PP Performers?

[smrtb0mb]

Although performance points are supposed to be a better guage than HP/weight, it's probably not a perfect system. So has anyone discovered any exceptional cars for a given PP value?

One example - in some online races I've noticed that the LFA, which is otherwise not too great for its price, seems to be very quick against other cars at the same PP. I was racing against tuned Subarus, Ferarris, Lambos... nothing could keep up with my LFA (and I'm no great driver that's for sure )

 

[TT3AZ]

I dont use the PP system, second, if you circuit racing, the setup is also very important.

 

[iamsupernasty]

Also, if you are racing against crappy drivers, you will win even if your not great.

Your right though, some cars are over/underrated in my opinion.

At the high end, the Lotus Elise is over-rated with PP.

The NSX Type R for example, is under-rated.

Those are the two most glaring examples I've seen.

 

[tlsuth41]

I also would like to know the answer to this question.

I often race at 500 pp and it seems there are a few cars that do well at that level. Honda s2000, Honda civic type r, and BMW M3 csl seem to have an advantage at 500pp.

Many people get all worked up when they see a RM car in the race but I have seen regular street cars monkey stomp the race cars many times.

 

[niky]

The LFA is good because the gearbox is ultra-quick.

It's not an exception to the rule, per se... PP only takes into account power, weight and downforce. It cannot measure the natural suitability of the chassis for performance. Some cars just naturally "stick" better than others at a given PP level, whether it's because the stock balance is better (and there are some sins of the chassis that no amount of GT5 tuning can account for) or because the stock tires on the car give it more natural grip, increasing the multiplication factor of upgrading to Sports Soft or Racing tires.

 

[andrez004]

Also, if you are racing against crappy drivers, you will win even if your not great.

Your right though, some cars are over/underrated in my opinion.

At the high end, the Lotus Elise is over-rated with PP.

The NSX Type R for example, is under-rated.

Those are the two most glaring examples I've seen.

This.

It seems almost any model nsx are beasts in PP races.
Yeah, the elise is almost worthless in PP races.


But the real question you forgot to ask is at what track? The track makes all the difference when it comes to car selection. Nimble cars for technical tracks and high HP cars for high speed tracks.

A good track to benchmark your vehicles on is Deep Forest. I know not everyone likes that track for whatever reason, but the track will really put your car through it's paces. It WILL show your vehicles demons inside, and it's not too long of a course to master.

 

[niky]

The big issue with Deep Forest is that there's only one proper braking zone... Turn One. Otherwise, it's excellent at showing up a bad chassis or an unbalanced one. Especially since they added a whole slew of bumps in the first high speed section for GT5.

 

[smrtb0mb]

We tried a bunch of tracks, mostly pretty technical like Deep Forest, Cape Ring, Suzuka. Definitely some cars, like the fully tuned WRX handled better on the corners, but the LFA had something like a 100 HP advantage! Grand Valley Speedway was a great example where it'd be back & forth all the way around the track until the final straight and I'd leave everyone behind... until I slipped up somwhere later on and we'd do it all over again

 

[oopssorryy]

Like a couple people have said, any NSX will dominate the races you put it in, no real clue why, they just do. If I remember right the GT-R (R32-R34) are a bit under rated in game.

 

[Mike Rotch]

But the real question you forgot to ask is at what track?

A very important factor.Its horses for courses.

R35's are very tough to catch at Trial Mountain for example thanks to their drivetrain. An LFA just wont cut it there.

But at SS5, a similar PP'd R35 gets steamrolled by the same said LFA thanks to the enormous grunt of the LFA.

 

[niky]

The only way to definitively say what's faster is to run the cars at the same weight and the same PP, and to adjust the powerbands to match.

The problem with the R35 is that it has a lot of weight and a lot of torque... both of which skew the PPs a bit... that bias towards low-end torque, plus the advantage of AWD, make the R35 incredible on the tighter courses compared to the LF-A and almost everything else.

 

[DMoss84]

Cheese cars still exist within any given pp range. These are cars that will pretty much always win, given all things equal.

For production cars:
475 ish to 560 the nsx reigns without competition.
560ish to 610 the r35, italia, and super veloce cheeses their way to the front almost always.

 

[IceMan PJN]

Although performance points are supposed to be a better guage than HP/weight, it's probably not a perfect system. So has anyone discovered any exceptional cars for a given PP value?

I haven't heard of a perfect system for gauging relative performance of cars. There are means that can probably get you into the ballpark fairly well, but there's always things that you're neglecting when employing any system I've seen discussed.

PP is a fairly decent "ballpark" gauge for general performance, but there's still things that it doesn't take into consideration from what I've read (including proposed in this topic already), but a generalized performance may not be sufficient for extreme scenarios. What I mean by that is, for example, if you're in a race on the Daytona superspeedway, a car's brake performance or low/mid-speed cornering performance isn't of any real value, so a car with most of its PP coming from pure speed should have a big advantage over a car with much of its PP coming from other factors. Conversely, a pure speed car with a certain PP rating should get dominated by a car of similar PP rating but for being much more capable under braking and cornering.

Look at the Bugatti Veyron as an example of my point. According to MyGranTurismo, it has an initial PP rating of 638 and has went up to 734 PP. The Enzo Ferrari has an initial PP rating of 584 and going up to 645. It lists the McLaren F1 '94 as having an initial PP of 611 and up to 676. From the looks of PP ratings one might expect the Veyron to win handily against either the Enzo or McLaren F1, but if we're taking this around Monaco ("Cotex Diaper" in the world of GT) or Laguna Seca, I'd rather have the the McLaren or Enzo, I would think.

Looking at power-to-weight ratios isn't any better. Again, it completely ignores other performance factors. If you have a car that weighs two tons with 600 horsepower and I have one at just one ton with 300 horsepower, we both have the exact same power-to-weight but we're probably not going to be equal. You might still have a top speed advantage, but I'll probably accelerate farther and corner better. If we're on a superspeedway you may ultimately hold the advantage but if we're weaving about Monaco I may win. Power-to-weight also completely ignores our weight distribution, drivetrain, downforce, gearbox (does your gearbox take you to just 120 MPH or 205 MPH?), et cetera.

In Forza, PI (Performance Index) seems to take into account everything (or pretty close, as near as I can tell). Even if you do have a system that takes into account all aspects of a car's performance, it still isn't perfect because you can still have scenarios in which you want more of one aspect than another.

 

[Mike Rotch]

Cheese cars still exist within any given pp range. These are cars that will pretty much always win, given all things equal.

For production cars:
475 ish to 560 the nsx reigns without competition.

Got to disagree on that. Its fast, but up around 550pp the NSX stands little chance on circuits with long straights (SS5, Tokyo, Fuji). Enough cars can hang with it in the twisties to them blow it away on the straights on those types of circuits.

 

[andrez004]

Got to disagree on that. Its fast, but up around 550pp the NSX stands little chance on circuits with long straights (SS5, Tokyo, Fuji). Enough cars can hang with it in the twisties to them blow it away on the straights on those types of circuits.

That's right, after 550pp it just doesn't have the power to keep up.

The big issue with Deep Forest is that there's only one proper braking zone... Turn One. Otherwise, it's excellent at showing up a bad chassis or an unbalanced one. Especially since they added a whole slew of bumps in the first high speed section for GT5.

You're right, but it's still a game. With the abs settings braking zones can be very consistent. I still can't find a better track that flows well and the variety.

 

[CMvan46]

I don't really know of any great exceptions but yes the LFA is great value at its PP. Used the RKM tuning tune on my LFA and the thing is amazing. I can outrun 600 pp cars at Laguna with it and I believe right now its only at 554ish pp.

 

[GTP_roadrunner]

Someone stated earlier, that the Elise wouldn't be that good in PP races. We were running quite a lot 500pp's on many tracks and the Elise if dialed-in well, always was a contender for P1. Next to NSX's...

 

[Nismo34]

IMHO, Its not What you drive, its how you drive it. The PP System isnt actually all that bad, Ive been in 550pp races where My S15, fended off an NSX for 5 laps at grand valley. The same S15 fended off an SS Camaro '10 at Deep forest. I also did a 600pp Test where my Lamborghini SV beat a Audi R10 by 1 second around Nurburgring GP/F. My ford focus WRC actually Beat a few Lotus Elise's round Eiger Nordwand short aswell. It all comes down to the driver and the tuning. If neither are good, the whole car just fails.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I've just recently gotten into PP racing and I've found that there are a lot of exceptions in cars that are overrated, like the Elise's, but few that are underrated.

The Elise 111R stock version is quite good on shorter tracks like Tsukuba and Autumn Ring mini and perhaps the full Autumn Ring, but not so good on tracks that have longer straights and higher speeds like GVE for example. 53.xx at Tsukuba in the 550 pp range.

I've had great success with the Alfa Romeo Competizione, the big Jags and Aston Martins, the Gran Turismo S, and the BMW M5 on bigger tracks because they handle well and have huge hp to compensate their weight disadvantage. Get one of these big beasts going on the straight at Fuji for example and it'll pull away easily from most cars because it can have 100-150 hp more than a Mclaren F1 for example. And they handle surprisingly well too.

The Ferrari combo of the Scuderia and the 458 Italia are great all around cars that do well at most tracks as to the 4wd Lambo's and Audi's. The Audi Nuvolari Quattro is rarely seen online probably b/c it has no rear d/f but it's fast, doing 1:24.xx at Nurb GP/D and 1:00 even at GVE

The Ford GT40 is down on hp somewhat but has massive torque and pulls like a beast anyway and outhandles most cars and is good at most tracks, if you can tune it. I've done 1:24's online during races for example at Nurb GP/D at 600 pp. Against tough competition it's often my go to car.

NSX Type R 02' is awesome below 550 pp. The Lotus Evora maxes out around 560 if memory serves and it is just as awesome. Nearly unbeatable at 550 pp. 1:48.xx at Grand Valley if memory serves again and 52:xx at Tsukuba.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I've actually been giving some thought to creating a PP based tune garage, with tunes set up for online racing. 3-7 lap sprints which covers most online racing, where cars are set up online, to race as fast as possible with the type of control needed to race side by side with someone, as opposed to a lot of the tunes I see on here, which are cars that are fully maxed out and tuned to be on the edge of control, which is fastest, but not necessarily as easy to control, which is necessary in online racing.

I've tuned at least 20 cars that I win with regularly online, when there is an online...lol.

 

[X3rx3s44]

That's right, after 550pp it just doesn't have the power to keep up.

You're right, but it's still a game. With the abs settings braking zones can be very consistent. I still can't find a better track that flows well and the variety.

At 550PP upwards, you can still easily run the NSX LM Prototype Road Car and win. Best of all it is a road car! Any PP races I run with friends we stipulate no race/RM cars allowed but as it is a "road car" it makes the cut!

As for circuits, try using Nurburgring GP/F. It is quite long at just under 5.2km (3.25mi) but it is a layout that is easy to learn, and tests all areas of a cars performance extremely well. I tend to use this and Grand Valley (Full) to tune and assess a cars overall balance and performance relative to each other for similar levels of PP. 👍

 

[chuyler1]

I've actually been giving some thought to creating a PP based tune garage, with tunes set up for online racing. 3-7 lap sprints which covers most online racing, where cars are set up online, to race as fast as possible with the type of control needed to race side by side with someone, as opposed to a lot of the tunes I see on here, which are cars that are fully maxed out and tuned to be on the edge of control, which is fastest, but not necessarily as easy to control, which is necessary in online racing.

I've tuned at least 20 cars that I win with regularly online, when there is an online...lol.

I've got probably 50 street cars tuned for 450pp on sports tires but i always fall back to the same 5 or so if i actually want to win.

Fast examples include...
Any NSX on just about any track
Mazda RX-8 on most tracks
Elise / Evora on tight tracks
RUF BTR/CTR provided you can tune it and drive it
Nissan 240RS provided you can handle the oversteer
Ford RS200
Honda S2000
Dodge RAM

The secret is in the power band and mod selection. Too many mods and you are pushing a car beyond its comfort zone. Find something close to the PP you are shooting for, install a few mods, then dial back the power with the restrictor plate (aka power reduction). Too much reduction and you'll castrate the car, not enough and you won't have a wide enough power band. Cars that have peak power/torque in the higher rpms before power reduction is applied usually do better than cars that have midrange power.

 

[watermelon punch]

Oooh I love these topics because I wish they were pinned & I saw them day one I got the game!

I could just basically say "What Chuyler1 said."

Especially about the "power band" stuff. I guess that's the proper way to describe it?
I usually say that you need a hill design in the graph, and definitely don't want an X design. I think that's what chuyler1 is talking about?

If you have an X design, doesn't matter your pp or hp or top speed, the car just won't go when you need it to.

And it seems to be best to upgrade the car somewhat past the pp you want, and then restrict it back down to that pp. I've noticed this right from the get-go that it just seems to be the best way to get the most bang for your buck at any given pp #.
Unless you just want to take a really hopped up well-handling super-performing car, and just max restrict it down to a lower pp. But I'd say that's cheesy.

A good track to benchmark your vehicles on is Deep Forest. I know not everyone likes that track for whatever reason, but the track will really put your car through it's paces. It WILL show your vehicles demons inside, and it's not too long of a course to master.

People don't like that track? I've always loved it! It's one of my favourites.

And it's true that it displays weaknesses in cars, and it's helpful that it's one that you probably know pretty well (I know it is for me). Though I find it's best to test cars on Trial Mountain AND Deep Forest. Between those 2 you can find out loads about the handling of a car. And chances are, if I know those 2 well, most people do.
I'm sure there's other tracks that can display characteristics, but it doesn't help me much with that if I'm not super-good at that particular track. And there's many tracks I'm not nearly as good at simply because I haven't played often enough & long enough

 

[chuyler1]

I used to use Trial Mountain all the time to get a feel for a car. However, I found it was causing me to tune cars with very soft suspensions so they could handle the bumps. When I moved to other circuits, the settings didn't translate well. I personally hate Deep Forest but I should probably spend more time there.

A quick question about Deep Forest, is it fair game to put 4 wheels on the concrete sections? It makes that series of turns much easier by straightening the brake zone. I'm not sure if people use it when posting times on this forum. it doesn't cause an invalid time as far as I know.

 

[boredgunner]

The PP system is retarded. The Chaparral 2J Race Car '70 has less PP than the Chaparral 2D Race Car '67, and it even has less PP than some supercars or lower class race cars. The GT by Citroen Concept is way overrated. These are just two examples but there are much more...

 

[VQuick]

In Forza, PI (Performance Index) seems to take into account everything (or pretty close, as near as I can tell). Even if you do have a system that takes into account all aspects of a car's performance, it still isn't perfect because you can still have scenarios in which you want more of one aspect than another.

The PI system does seem to take most factors into account, although there are a few gripes. Actual adjustments made to the car are important, and many people want to be able to do this. However, simply adding the adjustable parts can raise a car's PI too high for the intended class. It's understandable that the parts offer a slight weight savings, but it shouldn't make anywhere near that sort of difference in PI.

There was also some bias in terms of the stock PI for some cars, at least in FM3. There were some cars that were heavier and less powerful, yet still had higher PIs than other cars. Sometimes a car could have a lower PI, yet still be significantly faster.

In theory though, the system is pretty nice. I liked how it took tires into account, and was bummed when PD decided to remove tires from the PP equation.

 

[smrtb0mb]

The problem with taking tires into account is that it can be confusing when you forget what tires your cars have and they're all over the place in the list. I think I prefer PP to be calculated separately, and then set a tire limit for the online room. I like racing all-same-tires.

 

[X3rx3s44]

The problem with taking tires into account is that it can be confusing when you forget what tires your cars have and they're all over the place in the list. I think I prefer PP to be calculated separately, and then set a tire limit for the online room. I like racing all-same-tires.

+1 This! 👍

My garage was a mess when they introduced that system... 👎
Much better with the tyres separate for controlling in online lobbies or by player preference.

 

[sk0pe]

X3rx3s44

1608 cars? Platinum trophy already . Sicko I need to get off here and get back to playing, i feel small.

 

[iamjajo]

The Ferrari 430 is very fast at 600PP.

The Lamborghini Gallardo is very fast at 550PP

With decent set ups, both of these cars can run well on Sports or Racing tires.

I like several other street cars between 500-600PP

NSX
BMW Z4
Spirra
S2000
Mazda RX7 Spirit

My choices favor Premium cars, but that doesn't mean they are inherently faster than Standard cars.