The emperor's X2010

[RacingManiac]

Every single person cites the tire thing. As though tires are impossible to construct.

Rubber tires have been used up to and passed the speed of frikken sound. It will NOT be the most difficult to modify a proven construction to take more sideforce.


Edit: Realisticly, all your asking is another 20ish percent from tires used in Group-C which is over two decade old technology as it was.

Thrust SSC uses aluminum wheels, no rubber tire....

Tires are the single most difficult subject in racing to understand. Going around a track another 20-30 sec faster than the current F1 car is not just 20%...

Edit, also F1 cars has had hydraulic suspension....

 

[Shinzah]

It doesn't matter how in-depth they went, I'll bet my life if you took Kaz's idea to any other F1 technical specialist they'd come up with an X2010 beater. Why? Because it's not real and they don't have to stick to realism while designing a car for a video game.

IF they could beat the X1, they wouldn't come up with anything too far removed from it. The X1 looks literally like a cross between an F1 car and a Sports Prototype SRP/LMP1 tin top.

Group-C cars are the predecessors of SRP/LMP1 technology. If given the engine and weight limits of Group-C, an SRP/LMP1 car could easily surpass 270mph with the added aero technology developed since the Sauber C9.

Has as 1500bhp fan car ever been done? No.

1500hp cars are very, very, comicly common.

Fancars were banned from motorsport for the very reason the X1 would be.

And finally no. I know it's unrealistic because this car was designed for a video game, not racing, not as a concept car, not even as a car that was designed to go out and break every track lap record in the world. It was designed for a video game.

The car was designed by one of the most world renouned car designers and engineers today. Someone who probably wouldn't hold back on technical details for the sake of videogames, and knowwing Kaz's love for CARS not for VIDEOGAMES, the car is most likely accurately represented to the limits of what GT5 can offer.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Thrust SSC's tires weren't traditional tires were they?

I believe the SSC rode on traditional construct tires, but I'm not sure. The Thrust SSC 2 rode on O Rings, that I know.

Either way, common constructed tires can take a whole lot more abuse then people give them credit for.

The X1 is only 20% faster then a Group-C spec car. That is, what it is. Group-C is twenty years ago, and the construction used was developed at least ten to twenty years before that (Not compound, tire construction)

 

[Stephen220378]

Just like they can choose to stick to realism if they want.


Not relevant. That's a terrible argument. Has an F1 car with neon lights and hydraulic suspension been done before? Is it not possible? Of course not.



And that makes no difference at all.

No, but an F1 car with neon lights and hydraulic suspension would serve no purpose at all. That's why it's never been built. So terrible argument right back at you.

Why does it make no difference?

To many people take GT way to seriously, as if they're some sort of pioneers in the automotive world.

 

[mastretta_mx]

I unlocked yesterday and man, is really hard to drive (I'm using a Dualshock) I can handle it but so far even from bronze, any advice to defeat this challenge in bronze using a Dualshock?

 

[Stephen220378]

IF they could beat the X1, they wouldn't come up with anything too far removed from it. The X1 looks literally like a cross between an F1 car and a Sports Prototype SRP/LMP1 tin top.

Group-C cars are the predecessors of SRP/LMP1 technology. If given the engine and weight limits of Group-C, an SRP/LMP1 car could easily surpass 270mph with the added aero technology developed since the Sauber C9.



1500hp cars are very, very, comicly common.

Fancars were banned from motorsport for the very reason the X1 would be.


The car was designed by one of the most world renouned car designers and engineers today. Someone who probably wouldn't hold back on technical details for the sake of videogames, and knowwing Kaz's love for CARS not for VIDEOGAMES, the car is most likely accurately represented to the limits of what GT5 can offer.




I believe the SSC rode on traditional construct tires, but I'm not sure. The Thrust SSC 2 rode on O Rings, that I know.

Either way, common constructed tires can take a whole lot more abuse then people give them credit for.

The X1 is only 20% faster then a Group-C spec car. That is, what it is. Group-C is twenty years ago, and the construction used was developed at least ten to twenty years before that (Not compound, tire construction)

Adrian Newey was asked to design a car that wasn't restricted by rules, fast and created massive amounts of downforce. At no point was realism ever mentioned.

 

[Exorcet]

No, but an F1 car with neon lights and hydraulic suspension would serve no purpose at all. That's why it's never been built. So terrible argument right back at you.

Why is my argument terrible? You said:

That because X has not been built in real life, X is not realistically possible.

This is obviously logically wrong. You're absolutely right that a neon F1 is pointless, but it completely wrecks your argument because it's possible to build, yet it does not exist.

Why does it make no difference?

What difference would it possible make? It's the same as above. If a team of engineers worked together to build a virtual model of car, does that make the resulting model of the car unrealistic?

This happens all the time. Things that do not exist are made virtually and simulated. These simulated things are quite realistic. As a matter of fact, I designed set of brakes discs a year ago. They only existed on my computer for months. Did that make them unrealistic? I was able to, and did, make them in reality later on.

To many people take GT way to seriously, as if they're some sort of pioneers in the automotive world.

You haven't seen me criticizing the game up and down the forums? Just look through my 1000 posts.

 

[RacingManiac]

And Adrian Newey did not design the car. He talked about what he would do, PD just made something along the line of it. Namedropping is a beautiful thing in marketing, but how much free time do you think one of the most capable tech director/designer in F1 has, outside of his dayjob, and his hobby of historic car racing and sailing? Red Bull has a great marketing thing going with PD since now they are tied to a popular video game with free advertisement, with really just letting them film their facility and a few interview...

 

[Shinzah]

Adrian Newey was asked to design a car that wasn't restricted by rules, fast and created massive amounts of downforce. At no point was realism ever mentioned.

Excuse me. But wheres your three constructors championships across three teams in the highest level of motorsport.

I think I'd rather ask the man himself (if only I could..) then listen to STEPHEN...NUMBERS on an internet forum speculate on his motives.

 

[Shinzah]

And Adrian Newey did not design the car. He talked about what he would do, PD just made something along the line of it. Namedropping is a beautiful thing in marketing, but how much free time do you think one of the most capable tech director/designer in F1 has, outside of his dayjob, and his hobby of historic car racing and sailing? Red Bull has a great marketing thing going with PD since now they are tied to a popular video game with free advertisement, with really just letting them film their facility and a few interview...

If Adrian drew a diagram on a piece of paper in twenty seconds while drinking a coffee and signing autographs, I'm pretty sure it would be more technically sound then anything anyone of us here could ever hope to achieve.

The man has *enough* free time. Vettel had enough free time, during the season, to do the sit in voiceovers for his cameo. He's a world champion. And if you think script reading isn't hard, I had to do placeholder VO's while working briefly in game design, it took more then three days for two pages of dialogue.

 

[Exorcet]

And Adrian Newey did not design the car.

Did he sit down and take it from concept to a final fully defined CAD model with 1000's of hours of virtual testing? Probably not. That doesn't mean that he sent PD an email saying:

"Put fans on a car and call it X1."

The amount of work that Newey put into the car isn't known, but that's OK. The X1 does not use any alien technology (save for maybe those tires). Its performance also doesn't greatly exceed what is concieveable with modern technology. 300 mph has been done, and drag racers accelerate much faster. It might be an overwhelmingly difficult engineering challenge to create the X1, but there is nothing on it that is technically impossible.

Is it unreasonable to think that a car can be created that would have a large advantage over a F1 machine? If so why?

 

[B Quiet N Drive]

You're not alone here. I drove the car last night for the first time and although I have no real life experience in a car anything like this car, none the less it just doesn't feel real to me, it doesn't feel enjoyable to me. I can definitely see how other people could get a huge kick out of it. But me personally, I just don't enjoy it. It feels gimicky.

 

[Shinzah]

X1 - Top Speed of what, 475kph? Give or take
Sauber C9 - 400kph at roughly twice the weight, and a fifth the downforce
F1 - 350kph rounded thereabouts, roughly same weight, less then half the horsepower, and a third the downforce


1500hp engines have been used across Group-C and F1

Adding Fancar technology to that, X1

Tires are moot. You can't call a car unrealistic based on flawwed logic. Unless you can give solid proof that a tire can't, EVER, IN THE HISTORY OF EVERNESS, take the sideforce generated by the X1, you can't argue the point. You're just throwing Semantics.

Then it doesn't look like the OP is the one who needs to learn how to drive the car. Just sayin'.

 

[reece22345]

The issue is that everyone has said that the X1 is possible given today's current technology, even Newey.

This would be the future of racing were we not bound by regulations, but one that is achievable today.

Quite simply, it's not possible with today's technology.

If you have to spend millions of dollars developing a tire that can handle the Gs and wear and speeds, and developing brakes that can decelerate at the in-game rate in mere seconds and creating some kind of superhuman that can drive at those Gs without dying... it's not "achievable" today.

People need to understand that the car IS fantasy because it doesn't exist, and couldn't possibly be built with today's technology. The same way that an Evo X wasn't possible in the 60s and would have been a "fantasy" back then. Doesn't mean the X1 might not be built as some billionaire's plaything, but it is still a fantasy car, even if possible in the future.

EDIT: You can't just throw the tire argument out by saying you couldn't possibly know if it's possible or not in the future. I could quite as easily say that you couldn't possibly know if wipeout vehicles or upside down flying mushroom cars might not exist in the future, however unlikely. It's STILL the realm of the impossible TODAY, thus making it fantasy.

 

[Stephen220378]

Why is my argument terrible? You said:

That because X has not been built in real life, X is not realistically possible.

This is obviously logically wrong. You're absolutely right that a neon F1 is pointless, but it completely wrecks your argument because it's possible to build, yet it does not exist.


What difference would it possible make? It's the same as above. If a team of engineers worked together to build a virtual model of car, does that make the resulting model of the car unrealistic?

This happens all the time. Things that do not exist are made virtually and simulated. These simulated things are quite realistic. As a matter of fact, I designed set of brakes discs a year ago. They only existed on my computer for months. Did that make them unrealistic? I was able to, and did, make them in reality later on.


You haven't seen me criticizing the game up and down the forums? Just look through my 1000 posts.

A 1500bhp fan car that can be driven as intended has never been done, therefore it remains unrealistic until it's been built and tested, otherwise it's just a big maybe it's possible. Adding neon lights and hydraulic suspension is just modifying an F1 car with simple components. It's two completely different scenarios.

Yes but you designed your brake discs with the intent of making them so you had to stick to realism. If however they couldn't be made when you tried then it was an unrealistic design that couldn't work.

 

[Exorcet]

Edit, also F1 cars has had hydraulic suspension....

Well, it's my fault for not being specific, but I was intentionally being ridiculous

A 1500bhp fan car that can be driven as intended has never been done, therefore it remains unrealistic until it's been built and tested, otherwise it's just a big maybe it's possible. Adding neon lights and hydraulic suspension is just modifying an F1 car with simple components. It's two completely different scenarios.

If that's the case, a 1500 hp fan car is just a matter of dropping that Ultima motor in a 2J. Just simple modification.

Yes but you designed your brake discs with the intent of making them so you had to stick to realism. If however they couldn't be made when you tried then it was an unrealistic design that couldn't work.

And who says PD didn't stick to realism?

 

[Shinzah]

The issue is that everyone has said that the X1 is possible given today's current technology, even Newey.

Once again, Don't go to an internet forum pretending to know more about engineering then someone obviously more qualified. Who am I going to listen to? These people with so many numbers in their names, that have next to no credibility in the whole world? Or the several professionals and designers and the one man whose won CHAMPIONSHIPS?

Snipped the semantical rest to save my time

 

[Stephen220378]

Excuse me. But wheres your three constructors championships across three teams in the highest level of motorsport.

I think I'd rather ask the man himself (if only I could..) then listen to STEPHEN...NUMBERS on an internet forum speculate on his motives.

Then why hasn't the man himself came out and stated without any doubt the X2010 can be built and driven as it was designed? Surely even PD would have let everyone know that the car is actually realistic.

 

[reece22345]

Once again, Don't go to an internet forum pretending to know more about engineering then someone obviously more qualified. Who am I going to listen to? These people with so many numbers in their names, that have next to no credibility in the whole world? Or the several professionals and designers and the one man whose won CHAMPIONSHIPS?

Doesn't surprise me that you're unable to listen to logical debate without touting Newey's greatness, and anything he does must be true and possible because he doesn't lie, or attempt to maybe bolster red bull's marketing or do anything like that.

If you look at the facts, you don't need engineering qualifications to see that the car is not possible today. It's unfortunate some people are so blinded by reputation that they refuse to enter into reasoned debate. Even when it's obvious.

Then why hasn't the man himself came out and stated without any doubt the X2010 can be built and driven as it was designed? Surely even PD would have let everyone know that the car is actually realistic.

See my post before, Newey's stated it's possible with today's technology. Redefine "today" to: Technology that doesn't exist today but still needs millions of dollars of R&D to actually work.

Go figure.

 

[Exorcet]

Then why hasn't the man himself came out and stated without any doubt the X2010 can be built and driven as it was designed? Surely even PD would have let everyone know that the car is actually realistic.

Isn't that PD's stance?

 

[Lillee]

This thread is chock-a-block wih so much seudo engineering knowledge and schoolyard bickering I've ever come accross.

Don't like that car? DON'T DRIVE IT! Next whinger

 

[Stephen220378]

Well, it's my fault for not being specific, but I was intentionally being ridiculous

If that's the case, a 1500 hp fan car is just a matter of dropping that Ultima motor in a 2J. Just simple modification.



And who says PD didn't stick to realism?

Yes, but would it actually be drivable? Plus the 2J's stats don't boast figures never recorded on a track, more importantly figures that not only break records but obliterate them.

 

[Shinzah]

Then why hasn't the man himself came out and stated without any doubt the X2010 can be built and driven as it was designed? Surely even PD would have let everyone know that the car is actually realistic.

Probably cause the man has something better to do then be undermined at every corner by someone with a whole lot of numbers in his name. Seriously. What does he have to defend to you?


The best arguement I've seen in this thread is "Newey says its possible so its not, heres some not proof, and some evidence that backs both sides equally."

 

[ZEROX]

I haven't used it since and I doubt I ever will use it again.

Don't want to use it?
Give it to meh!..lol....

Actually, X2010 is a fun car to drive. The speed, the tense, the pressure. Man, you can feel it. Although that's a virtual..

 

[Stephen220378]

Isn't that PD's stance?

Go read the X2010 in-game description. You'll see words like "imaginary" and "dream", at no point does it mention it's realistic and could be made so I doubt that's PD's stance.

 

[jacksmith]

It's dull, it is so far removed from a real car it lacks everything I love about them. You can't step the back out and slide, you can't take in how the car and track interact, there is no passion or love here. It's a go kart that goes veeeeeeee veeeeeee veeeeeee like a hyper active Mitsubishi from the challenges a while ago. It's arcade handling is simply idiotic and is far more fantasy than I ever feared, look a hairpin, weeeeeee 110 mph!! Total fantasy.

I drove it on tokyo and lapped it in 53 dead,never ever experienced such driving experience in a game before,if you want to enjoy it then you have to completely change the way you think about driving cars because there is no other car like this,they threw the rulebook in the rubbish bin then designed this car.Also I have suzuka-silver,monza-silver and nurburgring-bronze and I never drove it before the vettel challenge and yes you can take the hairpin at 100 mph if you have a car with that kind of downforce.If you told sir moss in the 60s that there is a new F1 car that can go around eau rouge flat out he probably will say that its not possible but look at the F1 cars today.I appreciate newey and PD for making the effort to create this car.

 

[Shinzah]

Doesn't surprise me that you're unable to listen to logical debate without touting Newey's greatness, and anything he does must be true and possible because he doesn't lie, or attempt to maybe bolster red bull's marketing or do anything like that.

Pull the fanboy card. Please. Every time someone can't get a decent response in, its "Oooh your a fanboy I can't argue with you." Give me a break.


If Newey was bold faced lying to promote Redbull, then Ferrari (Definately, given their involvement as well), Mclaren,Lotus, Virgin (Especially Virgin, given their whole fluid dynamics approach), HRT....Would be all over them and PD.

If this was a marketing scheme, Ferrari especially would demand that an FX2010 be designed by their technical team to compete with the X1. And Virgin be left out of a Virtual Engineering problem?

The fact is you don't know, I don't know, and nobody knows how real or not realistic is. But I will rather listen to PD and Newey then you, and thats about the only true fact this thread will ever produce.

If you look at the facts, you don't need engineering qualifications to see that the car is not possible today. It's unfortunate some people are so blinded by reputation that they refuse to enter into reasoned debate. Even when it's obvious.

The Thrust SSC was not "Possible." until MONTHS before its construction, even though the technology was years old.

The Space Shuttle was not "Possible."

The aptly named X-1 was not "Possible."

The Sauber C9 and Mazda 787b were not "Possible."

Nor the Tyrell P34 for that matter.

The F2007 cars getting around the new regs? People said not possible.

Apollo Moon Landing, The Hindenberg, The Wright Flyer.....

The technology for everything listed was availible for years, sometimes decades before any construction.

See my post before, Newey's stated it's possible with today's technology. Redefine "today" to: Technology that doesn't exist today but still needs millions of dollars of R&D to actually work.

Go figure.

He said "Today" Quote "Today" he which I'm sure literally means, if you build a wind tunnel, and poured an unholy budget into it, then in a few months, one of these could be built with "Today" technology.

 

[Stephen220378]

Probably cause the man has something better to do then be undermined at every corner by someone with a whole lot of numbers in his name. Seriously. What does he have to defend to you?


The best arguement I've seen in this thread is "Newey says its possible so its not, heres some not proof, and some evidence that backs both sides equally."

Omg you really are a tad delusional.

And you seem to speak about Adrian Newey as if you actually know what he's thinking. Very strange.

 

[zk523]

It pretty much unknown whether a human being could actually drive it at the speeds it's designed to hit, due to the massive G's it would pull and if a humans reaction time would be fast enough to actually control it.

You're not sure that there are humans that could sustain those types of Gs that it would produce? How many Gs are we talking about? Seems that fighter pilots can hold up to 9 Gs of vertical force using pressure suits and muscle techniques...I doubt a race car driver experiences even .5 Gs. Our friends over at Wikipedia informed me that the human body is more tolerant to horizontal Gs (which a race car driver would encounter)...between 12-17Gs. I highly doubt the X2010 is exceeding 4 or 5 Gs...

I thought the challenge was fun. It was quite a different experience from the other cars in the game. I've never driven it again though as it is just not my taste. I really don't care for the fgt either.

Is your avatar from the Homer japanese commercial episode?

I want Group-C to come back. Athletics have MMA; how the hell does motoring not have an "extreme" series where the restrictions are basically nil?

You must not watch a lot of modern day MMA...yes, you could say it is "extreme" but to say that the restrictions are basically nil is a bit stretching it.

See my post before, Newey's stated it's possible with today's technology. Redefine "today" to: Technology that doesn't exist today but still needs millions of dollars of R&D to actually work.

Go figure.

I dont get it...flying cars are pretty much a realistic possibility at this point, yet we cant make a car that drives like the X2010?

Disclaimer: I havent unlocked the car in the game and have only caught glimpses of it...maybe my tune will change after I drive it but from reading here, I doubt it.

 

[Shinzah]

Omg you really are a tad delusional.

And your post is a Tad flagged for AUP Violation.

 

[Exorcet]

Yes, but would it actually be drivable? Plus the 2J's stats don't boast figures never recorded on a track, more importantly figures that not only break records but obliterate them.

May or may not be driveable, who knows.

I don't get the rest of your post. The performance of the X1 doesn't really effect how realistic it is. If it was slower than a F1 car, it would be exactly as realistic/fake. What's important are the concepts* behind it.

* These will place performance limits on it. What I mean is just because what the X1 offers has not been achieved doesn't mean its performance can't be achieved.

Go read the X2010 in-game description. You'll see words like "imaginary" and "dream", at no point does it mention it's realistic and could be made so I doubt that's PD's stance.

I can't, no PS3 at the moment. Still, imaginary as in "does not exist in reality" and dream as in "possible but not achieved" don't point to it being unrealistic.