Performance point limitations are ridiculous

[dr_slump]

Ok. Enzo is known to be slow around corners and get the power down, so that makes sense.
The 4WD probably did fairly ok I guess.

Yes, because it's such a slow track.

Ok.. So did you run all cars as stock as possible (only weight and bhp tuned, no suspension etc), and used the power limiter to get the down to 590pp?

Want a serious answer?

Fully modded, but I tried to hit the pp limit through removing parts.

For cars in the 590pp range, I think that LaSarthe is a good track to compare race cars with road cars.
This was before I knew you only ran street cars though.
But still, Monaco is way to twisty imo. You should go with Suzuka or something similar..

I didn't test them for this thread. There's was a little challenge in the tuning forum, which was about to find the fastest 590pp street car for Cote d'Azur.

Ok, why?

Btw..... I thought I wrote speechless and not speachless? Ehh....

Because I initially (without testing my self) think 1:27's around Monaco in a 590pp street car on sport hards sounds really fast when I know for a fact that it's practically impossible to go below 1:30 in a 610 PP race car on RH tires?
It's possible I've missed something important though..

Yes, you did, you certainly did.
Iron, why?

 

[Denilson]

Btw..... I thought I wrote speechless and not speachless? Ehh....

Yes, you did, you certainly did.
Iron, why?

It was a manual quote.. I'll fix it right away so you don't need to think about the horrible spelling. 👍

text.. I don't follow..

But "street cars"..?? As in fully modded with aero parts installed.. We're talking 1200ish kg, 550ish bhp street cars with up to a value of 20 or 30 for downforce?
Ok.. 👍

Things start to fall in to place..

 

[dr_slump]

It was a manual quote.. I'll fix it right away so you don't need to think about the horrible spelling. 👍

text.. I don't follow..

Shortcut for why is y

Iron, why? -> Iron, y?

 

[CSLACR]

To learn what pp means. Increase your horsepower. It increases pp. try low end turbo, higher pp but not as much max hp. decrease your weight. That increases pp. put weight ballast on and shift to and fro. A near 50:50 weight increases pp. put on window weight reduction. That increase pp more than proportion to similar weight reduction as it lowers cg. Uptune your engine and use engine limiter. That reduces max hp more than normal as pp is related more to area under hp. Play with downforce. More downforce, higher pp.
In short, if 300zx has high torque at low end, your max hp is screwed. Makes perfect sense if you can accelerate faster, your top speed is lower to even things out at same pp.

No it doesn't, that's a stupid rumor started by people who didn't understand that sometimes 10KG is enough to reduce the PP, and sometimes it isn't.

Of course you could also be confusing it with the fact that on some cars, removing any weight and adding ballast increases PP. I've never confirmed it, but I'm guessing it's for front heavy cars, since the PP system thinks that a "perfect car" has a weight distribution of 0/100.

There are other subtle adjustments but show me one limitation that takes into account torque curve, weight, weight distribution, centre of gravity, front and back downforce within gt5

You want to be shown a limitation that accounts for "torque curve, weight, weight distribution, centre of gravity, front and back downforce".
Do you know what a limitation is? Do you mean limit?

Weight DOES and CAN have a huge factor in top speed. Heavier car = slower acceleration = lower top speed.

Weight has less and less effect the faster you go. At 200MPH, 200KG's will take less than 2mph off your top speed, if it does that much.
How do you think Veyrons weighing as much as tanks reach 265+mph?

I doubt it will be as fast as it was without the ballast.

You haven't tested anything, which is why you "doubt" instead of "know". Test it out.

Shortcut for why is y

Iron, why? -> Iron, y?

Irony.


Dennis - Yes, we used RS tires.


FTW, the PP systems major flaw in GT5, is that it doesn't account for "blessed" cars. The cars that radically outperform anything else, even at exactly the same spec.
So basically, the PP system is fine, PD just needs to stop blessing every 🤬 car that comes out of Japan.

 

[Vegard]

PD just needs to stop blessing every 🤬 car that comes out of Japan.

The chances of that happening is about the same as me jumping out the window and flying to Cleveland.

 

[gtnoobie]

Equally blessed cars like Chap 2J, Lotus Elise, Lotus Evora, BMW CSL does not seem very Japanese to me...

As for top speed achievable over unlimited distance, coefficient of drag has much more effect than weight as frictional energy loss is way lower than air resistance in automobile.

 

[CSLACR]

The chances of that happening is about the same as me jumping out the window and flying to Cleveland.

You'll get to Cleveland first.

Equally blessed cars like Chap 2J, Lotus Elise, Lotus Evora, BMW CSL does not seem very Japanese to me...

Surely there are some blessed European cars as well. I believe there is a whopping total of 1 American car that is truely blessed for PP racing. More of a reference to % of blessed cars. I guess when the game is 2/3 Japanese 2/3 of the blessed cars would be too though. Fair point. Except American cars of course. We 🤬 hate them.
The real issue is blessing cars at all of course.

As for top speed achievable over unlimited distance, coefficient of drag has much more effect than weight as frictional energy loss is way lower than air resistance in automobile.

Agreed.
I've tested weight's effect on top speed in GT a couple times, and as it shouldn't, it doesn't have a large effect at all.

 

[Exorcet]

If PP is a sum of values that refer to different parameters regarding performance (ie, power/weight and drag which determine acceleration and speed, as well as downforce and weight to determine cornering) then PP can be broken down into more specific values that provide a more detailed evaluation of car peformance.

If players could see this breakdown, it would pretty much make mismatches like Caterham vs Veyron impossible.

Caterham
200 points speed
400 points cornering
600 total PP

Veyron
400 points speed
200 points cornering
600 total PP

 

[sinbad]

If PP is a sum of values that refer to different parameters regarding performance (ie, power/weight and drag which determine acceleration and speed, as well as downforce and weight to determine cornering) then PP can be broken down into more specific values that provide a more detailed evaluation of car peformance.

If players could see this breakdown, it would pretty much make mismatches like Caterham vs Veyron impossible.

Caterham
200 points speed
400 points cornering
600 total PP

Veyron
400 points speed
200 points cornering
600 total PP

You're better off using power and weight than an approximation of "speed" that doesn't really tell you much.
A Caterham 7 might be way faster than an M5 to 100mph, but some time after that the M5 would leave it for dead, with no limiter in place, which of course would make it potentially much faster on a high speed circuit.

Power and weight values give you an indication of which sorts of circuits will suit a car. Pwr alone is not as useful, and neither is pp imho.

The biggest issue is with the levels of grip that the older cars have with their skinny tyres. I'm positive that pp does not account for this, and it's not something you can easily judge for yourself without benchmarking the car against a modern one.

 

[CSLACR]

You're better off using power and weight than an approximation of "speed" that doesn't really tell you much.
A Caterham 7 might be way faster than an M5 to 100mph, but some time after that the M5 would leave it for dead, with no limiter in place, which of course would make it potentially much faster on a high speed circuit.

Power and weight values give you an indication of which sorts of circuits will suit a car. Pwr alone is not as useful, and neither is pp imho.

The biggest issue is with the levels of grip that the older cars have with their skinny tyres. I'm positive that pp does not account for this, and it's not something you can easily judge for yourself without benchmarking the car against a modern one.

Wrong.

As said before, 2 vehicles with identical pwr/wt can be 100% different.

My bike has a phenomenal pwr/wt ratio, enough to keep up with the likes of a new GTR black edition through the 1/4 mile.
The GTR is still going to whoop my ass after the 1/4 mile line, and on the Nurburgring. The bike would win at Laguna Seca. Life.Physics.

Power to weight works in the same context our PP system already does, by using like cars with like drivetrains at similar figures. You can't race a Veyron against a Caterham any easier going by pwr/wt than you can PP. They're too different, different tracks will suit each better, that's life.

 

[sinbad]

Wrong.

As said before, 2 vehicles with identical pwr/wt can be 100% different.

My bike has a phenomenal pwr/wt ratio, enough to keep up with the likes of a new GTR black edition through the 1/4 mile.
The GTR is still going to whoop my ass after the 1/4 mile line, and on the Nurburgring. The bike would win at Laguna Seca. Life.Physics.

Power to weight works in the same context our PP system already does, by using like cars with like drivetrains at similar figures. You can't race a Veyron against a Caterham any easier going by pwr/wt than you can PP. They're too different, different tracks will suit each better, that's life.

Much as I find your tone both unnecessary and offensive, I perhaps brought a reply like upon myself by using Pwr as an abbreviation for Power Weight Ratio. I thought in the context it would be clear enough, though, especially given that your bike-car comparison is essentially the same as my 7 - m5 comparison.

I totally agree that power/weight is largely useless, except as part of a number of other limitations. Power and weight seperately works simply because you're forcing more similarity than pp can.

 

[CSLACR]

Much as I find your tone both unnecessary and offensive, I perhaps brought a reply like upon myself by using Pwr as an abbreviation for Power Weight Ratio. I thought in the context it would be clear enough, though, especially given that your bike-car comparison is essentially the same as my 7 - m5 comparison.

I totally agree that power/weight is largely useless, except as part of a number of other limitations. Power and weight seperately works simply because you're forcing more similarity than pp can.

My tone?
All I did was say what you said was wrong and showed you why/how it was.

If that offended you, I can't help you. Literally nothing offensive in that post whatsoever.

 

[RaidoGT]

Tires grade MUST be included in PP calculation as well.

Hear hear. It's almost useless without it, because throughout GT5 you can still simply slap ridiculous F1-style tyres on your rig and win almost every race.

 

[CSLACR]

Hear hear. It's almost useless without it, because throughout GT5 you can still simply slap ridiculous F1-style tyres on your rig and win almost every race.

If only there were some way you could limit the tires your opponents and/or yourself use while racing online...

 

[Johnnypenso]

If only there were some way you could limit the tires your opponents and/or yourself use while racing online...

That's a great idea too bad someone didn't think of that!!

Generally speaking, the whole tires as a part of PP while great in theory is a red herring. Cars are on the same tires in a race anyway. If you want to race on CS tires, limit the room to CS tires. Expecting to find a formula that allows you to run a 600PP car on RS tires and keep up with the same car tuned for 600PP on SH tires is ridiculous in the extreme.

 

[J91patriz]

I just wanted to bring this post to attention now that the newly released patch has come out.

This 🤬 pp system is ridicolous to say the least. This doesn't simply affect seasonal event but, more importantly, in my opinon, online racing as well.

For further evidence a quick visit to any 550 pp will enlighten all those unaware of the issue.

Pd should perhaps consider fixing this problem one of the main priorities.