Pininfarina Teases Fittipaldi EF7 Vision GT Before Geneva Motor Show

[fortbo]

With all of the fantasy cars in GT Sport, they might as well title it "Ridge Racer 8". This one doesn't sway me to pick up the game anymore than the others have.

For like the 10th time, this is a production car...

 

[Suzumiya]

With all of the fantasy cars in GT Sport, they might as well title it "Ridge Racer 8". This one doesn't sway me to pick up the game anymore than the others have.

I'd argue if it were Ridge Racer 8, there would be much more incentive to pick it up

 

[Sharpie]

Sharp looking I give a name Shark attack

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Looks quite Glickenhaus-ey. Still not sure on the front but the rest of the profile is quite nice.

Yeah saw that and enzo in it and some fiero with the way they designed the front. Could have been perfectly fine without the attempt at trick aero on the front. It's not bad but it could have been really great. It's a good looking car to me.

 

[girabyt3]

Avoid comments at all cost!!

 

[ScottPuss20]

This better provide some of the best on-track moments in GT Sport. It has to be challenging to drive, not to mention an absolute hoot...
Seems as though my guess was correct:

 

[another_jakhole]

This better provide some of the best on-track moments in GT Sport. It has to be challenging to drive, not to mention an absolute hoot...
Seems as though my guess was correct:
View attachment 632684

It looks so smooth. Looks like it'll cut air like a hot knife through butter. I can't believe I've seen someone call it an ugly car. They had a Ferrari avatar picture or username. That's right! I'm calling you out a little!

 

[Aphelion]

This better provide some of the best on-track moments in GT Sport. It has to be challenging to drive, not to mention an absolute hoot...
Seems as though my guess was correct:
View attachment 632684

I am sorry, but that looks literally nothing like the EF7.

 

[ScottPuss20]

I am sorry, but that looks literally nothing like the EF7.

Why so serious?

 

[Aphelion]

Why so serious?

I was debating putting a smiley face on the end of that comment but I didn't want to come off condescending.

 

[C-ZETA]

Blimey. Compared to most VGTs, that looks comparatively ordinary. And that's fine.

 

[another_jakhole]

@CLowndes888 is that a mod or something R* released? I don't have GTA anymore.

 

[Tornado]

Should put that it is a real car on the thread title

 

[Imari]

The best VGT yet in my opinion. Its a VGT going into limited production...which is remarkable for the project. I reckon if the car had zero ties to the VGT project, and was simply announced to be available in the game, nobody would be hating on it.

Pretty much. It's another case of misadvertisement.

The VGT program was (and presumably still is) created around the idea of manufacturers creating a car that reflects their vision of a Gran Turismo, whatever that means to them. From past entries it's pretty clear that it meant to create a concept car that shows off the particular manufacturers design and vision, rather than as a tool to promote their latest model whatever.

Add in to that that GTS is pretty solidly lacking real models as it is, and you have to wonder why they bothered blurring the lines like this. If VGTs can be real cars, what's the point of distinguishing them from other real cars?

IMO, the EF7 is pretty cool and an interesting addition, but it's not a VGT. It's just more marketing BS. I hope Polyphony is getting paid for that one, because if not then they really missed a massive opportunity. It's not like they don't have experience marketing new cars, see the GTR Black Mask and the C7 Test Prototype.

I remain baffled as to why they approached this car in the way that they have. They're so inconsistent that no wonder people have qualms pre-ordering sight unseen.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

Pretty much. It's another case of misadvertisement.

The VGT program was (and presumably still is) created around the idea of manufacturers creating a car that reflects their vision of a Gran Turismo, whatever that means to them. From past entries it's pretty clear that it meant to create a concept car that shows off the particular manufacturers design and vision, rather than as a tool to promote their latest model whatever.

Add in to that that GTS is pretty solidly lacking real models as it is, and you have to wonder why they bothered blurring the lines like this. If VGTs can be real cars, what's the point of distinguishing them from other real cars?

IMO, the EF7 is pretty cool and an interesting addition, but it's not a VGT. It's just more marketing BS. I hope Polyphony is getting paid for that one, because if not then they really missed a massive opportunity. It's not like they don't have experience marketing new cars, see the GTR Black Mask and the C7 Test Prototype.

I remain baffled as to why they approached this car in the way that they have. They're so inconsistent that no wonder people have qualms pre-ordering sight unseen.

I was thinking somewhat along the same line last night.
Not the "misadvertisment" point of your post, but the classification of the car.
It certainly is an oddball in reference to the VGT programme as we know it.

With gran-turismo.com being on the ball the last two days, essentially updating on time to break the latest two news items, as opposed to dragging their heels, and yet the VGT section of the site has no update of the EF7.
Perhaps I'm reading too much into that, I can't decide.
Or perhaps the car will be classed like any other production car, and the name assigned to it by Pininfarina is to be ignored.

To me, as the name of the car suggests, it should be classed as a VGT.
But perhaps PD are looking at it differently.
Time will tell.

 

[Switcher]

With all of the fantasy cars in GT Sport, they might as well title it "Ridge Racer 8". This one doesn't sway me to pick up the game anymore than the others have.

*inhales*




Wot in tarnation

 

[ZRO]

With all of the fantasy cars in GT Sport, they might as well title it "Ridge Racer 8". This one doesn't sway me to pick up the game anymore than the others have.

 

[hankolerd]

To me, as the name of the car suggests, it should be classed as a VGT.

I agree, I think the point of VGT program was to get folks to push engineering boundaries, and create something that they felt was the ultimate sports or race car. But, each company has invested a lot of time and energy to design every aspect of the car like they would for a production car. I think in this case the 3 companies that were working on this car realized there vision maybe wasn't as far fetched as they originally thought, and that they could actually produce a few (at a very high cost). It sounds like they are using some very interesting tech from the racing world that have not been seen on production cars as well.

 

[MarcoGT5]

It's nice having cars that are unique and not in other games.

 

[Imari]

I agree, I think the point of VGT program was to get folks to push engineering boundaries, and create something that they felt was the ultimate sports or race car.

It was to get them to create the ultimate Gran Turismo car, a grand tourer. But that got thrown to the curb pretty quickly.

But, each company has invested a lot of time and energy to design every aspect of the car like they would for a production car.

Meh. Some have. Others haven't. Don't tell me that the Chaparral and the Tomahawk were designed like a production car would have been. They styled the outside, then waved some magic pixies at the technology and went down the street for a pint. It's much easier to pull numbers from one's bottom than it is to come up with a realistic engine and drivetrain.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

I sometimes wonder whether the VGT programme would attract less vitriol if those 2 manufacturers had limited themselves to more realistic designs.

The 2X and Tomahawk always seem to be raised as points against the programme.
But saying that, there should be more designs incoming, and looking at the list there will probably be contenders who'll challenge that title.


As for the Pininfarina, it should shape up as a popular car due to its design.
I find it interesting that it still doesn't rate a mention in the VGT section of the website.
And in that vein, I wonder if the H2 Speed (or H600) may also be on the cards.

 

[GBalao888]

To be honest, the entire car reminds me of the Angelus from Ridge Racer 6 (pair that up with the Bugatti Vision GT's Gr. 1 variant and we can recreate both the Angelus and the Crinale, respectively, if only it were a Gr. 1 car).

I really like the fact that through its technology, it's traditional, yet advanced, with none of that mainstream hybrid stuff, or even active aero. It's like going back to the basics, and its simplicity is just great, from its engine, to its gearbox and chassis. It could somehow match the Bugatti Vision GT in the Gr. 1 class since that has 621hp and 980kg and this one has 600hp and 1000kg, well if only it were a Gr. 1 race car.

This, overall makes the Fittipaldi EF7 my fourth favorite Vision car of all time.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

To be honest, the entire car reminds me of the Angelus from Ridge Racer 6 (pair that up with the Bugatti Vision GT's Gr. 1 variant and we can recreate both the Angelus and the Crinale, respectively, if only it were a Gr. 1 car).

I really like the fact that through its technology, it's traditional, yet advanced, with none of that mainstream hybrid stuff, or even active aero. It's like going back to the basics, and its simplicity is just great, from its engine, to its gearbox and chassis. It could somehow match the Bugatti Vision GT in the Gr. 1 class since that has 621hp and 980kg and this one has 600hp and 1000kg, well if only it were a Gr. 1 race car.

I'm fairly confident the Pininfarina will be a Gr1. car, BoP'd to suit for Sport mode.

But I'm also confident both cars will be available in their original specs. form for online lobby gaming. 👍

 

[hankolerd]

It was to get them to create the ultimate Gran Turismo car, a grand tourer. But that got thrown to the curb pretty quickly.

Yeah, you are right, they were looking for a "Grand Tourer, which describes a sporty performance coupe". Alpine, Chaparral, Dodge, and Hyundai all seem to have focused more on extreme race cars than a sporty GT.

Meh. Some have. Others haven't. Don't tell me that the Chaparral and the Tomahawk were designed like a production car would have been. They styled the outside, then waved some magic pixies at the technology and went down the street for a pint. It's much easier to pull numbers from one's bottom than it is to come up with a realistic engine and drivetrain.

I guess that is the point I am trying to make. They didn't just make it all up and call it a day. Chaparral was looking at advancements from the space industry on laser propulsion, and imagined where that tech "could" be in the next 4 decades. They had to work through what would be technically feasible given an unlimited R+D budget.

If Koenigsegg can produce a reliable 1500hp out of a 5.0L V8 and electric drive system for the Regera, it is not preposterous to think Dodge could produce a 7.0L V10 that, in theory, could produce 2200hp. 35 years ago BMW was producing a 1.5L 4-cyl capable of ~1400hp (their dyno topped out at 1280hp) when they only needed it to last 2-3 laps for qualifying. They would rebuild it after qualifying and detune it to 850hp for race day. Pneumatic air systems have existed since the early 1900's, and while we might not be able to get 400hp out of a small enough system today to shove into a front wheel well, it is in the realm of possibility to imagine that technology advancements will get us there in 20-30 years.

Without having to design cars that meet todays safety laws and not have to worry about reliability everyone was able to envision cars that are extremely light and extremely powerful. They are not just producing an exterior design, waving pixie magic, and calling it a day. They design these cars inside and out using the same processes they do when they design a production car. They don't go into the same prototyping and test phases a production car would, as the technologies they call for don't exist, but they are doing very real and very well thought out design work.

http://www.topgear.com/car-news/la-motor-show/meet-chevy’s-insane-vision-gt
http://www.topgear.com/car-news/gaming/meet-srt’s-2590bhp-vision-gt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_propulsion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed-air_vehicle
http://gtspirit.com/2014/05/31/the-most-powerful-f1-car-ever/

 

[Tornado]

Meh. Some have. Others haven't. Don't tell me that the Chaparral and the Tomahawk were designed like a production car would have been. They styled the outside, then waved some magic pixies at the technology and went down the street for a pint. It's much easier to pull numbers from one's bottom than it is to come up with a realistic engine and drivetrain.

Or, like Bugatti, they made some changes to a car they had already designed but not revealed yet, then just made some stuff up to go in the press packet for it.

Chaparral was looking at advancements from the space industry on laser propulsion, and imagined where that tech "could" be in the next 4 decades. They had to work through what would be technically feasible given an unlimited R+D budget.

That's impressive considering Chaparral hasn't actually existed since 1982.

 

[hankolerd]

.That's impressive considering Chaparral hasn't actually existed since 1982.

I don't think that is true, considering they partnered with chevy for the continuation series of the 2E back in 2005. But I think you are correct to imply Chevrolets team of designers were the key team behind this VGT project, I apologize for being misleading.

http://www.chaparralcars.com/2e.php

The new 2E's are true continuation vehicles, not only because they are being built by the original people but also because they are using the original 2E body molds along with chassis parts made from the original engineering drawings.

And didn't they race through the 90s in Indy car?

EDIT: I don't disagree Chaparral is not operating to the same degree today as they did in their heyday.

 

[Imari]

I guess that is the point I am trying to make. They didn't just make it all up and call it a day. Chaparral was looking at advancements from the space industry on laser propulsion, and imagined where that tech "could" be in the next 4 decades. They had to work through what would be technically feasible given an unlimited R+D budget.

No, there are problems all over the project, some of which potentially don't have solutions.

Let's assume that they can build an energy pack of sufficient energy density to power the car for at least 30 minutes without weighing several tons. You know, not a lithium ion one like they claim. Difficult, but possibly plausible without resorting to fission, fusion or anti-matter.
Let's assume that the laser only has to produce ~670kW like they claim to produce 900hp, ignoring the massive amount of energy that is going to be lost to heat, noise, and lateral force.
Then they need to scale up the power of laser technology from the few hundred kW range, scale down the size and weight from needing a destroyer or 747 to mount it on, and figure out how to cool it enough so that it can operate continuously instead of for a few seconds at a time. Or just invent ambient temperature superconductors. No problem.

And so now they've somehow got it functional, and they still have to deal with the fact that the sound and pressure waves. Let's assume that the car is made of ultralight adamantium and is invulnerable. You almost certainly couldn't have anyone watching the race, because it would be unbearably loud. Potentially it damages the track and surrounds as well, because you essentially have open air explosions with all the heat that entails.

So even though you've made your way through with all these assumptions, some of which potentially may not have solutions because we're not close enough to even tell yet, the car as designed is basically unraceable simply because it will destroy anybody and anything around it.

If Koenigsegg can produce a reliable 1500hp out of a 5.0L V8 and electric drive system for the Regera, it is not preposterous to think Dodge could produce a 7.0L V10 that, in theory, could produce 2200hp. 35 years ago BMW was producing a 1.5L 4-cyl capable of ~1400hp (their dyno topped out at 1280hp) when they only needed it to last 2-3 laps for qualifying. They would rebuild it after qualifying and detune it to 850hp for race day. Pneumatic air systems have existed since the early 1900's, and while we might not be able to get 400hp out of a small enough system today to shove into a front wheel well, it is in the realm of possibility to imagine that technology advancements will get us there in 20-30 years.

The engine isn't the fantasy part of the Tomahawk. You can make a 7.0L V10 that makes 2200hp today. It doesn't last for very long, but sure.

The fantasy part is their massive aero panels. In order to hold those you need more than a pencil strut. And the power to lift and hold those would be significant.

Without having to design cars that meet todays safety laws and not have to worry about reliability everyone was able to envision cars that are extremely light and extremely powerful.

Also without having to worry about the laws of physics, because they're designing for a computer game.

They are not just producing an exterior design, waving pixie magic, and calling it a day. They design these cars inside and out using the same processes they do when they design a production car. They don't go into the same prototyping and test phases a production car would, as the technologies they call for don't exist, but they are doing very real and very well thought out design work.

http://www.topgear.com/car-news/la-motor-show/meet-chevy’s-insane-vision-gt
http://www.topgear.com/car-news/gaming/meet-srt’s-2590bhp-vision-gt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_propulsion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed-air_vehicle
http://gtspirit.com/2014/05/31/the-most-powerful-f1-car-ever/

Sigh. You really bought into the marketing, didn't you? That's all it is, marketing. Do a little reading on the engineering behind the 2X and come back to me.

 

[TrevorPhilips]

 

[Imari]

View attachment 633780

Slow day at work, huh?

 

[cutmeamango]

Sigh. [...] Do a little reading on the engineering behind the 2X and come back to me.

And so now they've somehow got it functional, and they still have to deal with the fact that the sound and pressure waves. Let's assume that the car is made of ultralight adamantium and is invulnerable. You almost certainly couldn't have anyone watching the race, because it would be unbearably loud. Potentially it damages the track and surrounds as well, because you essentially have open air explosions with all the heat that entails.

RIP everyone.

The fantasy part is their massive aero panels. In order to hold those you need more than a pencil strut. And the power to lift and hold those would be significant.

Beware, sorcery:



You don't understand the physical principles behind anything, it's embarrassing.

Also without having to worry about the laws of physics, because they're designing for a computer game.

Source please?

----



15/03/2017

Great job.

Might want to make sure you have it straight yourself before throwing out that accusation. Spamming "lol" emoticons does not support your point either.

Seems like the forum is really buggy this week!

But here it is:

1) Explosion and combustion are not mutually exclusive. Incorrect and non-sensical.

Combustion is an exothermic redox chemical reaction.
Laser Ablation is an exothermic decomposition chemical reaction.
Explosion is the physical, kinetic reaction process of the rapid expansion of pressure/temperature/volume due energy conversion.

Combustions can be and often are explosive.
Combustions can and do occur in laser ablation because the material ejection may react with the surrounding atmosphere.

The point of contention with its absurdity was that such things are made to utilize the force (Thrust), so they have the form that vectors it.

2) Drag (load distribution) and point force.

Anyone can test and learn at home with a fan, cardboard and stick. Small surface area => Weaker forces. Large surface area => Stronger forces.
Understand purpose of designs. Understand physics.

3) Unsupported, illogical inference.
Can't demonstrate who came first, can't demonstrate a continuity, can't demonstrate set majority.