Update-Minolta Vs Sauber Revisted

[2_FAST_4_U]

After reading many various threads and comparisons over the internet of which car is the best, Toyota MINOLTA Toyota 88C-V Race Car '89 versus the Mercedes-Benz Sauber C9 Race Car '89 I decided to do "Non Bias" extensive testing myself...

Controlled Testing:
Both cars were new and pure bone stock with -0- mileage.
Both cars had NO oil change.
Both cars had NO equipment modifications added.
Both cars had no special tuning of any type.
Both cars used the original equipped tires.
And... Not even a car wash, tested directly from the dealership, again pure bone stock as they came.

Important Note: Other Le Mans type race cars such as the Nissans, 787B, Jag, Bentley, etc were not tested as it is usually common knowledge in general that the Minolta and the Sauber are the fastest of the bunch in most circumstances, however handling varies much in this regard.

The results:

1)
Test Track Machine Test 400-Minolta Average 3 Runs = 0.9.179
Test Track Machine Test 400-Sauber Average 3 Runs = 0.9.320

2)
Test Track Machine Test 1000-Minolta Average 3 Runs = 0.16.102
Test Track Machine Test 1000-Sauber Average 3 Runs = 0.16.175

3)
Test Track Machine Test Top Speed-Minolta Average 3 Runs = 233.9 mph
Test Track Machine Test Top Speed-Sauber Average 3 Runs = 235.2 mph (This Surprised Me)

4)
Vegas Drag Strip Machine Test 400-Minolta Average 3 Runs = 0.9.169
Vegas Drag Strip Machine Test 400-Sauber Average 3 Runs = 0.9.324

5)
Test Track "B spec Setting 3 Steady" 1 Full Lap-Minolta Average 3 Runs = 1.40.877
Test Track "B spec Setting 3 Steady" 1 Full Lap-Sauber Average 3 Runs = 1.40.212

6)
Test Track "B spec Setting 4 Fast" 1 Full Lap-Minolta Average 3 Runs = 1.40.448
Test Track "B spec Setting 4 Fast" 1 Full Lap-Sauber Average 3 Runs = 1.40.116

7)
Test Track "Me In A spec" 1 Full Lap-Minolta = 1.41.292
Test Track "Me In A spec" 1 Full Lap-Sauber = 1.41.038

8)
Le Mans de la Sarthe I With Chicanes 1 Lap Practice In "B spec"-Minolta = 3.20.792
Le Mans de la Sarthe I With Chicanes 1 Lap Practice In "B spec"-Sauber = 3.20.781

9) Further...
"Me Running In A spec" At Le Mans de la Sarthe I With Chicanes 1 Lap Practice... The Sauber was quicker around almost every time, however handling felt a bit better to me in the Minolta.

Test Conclusion
Without Bias... I was surprised that overall the Sauber wins for best fastest race car.

1ST PLACE:

2ND PLACE:

 

[Wadsy]

I don't know which care is 'better' but the Sauber wins for me as it is my favourite car from the GT universe. It is also the hardest car to win - beating Formula GT in GT4. Easy to get in the later games though.

 

[Raine]

Great research and write up. The 88cv was a real life failure and so it's surprising it's so good in GT4. It's specs must have plugged well into GT4. Though the 905 had potential to be the best in the game with it's power to weight but somehow the programmers made a shift lag appear. I look at the 88cv as a glitched car like the Escudo in GT2 and the Copperhead concept in GT1 and I refuse to use a car that was a failure in life that's senselessly great in a 'sim' game. Then again maybe they made the '88 cv' based on the real life...

Chassis 89CV-003

and called it the 88cv on accident because in reality the 89cv was pretty dang fast...

https://www.racingsportscars.com/chassis/89CV-003.html

 

[Raine]

Well I'm pleasantly surprised by the lap times and performance I'm getting out of the 905 now. I'm averaging 54-55 second laps at midfield and a 5:20's at nurb both on Free Run in sim mode not arcade with no quick tuning. Being that I use a TCS of 1 and the car is lightweight it will also have great tire life compared to the 88cv. So overall in time I may have set up a 905 that overall matches the C9 and 88cv. My next project will be the XJR9 when I get it.

I'm sure if I ran the 905 in arcade mode with +20% power and -20% weight I'd get 50 seconds or even 49 with the 905.

This is all aspec obviously. For bspec I'll have to raise ride height and adjust shock bound and rebound and spring tension in order to make the car stable in bspec for Sarthe races. I'm sure adding 50-75kg ballast will make the car less bouncy on Sarthe but at the cost of tire wear which I'll negate with lessening camber.

 

[submaniac93]

It's def not the 89sv just for the additional aero of the car. Canard and a very different spoiler shape. PD's however pretty notorious for inaccuracies in car specs (turbo 787b for example).
Plus, games don't take mechanical and manufacturing failures into consideration so comparing it to irl results i find to be slightly irrelevant.
905 do be shifting awfully slow though, makes no sense but i blame the rush of including it in the game before the international releases.

 

[Tornado]

As mentioned, no estimations of basically anything should be taken from how the FIA GT/Le Mans cars perform in any GT game from GT3 on. PD deliberately inflated all of the power of the majority of the post-Group C Le Mans cars typically by about 20-25%; presumably so they could have a single all-encompassing bloc of "Le Mans" cars across 20 years that they could intermingle among each other in race events.



For example, we know the power numbers of the Esparante GTR-1, CLK-LM and McLaren F1 GTR: 600-ish. We know that that was the power range because that's how they were regulated to by the FIA to race in FIA GT (the F1 in particular was rather infamous for being less powerful than the road car, and having the F1 LM be the 1995 race engine with the restrictors removed); and what they were constantly referred to as having in television broadcasts of BPR/FIA GT races. PD took those numbers and the presumably realistic torque curves attached to then; then inflated them by 25-ish percent to the mid 700s. But they didn't do it for the McLaren, so it still has its realistic power but now is hopeless to compete in game with the two cars it more-or-less was contemporary to and competitive against.

 

[dylansan]

Great research and write up. The 88cv was a real life failure and so it's surprising it's so good in GT4. It's specs must have plugged well into GT4. Though the 905 had potential to be the best in the game with it's power to weight but somehow the programmers made a shift lag appear. I look at the 88cv as a glitched car like the Escudo in GT2 and the Copperhead concept in GT1 and I refuse to use a car that was a failure in life that's senselessly great in a 'sim' game. Then again maybe they made the '88 cv' based on the real life...

Chassis 89CV-003

and called it the 88cv on accident because in reality the 89cv was pretty dang fast...

https://www.racingsportscars.com/chassis/89CV-003.html

I obviously can't really speak to the real-life performance of the car, but from what I can find, while it did get poor results when it raced the Fuji 500 miles and 1000km events, it did qualify 7th and 5th in those races, respectively, suffering mainly from mechanical problems (gearbox issues in the 1000km) during the actual races. Based on this write up from the latter race, it sounds like it was keeping up with the pack at least for the first hour.

If GT games simulated mechanical failures and gave different cars different reliability, we might see the 88C-V struggle a lot more, but from a pure performance perspective I don't know if the car is particularly exaggerated more than any other.

 

[Wadsy]

While the Sauber is my favourite car, it does have a major flaw. Tyres wear out faster than most other race cars in the case of GT4, though I cannot remember how well it performs in 5 and 6 since it has been a while since I have used it on those games.