Wtf! Why?

Why are the muscle cars like 69 camaro, 67 vette, 71 charger and others, why are the slow, and why did they make them suck in gt2? And is the pontiac gto in the game? if so how do i get it?
 
Do'nt know, pi$$es me off too, and as far as I know there are no pontiacs in the game at all.

Glad I'm no longer the only one b!tch'en about how the muscle cars got screwed in this game.
 
Note that the "Muscle cars" are very heavy. With the exception of the '67 Cobra, they all seem to be about 3200-3600 pounds. And they weren't originally designed for taking corners too well. So these dinosaurs are fun for gentle corners, not for tight circuits with lots of high-speed braking.
 
You need more traction than the game can give.Not just the old cars but any RWD car with good fat torque curve.look at the Supra.Gameshark the traction code to see what these cars can do at max trac.
 
Intersesting, I'll give it a try. I've hybrided some interesting muscle cars...way-out stuff, but I haven't messed with the traction codes too much; I'd rather mix and match parts.

Putting a Concept Car LM engine in the Neon is one of my favorites...that's as much power as that FF drivetrain config can handle! I tried a Viper and eventually a TVR Speed 12 engine; it was too much for the car with out resorting to 4WD or FR.

I've noticed weight is the primary enemy of speed. It's quite a difficult obstacle to overcome, especially if since the game uses the concept of weight transfer quite well.
 
Eddy, I take it u haven't looked closely at the Viper, the ideas of the people who designed it, and what it represents....:D
 
Muscle cars are an important part of motoring history.
Look what the Mustang and the Corvette have evolved into. The Viper is no more or less than the son of the Charger, Challenger and 'Cuda. Yes they are big heavy cars designed to drag race. The Viper just got some agility that its "fathers" lacked. Is it any different with people. AT first, the Viper was a vile handling monster. It also possesses a bigger motor than any of it's forbears.
Are there more agile cars?? Yes.
Has thirty years of technology improved the automotive breed? Yes.
GT2 did make muscle cars that suck. That's cool. There is much suckage (AZ-1 and BEAT single make races) in the game. There is also a lot of great, fun stuff. The creators of GT probably have never been subjected to a Vega wagon with a 350 small-block, or an AMC Gremlin with a 401 cid motor. 😈
Isn't diversity great? :D
 
If anyone has looked back into the history of Muscle Cars, Chrysler, Ford, And GM, You will see that as the late sixties early seventies came around, muscle cars were more ment for drag racing then anything. If you see what power options came in the cars, you can tell that they were ment for drag racing. They weren't ment to corner hard, or jump of the top of a hill. I am dissapointed however, that the Superbird, was ment for oval track racing and you couldn't do much to the car in the game, The Corvette, Camaro, and the Shelby cars were built for road racing and the Cobra truly sucks too in the game, the Challenger was a big Trans-Am racer in the 70's. Basically you can consider the muscle cars eye candy for your garage.
 
Well, the Nascar Superbirds had custom-built suspensions that were vastly different than what was in the road-going Superbird. But yeah, muscle cars were all about power and most likely were meant for the drag strip that we were promised but never got.

Still, if you're willing to do a lot of testing and tuning you can make those brutes go around the corners fairly well. Try putting in a 1.5 way LSD and soft racing tires (not super soft, they're too grabby) and firming up the springs for starters, that's what I do and it's had good results. Oh, and make sure you turn up the autogear setting too, most of them default at 1 or 2 when you install the racing transmission.
 
If you tune the muscle cars they perform pretty well. It's just all that weight and soft suspension that make them handle so bad when they're stock.
 
Back