Laguna Seca Lap Times For 449 Cars (And Counting!)

  • Thread starter Thread starter MidFieldMaven
  • 357 comments
  • 61,364 views
Those cars are a bit too fast for my liking, but perhaps when I'm bored with Mid-Field, I'll do something like that.

Just got a sub-1:21 lap in the Honda NSX Type R '02 after lots of 1:21's. Nothing to really compare it with yet...

And a sub-1:35 in the Toyota Trueno AE86 '83 which puts it between the MR2 '86 and Eunos Roadster '89.

Replays here: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLaHydDMyRymSb8YrVzlw7Pla07fKtvksN
 
Last edited:
Went back to the Honda Insight '99 because I wasn't happy with the third-to-last corner leading into the tunnel, and managed to slice nearly 5 tenths of a second off my time. 1:40 is as good as it gets in this car, trust me ;)

Also tested the MR2 G-Limited '97 with a 1:27.991 and it was a very solid lap. That's 1.6 seconds better than the MR2 Spyder (6MT) '02.

 
Last edited:
I don't think I've ever been more proud of a lap time. Getting under 1:25 in the RX-8 with a DS3 requires some major breath-holding. For your enjoyment, I present this onboard replay:



It's just over half a second slower than the Toyota Supra RZ '97 and only a tenth behind the Honda S2000 '03.

It actually ties with the Ford Focus RS '02.
 
Don't know if you've ever seen this, but it turns out Motor Trend has tested a bunch of street cars at Laguna Seca.

Fastest car they tested was the 2013 SRT Viper TA with a 1:33.62. (Though the much more conventional 2013 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 got very close with a 1:33.70.)

This site claims the Porsche 918 Spyder has gotten a 1:29.89 driven by Randy Pobst, who tests cars for Motor Trend, but it's not on MT's site and the laptime has no citation to support that. (Not that I doubt that the 918 would be up to that.)

EDIT: Found it. The article shows the 918 getting that 1:29.89 time and the McLaren P1 getting 1:30.71.
 
Last edited:
Man that Porsche is HEAVY at almost 350 lbs more than the McLaren, but it has almost 300 more ft-lbs of torque and better weight distribution, and of course the confidence-inspiring AWD.

Those cars are insane. I was hoping there would be an onboard video of their laps.

Also, this made me laugh. "Ferrari refused to grant permission for hot laps and data acquisition to the LaFerrari owner we had lined up."
 
SuzukaStar
Man that Porsche is HEAVY at almost 350 lbs more than the McLaren, but it has almost 300 more ft-lbs of torque and better weight distribution, and of course the confidence-inspiring AWD.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it seems a better power to weight ratio counts for less when you can't get the power down. (Porsche FTW! :D) I've seen this myself when testing the Huayra and McLaren F1—they're hard to get good laps in because you have to be so delicate with the throttle. It's what makes the MP4-12C so awesome, since it's MR and still not difficult to drive. (After running it again on Saturday, it's the second fastest road car I've tested on the Nürburgring at the moment.) Since you were using CH tires here, I'm sure you've noticed this phenomenon, too.
SuzukaStar
Those cars are insane. I was hoping there would be an onboard video of their laps.
Click to expand...
Me, too, considering MT puts together some nice videos. I couldn't find one. :( (I'm also at work, so that's not helping. ;) )
SuzukaStar
Also, this made me laugh. "Ferrari refused to grant permission for hot laps and data acquisition to the LaFerrari owner we had lined up."
Click to expand...
Reminds me of the F50, where Ferrari refused to let anyone test it. Apparently, it was difficult as hell for Car and Driver to get a hold of one, back in the day.

Anyway, despite how much praise the LaFerrari gets—it seems like the favored hypercar of this generation by every comparison review I've read—I'm starting to wonder if it's actually not up to competing with the 918 and P1 on the track. At the end of the day, I suppose it doesn't really matter—the owners of the cars won't enjoy the car any more if it gets a 1:28 at Laguna Seca or a 1:32. Or they shouldn't, anyway.
 
88GTA
I would take the ZR1 even if it is 4 seconds slower than the 918 Spyder. And then I'd buy a house with the left over money.
Click to expand...
SuzukaStar
I'd buy the new Z06 :sly:
Click to expand...
If I were buying one of the three hypercars, I'd do the 918 Spyder because a.) it's a Porsche, and Porsche is awesome, b.) the AWD makes a lot of sense for the reasons we've mentioned in this thread, c.) if I cared about its track qualifications, it definitely has them (as Motor Trend demonstrated above and as Porsche has demonstrated at the Nordschleife).

However, if I did somehow have the money for one of the current crop of hypercars, I agree with you guys that I wouldn't get one. I'd actually buy a 911 Carrera 4 Coupe like the one in my avatar (not even the 4S, 'cause I'm a weenie behind the wheel in real life :) ). Though if I were shopping for track cars, it'd be a toss-up between the 911 GT3 or the 911 Turbo S—I'm not sure which I would enjoy more nor which I could get better lap times with. Especially since GT6 doesn't have Porsche! :grumpy:
 
Last edited:
I was so shocked when I first read that article on the 918 vs. the P1 at Laguna Seca. The 918 continues to surprise me - not that I ever thought it was a dog, but I thought the P1 would really shine on a course like Laguna Seca, but I was wrong. Personally, I believe the Ferrari is probably the slowest of the three cars. Ferrari doesn't feel the need to prove themselves in any way and I get that - but there is a new generation of millionaires growing up who aren't going to flock straight to Ferrari based on tradition. They're going to want to see test results and performance reviews and with cars like he P1 and 918 out there proving themselves to each and every journalist, I wouldn't be surprised if things start turning a bit sour for Ferrari in the years to come. The La Ferrari is a gorgeous car and I have no doubt that it performs brilliantly, but have some balls Ferrari. How dare you threaten car owners who want to donate their cars to a magazine like Motor Trend for performance reviews! Not cool...
 
ALB123
The La Ferrari is a gorgeous car and I have no doubt that it performs brilliantly,
Click to expand...
Yeah, the press reports for the car have been overwhelming positive. Each of Top Gear Magazine's reviewers rated it as their favorite of the three hybrid hypercars, for instance. And my god does it sound amazing.

ALB123
but have some balls Ferrari. How dare you threaten car owners who want to donate their cars to a magazine like Motor Trend for performance reviews! Not cool...
Click to expand...
As I said, it's nothing new. They did the same thing with the F50. (Though that was undoubtedly less about the F50's competition and more about its predecessor.) Apparently, Ferrari can be a bunch of... well, jerks. Which I guess isn't terribly surprising: Lamborghini was founded to spite Ferrari and the Ford GT40 was built to spite them, too. They make some absolutely amazing cars, but I don't think they garner much good will outside of that. Nor do they seem to need it—the brand still has incredible cachet.

Still, it'd be nice if we could test simulated versions of the LaFerrari, P1, and 918 to see which we found the fastest, wouldn't it? :)
 
RobertM525
Yeah, the press reports for the car have been overwhelming positive. Each of Top Gear Magazine's reviewers rated it as their favorite of the three hybrid hypercars, for instance. And my god does it sound amazing.


As I said, it's nothing new. They did the same thing with the F50. (Though that was undoubtedly less about the F50's competition and more about its predecessor.) Apparently, Ferrari can be a bunch of... well, jerks. Which I guess isn't terribly surprising: Lamborghini was founded to spite Ferrari and the Ford GT40 was built to spite them, too. They make some absolutely amazing cars, but I don't think they garner much good will outside of that. Nor do they seem to need it—the brand still has incredible cachet.

Still, it'd be nice if we could test simulated versions of the LaFerrari, P1, and 918 to see which we found the fastest, wouldn't it? :)
Click to expand...

Coudn't agree more. Especially LaFerrari and P1 should already be in our GT6 garages... Come on PD! Don't keep them for GT7 as we need 2 years more for it and a PS4 and a new wheel to enjoy, so many here will not have the experience at all, or they are forced to buy PC games that have them only for these two cars. I leave Porsche 918 out of it as Porsches are a well known matter.
 
Last edited:
@RobertM525 I can remember when the F50 first came out. I also remember how secretive Ferrari was being about the car -- no test equipment to measure 0-60 times, 1/4 mile times, etc... just like they're being with the LaFerrari. Back then, with the F50, I remember people were speculating that Ferrari didn't want the magazines acquiring data on the car because it couldn't out perform the F40! :lol: It seems like since then Ferrari has been very tight-lipped about their cars - well, especially their 12 cylinder and/or Flagship models.
 
Rotorist
a new wheel to enjoy
Click to expand...
Look ma no wheel! Seriously though I don't need a wheel to enjoy it...It's pretty easy to learn how to ease the x and square buttons. Now I'll admit that I would love a good wheel but it just isn't in my price range.
Long story short: I'm trying to convince myself the controller is as good as a wheel.
 
I can totally understand that not everybody has the money to just run out and get a wheel. However, for people who have been playing since GT5, if you fell in love with the game, how could you not save up $250 over 2-3 years to get a wheel for the game you love?! I'm not a "gamer", so I don't use the Playstation controller for anything else, but I could never, ever use that darn controller to control a car at the speeds required in GT6 events. I have an incredibly high amount of respect for GT6 players who can post anything better than a bronze level time with a darn controller. If I didn't have a wheel I wouldn't even attempt to play.
 
I am one of those who can gold things with the controller...just not that darned S-5 with the Veyron....and Dark Souls is flat impossible on the computer without a DS3/Xbox controller...high respect for those who can play without one lol.

Last off-topic post from me here, sorry Suzuka.
 
SuzukaStar
I don't think I've ever been more proud of a lap time. Getting under 1:25 in the RX-8 with a DS3 requires some major breath-holding. For your enjoyment, I present this onboard replay:



It's just over half a second slower than the Toyota Supra RZ '97 and only a tenth behind the Honda S2000 '03.

It actually ties with the Ford Focus RS '02.
Click to expand...


In Serres circuit in Greece, RX8 was a bit slower than both S2000 and Focus RS '02 (S2000:1.37,45 - Focus RS:1.38,1 - RX8:1.38,5) when tested by Drive magazine 10 years ago, so they are indeed equal cars. And that's an acheivement for RX8 which has more weight, less torque, longer wheelbase and softer suspension. But the balance of its chassis having just a small wankel low in the front compensates for it. S2000 is a great on too (50/50 weight deistibution like RX8) but it is naturally setup for tracks in suspension settings.
 
Only solo event I can't do with a controller is the Red Bull car at Goodwood. Hell, I probably can't do that one with a wheel.

Choosing between an RX-8 and S2000 in real life would be tough for me.
 
SuzukaStar
Choosing between an RX-8 and S2000 in real life would be tough for me.
Click to expand...

RX-8 is more practical with a back seat while the S2000 is much more track focused and of course, drop top.

If I lived in Florida or California, S2000. I'd have to pick the RX-8 because NJ winter and kids.

Oh and the gas mileage, since I looked it up anyway is:
'08 RX-8 - 16/23
'06 S2000 - 20/26
 
88GTA
RX-8 is more practical with a back seat while the S2000 is much more track focused and of course, drop top.

If I lived in Florida or California, S2000. I'd have to pick the RX-8 because NJ winter and kids.

Oh and the gas mileage, since I looked it up anyway is:
'08 RX-8 - 16/23
'06 S2000 - 20/26
Click to expand...
where you found that mileage data? the data i found for the rx8 shows more mileage than others sports cars like the s2000 :/
 
Something to consider with rotaries is not fuel, but oil consumption. You should basically change your oil every 3.000 km (that's 2.000 miles, yes, but that's considering you should never get over 10.000 km / 6.000 miles between oil changes with any regular car) if you want it to be durable. Also, rotaries HATES short runs. If your road to work isn't long enough to have it well in temperature, forget about that as a daily.

But a rotary is very reliable if maintained properly, which is not that expensive, but you have to know what to expect and make checks on a regular basis (oil quantity, cleaning spark plugs, etc.) People are frightened by this, which leads to legends and makes it less popular.
 
alexnipi
where you found that mileage data? the data i found for the rx8 shows more mileage than others sports cars like the s2000 :/
Click to expand...
I typed "2008 rx-8 gas mileage" into Google and a window popped up telling me the numbers. I didn't really care enough to look further or validate the information.
 
The '11 RX8 gets 16/22 and the auto gets 23 highway.

http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/musa2/pdf/specs/specs_RX8.pdf

232 hp / 159 tq

Automatic gets only 212 hp and a redline of 7500 vs. 9000.

Manual version gets a carbon fiber driveshaft vs. steel in the auto, and LSD which the auto doesn't get.

It pays to know how to drive manual. Buying an auto RX8 is a waste.
 
Last edited:

Latest Posts

Back