I think the X2010 gets too much hate.

[Exorcet]

high level of unrealism, but it's only my opinion.

There is no high level of unrealism. Or at least there's enough uncertainty for a debate to be going on. You're free to have an opinion, but it seems like you formed one without reading the topic thoroughly.

As for "legend" vs fiction, I contend that being legendary makes no difference to the laws of physics.

 

[Tonnie073]

I like the idea of a fiction car, but you shouod ve abke to resrrict it out of you lobby, with a option at the game settings that says: no x2010

 

[Exorcet]

You earn it at lvl 30 and 35, its the best car in the game, shouldn't you earn it at lvl 40?? and an anorexic and grindey career mode makes the continious use of it inevitable.

Levels don't mean anything. If you get the X1 just for putting the disk in the PS3, I wouldn't complain. It wouldn't make any difference.

You can use the car in almost any endurance race in the game which makes you win 100 percent of the time, as if the other 11 cars are not there. That is the meaning of obsolete right????

If so, then every car makes every other car obsolete. The FGT is faster than every car that the AI uses in the endurances. The Group C cars are faster than the Nring, Laguna Seca, Suzuka, etc endurance grids. It doesn't matter. Choose to overpower the AI or not, it's up to you. I have no problem with being able to win races twice as fast with no contest from the AI because I just want to race online. Anyone who prefers offline just needs to not use the X1. The car can't ruin anything, and it doesn't make anything else obsolete.

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

Deformation is most simply expressed by Hooke's Law, F=kx. The more force, the more deformation. Hard tires on the X1 could act like soft tires on F1 cars. You wouldn't put soft F1 rubber on a racing truck, the truck would be too heavy. Same for the X1, it makes too much downforce, so it gets its own tire.

the cost of putting harder rubber tires is it will slow the car down. Softer rubber goes faster and has more grip than harder tires. If you have to put harder tires on X1 than F1 then you will obviously lose some of the advantages of X1 the start with. In a video game tires can have super-glue traction , last forever, super strength,etc.
And another reason a Bi plane can out turn a jet is it has a lot less energy behind it as well wings design for slower speeds. So even when it comes to planes there is a cost of going very fast and pulling a lot of G's. The tighter the turn with more G's means the tire has to absorb a lot more energy in a shorter period of time. The wider the corner the less energy the tires (and brakes) has to absorb and the easier to direct most of the energy in a different direction.

 

[Exorcet]

And again that is why it is not liked, (and the FGT for that matter) it has no competition. The fact that the races have no form of limits makes this situation occur

The X1 has as much competition as every other car. Race a X1 vs another X1, and there you.

Race restrictions are completely unnecessary. If you don't want to win easily, don't use the X1. That's all there is to.

I'm starting to get the feeling that you think it's a problem that other people can just use the X1 to beat GT Mode. If that's the case, you're just wrong. It's their game, they can do as they like.

Again you are reinforcing my point on how the car takes away the excitement and uncertainty of winning in the career mode. You can race online regardless of career mode....

The X1 doesn't take away any excitement or uncertainty. No one is forced to use it, so no one is forced to race with a huge advantage. You can choose not to use the X1 regardless of how fast it is.

Again the situation isn't help with a anorexically structured career mode. So that idea is insympathetic. Does it make the cars inferior??? no becuase it can't be compared on the race track.

Two X1's racing side by side is as even as it gets.

the cost of putting harder rubber tires is it will slow the car down. Softer rubber goes faster and has more grip than harder tires.

This isn't true. Soft is only faster in the right conditions. Like I said before, putting soft tires on a truck would be a disaster. Hard tires would let the truck drive faster because they would not be overstressed. The X1 would be fastest with a set of tires harder than those used in F1. The tires would need to operate at a higher temperature, and the larger forces that the X1 would see in corners would insure full contact patch.

If you have to put harder tires on X1 than F1 then you will obviously lose some of the advantages of X1 the start with. In a video game tires can have super-glue traction , last forever, super strength,etc.

As explained above, that's not the case at all. Don't refer to GT's tire structure. Tires are more complex than soft-medium-hard. There are various materials and manufacturing techniques that give you a different product. And tire performance depends on much, much more than the tire itself.

If you put soft tires on the X1, they would overheat and have no grip, and probably shred themselves to pieces. Put on hard tires (which may or may not be the same type of material as the softs), and the tires would be at peak temperature and produce optimal grip that would greatly surpass that seen by F1 cars.

And another reason a Bi plane can out turn a jet is it has a lot less energy behind it as well wings design for slower speeds. So even when it comes to planes there is a cost of going very fast and pulling a lot of G's. The tighter the turn with more G's means the tire has to absorb a lot more energy in a shorter period of time. The wider the corner the less energy the tires (and brakes) has to absorb and the easier to direct most of the energy in a different direction.

Energy isn't directed. It's hard to understand that paragraph. You might be talking about inertia. Do you mean that at higher speed it's harder to turn? This is not necessarily true. An aircraft's turn rate generally increases with speed.

You're right that the tire needs to absorb more energy in the form of heat. That is why the X1 would most likely require a harder tire compound.

 

[Exorcet]

Now your making idiotic statements.

How so? I don't need a sign telling me that my car is over powered to know that my car is overpowered. If you're going to enter a NASCAR race, do you need a set of rules to tell you what car is fair? If you're going to enter a Super GT race, do you need a set of rules to tell you what car is fair?

No, it's all quite obvious in those cases. Just like it's obvious that the X1 will beat anything that isn't an X1, but that has no effect on the career mode because it's the player's choice to use the car or not.

And i get the feeling that the x1 is a complete win. If thats the case then you're wrong and unable to grasp the it's fundamental impact in the game.

Case is rested.

If you mean that the X1 is a superior car, you're quite right. But that doesn't make me wrong, not in the slightest. I've been saying it all along, but for some reason you feel as if the X1's very existence is forcing you to use it in a race.

In GT5, you can go through the entireity of the game without ever using the X1. This would be true even if you were gifted an X1 on the day that GT5 was released. The X1 has no impact on the game.

 

[BlackIce90]

All it needs is some online restrictions.

GT5 is a driving sim right? Does a fictional car necessarily work to cancel that out? No.

Is't it suppose to be based on real world calculations? IMO, I think it was an amazing idea.

Think about how much it would help the series if top people looked to it to test drive prototype cars?

Reminds me of this game called "No Limits Roller Coaster simulator". It's like the gran turismo of coaster sims. You build your own coaster in a CAD like interface, and it shows how it would work. Graphics were amazing for their time too. Overall, there's a separate edition for professional coaster designers called "No Limits Pro".

GT is becomming more than just a game.

People forget what games like GT have been about. Forget fixing blocky shadows, forget how many polygons a premium has. Just remember that it's as close as many will ever be able to get to being a real race car driver.

GT is more than a game, it's an escape, a glimpse, and a test of your skill.

I agree 300% with you, but if my family or girlfriend read that, they would think you have no life playing a video game pretending to be a race car driver. Ive always wanted to be a race car driver so I'm with you buddy.

 

[DEATHSARTHE]

I agree 300% with you, but if my family or girlfriend read that, they would think you have no life playing a video game pretending to be a race car driver. Ive always wanted to be a race car driver so I'm with you buddy.

This is kind of random lol

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

If you put soft tires on the X1, they would overheat and have no grip, and probably shred themselves to pieces. Put on hard tires (which may or may not be the same type of material as the softs), and the tires would be at peak temperature and produce optimal grip that would greatly surpass that seen by F1 cars.

soft tires would overheat because they are able to absorb more energy than hard tires thus provide more traction. I don't doubt like a truck X1 may need harder tires yet what truck can't handle 8 G's around the corner. In video games you can have both your cake and eat it too; super hard tires that can absorb energy at the same rate as softer tires. Just go to the options and you can even have these tires have the same grip level without any wear.

P.S I agree that tire physics are extremely complex and more than hard vs soft rubber. Even the same tire you can "soften up " the tire by lowering the tire pressure and "harden" a tire by increasing the tire pressure. You change tire pressure so they run at the right temperature around each track. (something that missing in GT5)

Energy isn't directed. It's hard to understand that paragraph. You might be talking about inertia. Do you mean that at higher speed it's harder to turn? This is not necessarily true. An aircraft's turn rate generally increases with speed.

You're right that the tire needs to absorb more energy in the form of heat. That is why the X1 would most likely require a harder tire compound.

Inertia itself is not a force. It just the fact the energy in one direction will continue that same speed and direction until some force counters it. Everything comes down to energy and how to redirect or convert the energy.

 

[CrackedTrigger]

Also hate to double post, but I think you took my quote out of context. The point I was driving in is that something like the X2010 would just be physically impossible IRL because some people use GT5 as some sort of twisted credibility.

I don't have one, and I don't plan on having one. I had my opportunities during the whole free trade thing before the 1,000,000cr limit happened but it just doesn't fit in my garage.

In reading my origional post again, I did take your qoute out of context.... but my point as to its inclusion in the game still stands. The truth is PD worked off of performance figures calculated by Adrian Newey, with some concept drawings. Thats what it says on the Red Bull website. Maybe the lines of reality were blurred along the way, maybe they got it right and it is possible?! The fact is its a concept car..... they don't always work, there is no real word equivelant, there has not been any real world testing....... but they were trying to portray an idea of ... what if? You are the only one on here trying to discredit the X2010..... and taking quite a bit of flack for it, but then there is the fact that everyone else now thinks they're an expert in aerodinamics and engineering.... and are qouting and saying things they "know" from what they've read in the descriptions of cars in GT5. I don't mean to steriotype people.... maybe theres a few who know what they're on about! But there's a saying "don't believe everything you here on the radio."

I like the x2010, and the idea behind it, no-ones gonna change my opinion!

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

I don't think you have to be a expert in engineering to have doubts about a car that I can use 100% of traction to slam on brakes (ABS off) and still have 100% tire grip to turn the car in the corners. You can even set the brake bias totally in the back.

 

[Ishie]

I don't have a problem with the car in itself. I just don't like people who come into DRIFTING sessions and use it, seemingly to say "look at me, I got the X1!".. That was cool when they were rare. But then it got out that you pretty much could get it for free by grinding B-spec.
It's not so much cool as it is annoying anymore.

 

[STIG_RS6]

Not a good car.

 

[CrackedTrigger]

That was cool when they were rare. But then it got out that you pretty much could get it for free by grinding B-spec.

I've got three x2010's at the moment, the bronze times are pretty easy now tho, whoever you are, you should be able for them, gonna get the prototype soon enough, i've gotten gold on Monza and Suzuka, and silver on Nurburgring in about a half an hour... so much easier once you gold Suzuka (I did the other two first). I got one from b-spec and I haven't used any of my x2010's yet, they're more like a trophy to me at the moment...... that said, I can't wait to be finished the damned Vettel Challenge!!

 

[Rich S]

the 2j is legendary race car, the x2010 is fictional one... I don't know how both can be compared.
I don't "hate" x2010 but despite him a lot, because his high level of unrealism, but it's only my opinion.

That was the original fan car.

Generally I think Gran Turismo players enjoy a lower speed atmosphere, where reaction times & reflexes arent required to race well. Its been that way through the whole history of the series.

I noticed the conventional real F1 cars (Ferrari's & FGT) are not popular either.)

Older folks tend to be the "purists" and their also the ones with an inablity to learn quickly &to have good reflexes. There's no doubt in my mind this car favors younger players because its new & and its so fast. That must contribute to the older purists disliking it.

 

[Zer0]

I don't think you have to be a expert in engineering to have doubts about a car that I can use 100% of traction to slam on brakes (ABS off) and still have 100% tire grip to turn the car in the corners. You can even set the brake bias totally in the back.

Does not seem too far to me. This was in 1970:

Enough downforce to equal a minimum of 50% more vehicle weight, without the extra weight penatly. What Jim was seeking was the equivalent downforce of 1,000 or more extra pounds without adding any weight. Sounds impossible.

The reason for the added downforce was simple. To improve the tire adhesion. Not only in the corners, where the quickest way through is best, but on the straights where they accelerate and decelerate. Jim wanted to keep the car glued to the track.

What's it like to drive? Well, it's different because the cornering forces are greater than any race car has ever generated. Jim Hall says this, "The 2J's major advantage is that it will corner faster on low-speed corners, the ones that are 30 to 90 mph in normal Can-am cars. these corners predominate on Can-Am tracks. It means you can leave the corner faster, with more speed, and carry that speed down the straight."

The suction has minimized another problem on every Can-Am car: too much power. Wheelspin can be induced at any speed up to 150 mph on normal Can-Am cars. With the 2J, the suction virtually eliminates all wheelspin, even from a standing start. Drag fans, take note.

The car brakes better than any previous Chaparral, too. "I simply can't believe the braking capability of this car." says Jim Hall. "It feels like it will decelerate about twice as fast as any Groulp 7 car I've driven."

The most unrealistic aspect of the X1 would be judge its driving with racing soft tyres. A car with that specs would multiply its performance with those unrealistic super grip tyres.

 

[3thanol]

I think something like an X1 could be built, if you look at early cars and took the same logic that is taken by some here, we would have never progressed technically in the last 100 years. Everyone going on about tyres, look at aircraft tyres huge speeds and very high pressures.

To think the current F1 cars are as good as it gets when these are heavily restricted is nonsense.

It may not look like what is on GT5, but the acceleration and top speed is very very possible, cornering is the hurdle, but is only limited by down force, we all know mechanical grip is not going to get you round most corners like an X1 goes round.

But if down force /aero dynamics are not limited then something like the X1 becomes more realistic and when aero is at it's limits then add a fan that also sucks it to the ground.

When you add together what is possible on top of a current F1 car it is not a million miles away.

From the above car to heavily restricted RB7

Technical & theoretically impossible once upon a time, heavily restricted now.

 

[Exorcet]

soft tires would overheat because they are able to absorb more energy than hard tires thus provide more traction.

The hard tires would absorb more energy. The energy going in would be from the heat flux through the tire. In the soft tire, if it's disintegrating, the heat (energy) in the tire has reach maximum and is physically breaking the tire down. The hard tires would survive because they would be able to take in more heat.

I don't doubt like a truck X1 may need harder tires yet what truck can't handle 8 G's around the corner.

A truck weighs multiple tons and doesn't have fans under it. That's why it can't pull 8g, it doesn't have anything to do with the tire.

F = ma

a is the turning ability, roughly

m = is the mass

F = mu*N where N = weight which is not the mass.

m/N_truck = 1

m/N_X1 = >> 1

So the X1 would perform much better than the truck even the tires were just as hard.

In video games you can have both your cake and eat it too; super hard tires that can absorb energy at the same rate as softer tires. Just go to the options and you can even have these tires have the same grip level without any wear.

Well, in GT5, the tire physics are overly simple. The Soft tires never have to worry about overheating or getting destroyed, so it makes it look like a soft tire is always better. In reality, the hard tire will be faster under certain conditions.

Inertia itself is not a force. It just the fact the energy in one direction will continue that same speed and direction until some force counters it. Everything comes down to energy and how to redirect or convert the energy.

Energy is a scalar without direction. You're talking about momentum, the derivative of which is force. Going back to F = mu*N, it can be seen that the X1 will be able to change its momentum at a greater rate than other cars.

m/N is proportional to a

m/N F1 ~ 4*

m/N X1 ~ 8*

*these are guesses, but we know for sure that it's higher for the X1

The X1 will need to bleed off more momentum, but that's not a problem since it can generate more force (which is momentum/time).

F = mu*N where N = weight which is not the mass. Let's say that mu would be higher for a soft tire at optimum conditions than for a hard tire at optimal conditions

m/N_truck = 1

m/N_X1 = >> 1

So the X1 would perform much better than the truck even the tires were just as hard.

Going back to mu

mu_F1 = 1.5

mu_X1 = 1

N_F1 = 4*1.5 = 6

N_X1 = 8*1 = 8

Even with less grippy tires, the X1 could very easily beat the F1.

I don't think you have to be a expert in engineering to have doubts about a car that I can use 100% of traction to slam on brakes (ABS off) and still have 100% tire grip to turn the car in the corners. You can even set the brake bias totally in the back.

Why not doubt the physics engine? GT5 is not perfect in its simulation. The X1 we get in GT5 is made "inaccurate" by GT5's non perfect physics. In reality it might very well be just as dominant as in the game, however we can't expect a 1 to 1 correlation.

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

Why not doubt the physics engine? GT5 is not perfect in its simulation. The X1 we get in GT5 is made "inaccurate" by GT5's non perfect physics. In reality it might very well be just as dominant as in the game, however we can't expect a 1 to 1 correlation.

It doesn't take much effect to remove of the physics to make a more arcade car. Increase the trip grip numbers by 400% or more, remove most if not all weight shifting with increase power and bingo you have X 2010. PD just slap some "real life" prototype techology to make sound more real than it is. Arcade games does this all the time, it takes an image of a real car than give the car unrealistic traction to drive like it's on rails.
X 2010 is over-hyped just like a lot things about GT5.

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

Does not seem too far to me. This was in 1970:

The most unrealistic aspect of the X1 would be judge its driving with racing soft tyres. A car with that specs would multiply its performance with those unrealistic super grip tyres.

That's from the 70's. Even Nascar which weights like a tank has greatly improve with technology since the 70's.(even though not the exact same technology from the quote) I would think even F1 cars for the 70's drives like tanks compared to today's F1 cars. Cars (jet on wheels) have also gotten faster and broken the speed record many times since the 70's but this record is getting harder to beat because the limitations of known laws of physics.
It' not saying this technology will not make some differences but not anywhere near as much as cars from the 70's.

 

[WeShallNverStop]

Make the F1( ferrari F2007 and F10) not a restriction and make the X1 a restriction.
The X1 is faster than the F1s and X1 is usually driven by idiots. Why not reverse the restriction? F1s aren't bad. Formulas compared to FGT are nothing a like.

 

[Tweetman_277]

Softer tyres arent always instant winners in gt5 anyway, even with tge depletion off, i much prefer racing mediums and hards on my x2010 and other high end speed machines because they can handle much more of my very abusive driving style before they start going up in smoke.

It gets driven by idiots tokmuch, thats tge big problem. However, one of the most exciting races i ever watched online was a Le Mans race between some minoltas, some FGTs and a trio of x2010's, all under some heavy pp restrictions. Minolta won, fgt second, red bull last. Driven by idiots, as it was clearly still faster in any useful direction...

 

[Zer0]

It' not saying this technology will not make some differences but not anywhere near as much as cars from the 70's.

Why not? the principles are the same in the 70's than todays. You can not have this amount of extra downforce and handling characteristics with any traditional method and nevertheless you always will depend of the speed. Independently of how good/modern is the car this always will have a massive advantage vs the same car with no suction.

I guess that with today technology and no restrictions the difference would be a lot more significant than it was in the 70's.

 

[CrackedTrigger]

Sorry for off topic but, Just golded the last challenge, Nurburgring (left it till last because its so easy once you've done Suzuka), did a 1:03.6 first lap, then cocked up the second lap and missed out by 0.023, then straight away did a 1:04.4xx first lap and a 1:03.5xx second lap and.....GOLD!!! So happy!!

 

[Exorcet]

It doesn't take much effect to remove of the physics to make a more arcade car. Increase the trip grip numbers by 400% or more, remove most if not all weight shifting with increase power and bingo you have X 2010. PD just slap some "real life" prototype techology to make sound more real than it is. Arcade games does this all the time, it takes an image of a real car than give the car unrealistic traction to drive like it's on rails.
X 2010 is over-hyped just like a lot things about GT5.

OK, but there is no evidence to say that this was done for the X1. It's probably running the same physics as every other car. Especially since no one would code different physics for each individual car. There is only one set of physics, and it applies to every car in the game. That's how a sim is made.

There is of course the question of what parameter values went in to specifying the X1, but again, it's only speculation to say that it's just a programming trick.

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

OK, but there is no evidence to say that this was done for the X1. It's probably running the same physics as every other car. Especially since no one would code different physics for each individual car. There is only one set of physics, and it applies to every car in the game. That's how a sim is made.

There is of course the question of what parameter values went in to specifying the X1, but again, it's only speculation to say that it's just a programming trick.

No evidence? As I said before I can stop the car just the same with brake bias set to Front:0 Back:10 as with Front:10 Back: 0 (or Front 5 Back 5) with ABS off. Of course it stop the shortest distance with Front 10 Back 10. I can brake super hard and turn hard at the same time without any cost (same with hitting the gas) almost like I'm riding a roller coaster. No other car I've tried so far in the game is this way especially with ABS off.

 

[Exorcet]

No other car has as much downforce. The more downforce you have, the harder it is to lock up. It's the same with the F1 cars. They are much more lock up resistant than the Group C's or LMP's.

The X1's performance comes from its downforce. And when that downforce is upset by bumps, the car can go completely out of control. If it was being given special treatment with the physics, it would probably just sail over bumps and curbs.

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

No other car has as much downforce. The more downforce you have, the harder it is to lock up. It's the same with the F1 cars. They are much more lock up resistant than the Group C's or LMP's.

The X1's performance comes from its downforce.

So you trying to tell me a F1 car wouldn't have any trouble braking fully with the back tires while turn the corner at the same time?
Sorry, I have to actually see this before I believe it.

 

[Exorcet]

Not at all. I just said that the F1 is harder to lock up than lesser cars because of it's downforce and that the X1 is even harder to lock up than the F1.

 

[GTOne2Three]

No other car has as much downforce. The more downforce you have, the harder it is to lock up. It's the same with the F1 cars. They are much more lock up resistant than the Group C's or LMP's.

The X1's performance comes from its downforce. And when that downforce is upset by bumps, the car can go completely out of control. If it was being given special treatment with the physics, it would probably just sail over bumps and curbs.

True, hitting bumps is pretty fatal for an X1. If I had a dollar for everytime a curb threw me off..