Suzuki GSX-R/4

[Sidebrowns]

Obviously there are some holes in the PP system. Ideally they would be paying attention to how much quicker a certain car is at that PP range and adjust that individual cars PP, or find a better way to calculate it for all cars. The former being a lot easier.

 

[Grayfox]

Looks like the problem is the Cappuccino rather than the GSX. Without having tested it I'm guessing that the problem is the engine size. 650cc isn't a lot, I imagine you need to get up to the peak revs before it starts delivering any power. Add a bit of turbo lag and you'll get poor acceleration. It could also be a matter of weight distribution, a mid-engine car is usually better at tight cornering.

I tuned my Cappuccino for tight technical tracks in mind, and it is pretty fast.

I also tried a VW Gold Mk I
A daihatsu X4 AWD

I tweak their settings before I got the GSX-R

 

[snowgt]

The reason why the GSX-R/4 has such a low PP-figure compared to its speed, is that the motorcycle-engine doesn't have a lot of torque to begin with, and its power is not available over the whole rpm-range. One part of the PP-formula clearly takes the integral of power and torque into account (for the math-impaired: that is equivalent to the area under the power and torque curves), so cars with peaky engines get a lower PP-figure. However, if you manage to keep them in the right rpm-range, they over-perform.

If you just take pure acceleration and top speed into account, the GSX-R/4 performs much more as you would expect from the given PP-figure.

The fact remains that actual performance that reflects in lap times on an average circuit is not reflected very accurately in the PP-calculation.

 

[NixxxoN]

The reason why the GSX-R/4 has such a low PP-figure compared to its speed, is that the motorcycle-engine doesn't have a lot of torque to begin with, and its power is not available over the whole rpm-range. One part of the PP-formula clearly takes the integral of power and torque into account (for the math-impaired: that is equivalent to the area under the power and torque curves), so cars with peaky engines get a lower PP-figure. However, if you manage to keep them in the right rpm-range, they over-perform.

If you just take pure acceleration and top speed into account, the GSX-R/4 performs much more as you would expect from the given PP-figure.

The fact remains that actual performance that reflects in lap times on an average circuit is not reflected very accurately in the PP-calculation.

The low torque doesnt matter much when it weights so little (See N/A Formula 1 cars)
If you ask me i would say it has a pretty good, steady power curve, it doesnt give you nasty surprises, and it makes the car easier to control on the limit.

The reason this car is so fast its pretty simple to me.... It's design... its like a mix between a big go-kart and a lemans prototype (low profile cars). Without having downforce wings that can slow the cars in the straights, its so aerodinamically good, and the gravity center is sooooo low aswell, that the normal road cars have no chance. The engine is from a Suzuki Hayabusa bike, so it means its powerful and light at the same time.

I believe the PP system doesnt take into account the SHAPE of the car bodies... I mean how would you do it?

 

[eran0004]

I tuned my Cappuccino for tight technical tracks in mind, and it is pretty fast.

I also tried a VW Gold Mk I
A daihatsu X4 AWD

I tweak their settings before I got the GSX-R

Now that I tried, I can't get more than 480PP out of the Cappuccino. Also, I noticed that the engine power drops a lot after 7500 rpm, so there's a lot of time lost when shifting at 10 000 rpm instead of 8000 rpm.

 

[snowgt]

The low torque doesnt matter much when it weights so little (See N/A Formula 1 cars)
If you ask me i would say it has a pretty good, steady power curve, it doesnt give you nasty surprises, and it makes the car easier to control on the limit.

The reason this car is so fast its pretty simiple to me.... It's design... its like a mix between a big go-kart and a lemans prototype (low profile cars). Without having downforce wings that can slow the cars in the straights, its so aerodinamically good, and the gravity center is sooooo low aswell, that the normal road cars have no chance. The engine is from a Suzuki Hayabusa bike, so it means its powerful and light at the same time.

I believe the PP system doesnt take into account the SHAPE of the car bodies... I mean how would you do it?

I didn't say the low torque makes it slower. I said it's so fast in relation to its PP-value, because the PP-calculation takes the whole rpm-range into account even when only a small part of it actually is being used. If you manage to keep the car at high revs, it performs at a level that the PP-figure does not reflect, because one of the main components of the PP-figure is derived roughly from the average power and torque over the whole rpm-range. So, when the torque-curve generally is very low, but the car is very light, it still performs at a very high level, but the PP-figure stays low. That's one of the PP-calculation's flaws.

Of course the low weight is good for the car's performance, but it also increases the PP-figure, so that's not an unusual effect that explains the massive PP-advantage the GSX/R has.

What the other factors in the PP-calculation are, we can only speculate on. There probably are some basic constants that reflect weight distribution, centre of gravity, etc., and it is pretty certain that some calculated traction-factor is involved as adding power beyond a certain point sometimes decreases the PP-value (try an oil change on the Gillet Vertigo).

Maybe there also is an aerodynamic constant reflecting a car's default downforce or drag-coefficient, but it currently does not appear to be calculated. But the "how" is easy ... you just pre-calculate downforce and drag coefficient (or get it from the manufacturer) and put it into the physics model.

 

[snowgt]

Now that I tried, I can't get more than 480PP out of the Cappuccino. Also, I noticed that the engine power drops a lot after 7500 rpm, so there's a lot of time lost when shifting at 10 000 rpm instead of 8000 rpm.

Characteristics that it shares with about half of all cars in Gran Turismo. (that being that you are faster when you do not shift at the red line)

 

[TurismoBad]

That's why we need secondary system that takes into account performance of a car on different tracks.

New PP sub-system concept - car/track combo - C/T

Ideally this would allow for nearly all cars to participate in TT events - with PP adjusted accordingly to match the C/T value.

So for example the GSX would need to have lower PP than let's say a Corvette Z06 in order to have the same C/T values.

As a result tons of cars have very similar potential and each track/event have different machinery on top as it's impossible to predict what car at at C/T value will have that slight edge.

Even if there would cars with an edge getting into top 50 or 20 with cars different than everyone is using wouldn't be impossible.

All in theory obviously.

 

[332i]

The nature of the Beast, just look at NASCAR, it used to be Race on Sunday, buy on Monday. Nowadays good luck even finding a V8 or a single part as an option on the street version.

It 's "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday"

 

[eran0004]

That's why we need secondary system that takes into account performance of a car on different tracks.

New PP sub-system concept - car/track combo - C/T

Ideally this would allow for nearly all cars to participate in TT events - with PP adjusted accordingly to match the C/T value.

So for example the GSX would need to have lower PP than let's say a Corvette Z06 in order to have the same C/T values.

Well, ideally. How is that value supposed to be obtained though? And how will tuning be treated? Just for reference, the possible tuning combinations for a single car (I picked the Camaro Z28 Race Car '69 as an example) are over five vigintillion (5*10^63):

5'021'745'289'199'310'000'000'000'000'000'000'000'000'000'000'000'000'000'000'000'000

Will each tune have a different C/T value? Probably not, because there aren't enough hard drive storing capacity even if we could combine every harddrive on Earth to store even a fraction of the C/T values required for a single car on a single track. So I'm guessing they'd have to be based on the stock car, which in turn makes the system obsolete once you start to tune the cars.

At best it would be a more accurate starting point for every car, but the end result would be the same: Through tuning, there will be one or two cars that simply are better than the others, and everyone who wants to be in the top of a time trial will pick that exact car.

 

[332i]

They just made it a ridiculous car for what it is. It is nothing special IRL. The only videos of it on a track are from GT6. They had very little to base that car on. It is ficticous as far as I'm concerned in GT6. Does it look like one? Sure. Does it drive like one? Both PD and Suzuki probably have no clue. It's not as if Suzuki would ever do what we are doing with that car, make it that fast or handle that well. How it compares to other cars in gt6...1) it has too low of a PP for what it is, 2) it is too much in gt6 for what it is lol. The cars that are pitted against it in seasonal would rape it IRL around willows. It is comical. Whoever modelled that car at PD, love the hell out of it. Period.

 

[TorqueWrench]

It 's "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday"

True lol

Ouch, got some rubber in my eye.

 

[TorqueWrench]

As I understand the PP system is the result of the cars specs being used in a calculation to determine the "performance rating" of the car.

To change the PP raring of a car PD would have to

A) Change the PP rating system for all cars

B) Change the specs of the car to manipulate the outcome of the PP calculation or make a special exception attached to the car altering the results of the PP calculation.

C) Some other means I can't think of

I don't think k PD will ever change the entire PP system for any 1 car, although I believe PD is working g at improving the system across the board. I also do not believe PD would manipulate the specs or make an exception to the system for any 1 car to alters its PP rating.

In my opinion A & B are off the table, I can't figure out C

 

[ACGreen86]

I say they abolish the PP system and use other criteria for races; Age, classification, drivetrain, etc.

 

[SW__10]

Sorry I can't be constructive...but I feel drawn to this thread to say...

I don't like this car...

I wish there was an alternative to be competitive in the TT's...

It's boring using the same car over and over again...

Apologies......carry on .

 

[nick77]

The thing they should do to the Suzuki is stop classifying it as a "normal car", its just a concept that never made it into mass production.

It was said earlier but worth repeating - as a concept car it shouldn't really be classed as a normal car - problem solved

 

[dddsprayshop]

I wanted to post something, but then again, what's the point.
it's a car with a motorcycle engine, lots of power in the high rpm and lightweight.
Also it is the hayabusa engine, That's a monster engine used for lots of wierd carmods in real life.

In the uk they install that engine into a car of choice.

Klik this link, it's german but you get the point, Suzuki swift rebuild with a hayabusa engine.

And then decide if it is buggy or glitchy.

 

[Wide Boy]

What is the point of banning it all that will happen is someone will find the next fastest car & we will all use that instead if you want to chase the top spot.

As to being buggy lack of weight means it accelerates & corners well especially on fast corners due to lower lateral forces.

 

[nowcontrol]

The thing they should do to the Suzuki is stop classifying it as a "normal car", its just a concept that never made it into mass production.

It was said earlier but worth repeating - as a concept car it shouldn't really be classed as a normal car - problem solved

To do this would mean adding whole new "concept" classification of cars within the game because it doesn't fit into "tuner" or "race", this would then create a whole new list of cars excluded from "normal cars" time trials/races, and so would then from time to time need to have sets of TT/DT for this class of car to fairly make use of them competitively, and depending on the selected track and PP limit, guess which car would dominate?

The reason this "concept" classification doesn't already exist in the game is probably because it is such small yet eclectic list of cars, and separating them from everything else is a bit of a silly, and perhaps useless 'concept'.

 

[NixxxoN]

To do this would mean adding whole new "concept" classification of cars within the game because it doesn't fit into "tuner" or "race", this would then create a whole new list of cars excluded from "normal cars" time trials/races, and so would then from time to time need to have sets of TT/DT for this class of car to fairly make use of them competitively, and depending on the selected track and PP limit, guess which car would dominate?

The reason this "concept" classification doesn't already exist in the game is probably because it is such small yet eclectic list of cars, and separating them from everything else is a bit of a silly, and perhaps useless 'concept'.

I think they should separate the "normal" cars in two lists...
1) Road legal car
2) Concept car

I dont know why but so many concepts are so fast, even for the cars with concept and road legal versions...
See the Toyota FT86... the concept versions are much faster. The RX-8... exactly the same.
then you have the Suzuki GSX, the VW Nardo, the ZZII, the Mazda RX500...

 

[jimipitbull]

I dont know why but so many concepts are so fast, even for the cars with concept and road legal versions...
See the Toyota FT86... the concept versions are much faster. The RX-8... exactly the same.
then you have the Suzuki GSX, the VW Nardo, the ZZII, the Mazda RX500...

Manufacturer builds normal cars to make money. Concept is built for design/marketing purposes.

Why would you build a slow concept, when you could build a fast one instead?

 

[nick77]

To do this would mean adding whole new "concept" classification of cars within the game because it doesn't fit into "tuner" or "race", this would then create a whole new list of cars excluded from "normal cars" time trials/races, and so would then from time to time need to have sets of TT/DT for this class of car to fairly make use of them competitively, and depending on the selected track and PP limit, guess which car would dominate?

The reason this "concept" classification doesn't already exist in the game is probably because it is such small yet eclectic list of cars, and separating them from everything else is a bit of a silly, and perhaps useless 'concept'.

Was just thinking of excluding them, not of adding another classification; which is your idea, that you talk yourself out of in the end

 

[NixxxoN]

Manufacturer builds normal cars to make money. Concept is built for design/marketing purposes.

Why would you build a slow concept, when you could build a fast one instead?

I dont think we are talking about the same thing. I say concepts are very fast in the game, not in real life (that I dont know if they are fast or not)
With a given PP, those concepts I posted are so fast, normally faster than most road legal cars.

Why the heck the Toyota FT concepts (or the mazda RX8 concepts) have to be lighter and more powerful with the same PP compared to their road legal versions?
Put all those cars at 500pp and see for yourself.

 

[starcarper]

I've raced in a couple of leagues where most race classifications are based on weight and power.

Every one of the leagues have banned the use of so called concept cars.

It comes down to one thing. PD likes concept cars. They make a massive point about how the game can handle them and actively push manufacturers to produce them for in the game.

They will therefore have very little desire to remove them from TT's. It hurts their marketing.

 

[GTP_CargoRatt]

I think PD should just give us a loaner car to use with no tuning involved for these Seasonal TT's. As much as I like tuning my cars trying to get the most out of them that I can, I just think that by them providing the car, that would end all this complaining about everyone using these "super cars".

 

[Wide Boy]

Was just thinking of excluding them, not of adding another classification; which is your idea, that you talk yourself out of in the end

If you didn't classify them separately how could you exclude them they would still be classified as normal cars?

 

[Wide Boy]

I dont think we are talking about the same thing. I say concepts are very fast in the game, not in real life (that I dont know if they are fast or not)
With a given PP, those concepts I posted are so fast, normally faster than most road legal cars.

Why the heck the Toyota FT concepts (or the mazda RX8 concepts) have to be lighter and more powerful with the same PP compared to their road legal versions?
Put all those cars at 500pp and see for yourself.

Many concepts such as the Nardo, RX500 are very fast because they are showcases for technology.
Record breaking cars with solid engines.

Others are a bit quicker because they will just tweak the engine because its never going to do high mileage & they are light because they don't need safety things like airbags, crash beams etc.
Mazda Furai paid the price & caught fire.

Other concepts are dead slow if they even work, more just styling exercises.

In real life I think most concepts however do not handle that well, they don't spend the time tuning the suspension

 

[nick77]

If you didn't classify them separately how could you exclude them they would still be classified as normal cars?

Doesn't make sense

 

[nowcontrol]

Doesn't make sense

What he, and I mean, Is if you think a concept car should no longer be classified as a normal car then where should it be put? there are only three category's in the game .. normal/race/tuner .. we cannot have unclassified cars in the game, it needs to fit somewhere so the only solution would be that which I posted previously, a 'concept' classification which would also encompass all other cars that are not production, race, or tuner cars.

[Also, I was not expressing an idea that I am wanting in the game, I was simply explaining why a 'concept' classification does not already exist, it would be more hassle than it's worth for PD]

I also understand what was suggested originally, that it should be excluded from 'normal car' time trials, just as a singular non-eligible car, but I hardly think that would be fair for the poor little thing.

 

[NixxxoN]

Many concepts such as the Nardo, RX500 are very fast because they are showcases for technology.
Record breaking cars with solid engines.

Others are a bit quicker because they will just tweak the engine because its never going to do high mileage & they are light because they don't need safety things like airbags, crash beams etc.
Mazda Furai paid the price & caught fire.

Other concepts are dead slow if they even work, more just styling exercises.

In real life I think most concepts however do not handle that well, they don't spend the time tuning the suspension

I'm talking about the game, not real life. Why are concepts usually faster with the same PP? Why they are lighter and more powerful? Doesnt make sense.
In PP races, a big part of the most competitive cars are concept cars.