WATT, Yes it really is that bad

  • Thread starter Thread starter ghostrider135
  • 51 comments
  • 8,112 views
The apparent slowness of this car reminds me of several other cars that seem to suffer with this issue. The Caterham Fireblade, for instance, supposedly has a 900cc superbike engine in it, but the tacho rotates about as fast as the minute hand on a clock face!

I tried to alleviate this with clutch and flywheel upgrades, but it's only marginally better. It completely kills the perkiness and get-go of the car. Perhaps there is a similar problem with the Tesla? I think it stems from setting the drivetrain inertia too high for the engine, such that it takes it an age just to impart enough kinetic energy to break idle! Except, with the Tesla, the torque of those motors should in fact be higher than your average petrol engine for a car that size, so something is clearly up...

I remember the S800 race car in GT4 was similarly broken, and that thing revved so freely in real life, thanks to the roller-bearing crank...

Once again, PD seem to struggle with the little things. This issue has been present since the first GT.
 
If you're familiar with the graphical representation of an internal combustion engine's torque curve, it resembles a "hump" beginning at the bottom and slowly curving upwards (as revs increase) to a point where it eventually begins to fall back again. Now picture that image switched upside down .... that's what the torque curve of an electric motor looks like ..... maximum torque at the lowest RPM diminishing as it gathers revs. Drag bikes with electric motors accelerate faster than many of their fuel burning counterparts.
 
Tesla is actually a pretty mean drift car on Tsukuba. You have to get used to it not having gears and it takes a bit of practice to stay in the powerband, but you'll be the only person drifting an electric car.
 
Electric cars = Bad, end of story.

Until hydrogen fuel cells become allot cheaper 0 emissions cars will always be useless nor truly 0 emissions.
 
Last edited:
HuskyGT
I have a solution for that. What about if the pit crew has an already charged battery ready for you, and they just change it? Just like the old cell phones, that you had to carry a few charged batteries with you.
Click to expand...

Back around 1992 or so, I attended a demonstration race for electric cars at the Long Beach Grand Prix (part of the IndyCar weekend). That's exactly what some of the cars did -- pulled in the pits, changed out battery packs and continued. That was for a 20 minute race though. :) 10 minutes, battery change, another 10 minutes.

As I recall, the fastest electric cars were hitting around 120 MPH on the front straight at Long Beach. The funny thing is to see a car going by doing 120 MPH with only wind noise and a little bit of electric motor whine.
 
250 GTO
he he. You can't really use this car in a endurance race where you would have to refuel (recharge).... well you could but you would loose by a margin of a couple of days :D
Click to expand...

Just so you know, endurance races are run based on how far you can travel in an allotted period of time (Highest number of laps). Not who can complete a fixed number of laps the fastest.

I'm not trolling your comment, just trying to clarify for the benefit of the community.
 
MintBerryCrunch
The lotus doesn't have a truck load of batteries to worry about.
Click to expand...

No, but the Elise has to worry about a heavy engine and transmission relative.

Do you have info on the car weights and weight distributions?
thanks!
:dopey:
 
Bob_760
Elise + 800lbs ≠ "extremely well-handling"
The tests I've seen of it (that weren't just thinly veiled advertisements with no actual test) basically agreed...
Click to expand...

strange...but other major car mags are saying the opposite about handling and acceleration.

linky?
thanks!
:dopey:
 
XProHawkX
Is anyone else dissapointed at the physics engine from this car? Yes, it only has a reported 288hp, but the 0-60 time should be 3.6sec and in GT5 the time is like around 7sec? :sick:
Click to expand...

There are a few cars which don't match up to their real life models. The Mclaren F1 won't go over 220mph on the game when in reality it's a 240mph car
 
Keep your PS3 running for 8 hours for the Tesla batteries to be recharged ingame ... .

[/end joke]
 
Let's change things up a bit. For a stock vehicle (no mods), I LOVE the Tesla Roadster. When I first jumped online, I used one to race my friend in a NSX Type R on Cape Ring. Being the first time I had driven the car, I lost, but only by a couple second margin. This car is pretty damn quick!

Handling really is all up to the driver. No blinking red downshift lights slowed me down at first, but I naturally started slowing down for corners more sanely instead of dive bombing through them. No blinking shift indicator is also why I suspect most people here don't like it.

Also, this car is direct drive, not CVT equipped. Meaning it only has a single 1:1 speed and it doesn't change.

Elise + 800 lb = not as great but still handles pretty well!
 
Last edited:
I don't like it because it revs to 14,000 RPM but I can't seem to get it to half that between corners. Its supposed to have all of its torque between 0-6000 rpm but my prius still feels faster even before I tuned it.
 
smilerftm
There are a few cars which don't match up to their real life models. The Mclaren F1 won't go over 220mph on the game when in reality it's a 240mph car
Click to expand...


Probably because the only straight long enough is too bumpy to acchieve it's max speed.
 
Negative. I've tested my F1 on route 7, the ring and le mans. It just won't do it. it runs out of revs in 5th and 6th gear only drops revs and loses speed.
 
Time_Attack
Negative. I've tested my F1 on route 7, the ring and le mans. It just won't do it. it runs out of revs in 5th and 6th gear only drops revs and loses speed.
Click to expand...

Wing package, man. When F1 team race at Monza, they have a different aero parts to get the car up to 240 mph. There's no way in hell F1 car can reach that speed without those parts.
 
XProHawkX
Is anyone else dissapointed at the physics engine from this car? Yes, it only has a reported 288hp, but the 0-60 time should be 3.6sec and in GT5 the time is like around 7sec? :sick:
Click to expand...

thats because the 1000+ batteries weigh soooo much. this also explains why it handle like - i quote - "a slippery turd" and a "greasy weasel" :)
 
Mine didn't have a wing while I was testing. I didn't really expect it to hit 240 but it wont even hit 230 which the street car was supposed to be able to do.
 
HN7
Wing package, man. When F1 team race at Monza, they have a different aero parts to get the car up to 240 mph. There's no way in hell F1 car can reach that speed without those parts.
Click to expand...

We-re talking about the McLaren F1 road car not a Formula 1 car, what you see is what you get and you can't go around changing the wing settings as it doesn't have any. In reality it can reach 240mph while on the game it will only ever go up to around 220mph and it hits that on SS7 long before you have to take your foot off the accelerator.
 
smilerftm
There are a few cars which don't match up to their real life models. The Mclaren F1 won't go over 220mph on the game when in reality it's a 240mph car
Click to expand...

What track did you try it on?
I'm not saying you're lying or anything but if you tried it on LeMans there's no way to reach close to your top speed with all of those bumps. Have you tried the straight on the nurburgring?
 
MintBerryCrunch
What track did you try it on?
I'm not saying you're lying or anything but if you tried it on LeMans there's no way to reach close to your top speed with all of those bumps. Have you tried the straight on the nurburgring?
Click to expand...

I have tried it on SSR7 and it refuses to hit 240 in the tunnel.
 
Did you use racing tires and changed the aero? The stock McLaren F1 also can't just reach 240 mph without some changes, the right conditions and other things.
 
Back