Now that PD can easily fix things with patches...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tornado
  • 28 comments
  • 2,553 views
Messages
41,187
Shouldn't we be asking for accurate car statistics? Ever since this thread was brought up, this has been kind of bothering me.
Let me explain. There have been cars in the GT games that have repeatedly had incorrect performance statistics dating all the way back to GT2. And this is something that has generally been ignored, and in some cases ignored for each game in the series, since 1998.
For example, the Gulf GT40 featured in every game in the series since GT2 was not only incorrect in GT2, but has been incorrect in every game it has appeared in since then (which is all of them, actually). This really comes to a head in GT5, which features the later GT40 Mk IV. In real life, the Mk IV made considerably more power than the earlier Mk I, mostly due to a considerably larger engine. In game, however, the power numbers between the two cars is practically identical, as are the torque numbers (when in reality the Mk I made numbers much closer to those of the Chaparral 2D already in the game).

Now, I know that the overwhelming majority of these inaccuracies occur with Standard cars, but this kind of thing isn't something that is difficult to fix. One guy could go through the car list and correct most inconsistencies in an afternoon without much trouble. I've actually been mulling over starting a list of cars with specifications that are incorrect, because I've never seen anything more than occasional individual-by-car threads on the topic.



I dunno. It just seems weird to me that so much emphasis is placed by PD on being an accurate representation of these cars, yet so many of them don't really drive like they do in real life because their specifications aren't accurate. I suppose it was understandable in the days of GT2 and maybe GT3, but these days it isn't like most of this information is hard to find.









Edit: Oh, and please try not to swamp this thread with suggestions that are completely unrelated to this one. This isn't a wishlist thread, nor do I want it to be locked because it was turned into one anyways. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Fix it so every car can be turbo'd. Period.
 
I don't think they care one bit about things like that.. it will probably never get fixed. They'll "fix" things that aren't broke though, and spend time on features almost no one uses or cares about. Take the good with the bad I guess.
 
I just think people should stop complaining about the game and enjoy it.
 
I just think people should stop complaining about the game and enjoy it.

Ever occur to you that we do enjoy it, we just might want it to be better?
It's not as if I'm not going to play the game because a weight or power is a little off, but why not fix it?
 
I agree with this thread in general.

While they are at it, most of the muscle cars in the game are geared to go 50 mph in first gear and top out at around 120 mph. This is rediculous. There is no good reason the 6 speed tranny is disabled eighther.

Just seems like if there was a .6 HP discrepency in a nissan skyline it would be patched immediatly, while more glaring oddities get overlooked for years now.
 
I just think people should stop complaining about the game and enjoy it.
I think people should stop entering threads expressing criticism and complaining about said criticism without actually reading it.
I do enjoy GT5. Far more than I did back when it came out, and probably far more than I should based on what it does.

I can also recognize that there are probably a hundred+ cars in GT5 with incorrect performance statistics (with some of them being very incorrect). And that performance statistics are the single easiest thing in the game to fix if you get them wrong, and (arguably) the single most important thing to get right in the first place. And that despite that, PD has never shown much interest in actually correcting them for several cars, despite having several chances to do so; instead deciding to just copy-paste everything from game to game. And that, in the age of patches and direct developer feedback, it is easier than it ever was in the past to do so.

While they are at it, most of the muscle cars in the game are geared to go 50 mph in first gear and top out at around 120 mph. This is rediculous.
Actually, that is sort of accurate for most muscle cars. Some of them couldn't even go that high, depending on final drive ratios specified when you bought the car.

Fix it so every car can be turbo'd. Period.
This is not related to my original point in the slightest.
 
I applaud you gearheads for even noticing stuff like that. I guess I take it for granted and think everything is right.

I guess the question is, where do they get their info compared to yours?
 
I guess the question is, where do they get their info compared to yours?
A lot of the stuff can be looked up on the website of your automotive magazine of choice, or MSN Autos.


As to where PD gets their info, it is anyone's guess. I imagine they get as much as possible from the manufacturer directly. Otherwise, who knows. I'm assuming many of the problem cars (like the region duplicates that are treated as identical to the JDM models when they aren't in real life) is simply down to laziness on PD's part, but I don't understand how they came up with some of the obviously-incorrect numbers that they do (like the GT40 Mk I power numbers, or the weight of the Lister Storm) unless the manufacturers themselves were feeding PD bull. Some of them are simple typos and/or data entry errors (like the power of the Shelby Series One, or the weight of the '91 Celica GT-Four), though.
 
Don't think PD can fix anything easily anytime soon. Not with everything going on over there. Who knows what going to happen with Japan with nuclear reactors exploding and stuff. They are having rolling blackouts to save power over there. I'm sure they are not worried about are precious little game right now and rightly so.
 
Agreed pd needs to put forth hell of a lot more effort in researching the power and torque for cars....cuz my v6 maro runs faster then their v8, with only twin turbo headers exhaust ecu little more but simply they need to look into hooking up cars and offering more with hooking them up period...how can't u mod all cars body work...Wtf...pd is #%@'n idiots, good races and realism...some one write them a letter...lmfao cuz we probably won't be heard...
 
also fast fowar b spec and slowmo replays and rewind and all dat .... i want engine swaps too
 
I am not sure it is that easy to fix though... a lot of the cars attributes are figured and manually tweaked settings. While it's easy to imagine they can just feed the car shape and weight into a physics model, I would guess that really they have hundreds of attributes (like front drag, rear drag, rear downforce, lateral grip, acceleration grip, deceleration grip, grip under tire temp cool, grip under tire temp hot etc) so it might involve redoing all the calculating and tinkering they did to come up with those numbers.

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the sim engine is pretty good but often needs manual tweaks to individual attributes to make the car "feel" right regardless of what the math says should be a perfect system...

That said, it does seem like something they should focus on getting right when accurate car experience is the main focus of their product.
 
Toronado
For example, the Gulf GT40 featured in every game in the series since GT2 was not only incorrect in GT2, but has been incorrect in every game it has appeared in since then (which is all of them, actually). This really comes to a head in GT5, which features the later GT40 Mk IV. In real life, the Mk IV made considerably more power than the earlier Mk I, mostly due to a considerably larger engine. In game, however, the power numbers between the two cars is practically identical, as are the torque numbers (when in reality the Mk I made numbers much closer to those of the Chaparral 2D already in the game).

Gt40 MKIV came before the Gulf #6 GT40. ( not the other way around) The MKIV has more power because it has the bigger engine (GT5 has the MKIV"s specs spot on btw) they beat Ferrari so the rules had to be changed. Ford was hit with a rule change lowering the displacement maximum, so ford bailed on the series. The #6 was a JWA car & had the 302 that was (and here is the kicker) estimated to have around 425hp but GT was a lil generous with their estimation giving it 475hp. Was it PD being generous or them having good sources (better than our googling abilities) or were the sources overly generous? IDK. Most likely JWA improved on the 302's output and was able to up it closer to 475hp & PD sourced it's info from them directly, but that's only a theory.

The P/1075 being a rebuilt mirage or an original built with mirage tech has been mixed up, most people believe its a rebuilt mirage (group 6 car from JWA that raced alongside the GT40 in earlier years). It's now claimed to have been proven an original built with mirage tech, again IDK. On top of this it's run a few different motors in different races, the in game car sports the 302.

I haven't really paid any attention to any american versions of Japanese cars. Are there many a-spec hondas in GT5? I prefer not to get any detuned A-spec Japanese cars. I got no probs buying a-spec cars sporting j-spec motors though.

I think I remember the Protege sporting the Sport 20's engine spec & lip kit, but being as I used to own a Protege, I liked that as it's a swap that's done IRL. I do agree that they should have this more accurate, despite how I enjoyed my Sport 20 Protege in GT4.

I kinda see it as a non issue so long ad the discrepancies are only with Standard models and not recreated as they become premium in an update or GT6.
 
Last edited:
I am not sure it is that easy to fix though... a lot of the cars attributes are figured and manually tweaked settings. While it's easy to imagine they can just feed the car shape and weight into a physics model, I would guess that really they have hundreds of attributes (like front drag, rear drag, rear downforce, lateral grip, acceleration grip, deceleration grip, grip under tire temp cool, grip under tire temp hot etc) so it might involve redoing all the calculating and tinkering they did to come up with those numbers.

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the sim engine is pretty good but often needs manual tweaks to individual attributes to make the car "feel" right regardless of what the math says should be a perfect system...

That said, it does seem like something they should focus on getting right when accurate car experience is the main focus of their product.

The numbers we read are not figures of calculations...they are variables. If the variable is incorrect the handling will be incorrect. The variables likely reside in the equivalent to a spreadsheet...if not a spreadsheet.
 
Most likely JWA improved on the 302's output and was able to up it closer to 475hp & PD sourced it's info from them directly, but that's only a theory.
While I'm sure it is possible that the Gulf GT40s had power numbers close to that of the Mk IV, I can't imagine them having nearly identical torque numbers.

I haven't really paid any attention to any american versions of Japanese cars. Are there many a-spec hondas in GT5? I prefer not to get any detuned A-spec Japanese cars. I got no probs buying a-spec cars sporting j-spec motors though.
There are some regional duplicate Hondas (only S2000s, really), but all of the specifications for them seem fine (and the rest of them were properly converted into Acuras). It is Nissans, Mitsubishi and Lexus models that have most of the problems.
 
I can twll you guys the MKIV is near accurate with the specs. As far as the '69 its anyones guess, i know for a fact it take a hell of alot to get a 400hp naturally aspirated 302 without increasing displacement or nitrous so 475 is kinda iffy. But i've read alot about the 302 in the old GT40 race cars and it definately seems possible to make 425 with high compression, high lift cam, small combustion chamber, high rise intake runners and free flowing exhaust. Im no expert, just a huge fan of GT40s so i've done my research and hope this is at least helpful.
 
Every mention of straight performance I have seen for the small-engined GT40s has suggested numbers similar to the Chaparral 2D. 420-ish horsepower, 400-ish torque.
 
I was just in an online race and the hp limit was 503hp. I was in the Ford GT spec test car and a escudo started to pull against me. I had my tranny setup for the hp and also know the escudo doesn't have very good acceleration until the turbo kicks in. At 503hp, I would be certain it wouldn't pull much at all... wtf?
 
Toronado
While I'm sure it is possible that the Gulf GT40s had power numbers close to that of the Mk IV, I can't imagine them having nearly identical torque numbers.

For the MKIV
470ft-lb @ 5000rpm

For the 302 GT40
398ft-lb

In the game it has 434ft-lb

This could be increased output JWA was able to get out of the 302 and lead them to victory.

I wish PD would have a place to submit questions about details in the game like this where a rep would respond.

Toronado
There are some regional duplicate Hondas (only S2000s, really), but all of the specifications for them seem fine (and the rest of them were properly converted into Acuras). It is Nissans, Mitsubishi and Lexus models that have most of the problems.

Ohh yeah and Mazda, the Protege is just a Sport 20 familia. We don't get the 160hp and ground kit :( I forgot about that, I owned one in my GT4 days.
 
200MphFord
I can twll you guys the MKIV is near accurate with the specs.

I concur.

200MphFord
As far as the '69 its anyones guess, i know for a fact it take a hell of alot to get a 400hp naturally aspirated 302 without increasing displacement or nitrous so 475 is kinda iffy. But i've read alot about the 302 in the old GT40 race cars and it definately seems possible to make 425 with high compression, high lift cam, small combustion chamber, high rise intake runners and free flowing exhaust. Im no expert, just a huge fan of GT40s so i've done my research and hope this is at least helpful.

Yeah the road going 302 of the time (Mustang) was nowhere near 400hp. The GT40's were running race spec engines much more capable, but in any case how accurate are those figures really.
 
Toronado
Every mention of straight performance I have seen for the small-engined GT40s has suggested numbers similar to the Chaparral 2D. 420-ish horsepower, 400-ish torque.

Thats pretty spot on, the 302 was rated for 425hp & 398ft-lb the JWA GT40 in the game has 478hp & 434ft-lb. My theory is it's possible JWA upped the output of the 302 a bit, 53hp & 36ft-lb. If they were able to bump the 398 ft-lb by 36ft-lb that certainly accounts for the 53hp.

I wish they made the GT40 #6 a Premium model :)

Edit Sorry about the dup post I'm posting from my phone.
 
Shouldn't we be asking for accurate car statistics? Ever since this thread was brought up, this has been kind of bothering me.
Let me explain. There have been cars in the GT games that have repeatedly had incorrect performance statistics dating all the way back to GT2. And this is something that has generally been ignored, and in some cases ignored for each game in the series, since 1998.
For example, the Gulf GT40 featured in every game in the series since GT2 was not only incorrect in GT2, but has been incorrect in every game it has appeared in since then (which is all of them, actually). This really comes to a head in GT5, which features the later GT40 Mk IV. In real life, the Mk IV made considerably more power than the earlier Mk I, mostly due to a considerably larger engine. In game, however, the power numbers between the two cars is practically identical, as are the torque numbers (when in reality the Mk I made numbers much closer to those of the Chaparral 2D already in the game).

Now, I know that the overwhelming majority of these inaccuracies occur with Standard cars, but this kind of thing isn't something that is difficult to fix. One guy could go through the car list and correct most inconsistencies in an afternoon without much trouble. I've actually been mulling over starting a list of cars with specifications that are incorrect, because I've never seen anything more than occasional individual-by-car threads on the topic.



I dunno. It just seems weird to me that so much emphasis is placed by PD on being an accurate representation of these cars, yet so many of them don't really drive like they do in real life because their specifications aren't accurate. I suppose it was understandable in the days of GT2 and maybe GT3, but these days it isn't like most of this information is hard to find.









Edit: Oh, and please try not to swamp this thread with suggestions that are completely unrelated to this one. This isn't a wishlist thread, nor do I want it to be locked because it was turned into one anyways. Thank you.

I'm not 100% sure but the Mk1 in GT is the #1075 Chassis which one both '68 and '69 Le Mans races, and listed as running around 425bhp. But that was the sub 5.0L engine, I do believe that the 5.0L engine that was used in the '69 model is the one that PD used for the hp figures. I'm not too sure, but I think that PD has the cars running without restrictors as per qualifying, cars are usually unleashed at full power. In fact all the race cars in GT tend to come running way more hp that they ever actually raced with, why didn't PD include restrictor plates to accurately detune engines is beyond me.

Correct me if I'm wrong, I was pretty sure this is what PD does when it comes to the majority of older race cars and how they actually came. Super GT cars seem to run the same power for qualify and race, NASCAR is variable depending on venue.

Things that really need fixing are cars that reportedly have adjustable settings stock, but when you get the car it isn't adjustable at all. Also PD seems to have messed up some things, in GT4 when you purchased a rear spoiler it also came with a front lip spoiler as well, not so in GT5. Why in the world there are cars that you cannot attach spoilers to, the S7 comes to mind. The premium McLaren can't get a front spoiler, but the Carbon F1 has adjustable front down force?!?:indiff:. Things that make no sense, the Veyron should never go about 236-240 without being in top speed straight line mode at it's stock hp, that's just crap aero dynamic drag would prevent it from achieving it unless you draft. I have to pull out my GT4 to get all the cars with problems, one day in the future i will attempt to do so.
 
I 've never owned or played the previous GT games but when i picked up GTPSP i knew there were a few cars screwed up. As far as the production version of the 302, yes it only had 200ish hp(my car has a stock hp 302) bit the race version of the engine is capable of 400hp. Like i said earlier its possible just very difficult. So 425 is relatively easy 475 might be pushing it. And i also agree the '69 race car should have been premium :D
 
In Japan the highest HP they can publish, for a domestic vehicle, is 276. Cars often will have more than that and not show it. I don't know if this is part of your gripe, but it's worth noting.
 
While they are at it, most of the muscle cars in the game are geared to go 50 mph in first gear and top out at around 120 mph. This is rediculous. There is no good reason the 6 speed tranny is disabled eighther.

My real steel C3 Stingray does normally top out in the 120's. However, I agree that there is no good damn reason for 6-speeds being disabled.
 
I will note that PD does seem to be noticing some of these, so there is hope. I just realized yesterday while doing the Le Mans 24H enduro in B-Spec that they fixed the name of the CLK-LM, which had been incorrectly labeled as the CLK-GTR ever since GT4. I was actually going to comment on it until I saw this thread when I logged onto GTP earlier today. There are a couple of other cars that have completely accurate stats, except the car is named wrong so everything is off.

In Japan the highest HP they can publish, for a domestic vehicle, is 276. Cars often will have more than that and not show it. I don't know if this is part of your gripe, but it's worth noting.
I'm not sure if that actually still applies anymore. I mean, I know the Gentlemen's Agreement is defunct now, but I'm not sure if it still is in effect for older cars.
In any case, I can't think of any cars that the Gentlemen's Agreement made the cars themselves incorrectly modeled. The closest I can think of is the USDM 300ZX models having 276HP instead of the real figure of 300, but that is still probably just the laziness again.
 
Last edited:
The numbers we read are not figures of calculations...they are variables. If the variable is incorrect the handling will be incorrect. The variables likely reside in the equivalent to a spreadsheet...if not a spreadsheet.

He was saying that that the physics calculations used in GT5 will not give the correct output using the real values of the car performance variables.

However, if that's the case the answer is not to tweak the values, but to tweak the code.

I'd put fixing inaccurate performance well above many of PD's changes done via other patches in terms of importance. They seem content making the cars look correct when that hardly matters compared to how they drive. But I guess we should all be used to that by now.
 
Back