan for decades.
Track times
Pretty even - B-Spec says the Alfa is faster - I'd say the Alfa can get a faster time, but the Cerbera will get you a faster race time (Once you accept it won't slow down into corners as well as it should do.)
Final pick.
Close thing. My initial thought was TVR all the way. Testing and kicking them about a bit let me enjoy the 8C - but The Simple pleasures of the Light nimble English car kept it ahead in my heart.
I Pick the Cerbera
.
- 5,636
- North Dakota
- RacingCowboy570
- RacingCowboy570
This week I chose a suggestion that features two very well known cars to everyone. So without further ado, this week's duel is.....
The 2005 Ford GT
vs
The 2009 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1!!!
(Thanks to @ThrasherDBS for the suggestion)
Mid engine vs front engine. Should be a good one this week, so cast your votes and let me know what you think of these two!
The 2005 Ford GT
vs
The 2009 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1!!!
(Thanks to @ThrasherDBS for the suggestion)
Mid engine vs front engine. Should be a good one this week, so cast your votes and let me know what you think of these two!
- 3,417
- NJ
- Rave2Grave
Well, that ZR1 was pretty special, at least until the C7 Z06 came out and shamed it.
Looks like the Ford will feel that same way when the new GT comes out next year.
With its engine placed behind the driver, the Ford has a handling advantage. But, does it also hold a power or weight advantage over the ZR1? Let's find out...
Ford GT
5.4L
550 hp / 6,500 rpm
501 ft-lb / 4,000 rpm
1,451 kg (3,199 lbs)
Corvette ZR1
6.2L
639 hp / 6,500 rpm
604 ft-lb / 4,000 rpm
1,508 kg (3,325 lbs)
Both cars feature red-blooded V8 engines, but the Corvette is simply more hardcore. It crushes the GT with close to 100 more horses and over 100 ft-lbs more torque. With its extra 57 kg (126 lbs) and FR drivetrain however, the Corvette suffers some handling problems. Namely that of severe oversteer, unless you have a very light touch.
At Mid-Field, on Comfort Soft tires:
1:15.406 - 571 - Ford GT '05
1:16.874 - 573 - Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 (C6) '09
A difference of 1.468 seconds. Both cars topped out at 170 mph by the first braking zone on the track. The Ford GT felt great, much more engaging than the ZR1. You really feel like it's special when you drive it. The Chevy isn't as special, and that's ok. What's not ok is that this car caused me to make constant adjustments and corrections in my inputs. It was downright annoying, but some people prefer that challenge. I prefer dancing with the car, not trying to force it to do what I want it to do. Synchronization. Like the Miata guys like to say, jinba ittai, or 'rider and horse as one.' The Ford is eager and I bet if Ayrton Senna were alive, he'd prefer the Ford GT over the Honda NSX. But hey, I could be wrong about that.
Anyway, I think it's obvious by now, but I'm voting for the Ford GT.
Looks like the Ford will feel that same way when the new GT comes out next year.
With its engine placed behind the driver, the Ford has a handling advantage. But, does it also hold a power or weight advantage over the ZR1? Let's find out...
Ford GT
5.4L
550 hp / 6,500 rpm
501 ft-lb / 4,000 rpm
1,451 kg (3,199 lbs)
Corvette ZR1
6.2L
639 hp / 6,500 rpm
604 ft-lb / 4,000 rpm
1,508 kg (3,325 lbs)
Both cars feature red-blooded V8 engines, but the Corvette is simply more hardcore. It crushes the GT with close to 100 more horses and over 100 ft-lbs more torque. With its extra 57 kg (126 lbs) and FR drivetrain however, the Corvette suffers some handling problems. Namely that of severe oversteer, unless you have a very light touch.
At Mid-Field, on Comfort Soft tires:
1:15.406 - 571 - Ford GT '05
1:16.874 - 573 - Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 (C6) '09
A difference of 1.468 seconds. Both cars topped out at 170 mph by the first braking zone on the track. The Ford GT felt great, much more engaging than the ZR1. You really feel like it's special when you drive it. The Chevy isn't as special, and that's ok. What's not ok is that this car caused me to make constant adjustments and corrections in my inputs. It was downright annoying, but some people prefer that challenge. I prefer dancing with the car, not trying to force it to do what I want it to do. Synchronization. Like the Miata guys like to say, jinba ittai, or 'rider and horse as one.' The Ford is eager and I bet if Ayrton Senna were alive, he'd prefer the Ford GT over the Honda NSX. But hey, I could be wrong about that.
Anyway, I think it's obvious by now, but I'm voting for the Ford GT.
- 1,512
- Pacific NW
- ThrasherDBS
- ThrasherDBS
Wow... both of these cars are nuts. One good old fashioned "Blue Oval versus Bowtie" showdown, and with some (semi) recent supercars no less. And both of these cars are quite vicious, all too willing to throw you into a barrier if you're not careful. (Which as you'll see, I wasn't very.)
The lap times I did with these cars were super inconsistent. I had to fight both cars pretty hardcore, but I managed to get at least 1 okay lap on both tracks with each car. To show exactly how difficult these cars were to drive, I will include all three laps on the trials with the fastest lap bolded, and list the mistakes on each lap.
Mountain Trial:
GT
L1 - 1:48.163 (Spun out near the end after the hairpin under the bridge)
L2 - 1:48.294 (Stepped out of line after the uphill corkscrew and almost spun out, also almost spun out after the steep downhill section)
L3 - 1:41.975 (No major errors)
ZR1
L1 - 1:50.395 (Got caught on grass on uphill corkscrew, also stepped out of line on the downhill section, plowing nose-first into the wall at the bottom)
L2 - 1:45.763 (Hooked the grass on the inside at the end of the downhill section, nearly spun out, had to drift around the sharp left at the bottom. Also ran wide into the grass at the next section)
L3 - 1:46.019 (Hooked grass after the uphill corkscrew, took some time to stabilize the car.)
City Trial:
GT
L1 - 1:31.531 (May have been a little too conservative on the pedal on the turn leading to the main straight, and fairly cautious overall)
L2 - 1:29.553 (Ran wide in the tunnel right after the start. No major errors.)
L3 - 1:31.531 (Late braking on the darkened 180 turn, also late braking on the chicane with the lighted trees caused me to plow nose-first into the barrier)
ZR1
L1 - 1:33.406 (Hit the barrier in the section before the darkened 180 turn due to late braking, also hit barrier in the chicane with the lighted trees)
L2 - 1:34.736 (Destabilized car after 180 turn, lost control of the car, hit the barrier twice. Fishtailed on the long right-hand corner before the straight)
L3 - 1:31.275 (Fairly cautious in the tunnel, no major errors)
If these were real cars, things would've gotten pretty expensive on several occasions. Both cars have snap oversteer in corners if you're a little too trigger happy with the gas, however, the heavy front end on the Corvette caused major understeer in the downhill corners of the Rotenboden. The oversteer was more pronounced with the GT but it gave you only one thing to worry about, whereas you had to deal with too much weight transfer to the front on the Corvette if you hit the brakes hard. This is why I ended up noseplowing into barriers more often with the Corvette. The weight ratio on the Corvette is 49:51 whereas, the GT is at 44:56, and I feel that the GT's bias to the rear is what gave it the edge in this duel, especially on the Mountain trial. I know the general preference is to go for an even 50:50 distribution, but this proved to be disadvantageous for the Corvette. The GT will fishtail a lot easier, but you don't have understeer to deal with.
The GT wins.
The lap times I did with these cars were super inconsistent. I had to fight both cars pretty hardcore, but I managed to get at least 1 okay lap on both tracks with each car. To show exactly how difficult these cars were to drive, I will include all three laps on the trials with the fastest lap bolded, and list the mistakes on each lap.
Mountain Trial:
GT
L1 - 1:48.163 (Spun out near the end after the hairpin under the bridge)
L2 - 1:48.294 (Stepped out of line after the uphill corkscrew and almost spun out, also almost spun out after the steep downhill section)
L3 - 1:41.975 (No major errors)
ZR1
L1 - 1:50.395 (Got caught on grass on uphill corkscrew, also stepped out of line on the downhill section, plowing nose-first into the wall at the bottom)
L2 - 1:45.763 (Hooked the grass on the inside at the end of the downhill section, nearly spun out, had to drift around the sharp left at the bottom. Also ran wide into the grass at the next section)
L3 - 1:46.019 (Hooked grass after the uphill corkscrew, took some time to stabilize the car.)
City Trial:
GT
L1 - 1:31.531 (May have been a little too conservative on the pedal on the turn leading to the main straight, and fairly cautious overall)
L2 - 1:29.553 (Ran wide in the tunnel right after the start. No major errors.)
L3 - 1:31.531 (Late braking on the darkened 180 turn, also late braking on the chicane with the lighted trees caused me to plow nose-first into the barrier)
ZR1
L1 - 1:33.406 (Hit the barrier in the section before the darkened 180 turn due to late braking, also hit barrier in the chicane with the lighted trees)
L2 - 1:34.736 (Destabilized car after 180 turn, lost control of the car, hit the barrier twice. Fishtailed on the long right-hand corner before the straight)
L3 - 1:31.275 (Fairly cautious in the tunnel, no major errors)
If these were real cars, things would've gotten pretty expensive on several occasions. Both cars have snap oversteer in corners if you're a little too trigger happy with the gas, however, the heavy front end on the Corvette caused major understeer in the downhill corners of the Rotenboden. The oversteer was more pronounced with the GT but it gave you only one thing to worry about, whereas you had to deal with too much weight transfer to the front on the Corvette if you hit the brakes hard. This is why I ended up noseplowing into barriers more often with the Corvette. The weight ratio on the Corvette is 49:51 whereas, the GT is at 44:56, and I feel that the GT's bias to the rear is what gave it the edge in this duel, especially on the Mountain trial. I know the general preference is to go for an even 50:50 distribution, but this proved to be disadvantageous for the Corvette. The GT will fishtail a lot easier, but you don't have understeer to deal with.
The GT wins.
- 3,144
- Lancashire
- Ryk_BRM
Ford GT 05 vs. The Corvette ZR1 (C6) by Chevrolet.
The Corvette C6 ZR1
It is a handsome car, a real improvement over the wedgeish C4 Corvettes of the 80's - I much prefered the C3 Coca Cola Bottle Stingray but this C6 looks pretty spot on. I can see how it was begining to morph into a Viper wannabee with the headlamps. 7 paint chips - No White or Green. The back of the car has some meat to it, four exhaust pipes, four circular rear lights
The Front is weird, has a coy girl who is about to share a secret look about the "Face"... all is revealed if you look down on the car - a Glass window over the 6 litre Supercharged V8 - Peep hole bonnet... real classy
184,400 kazulas and I got mine in Black to blend in with the any colour you like so long as it is black roof. (Aparently this was not true about the Ford Model T but, I wasn't arround back then.
The Ford Model GT.
I retread of the 60's Endurace race car - But it has a step back from a Monocoque chassis to a more old fashioned Spaceframe chassis. Its looks are nice, but to me it is like a costume party with a tubby girl in a Princess Leia slave girl outfit... nice try. ("I know!")
Paint - you get the choice of 6 colours - and then each has two optional stripes - side stripes or side stripes and nose stripes... I think I'll go with no stripes.
149,880 kazulas - and I got mine in Speed Yellow...
Drive - Ford GT '05
Oddly floaty - (Forget that - Just realised it had SRF forced on... SO no wonder the car didn't feel like it had any prgression in the level of slip angle grip and traction....)
Sorry about that I tried the new seasonal... and forgot they force SRF grip-o-matic on.
I had a try at the home of American speed... the Incarnation of the US Grand Prix track... at Indianapolis.
Engine was solid - nothing remarkable. Gears felt pretty long.
1m40.0 IndyGP
Brakes felt weak (Or the car felt heavy) - Car was uneven in corners, felt a bit up and down on suspension and would wobble between under and oversteer. It does have some get up and go out of corners though.
Drive - C6 ZR1
1m40.5 Indy GP
Gah neither car are great to actually drive. the ZR1 had power oversteer in high speed stuff but also had high speed understeer if you didn't get the rear wheels to break traction... In the slow stuff the car felt like a SUV with a caravan was trying to overtake me.
Ding Ding
Round 1
***Looks ***
To me the Ford GT is a bloke in a dress, A small light delicate racer being impersonated by something else... If the actual car looked fresh and new then I would judge it as such but instead it is trying to be a 60's race car with the weight of a 50's delivery van and the throwback chassis of 40's sports car.
The Corvette is a natural progression of the C4 looking car - and I have no problem with a car evolving over the years when it is in constant production. The GT had the GT90 which I didn't like but at least it was trying to break away from the past.
--10-8 Corvette
Round 2
***Chips***
You have to edge this to the Ford - Not to the gimmicky stripes but for the rather classy Midnight Blue which is more impressive than the Vette's rather flat Atomic Orange.
--10-9 to the Ford
Round 3
***Sound***
Neither were painful. The Ford was innofensive and the Vette was nice and robust.
--10-10 - Even Round
Round 4
***Handling***
Both were pretty sloppy to me. I'd give the nod to the Vette as it's brakes were less prone to making the car pitch about into corners. But neither are razor sharp or require delicate inputs.
--10-9 Corvette
Round 5
***Price***
Pretty simple to split the pair on this one.
--10-9 Ford
Round 6
***Indy Lap***
--10-9 Ford
Not alot to say - If you can hook up the Ford and brake nice and early then you should be able to beat the more powerful Corvette.
***Total***
Ford - 56
Corvette - 57
I was pretty underwhelmed with both cars, The engines were big adorable brutes (Who doesn't like an old blower?) but the feel when driving them wasn't insprational. I think the bulky weight and spongecake like suspension took them out of the "fun to drive" area for me. - Actually thinking about it the Vette was horrendous in the slow corners - if I take a point off for that it is a tie... but do I honestly want to drive these two Baby Wheels again?
I pick the Corvette as it is much nicer to look at, the Model GT just seems hacky and bloated.
The Corvette C6 ZR1
It is a handsome car, a real improvement over the wedgeish C4 Corvettes of the 80's - I much prefered the C3 Coca Cola Bottle Stingray but this C6 looks pretty spot on. I can see how it was begining to morph into a Viper wannabee with the headlamps. 7 paint chips - No White or Green. The back of the car has some meat to it, four exhaust pipes, four circular rear lights
The Front is weird, has a coy girl who is about to share a secret look about the "Face"... all is revealed if you look down on the car - a Glass window over the 6 litre Supercharged V8 - Peep hole bonnet... real classy
184,400 kazulas and I got mine in Black to blend in with the any colour you like so long as it is black roof. (Aparently this was not true about the Ford Model T but, I wasn't arround back then.
The Ford Model GT.
I retread of the 60's Endurace race car - But it has a step back from a Monocoque chassis to a more old fashioned Spaceframe chassis. Its looks are nice, but to me it is like a costume party with a tubby girl in a Princess Leia slave girl outfit... nice try. ("I know!")
Paint - you get the choice of 6 colours - and then each has two optional stripes - side stripes or side stripes and nose stripes... I think I'll go with no stripes.
149,880 kazulas - and I got mine in Speed Yellow...
Drive - Ford GT '05
Oddly floaty - (Forget that - Just realised it had SRF forced on... SO no wonder the car didn't feel like it had any prgression in the level of slip angle grip and traction....)
Sorry about that I tried the new seasonal... and forgot they force SRF grip-o-matic on.
I had a try at the home of American speed... the Incarnation of the US Grand Prix track... at Indianapolis.
Engine was solid - nothing remarkable. Gears felt pretty long.
1m40.0 IndyGP
Brakes felt weak (Or the car felt heavy) - Car was uneven in corners, felt a bit up and down on suspension and would wobble between under and oversteer. It does have some get up and go out of corners though.
Drive - C6 ZR1
1m40.5 Indy GP
Gah neither car are great to actually drive. the ZR1 had power oversteer in high speed stuff but also had high speed understeer if you didn't get the rear wheels to break traction... In the slow stuff the car felt like a SUV with a caravan was trying to overtake me.
Ding Ding
Round 1
***Looks ***
To me the Ford GT is a bloke in a dress, A small light delicate racer being impersonated by something else... If the actual car looked fresh and new then I would judge it as such but instead it is trying to be a 60's race car with the weight of a 50's delivery van and the throwback chassis of 40's sports car.
The Corvette is a natural progression of the C4 looking car - and I have no problem with a car evolving over the years when it is in constant production. The GT had the GT90 which I didn't like but at least it was trying to break away from the past.
--10-8 Corvette
Round 2
***Chips***
You have to edge this to the Ford - Not to the gimmicky stripes but for the rather classy Midnight Blue which is more impressive than the Vette's rather flat Atomic Orange.
--10-9 to the Ford
Round 3
***Sound***
Neither were painful. The Ford was innofensive and the Vette was nice and robust.
--10-10 - Even Round
Round 4
***Handling***
Both were pretty sloppy to me. I'd give the nod to the Vette as it's brakes were less prone to making the car pitch about into corners. But neither are razor sharp or require delicate inputs.
--10-9 Corvette
Round 5
***Price***
Pretty simple to split the pair on this one.
--10-9 Ford
Round 6
***Indy Lap***
--10-9 Ford
Not alot to say - If you can hook up the Ford and brake nice and early then you should be able to beat the more powerful Corvette.
***Total***
Ford - 56
Corvette - 57
I was pretty underwhelmed with both cars, The engines were big adorable brutes (Who doesn't like an old blower?) but the feel when driving them wasn't insprational. I think the bulky weight and spongecake like suspension took them out of the "fun to drive" area for me. - Actually thinking about it the Vette was horrendous in the slow corners - if I take a point off for that it is a tie... but do I honestly want to drive these two Baby Wheels again?
I pick the Corvette as it is much nicer to look at, the Model GT just seems hacky and bloated.
Last edited:
- 3,417
- NJ
- Rave2Grave
This...
Or this...
Or this...
- 1,233
- Patra
- Rotorist
My opinion on this duel is that Ford GT has a bit better grip than in reality compared to most of the cars in GT5 and GT6. ZR1 is a monster, more difficult to drive on the limit. I like both but GT is a great GT for fast trips while pretty good and predictive in cornering on the limit and ZR1 is made for laptime hunting based on a basic sports car.
A tie is my opinion on this duel's GT6 presense. If I was to buy one in real life I would go with Ford since it's a legendary's car successor while ZR1 is a tuned version of a normal car.
A tie is my opinion on this duel's GT6 presense. If I was to buy one in real life I would go with Ford since it's a legendary's car successor while ZR1 is a tuned version of a normal car.
Last edited:
- 6,226
- Ottawa
- Pyano1132
I don't feel the need to do a full review this week, most of the comparison here comes down to personal preference, both cars can equally smoke other people online, so I just came with some stats:
Laptimes on user-created Eifel track: Both using Sports Soft tires and no TC
Ford GT: 2:10.720
Chevrolet Corvette: 2:10.767
That's a 0.047 of a second gap,
So if you want to go Half-of-a-Tenth-of-a-Second faster around that track, then buy a GT.
Otherwise, BUY A CORVETTE.
It looks better, it has a trunk, it doesn't run out of fuel after one lap, it isn't stuck in the past, it is faster in the drag race and better at drifting... Aaaand the stripes don't wash off whenever I try to paint it...
And of course, the verdict from me is to buy a Viper GTS. Better than both of these...
Laptimes on user-created Eifel track: Both using Sports Soft tires and no TC
Ford GT: 2:10.720
Chevrolet Corvette: 2:10.767
That's a 0.047 of a second gap,
So if you want to go Half-of-a-Tenth-of-a-Second faster around that track, then buy a GT.
Otherwise, BUY A CORVETTE.
It looks better, it has a trunk, it doesn't run out of fuel after one lap, it isn't stuck in the past, it is faster in the drag race and better at drifting... Aaaand the stripes don't wash off whenever I try to paint it...
And of course, the verdict from me is to buy a Viper GTS. Better than both of these...
Last edited:
- 5,636
- North Dakota
- RacingCowboy570
- RacingCowboy570
Let's start with the GT. Carrying on the legacy of the legendary GT40 of the '60s. The GT costs roughly 150K, which is around 30K less than the Corvette. The GT's drive is phenomenal. Taking it into any corner feels almost like a walk in the park, and the V8 in the back sounds great too. The colors are nice too, where as you're able to paint a single color, add on a side stripe, or add the Racing stripes.
The Corvette. How many times has that car shown up in the Duel of the Week? This time we have the ZR1 model, which is a spruced up Z06. The drive was well, not worth it. This is one of the most understeery cars in the game in my opinion, other than the FF cars. When you touch the gas in the corners, it wants to drift really bad. It does however, do good on the straights, which is probably where this car belongs. My obvious vote on this goes to.....
The GT
Both cars were tested on Grand Valley East, no aids other than ABS 1.
GT: 1:06.891
ZR1: 1:07.579
And the votes:
GT: 3
Corvette: 2
And the winner is.....
The '05 Ford GT!!!
Was a close one in the votes this week, but in the end the GT was the clear winner in driveability, and overall pleasure. Stop back here tomorrow for the next duel of the week!
The Corvette. How many times has that car shown up in the Duel of the Week? This time we have the ZR1 model, which is a spruced up Z06. The drive was well, not worth it. This is one of the most understeery cars in the game in my opinion, other than the FF cars. When you touch the gas in the corners, it wants to drift really bad. It does however, do good on the straights, which is probably where this car belongs. My obvious vote on this goes to.....
The GT
Both cars were tested on Grand Valley East, no aids other than ABS 1.
GT: 1:06.891
ZR1: 1:07.579
And the votes:
GT: 3
Corvette: 2
And the winner is.....
The '05 Ford GT!!!
Was a close one in the votes this week, but in the end the GT was the clear winner in driveability, and overall pleasure. Stop back here tomorrow for the next duel of the week!
Last edited:
- 6,226
- Ottawa
- Pyano1132
Let's start with the GT. Carrying on the legacy of the legendary GT40 of the '60s. The GT costs roughly 150K, which is around 30K less than the Corvette. The GT's drive is phenomenal. Taking it into any corner feels almost like a walk in the park, and the V10 in the back sounds great too. The colors are nice too, where as you're able to paint a single color, add on a side stripe, or add the Racing stripes.
The Corvette. How many times has that car shown up in the Duel of the Week? This time we have the ZR1 model, which is a spruced up Z06. The drive was well, not worth it. This is one of the most understeery cars in the game in my opinion, other than the FF cars. When you touch the gas in the corners, it wants to drift really bad. It does however, do good on the straights, which is probably where this car belongs. My obvious vote on this goes to.....
The GT
Both cars were tested on Grand Valley East, no aids other than ABS 1.
GT: 1:06.891
ZR1: 1:07.579
And the votes:
GT: 3
Corvette: 2
And the winner is.....
The '05 Ford GT!!!
Was a close one in the votes this week, but in the end the GT was the clear winner in driveability, and overall pleasure. Stop back here tomorrow for the next duel of the week!
That's a v8 in the back. made by "Bob and Jim"
- 5,636
- North Dakota
- RacingCowboy570
- RacingCowboy570
This week's duel features two tuned cars that you may have not expected to be rivals. This week's duel is.....
The 1996 Nismo 400R
vs
The Gran Turismo 350Z RS!!!
Standard vs Premium, 4WD vs RWD. Should be a good one, so be sure to cast your vote and if you have any suggestions, feel free to start a conversation with me!
The 1996 Nismo 400R
vs
The Gran Turismo 350Z RS!!!
Standard vs Premium, 4WD vs RWD. Should be a good one, so be sure to cast your vote and if you have any suggestions, feel free to start a conversation with me!
- 3,144
- Lancashire
- Ryk_BRM
The Nismo 400R vs. the Gran Turismo 350Z RS
The Legend vs. the Dream. The best R33 vs. The Fantasy best Z33... But we are testing them in GT6 - so we have to play by the laws of physics here... And Also paint chippary - so I can't get my 400R in Dark Green... Or LP2 (That would be Midnight Purple to those who don't speak Nissan Paint Codes).
Wearing the Super Clear Red II Mawashi - the Nismo Shi-hyaju-R. (400R)
Wearing the Midnight Purple Mawashi- the Operamuse San-byaju-go-ju-Z. (350Z)
This is going to be an epic battle between big powerful Tuning Sumatori - The next Basho is in January so lets have a December throw down of salt and Shinto.
Ding Ding - Round "Ichi"
*** Ikura desu ka? ***
120,000¥ for the "NISMO shi hyaku R" vs. 70,000¥ for the "san byaku go ju Z"
The Operamuse car seems cheap in GT land. In terms of price the gulf is wide. Big win on the scorcards for the 350Z.
10-7 san byaku go ju Z
Ding Ding - Round "Ni"
*** Powah***
The 400R's 2.8l twin turbocharged RBX-GT2 straght 6 vomits out 394bhp
The 350Z's Mystery naturally V6 (VQ35DE maybe) coaxes out 376bhp
A win to the Nismo
10-9 - shi hyaku R
Ding Ding - Round "San"
*** Chips ***
The Nismo has 4 chips AND it can't be re painted...
The Operamuse has 8 chips and can be resprayed... (So I did in Midnight Purple!)
10-8 - san byaku go ju Z
Ding Ding Round "Shi"
*** Track Test - Cape Ring South ***
Nice little 2 mile track... Let's run a few laps and see what times and how they feel to pedal. I've left all the girly drive aids on to replicate the tech that is a feature of both cars... (I'll run 10 laps in a naked Yellowbird on Comfort Hards to cleanse myself of this wussy tech.)
350Z RS (Sports Hard)
1m25.496 after 10 laps (TSC=5 - ABS=1 whatever GT6 forces on you - NO SRF and anti skid stuff
1m25.487 after 4 laps with no abs or TCS or active steering or Active stability managment or skid reduction force childishness
400R (Sports Hard)
1m26.696 after 10 laps (TSC=5 ABS=1)
1m26.695 after 4 laps with no ABS or TCS or active steeringor active stability managment or skid reduction force maguffins on.
1.2 seconds is a big old chunk of time on a 2 mile track. So I have to give this round by a big margin.
(I've given up trying runs with ABS=1 or Traction control - Everything beyond this point was every Driver Aid off> as nature intended.)
10-8 san byaku go ju Z
Ding Ding - Round "Go"
*** Handing ***
350Z
With driver aids the car felt as lifeless as I expected... the traction control felt like the car was on a muzzle and the rock solid brakes meant Ijust had to mash them into a slow corner - no thinking required.
It took me 4 laps to find the sweet spot with no driver aids on, rewardingly tougher to drive. but with the car dancing about in the brake zone and wearing parachute pants on corner exits - I quite enjoyed the car au natural,
400R
Understeeru was the big feature of this car WITH driver aids- the big plunging sweeper at Cape Ring South was too much for it to fly round flat...
With the aids off... a bit wallowy and it still has got understeer at all speeds but slightly less when you try to kick the tail out a bit and do a bit of that "Driver" stuff. Maybe that four wheel steering isn't compatible with my lack of talent!
10-9 san byaku go ju Z
Ding Ding - Round "Roku"
*** Horn ***
What good is a car if you can't lean on the horn and shout out of the window at pedestrians? Well this could be the weakest point of one of the cars...
I dare you to beep the 350Z RS and not cry with laughter. The buzzer on a 40 year old game of Operation® has more meat to it.
400R - Much more gravitas to it.
10-7 shi hyaku R
Ding Ding - Round "Chichi"
*** Looks ***
The R33 may well be the best looking Skyline in my eyes, (Which makes the 400R the prom queen at Skyline Comunity College) but the Z33 Fairlady by Operamuse is more what I like in a car. The GTR always looked a bit simplistic and brick-like in style with slab sides - The 350Z isn't perfect and is no Supra RZ in terms of muscular swoopy lushness but it does enoguh to beat the Nismo and wear the Tiara and hold a bunch of flowers and pray for world peace. (Beauty Queen.)
10-9 san byaku go ju Z
Ding Ding - Round "Hachi"
***Speed***
These are tuned cars... SO which is fastest? 1 lap at Special Stage Route X should give us the answer to that question.
400R
The Straight 6 engine red lines all the way to 9000 but power and torque drop off alot so you maybe best changing gear before you get to the red bit of the tacho.
1st 00 - 50
2nd 50 - 85
3rd 85 - 125
4th 125 - 163
5th 163 -
I ran stock levels of aero (0/50 on the 400R)
194mph down the hill - 189mph on the flat
350Z RS
The V6 engine only revs to 7500 but the gearbox has an extra cog over the 400R
1st 00 - 38
2nd 38 - 65
3rd 65 - 95
4th 95 - 120
5th 120 - 155
6th 155 -
I ran stock levels of aero (50/100 on the 350Z RS)
179mph down the hill - 174mph on the flat
Only 15 mph difference but in top speed terms there is a huge difference in getting an extra 10 mph of top speed.
10-8 shi hyaku R
Ding Ding - Round "Ku"
*** Spoilers ***
The 400R has a slippery 0/50 Natural aero package
The 350Z RS has 50/100 as stock but the rear can be adjusted between 50 and 150 - lettting a driver fine tune the aero balance for specific requirements.
This Aero factor could well be the real difference in track speed and top speed performance. Maybe the streamlined 400R would be faster on track if it had more aero but slower on the stright if it had to deal with the 350Z's level of aero drag? Maybe.
10-9 san byaku go ju Z
Ding Ding Round "Ju"
*** Interior ***
The 400R is an odd mix of Skyline and fresh - the Steering wheel is a smaller 360mm three spoke with a 400R button for the horn right in the middle - Airbag... piffle! The dials tell other stories, the speedo goes up to 320kmph (just shy of 200mph) and the rev counter goes yellow at 8000 red at 9000 and keeps on going to 11,000 rpm. - But in GT6 it seems ever so dark... I think the bulb for the cabin has fizzled out.
the Fairlady? Orange on Black dials - a triple cluster behind the wheel - (Fuel and Temp gauges share teh left dial, the Rev counter is front and centre (If a bit small) and the (shudder) metric speedo is over on the right.) three auxillery dials are above the centre console (Battery/Oil and a Digital Speedo (In Metric!) - and two white faces dials look out of place on the 'A' Pillar. The Wheel is a big three spoke with a Nissan Logo in the middle.
I can't really give either the points. I prefer the smaller tighter 400R wheel and lack of bolt on clutter - But seeing as I never driver incar
10-10 even round.
Ding Ding - Round "Ju Ichi"
*** History ***
The 400R was "the" Gold Licence Prize car in the very first game - Didn't own a 400R - then you were just some part time player who didn't have the skill set - And If my memory serves me you got it in a choice of Yellow or Yellow.
The FairladyZ was one of the early Prize cars in GT5 that stood out - Just not as much as the Superleggeria Z car - mostly as it was a bit of a mystery fantasy car. Very well modelled but not an actual car.
The fact the Nismo was one of the hardest cars to get in the game makes it super special - even ifany old herbert can buy one off the shelf ... Hurumph - Back in my day you had to gold all the licenes to get one of these! You Whippersnappers have it so dang easy!
10-8 shi hyaku R
-----------------
Okay 11 rounds of fun... and I have lost track over the score. In my heart I'd pick the 350Z all day to drive - but the 400R has more top speed more real history and more GT relevance... Let's add up the numbers.
san byaku go ju Z - 102
shi hyaku R - 102
Wow - I kind of thought the Operamuse Fairlady Z was going to win (It won most of the important things) but looks like I'll have to take this to a Sudden Death final round. But how do you split these cars?
A single time at the SS4 stage at Zahara - Best time from three attempts win.
1st Attempt
Operamuse 350Z RS.
2m18.453
Next up the Nismo 400R
2m18.216
The Nismo gets a slight edge, On the fast open sections it stretches away and always makes a great start. Has the Operamuse got anything more it can find?
2nd Attempt
2m16.720 (350Z RS)
Crash out of the final corner! (400R)
Interesting. The pressure is on the 400R as we go into the third and final timed run. The Nismo mechanics have repaired the damage to the car (Front bumper and all the various ducts and radiators located here... the car seems to be fine... but if it can't beat the Operamuse's time then it has lost.
3rd and Final Attempt
0m33.967 (Split 1)
1m34.068 (Split 2)
2m17.154 (Finish - 400R)
Desperatly close, the Nismo was ahead for much of the stage due to its peerless traction from a standing start but a slight mistake into a fast corner had the Nismo drop behind the time of the Operamuse 350Z who has already won and doesn't need to run again... but it is. A Victory run!
0m34.063 (Split 1)
1m33.779 (Split 2)
2m15.918 (Finish - 350Z RS)
An emphatic final shot beatings its own best time by 0.802 seconds and extending its winning margin over the Nismo by 1.236 seconds.
The winner after 12 rounds...
Amuse Power House / Opera Performance Gran Turismo Fairlady Z 350Z RS.
Sorry for the typos GTP is running very slowly and quite choppily.
The Legend vs. the Dream. The best R33 vs. The Fantasy best Z33... But we are testing them in GT6 - so we have to play by the laws of physics here... And Also paint chippary - so I can't get my 400R in Dark Green... Or LP2 (That would be Midnight Purple to those who don't speak Nissan Paint Codes).
Wearing the Super Clear Red II Mawashi - the Nismo Shi-hyaju-R. (400R)
Wearing the Midnight Purple Mawashi- the Operamuse San-byaju-go-ju-Z. (350Z)
This is going to be an epic battle between big powerful Tuning Sumatori - The next Basho is in January so lets have a December throw down of salt and Shinto.
Ding Ding - Round "Ichi"
*** Ikura desu ka? ***
120,000¥ for the "NISMO shi hyaku R" vs. 70,000¥ for the "san byaku go ju Z"
The Operamuse car seems cheap in GT land. In terms of price the gulf is wide. Big win on the scorcards for the 350Z.
10-7 san byaku go ju Z
Ding Ding - Round "Ni"
*** Powah***
The 400R's 2.8l twin turbocharged RBX-GT2 straght 6 vomits out 394bhp
The 350Z's Mystery naturally V6 (VQ35DE maybe) coaxes out 376bhp
A win to the Nismo
10-9 - shi hyaku R
Ding Ding - Round "San"
*** Chips ***
The Nismo has 4 chips AND it can't be re painted...
The Operamuse has 8 chips and can be resprayed... (So I did in Midnight Purple!)
10-8 - san byaku go ju Z
Ding Ding Round "Shi"
*** Track Test - Cape Ring South ***
Nice little 2 mile track... Let's run a few laps and see what times and how they feel to pedal. I've left all the girly drive aids on to replicate the tech that is a feature of both cars... (I'll run 10 laps in a naked Yellowbird on Comfort Hards to cleanse myself of this wussy tech.)
350Z RS (Sports Hard)
1m25.496 after 10 laps (TSC=5 - ABS=1 whatever GT6 forces on you - NO SRF and anti skid stuff
1m25.487 after 4 laps with no abs or TCS or active steering or Active stability managment or skid reduction force childishness
400R (Sports Hard)
1m26.696 after 10 laps (TSC=5 ABS=1)
1m26.695 after 4 laps with no ABS or TCS or active steeringor active stability managment or skid reduction force maguffins on.
1.2 seconds is a big old chunk of time on a 2 mile track. So I have to give this round by a big margin.
(I've given up trying runs with ABS=1 or Traction control - Everything beyond this point was every Driver Aid off> as nature intended.)
10-8 san byaku go ju Z
Ding Ding - Round "Go"
*** Handing ***
350Z
With driver aids the car felt as lifeless as I expected... the traction control felt like the car was on a muzzle and the rock solid brakes meant Ijust had to mash them into a slow corner - no thinking required.
It took me 4 laps to find the sweet spot with no driver aids on, rewardingly tougher to drive. but with the car dancing about in the brake zone and wearing parachute pants on corner exits - I quite enjoyed the car au natural,
400R
Understeeru was the big feature of this car WITH driver aids- the big plunging sweeper at Cape Ring South was too much for it to fly round flat...
With the aids off... a bit wallowy and it still has got understeer at all speeds but slightly less when you try to kick the tail out a bit and do a bit of that "Driver" stuff. Maybe that four wheel steering isn't compatible with my lack of talent!
10-9 san byaku go ju Z
Ding Ding - Round "Roku"
*** Horn ***
What good is a car if you can't lean on the horn and shout out of the window at pedestrians? Well this could be the weakest point of one of the cars...
I dare you to beep the 350Z RS and not cry with laughter. The buzzer on a 40 year old game of Operation® has more meat to it.
400R - Much more gravitas to it.
10-7 shi hyaku R
Ding Ding - Round "Chichi"
*** Looks ***
The R33 may well be the best looking Skyline in my eyes, (Which makes the 400R the prom queen at Skyline Comunity College) but the Z33 Fairlady by Operamuse is more what I like in a car. The GTR always looked a bit simplistic and brick-like in style with slab sides - The 350Z isn't perfect and is no Supra RZ in terms of muscular swoopy lushness but it does enoguh to beat the Nismo and wear the Tiara and hold a bunch of flowers and pray for world peace. (Beauty Queen.)
10-9 san byaku go ju Z
Ding Ding - Round "Hachi"
***Speed***
These are tuned cars... SO which is fastest? 1 lap at Special Stage Route X should give us the answer to that question.
400R
The Straight 6 engine red lines all the way to 9000 but power and torque drop off alot so you maybe best changing gear before you get to the red bit of the tacho.
1st 00 - 50
2nd 50 - 85
3rd 85 - 125
4th 125 - 163
5th 163 -
I ran stock levels of aero (0/50 on the 400R)
194mph down the hill - 189mph on the flat
350Z RS
The V6 engine only revs to 7500 but the gearbox has an extra cog over the 400R
1st 00 - 38
2nd 38 - 65
3rd 65 - 95
4th 95 - 120
5th 120 - 155
6th 155 -
I ran stock levels of aero (50/100 on the 350Z RS)
179mph down the hill - 174mph on the flat
Only 15 mph difference but in top speed terms there is a huge difference in getting an extra 10 mph of top speed.
10-8 shi hyaku R
Ding Ding - Round "Ku"
*** Spoilers ***
The 400R has a slippery 0/50 Natural aero package
The 350Z RS has 50/100 as stock but the rear can be adjusted between 50 and 150 - lettting a driver fine tune the aero balance for specific requirements.
This Aero factor could well be the real difference in track speed and top speed performance. Maybe the streamlined 400R would be faster on track if it had more aero but slower on the stright if it had to deal with the 350Z's level of aero drag? Maybe.
10-9 san byaku go ju Z
Ding Ding Round "Ju"
*** Interior ***
The 400R is an odd mix of Skyline and fresh - the Steering wheel is a smaller 360mm three spoke with a 400R button for the horn right in the middle - Airbag... piffle! The dials tell other stories, the speedo goes up to 320kmph (just shy of 200mph) and the rev counter goes yellow at 8000 red at 9000 and keeps on going to 11,000 rpm. - But in GT6 it seems ever so dark... I think the bulb for the cabin has fizzled out.
the Fairlady? Orange on Black dials - a triple cluster behind the wheel - (Fuel and Temp gauges share teh left dial, the Rev counter is front and centre (If a bit small) and the (shudder) metric speedo is over on the right.) three auxillery dials are above the centre console (Battery/Oil and a Digital Speedo (In Metric!) - and two white faces dials look out of place on the 'A' Pillar. The Wheel is a big three spoke with a Nissan Logo in the middle.
I can't really give either the points. I prefer the smaller tighter 400R wheel and lack of bolt on clutter - But seeing as I never driver incar
10-10 even round.
Ding Ding - Round "Ju Ichi"
*** History ***
The 400R was "the" Gold Licence Prize car in the very first game - Didn't own a 400R - then you were just some part time player who didn't have the skill set - And If my memory serves me you got it in a choice of Yellow or Yellow.
The FairladyZ was one of the early Prize cars in GT5 that stood out - Just not as much as the Superleggeria Z car - mostly as it was a bit of a mystery fantasy car. Very well modelled but not an actual car.
The fact the Nismo was one of the hardest cars to get in the game makes it super special - even ifany old herbert can buy one off the shelf ... Hurumph - Back in my day you had to gold all the licenes to get one of these! You Whippersnappers have it so dang easy!
10-8 shi hyaku R
-----------------
Okay 11 rounds of fun... and I have lost track over the score. In my heart I'd pick the 350Z all day to drive - but the 400R has more top speed more real history and more GT relevance... Let's add up the numbers.
san byaku go ju Z - 102
shi hyaku R - 102
Wow - I kind of thought the Operamuse Fairlady Z was going to win (It won most of the important things) but looks like I'll have to take this to a Sudden Death final round. But how do you split these cars?
A single time at the SS4 stage at Zahara - Best time from three attempts win.
1st Attempt
Operamuse 350Z RS.
2m18.453
Next up the Nismo 400R
2m18.216
The Nismo gets a slight edge, On the fast open sections it stretches away and always makes a great start. Has the Operamuse got anything more it can find?
2nd Attempt
2m16.720 (350Z RS)
Crash out of the final corner! (400R)
Interesting. The pressure is on the 400R as we go into the third and final timed run. The Nismo mechanics have repaired the damage to the car (Front bumper and all the various ducts and radiators located here... the car seems to be fine... but if it can't beat the Operamuse's time then it has lost.
3rd and Final Attempt
0m33.967 (Split 1)
1m34.068 (Split 2)
2m17.154 (Finish - 400R)
Desperatly close, the Nismo was ahead for much of the stage due to its peerless traction from a standing start but a slight mistake into a fast corner had the Nismo drop behind the time of the Operamuse 350Z who has already won and doesn't need to run again... but it is. A Victory run!
0m34.063 (Split 1)
1m33.779 (Split 2)
2m15.918 (Finish - 350Z RS)
An emphatic final shot beatings its own best time by 0.802 seconds and extending its winning margin over the Nismo by 1.236 seconds.
The winner after 12 rounds...
Amuse Power House / Opera Performance Gran Turismo Fairlady Z 350Z RS.
Sorry for the typos GTP is running very slowly and quite choppily.
Last edited:
- 1,512
- Pacific NW
- ThrasherDBS
- ThrasherDBS
Hmm... tuners this week. Interesting.
I have quite a favorable view towards the Nismo 400R because that has proven to be a reliably quick vehicle in the past Gran Turismo games. So, it's pitted against a 350Z? The comparison makes me laugh, because at first thought, it's like pitting a Toyota Supra against a Toyota Celica. However, these are tuned versions of the vehicles they represent and the Z does outclass the 400R in terms of Performance Points. Let's see how this turns out.
Mountain Trial:
400R - 1:48.799
350Z - 1:48.648
City Trial:
400R - 1:36.434
350Z - 1:35.187
Well, would you look at that? The 350Z won on both trials. While the 400R does have amazing amounts of stability, it's also a very heavy car, which spells "understeer" in pretty big neon lettering. The 350Z had a comparable amount of stability with a very reasonable amount of oversteer that comes with FR vehicles. I subjectively like the 400R over the 350Z simply because of my history with it over the course of the past Gran Turismo games, but the 350Z is the better overall performer.
The 350Z wins it.
I have quite a favorable view towards the Nismo 400R because that has proven to be a reliably quick vehicle in the past Gran Turismo games. So, it's pitted against a 350Z? The comparison makes me laugh, because at first thought, it's like pitting a Toyota Supra against a Toyota Celica. However, these are tuned versions of the vehicles they represent and the Z does outclass the 400R in terms of Performance Points. Let's see how this turns out.
Mountain Trial:
400R - 1:48.799
350Z - 1:48.648
City Trial:
400R - 1:36.434
350Z - 1:35.187
Well, would you look at that? The 350Z won on both trials. While the 400R does have amazing amounts of stability, it's also a very heavy car, which spells "understeer" in pretty big neon lettering. The 350Z had a comparable amount of stability with a very reasonable amount of oversteer that comes with FR vehicles. I subjectively like the 400R over the 350Z simply because of my history with it over the course of the past Gran Turismo games, but the 350Z is the better overall performer.
The 350Z wins it.
- 3,417
- NJ
- Rave2Grave
350Z RS
376 hp / 7,500 rpm
271 ft-lb / 5,000 rpm
1,450 kg (3,197 lbs)
400R
394 hp / 6,500 rpm
346 ft-lb / 4,500 rpm
1,550 kg (3,417 lbs)
The tuned R33 Skyline GT-R has 18 more horses, 75 more ft-lbs of torque, and weighs 220 lbs more than the tuned 350Z.
At the end of the front straightaway, the 400R reached a maximum of 147 mph while the 350Z managed 139 mph. The Z corners much better though, and ends up being just slightly quicker. 0.272 seconds quicker, to be exact.
I prefer FR over 4WD, so I must choose the 350Z here.
376 hp / 7,500 rpm
271 ft-lb / 5,000 rpm
1,450 kg (3,197 lbs)
400R
394 hp / 6,500 rpm
346 ft-lb / 4,500 rpm
1,550 kg (3,417 lbs)
The tuned R33 Skyline GT-R has 18 more horses, 75 more ft-lbs of torque, and weighs 220 lbs more than the tuned 350Z.
At the end of the front straightaway, the 400R reached a maximum of 147 mph while the 350Z managed 139 mph. The Z corners much better though, and ends up being just slightly quicker. 0.272 seconds quicker, to be exact.
I prefer FR over 4WD, so I must choose the 350Z here.
- 1,233
- Patra
- Rotorist
Track handling wise, 350Z is better. But, If I were to choose one of them for normal roads as well as for trackdays too, I would go for 400R. For tuning abilities 400R is easier to go much higher in power due to its legendary engine being able to be pushed close to the thousand hp. 350Z would be better only for trackdays imo. So, 400R is a more complete car and I like that better.
