Gran Turismo 5’s Red Bull X1 Prototype Revealed (w/Specs!)

The no-holds-barred prototype developed by Polyphony Digital and Red Bull has been revealed in the latest issue of Car magazine in the UK! As you may recall, the X1 is the answer to Kazunori Yamauchi’s question: “If you built the fastest racing car on land, one that throws aside all rules and regulations, what would that car look like, how would it perform, and how would it feel to drive?”

It’s been developed in conjunction with Formula 1’s most renowned aerodynamicist, Adrian Newey, and their star F1 driver, Sebastian Vettel. So far, we’ve only seen teaser shots, but now we get a much closer look along with some impressive specifications:

  • Engine: gas turbine, 1483bhp @ 15,000RPM, 527lb ft @ 12,000RPM
  • Transmission: continuously variable, rear-wheel drive
  • Top Speed: 249mph
  • Weight: 545kg
  • Length/Width/Height: 4750/2180/980mm
  • Suzuka Lap Time: 1:11.540 (compare with Vettel’s 2009 F1 lap time of 1:30.833)
  • Special Features: enclosed wheels, “fan element” to increase low and medium-speed downforce (much like a vacuum cleaner)

The article also confirms that time frames in Gran Turismo 5’s races can be “compressed”, so you don’t have to stay up all night if you want to see the game’s impressive day/night transitions. Pick up the latest issue of Car (issue 580) now for a lot more details and in-depth discussion with Adrian Newey about the project. Big thanks to Rich (Loxstokk) for sending this in!

See more articles on , , , and .

Comments (302)

  1. RTSolvalou

    I drove this car in Ridger Racer Type 4 back in 99, it’s a blast.

    Also, in regards to pikes peak (and other old tracks which have not been confirmed), I wouldn’t count out a bit of DLC action from Yamauchi and his team, maybe even an advanced-features track editor upgrade. (I don’t want to spoil anything, but I figure few people will read this anyway)

    1. gtone339

      What you ahve said about driving it in Ridge Racer Type 4 is just a teaser of it really.

      Does like similar to it, like the appearance but lacks the juice to keep up with this prototype.

      Have a nice day :)

    1. Sigmaviper11

      The Escudo, while powerful, was built as a Pikes Peak trial car. Its made for dirt and doesn’t do that well on tarmac. The Escudo may very well be able to be made the more powerful car, but it’ll still come across in 2nd when it comes to a race between it and this thing.

      Although, the X1 doesn’t look like it will EVER see a rally track, and should Pikes Peak be a viable location/track, then I know which car I’ll be selecting when it comes to that.

  2. Sigmaviper11

    Btw, I just realized that at the end of the November 2nd announcement trailer, you can hear what sounds like a turbine spooling up. Could this be the mighty X1? idk. Won’t be long till we find out.

  3. Apollo33

    Does anyone think the damage physics and modeling are capable of dealing with this car??

    I’m thinking 240+mph into a wall could be EPIC!! :-D

  4. ken_b

    Yo Sigma, all good man. I would assume that you couldn’t completely damage this car, I’m sure they have implemented the same rules for damage for other manufacturers. Such the exterior damage but the car will always run. Perhaps also the relationship with Red Bull as the sponsor would also merit restrictions in allowing complete damage of this model. All in all, I’m in the camp of being bitter of not having a release date.

    1. Sigmaviper11

      Ya. I’m getting impatient but I’m trying to do my best. Honestly though, I would’ve prefered to have more features given out rather than the beast, but I suppose it creates enough controversy to keep people busy. Honestly though, could they get on it with announcing a new release date! JFC!!!!

  5. Sigmaviper11

    So, if this is a completely original design, and for that matter for Polyphony’s other completely original designs, will the damage be more extensive? I mean its thier own cars. They don’t have licensing restrcitions preventing them form completely destroying their own machines. So is there a chance that the X1, PDFGT, and possibly the F/ cars from GT3 should they all be featured. Would they have the most extensive damage of all cars in the game?

  6. ken_b

    car is awesome, I think the hating is derived from the let down of the games delay. Which reminds me….sigh, sure would be sweet to have a believable release date.

    1. Sigmaviper11

      Its not so much about whining as much as many of us believe that the specs givin are for a circuit derived setup, and that if you adjust the car for speed, it will go significantly faster. Besides, it makes for interesting physics conersations.

  7. Gt3luke

    Why can’t we all be happy with this car.
    Adrian fckng Newey has designed this car for us. So that we can race with it.
    I’m glad that they made this car and I would love to drive it. Let’s face it. Adrian Newey has a lot more knowledge of making a sportcar then the guys here. So stop whining how this car can be even faster and just enjoy it.

    1. Bernd

      You’re right, Adrian had a reason to design it that way, or does anyone here think he’d have a problem to design a 500mph-car??

  8. RADracing

    So I’m thinking not all the power is transmitted too the wheels but from the trust of the turbine that makes it possible to accelarate that fast. I’d hate to be behind that car on the starting grid since it will just blow my car backwards with all the trust exaust of the turbine engine. hehe!

  9. neema_t

    I thought the X-1 was designed as the perfect racing machine, assuming there were no restraints? If so, why:

    – Does the car have headlights? NASCAR and F1 cars don’t need headlights and I’m sure the car would be lighter without them. I suppose for endurance racing they have a purpose but how economical is a gas turbine and how much fuel can something this light hold?

    – Doesn’t it have movable aerodynamic foils (front and rear wings, etc, like the Chaparral 2F) or a wing stalling device (like the ‘F Duct’) so they can reduce the downforce drag and therefore increase top speed when they need it?

    Still, good to see they remember the whole sucker car thing.

    Oh and I didn’t see any mention of ride height control, something Red Bull Racing was accused of having earlier this F1 season, it would help keep the ground clearance low when the car starts to lighten up as the fuel runs out during the race.

    1. brainfade

      you must be an a-level student with those kind of anti-establishment qeustions”

      1) The car is aimed to do what F1 cars arent allowed to have = headlights… being able to race in darkness, notice how it looks more like an lmp1 yeah? Also, this just shows how much you know about motorsport, there have been countless successful gas turbine cars in Indycar, Can-Am and to an extent F1, 60’s and 70’s had wins for such cars in Indycar and Can-Am… they NEVER had fuel issues, they turned out to be more efficient then the piston driver cars.

      2) F-duct is only viable if a wing has two planes, here it doesn’t and also theres no need for an F-duct with that much power and speed, if would only want an F-duct if it was competing for an edge, also, it doesnt need movable aero because it already has the fan, so theres little need for what your listing there, also its obvious that there ARE movable aero parts, its a race car for god sake, it HAS to have the adjustability.

      As for ride height adjustment, thats simple not needed anymore has what people don’t understand is that it is the natural suspension geometry of the Red Bull that creates this effect, something which is so complex it took them 3 years to perfect.

    2. neema_t

      You must be an arrogant arse with that kind of ‘high and mighty’ attitude.

      1. F1 cars aren’t allowed headlights, yet can still race at night. If this is the ultimate regulation-free racing car, why not just say ‘hey, we’ll just put floodlights around every course we take this thing to’, much like they did with F1? Worse things have happened in concept cars, like the GT by Citroen concept running a power train that doesn’t exist yet, for example.

      ‘Just shows how much you know’? What are you, an encyclopaedia or just incredibly stuck up? Fine, so I forgot that some gas turbine cars have competed in the past, please find it in yourself to forgive that transgression.

      2. Plenty for me to pull you up on here, so I’ll do so with relish:
      “F-duct is only viable if a wing has two planes”- Back that up, please? I haven’t seen or read anything of the sort. It may be true but if it is, I haven’t seen it.

      “No need for an F Duct with that much power and speed”, but if they were creating the ultimate restriction-free race car, an F Duct would still allow them to run huge amounts of aerodynamic downforce, yet cancel it for straight line speed. No, I think you’ll find that as a car gets faster, the aerodynamics have a lot to do with it’s top speed, and an F Duct would allow it to go faster, you can’t deny that.

      “only want an F Duct if it was competing for an edge”- This is a load of crap, the F Duct was created to neutralise the downforce and therefore drag of the rear wing when it wasn’t required, thus giving McLaren that advantage, but that doesn’t mean the implementation of such a device has to be limited to gaining an advantage, I’m sure you’ll find that the Audi Quattro’s AWD system was devised to give them an advantage, yet eventually everyone used it because it was effective.

      “doesn’t need movable aero”- No, it also doesn’t need a 1000bhp+ gas turbine, but they’re creating the ultimate restriction-free racing car here: Every little helps, but this would help a lot. It was effective enough to get banned, so why not?

      “it already has the fan”- Yes, but it also has aero parts for downforce, if the angle of attack of these can be flattened then it gains a distinct advantage.

      “it’s obvious that there ARE movable aero parts, it’s a race car for god sake, it HAS to have the adjustability”- I think you’re getting confused. I mean movable as in driver-controlled, very movable, to the extent that a wing that creates 500kg of downforce can be moved so that on straights it creates 0kg, such devices have been outlawed in the past and they’re still banned in F1. Of course, you’re going to point out that drivers can adjust their wings from the cockpit, but not as much as to be advantageous. Look up the FIA regulations and you will see that movable aero is banned, hence the necessity of the F Duct. You may also think I mean movable aero as in adjustable aero, but I don’t, of course race cars can be set up differently for different circuits but these types of adjustments can’t be made by the driver in the middle of a lap.

      3. Fair point here, but at the same time is it not possible that such artificial devices such as ride height control or live adjustment of suspension geometry could provide an advantage? Such as, for example, the ability to flatten the camber on straights (thus maximising the tyre contact patch for maximum traction)? It may not be necessary in F1, but if this is the ultimate restriction-free race car, why not do it anyway?

      Brainfade indeed.

    3. brainfade

      awww does someone not like being corrected? yes this is meant to be a perfect race machine, but also think of it personally for Newey: he won’t want to reveal too much or let it get in the way of a championship bid.

      as for the headlights, think of what the positioning of their weight and the bodywork around the wheel will do:
      -the weight hanging away from the centre of the car with the wheel between has a small amplifying effect on the downforce, also, having the wheels exposed creates drag, so the thinking behind using the headlights is the same placing the brake pads on the lowest point of the disc. understand no? remember, anything which carries a weight can be used to gain a small performance advantage.

      the fact clearly do not understand the f-duct shows something: you’ll notice that with standard F1 rear wing there are two planes, the reason is that if it was one single plane then at higher speeds the air would not follow the underside of the wing profile and ‘stall’ (not creating the low pressure required for downforce at highspeed) hence why two planes are needed, the gap feeds air up the top profile to keep air running along the profil. the f-duct works on the principle of using air to either push down on the top plane to close the gap between the two planes or forcing air between the two planes to push the airflow away from the top profile to create the stalling effect. sorry if my explanations crap but its easier to explain with images. but there is only one wing plane on this car because he has minimised the need for wings by using a fan and a ground effect.

      the rest of your rubbish i cant be bothered to read, but sorry about the aggressive reply

    4. neema_t

      A ‘bit’ is an understatement, brainfade is a typical child who thinks he knows more than he does. I can’t imagine why someone with any knowledge would act so bizarrely instead of take the opportunity to educate someone calmly or reasonably, instead brainfade just hops on his adolescent high horse and adopts the usual internet attitude: Everyone else is stupid so I’ll attempt to shout them down.

      Congratulations, you’ve just discredited yourself by acting like a child, maybe if you could keep your toys on the inside of your pram people will actually listen to you in future. As it is, acting like a know-it-all 15 year old doesn’t make you look cool, it just makes me and doubtless others question why you’d bother posting on a forum-style comments board at all? What kind of discussion are you trying to have here? Why would you dismiss my post as ‘rubbish’ instead of take the time to read it? Is it because you clearly know everything so no one else has any valid points at all? That attitude has a history of not really working out too well, so good luck with that.

      Kindly provide references and sources for all the points you’ve raised, until then I’ll politely consider them irrelevant. Futhermore, you may wish to remember to wind your neck in should you ever find yourself out in public. In fact you’d do a lot better in interacting with people if you could keep all those hormones in check.

    5. brainfade

      yes i know guys, sorry about all the rudeness, if it helps get rid of the hard feelings, im actually meeting Adrian Newey next week, going to see if i can get him to talk about the car.

  10. brainfade

    Other aerodynamicist aren’t impressed by this at all:

    One ( names are not going to be given out because i know what a certain minority people on this forum, who stoop to low levels of douche-baggery, they strike fear into commonsense and annoy the living hell out of most people, these people are simply known as ‘TEH TROLLS'(sorry about the tangent) ) who is well respected with a solid successful background in sportscars said:

    “Amazed someone like Newey can’t get away from the basic F1 archetype. Looks draggy, and with 1483 hp available it should go way faster than 249, which seems to confirm the suspicion as I suspect they at least ran some rudimentary figures to calculate Vmax. Why not make the roll over hoop conformal to the roof? F1 rear wing in basic execution, why not full width or even active aero with elements that conform to the body to reduce drag?”

    …essentially the reaction within motorsport is that this car is no where near what would be possible and Newey has definately held back here and it only resembles the basic F1 archetype mainly for marketing reasons, think of it, if something thats supposed to be an ultimate F1 car looks nothing like an f1 car… then whats the point?!

  11. dearlybeloved

    So adrian newey is behind this design right? well expect it to be so lightweight that it will probably breakdown left right and centre! and that is where we can see if damage/mechanical breakdowns are so prominent within the game.

  12. Stune

    Wow looks impressive. Although I cant help but worry what will happen to the game scoreboards. Every track will be dominated by this thing and if an f1 car cant get within 20 seconds neither will anything else in the game. Could also be a problem in online races if they are not careful.

  13. Icant55

    Oh boy nice car but a citroen part 2…. alot of development in these fantasy cars while delaying the game! GT5 will is delayed again BUT wait “check out the new car that i just help build!!!” and you cant drive it because…………………………..The game isnt out! Such torture!

  14. NBH

    Makes more sense with the video clip where we here Vettel talking about 400km/h, I guess he is talking about this car?

    And if GT5 is that realistic then none of us should be getting near Vettels time bearing in mind he’s an F1 driver and we aren’t!

    1. wakenabeb

      It did say that that time that was 20 seconds faster was one of his first few runs. Not sure where I read it, so it seems there is plenty more to improve on

  15. SavageEvil

    I’m pretty sure they have a prototype built, seriously didn’t Kaz and Co. have a hand in the Citroen GT? These numbers, you’d have to be very physically fit in order to pilot that thing.

    Too many complainers in here, what are you crying about? Grow up and go read a book, everything made is usually drawn on paper with at the time ridiculous claims. Cars these days are digitally produced first and tested that way using advanced physics before they are even built.

    Well limiting that car to 250mph is a good thing, it will be a wonder to see what happens if it goes any faster, either the tires will disintegrate or something else could happen related to stability of the vehicle. Veyron’s top speed is now 268 mph, it can barely go any faster friction is it’s biggest problem and finding tires that won’t liquefy at sustained high speeds.

    I wonder how you will get that car in game, it will definitely be a hard car to come by and it should have it’s own races as nothing else can compare to it’s road holding capabilities.

  16. Skymeat

    I’m quite surprised they didn’t dimple the exterior. That would have given it a few more MPH. Come on – No rules, let’s see it all out.

    1. Veitchy

      It wouldn’t really need an air brake as it has so little mass. A Veyron is over two tonnes. combine this with superior downforce to hold it onto the road in corners and you wouldn’t need to scrub off as much speed (all things being relative). put all of these together that the brakes themselves should be able to work pretty efficiently.

      Dimpling would be really cool. Although, considering that this still had to be able to perform within the bounds of GT5s physics engine, perhaps more elaborate factors (like dimpling) aren’t practically computable.

  17. NoonenF1

    I see a fun “online” track day at the Test Course with players trying to find the fastest top speed with this thing. And actually any course for that matter going for best lap times.

  18. GeGuy

    It looks similar to an old anime called “Cyber Formula”
    Enclosed canopy, active downforce. Wonder if there’ll be active suspension?

    1. gtone339

      More like a Peugeot 908 HDI FAP’10 Le Mans Prototype, plus any modern F! vehicle = An ULTIMATE F1+LMP PROTOTYPE RACE CAR!!!


  19. fredyellowone


    “that’s the point asshole”
    “lighten up douchebag”
    “you friggin moron”
    “you people are retarded”

    No one can moderate this impolite juvenile?

  20. Mutimy

    it looks like there is different colors of it, the pictures are blue with colored redbull logos and the video is all carbon with white logos

    1. rydeen

      Maybe we’ll get a Red Bull challenge?!?! Just like we have the karting challenge and Jeff Gordons whatever challeng…

  21. Puzyaka

    249 mph with insane amounts of downforce actually makes sense. Remove the wing and set the downforce to minimum and aerodynamic drag will be significantly reduced. I wonder what the fuel consumption is… I bet it’s gpm rather than mpg.

    1. Puzyaka

      lol… when you run out of fuel it will be mts (miles till stop) I hope that thing can do a lap or two around the Ring on a full tank of fuel.

    2. Sigmaviper11

      Maybe that turbine is powered by Dark Energy or something. Now that you say that though, it has me worried, specially if they make the fuel consumption realistic. Maybe they’ll come up with some ambiguous reason to get 20miles to a tank on car that would empty its tank on 0-250mph run. This car has me more worried than happy though.


    3. Stune

      Something i was thinking, it may be 545kg without fuel but it will need quite a bit of fuel to do a whole lap of the ring or even Lemans. Will the fuel tank be big enough?

  22. Circa1990

    Everything looks awesome to me but I’m thrown off by their choice of a gas turbine engine… I was hoping for something a little more conventional.
    Can’t wait to try it out though or see some gameplay videos of it.

    1. Veitchy

      A gas turbine makes sense, as it has less moving parts and provides the desired performance more efficiently. As it doesn’t have to comply to any regs, refueling needs go out the window too. I cant imagine it will get great millage (even for a rececar) but it seems that wasn’t the point. It’s one of those wonderful ‘what ifs’?

  23. Flavio Briatore

    I thought Gran Turismo was ‘the REAL driving simulator’, obviously it is now ‘the fictional driving simulator’. Save the Cloud Cuckoo Land cars for MIDNIGHT CLUB, Kaz.

    1. HugoStiglitz_420

      you friggin moron, it still uses the same unbeatable phenomenal physics that it uses for real cars so 1 car doesn’t make a whole game something it is not. you people are retarded

    2. Sigmaviper11

      It is a simulator! How do you think new supercars are built!? They run them through a friggin simulator! Its a fictional machine yes, but the physics are no less accurate.

    3. grog

      Think of it as a concept car, we’ve seen tons of then, like the silly nike concept car in gt4 its nothing new. Plus one example might just be built

  24. FelipeJardim_BR

    Even with crazy downforce, this thing still has 1500hp. I bet you getting up to 249 (on the ring) woulnd’t take to much. and turns you normally whip with F1 will be even more whippable…remember it’s 20 seconds faster than F1 so you can make your estimated lap time based on that difference.

  25. GT'ireland

    if that machine is in the game that would be lethal…i wonder how many races you’d have to do to get the credits to buy it,lovely piece of kit there i have to say.

    1. Sigmaviper11

      If for some weird reason, PD decides to make it a car available for sale (which I highly doubt) I would imagine the list price to be potentially in the tens or hundreds of millions of credits. Also, I have a pretty good feeling this car will be restricted from the ability to be gifted.

    2. J-KiLLA24

      @ Sigmiviper11, yea it probably would get restricted to be gifted away :( lol though, i think this will be a car you have to win, and can’t purchase.

    3. GT'ireland

      true enough guys, it would be more likely the car that you win,like complete the game 100% or the prize for the endurane races,who knows,but what a beautiful design none the less.absolutely stunning.

  26. Mr Latte

    Very nice but Im concerned about the fuel consumption and has it got an iphone plugin, ha haa…

    As for the car in the game.
    Will be nice racing against the Ferarri F1 and cars like the Veyron / Mclaren in this.

    1. viejaloca

      Actualy, fuel consomptin wih a jet engine…this thing wouldn’t last on an endurance race becuase the amount of fuel a jet engine can chug within an hour of driving! the pit stops would easily keep it from winning.

    2. brainfade

      your forgetting that there were gas turbine cars winning at indy in the 60’s and 70’s, they went longer on fuel than the conventional engines

  27. Driftster

    I was under the impression that Gran Turismo 5 was going to be a driving/racing simulator? Thus far, there has been nothing released thus far that indicates it is anything more than a chance for 13 year olds to drive million dollar cars into walls effortlessly while still winning a race. Seriously, a 1500hp CVT F1 fantasy car? Is this San Francisco Rush or a simulator?

    1. Don_Juan

      wtf? a car going over 60 mph in a racing game?? is this crazy taxi or a aimulator?.. WHERES THE POINT DUDE?!?!

    2. HugoStiglitz_420

      that’s the point asshole, IT IS A SIMULATOR!!! that’s why they wanted to create it, to simulate what it would look & drive like in real life. lighten up douchebag

    3. Driftster

      LOL alright kiddo, you must have had a blast driving that Nike car around too right?

      Tell me to lighten up? I’ve been waiting on a driving simulator, not some fantasy adventure game with jet cars. But naturally the crowd that finds “4 minute nuremburg ring laps” acceptable would see that this physically impossible creation as something to oogle.

    4. SmilerFTM

      What exactly is physically impossible about this car? CVT? No, already ben done on trains and motorbikes. Fan assisted downforce? No, already been done on F1 cars. 1500bhp? No already been done on F1 cars. 545kg? No, already been done on a numbeer of cars. I’m not really sure why you think it would be impossible to make it, the only thing about it that would make it almost impossible to make is the cost

    5. TheIshter

      Jesus Christ. Over ONE THOUSAND cars in a game with real life cars.

      Add one theoretical car.



      Don’t use the car if you don’t want to. The physics wont change just because they added a single theoretical car.

    6. Themadcat001

      @ Driftster Yeah, Umm, I’m not sure how much more of a simulator you want, they also have another 1000 cars, I guess you forgot about that, ando not all of them are million dollar 220+ mph cars, guess you’re blind as a bat, I’ll remember that when I’m in a CRX or an Exige on a small course with corners trying to get a good lap time and think to myself “damn, if only PD didn’t try to put so many million dollar cars into the game…” Or any of the other 1940-1980s cars, You sir were done with your comment before you even started, sorted ended your own statement when you complain about “nothing released thus far” Ummmm… LOL we know about 240 of the cars, I’m sure the dodge ram fits into that “Million dollar car” thing too eh? Man you sure are dull.

  28. Red_9

    And THIS is why GT takes so long to come out; because PD takes their game way too seriously and treats it like it’s a television show.

  29. SmilerFTM

    Not sure a human could drive this in real life. He’d have his brain pushed out through his ears by the lateral G’s it creates.

    1. Bernd

      Humans can take a lot of G’s if they are trained enough. Fighter-pilots sometimes have to endure +12 G. Of course, their G-suit helps a lot

    2. grbmrdj

      i read an article by a fighter pilot on g forces on the net, ill just paraphrase a bit for you. lateral gs aren’t nearly as bad a vertical g’s, and there is a huuuge difference in sustained g’s and g’s lasting a under a second. there was heaps more on this, it was quite interesing. thats basically all i remember.

  30. hsoomal



    oh no, wait, they made this?


  31. Brad

    Ok, I am glad the car is in the game, it will be a good benchmark, I am amazed and excited about the collaboration with Red Bull / Newey, but honestly I am completely not interested in using it. It looks like it belongs in F-Zero, not GT.

    Build a real one, put it on a track… then I’ll convert. ;)

  32. pasigiri

    I absolutely LOVE the side view. And with the Chaparral 2J trickery too …. oh this car is going to be sick.

  33. s2k2k3

    This will run the Ring in the 4’s easy (virtually).

    249 is definately slow for the weight and power specs. The Veyron beats that with 2/3 the power and a much larger frontal area. Even if the CD on this car was worse than the Veyron, the total drag should still be less. Especially since this car was designed by “Formula 1’s most renowned aerodynamicist”. Unless top speed was totally thrown away in favor of insane downforce…

    1. Veitchy

      The car could probably be geared for much higher speeds. The main difference between this and a Veyron is downforce. Sure, the Veyron has a wing here and a vent there. But we’re talking racecars, and we’re talking real downforce. A Porsche 962 has real downforce. Its a ground effect vehicle. It forces and sucks itself onto the road. This results in magnificent handling. The tradeoff of high downforce is that you will limit your speed, as the downforce itself has weight, figuratively speaking. As this car was designed to go fast round corners, it needs the downforce.

    2. Veitchy

      For what its worth, You don’t need massive straight line speed in most, if any, forms of circuit racing. Going fast helps, but corners is where you make up your difference. For example, Fuji has the longest straight of any FIA F1 Sanctioned course. F1 cars aren’t allowed under current regs to run on anything longer. Mulsanne has chicanes in it now to limit speed. ect, ect. The last time a top tier track car cracked 400 KPH was a privateer Peugeot Le Mans car in 1988. It was a couple of years before the chicanes were put in and they figured that if they could achieve it, the record would stand damn near forever. They set the car up with low downforce, skinny tires and a qualifying-spec engine. It managed to crack 400 KPH and the engine blew later on in the race. In all other areas of the race it was crap. it got overtaken everywhere. These days, there is no real point having a track car that can pull much over 300-320 KPH, as you don’t need the speed.

      Don’t get me wrong, speed is a wonderful thing and I hope the human race continues to pursue it in all forms in perpetuity, but a quick race car isn’t always a fast one.*

      *Drag racers will understand this distinction, but for the rest of us: In motorsport terms, quickness is the length time it takes a car to cover any given distance. Fastness (or speed) is the rate at which it covers it. Don’t confuse them, you’ll impress the ladies and sound more intelligent.

    3. Themadcat001

      You don’t need it to go 300 mph, its not a dragster with alcohol, F1 cars will destroy a Veyron on any laptime, even if the SS veyron is faster, speed isn’t what gets you there, it the time it takes you (Which is determined by a lot of things, this car will get from 0-150mph before the veyron would even reach 60, and I imagine this car nearly breaks your neck from the Gs it can take around a corner.

    1. Jordan

      Great point – with GT5’s simulated pit crews, I wonder if they’ll be shown removing the wheel covers during a stop?

    2. Sigmaviper11

      Ok, the front looks like a type of snap or screw on plate that can be easily removed. But what about the back. The Carbon Fibre panel in the back looks quite well secured.

    3. Dave-o

      Also fuel economy would be a significant factor if you were designing it to win a no regulations race. A slower car that needs to pit less often may be superior

    4. neema_t

      Didn’t the old Jaguar Group C cars with covered wheels allow the rear suspension to be disengaged to drop the rear axle when changing the tyres, or did I make that up?

  34. whiteman

    If the Can-Am series was still running with it’s anything goes rules and limits on budget being what ever you can afford, this might be the kind of lunacy we would see on track.

  35. Dog Face

    So, just make up a load of arbitrary figures and say it’s the fastest car in the world around Suzuka………sounds like something a 10 year old would do. Now I can see why this game has been delayed so long, all this willy nillying. Real cars on a track please, Kaz.

    1. IVKillerVI

      You’re quite the whiny little ass aren’t you?

      Damn, I’m beginning to regret signing up for this site. So many people with nothing better to do than bitch.

    2. Palleraa

      I say there is a good chance this will be build as an actual prototype later on. It will of course not be tuned and optimized to perfection, but I think they can pretty easy and affordable build the X1 and drive it around to set some records.

    3. Veitchy

      I get that it seems glib to have such performance from a digital car. I guess the only caveat is that it is built within the restraints of the most realistic console simulation physics engine available. In my book that counts for something.

    1. Dunavantj

      I think LOW 5’s will be quite achievable once your used to the ridiculous speed. Imagine driving that and then going to a 500pp car, ugh.

    2. EiFFeL

      True but physics are very forgiving in GT4. In GT5 they seem more though (more like reality…). The times you can get in GT4 are not realistic. It seems solved in GT5 (I love to compare real times with the game times :))

    3. Sigmaviper11

      You know what, I’d say a 4 minute time is possible based off of Vettel’s given lap. But it won’t be kind. Even though its technically “only a videogame” it will have the hairs on your arms and neck standing on end for the whole of those 4 terrifyingly fast minutes. Whether you’re skeptic or not.

    4. Veitchy

      I think the setup would be the greatest challenge. The ‘Ring is pretty poorly surfaced and very undulating. Alot of racecars tend to run relatively high suspension there. They have to, its actually like driving on a public road as opposed to a nice, flat, modern racetrack.* This car, along with its natural ground effect, seems to have some sort of active vacuum to suck it onto the road. Now, unless you wanted to run a very stiff suspension setup, you would have to raise this cars suspension to give it adequate damping, travel and overall compliant handling. I wonder how far off the ground the car can get before the vacuum becomes ineffective?

      *Yes, I know that the ‘Ring is a one way public toll road from time to time. What I meant to say is that its (crap and varied) surface is actually kind of representative of the average conditions encountered on many public b-roads. I figured this is one reason why it is a popular place to test the setup of production cars.

  36. Circuit*star

    Awesome…but the turbine engine wasn’t the 1980s BMW was making the same Bhp with 4 cylinder and a turbo for f1 ….now days they can produce 12cylinder engine with 2kbhp+..but nevertheless innovation is the way to go and just like Toyota Moving forward..

    and in another note:
    REthink Green Hybrid F1 should be the way of the future

    1. BWX

      I think a turbine was necessary because they use the suction of the turbine at lower speeds to produce downforce. I didn’t read the article though, that’s just a guess.

  37. Tom Ste... GT5!!!!

    I know its a car with no frictional laws, or laws of any sort that would be present in the real world. But come on polyphony and red bull it looks gorgeous in my opinion so make a real model it’ll get the press excited. =D

  38. ken_b

    Wow, now that is one fast sled!! Can’t wait to beat Vettel’s time..I mean, can’t wait to drive that car. Oh wait, no release date in sight, thus I’ll keep dreaming. Come on PD/Sony, throw this dawg a bone!!!

  39. John Marine

    This is absolutely crazy, like the Caparo T1 from Hell. I would have to wonder if the human body could be fit enough and potent enough to sustain the forces this car can produce. A car like this would be as extreme to race on real-world tracks as any ship in the WipEout games on anti-gravity tracks. Even the Batmobile would be cowering in shame seeing this beast.

    1. HugoStiglitz_420

      LOL yea like a caparo T1 that doesn’t kill the driver & require surpervision by the national guard everytime it’s driven lol

    1. Erik

      THE FINAL GAME IS WITH SONY, WAITING FOR A WINDOW TO BE PRINTED ON 6 MILLION BLURAY DISCS !!!!!!! So no, they can’t release the game because they can’t print it on toilet paper…

  40. King Goeres

    Damn, I hope it’s some platinum reward or something like that. Something to make you want to grab that last trophy :D

    1. grog

      Yeah it seems like the same sort of concept, and the should have described it as chaparral inspired instead of like a vacuum cleaner.

  41. bucketseat

    Very impressive…when do we get a chance to drive (in GT5 terms anyways) it?

    Do you suppose that it will be the last car unlocked after completing (or nearly) the game?

    Any word on a ship date? Sad to say, but it was to have been two weeks from tomorrow! Drat!

    1. HugoStiglitz_420

      I hope not. 100% completion is insane that anyone @ all does but @ least 80% of people that get GT5 won’t get 100%. It would be stupid to allow such a small number of people get to drive this amazing car. If they do that, at least make it the last test for the S licence so we all can drive it.

    2. Sigmaviper11

      @HugoStiltz_420, I doubt it will be a 100% only machine. I’m beting it maybe a reward for completing a certain 24 HR race. Or maybe for completing all endurance events should they bring out prize cars for completing Halls (a la GT3). The Polyphony Formula GT has been dethroned, and prologue seemed to send a pretty clear message that F1 may have a significant enough presece to warrant the ability to purchase them. So, I wouldn’t count on a 100% completion (though its almost guranteed that acheiving 100% will net you one) being the only way to get one.

    1. FlareKR

      @ GoldUltima
      You’ll have a problem with that. Seems like some people here are gonna do the same thing. No worries, I’ll be watching your fiery funeral on the first turn on Suzuka. Oh what a tragedy – for the car, that is.

  42. Sigmaviper11

    How the hell do you only get 250mph at 545kg and near 1500bhp!? THIS THING SHOULD BE CAPABLE OF ABOUT 400MPH!!!!!

    1. Dog Face

      KKRT, not really:

      Veyron Super Sport does 268mph
      Veyron does 253mph
      Dauer 962 LM does 251mph
      Koenigsegg CCXR does 250mph

      “air resistance force” seems to allow these to go faster.

    2. Circuit*star

      Yes very true but this car is a like a vacuum the faster the more air pressure, the more air pressure,more friction, more friction, equals faster cornering speed but less top speed and acceleration.

    3. Sigmaviper11

      It’s Polyphony’s/Redbull’s car. I expect it to be fully adjustable, including those vacuum systems outputs. Adjust the gearing, aero set up, suspension and that vacuum system and it should get pretty damn close to 400mph. I mean a 1000 hp Veyron that weighs what. . . two tons? That thing does over 250mph. In GT4 I had an Audi R8 LMP with 1000hp @ 1000kg and it cruised at around 284mph. So. . . half the weight ish and apprx 40-50% bump in power, I’d say a minimum speed of 340mph for a top end should be attainable.

    4. Circa1990

      But since it is so light, it needs the downforce to keep it on the ground at top speed no? So it needs just enough downforce to keep it from becoming unstable and probably limits the top speed it can do?

    5. Sigmaviper11

      Maybe, but would it? I mean the car has a lot of natural downforce so I’m not entirely sure. I mean you reduce as much downforce as possible so you minimize drag. But the may the machine is built as long the ground clearance at the front of the car is lower than that at the back of that at the back of the car, then it should create enough downforce to keep it stuck. (I’m sitting here thinking Test Course not, something bumpy like Circuit de la Sarthe). I mean if by some means the front end lifted at all higher than the rear or possibly even cam even with it, the car may become airborne. Otherwise, the car should be well planted on the ground, and as long as the bias is downforce, the faster you go the more you will get. I would imagine bottoming out would be about equally as fatal though.

    6. BWX

      Even in a vacuum you need 4 times the power to go twice the speed.. it’s a law if physics. So when you take into consideration air resistance.,… It’s just not going to be double the speed or whatever.

    7. Sigmaviper11

      So, about 500bhp will get you up to 400mph? Really? I wouldn’t think it would take that much. And yeah while while 400mph is considerably exaggerated I don’t see why it wouldn’t be able to tap the 320mph mark or 340mph mark. I mean yea, it takes a lot of horse, but the car also has a smaller surface area at the front (specially in comparison with the Bugatti Veyron) and is considerably lighter. That has to count for something. I mean ok. The most conservative Top End I could think of would be 285mph roughly.

      I suppose whenever GT5 comes out and we get our hands on that X1 maybe take a little online meet to the test course? It’ll be a fun experiment trying to see what the thing can really do. Plus the evidence will speak for itself. At least, within Gran Turismo’s physics engine anyway.

      Btw, I know a lot of it can be done in theoretical physics calculations but, how did they figure 4x the power = 2x the speed?

    8. GT5Canuck

      Maybe Kotaku could do a slowed down video of it doing 400 mph, then claim Sony/Red Bull were putting out an inferior product because it moved so slowly?

    9. Sigmaviper11

      lol. No, you can’t run an engine without air, but he may have a point in I may be over estimating the cars capabilites. It just seems like it maybe one of those things where science may have been slightly off and has to re evaluate a few variables. or maybe I do.

    10. Erik

      It’s not only about gearing, it’s mostly about the mass to drag ratio actually. If the car was heavier I bet it would go a lot faster (only it would take more time to accelerate and it wouldn’t be as agile in corners).

  43. ferhound psnid

    Thats very cool, good idea Kaz. Nice to see they implemented the day-night advance frame. I tought for a moment it was referring to endurance races in spec b :/

    1. DJW_GT

      Correct, it helps with the aerodynamics, enabling it to reach slightly higher speeds on the straights, very similar to the 2009 F1 cars.

    2. Mickle Pickle

      Can’t see those glowing red brake disks anymore :( :( :( :(

      … i wonder how those disks are ventilated??? because it doesnt seem they have provided means to suck air and ways for rammed air to cool those front brakes…

      you will need cool brakes to slowdown from 250mph speeds after a few corners …

    1. HugoStiglitz_420

      not bad? that’s an understatement. think about the difference in seconds between I race car, lmp, road car, & F1. then realize bcuz by the time the F1 is going around, it’s going at rediculous speeds & it really is that much harder to shave off time @ that point. Now realize how enormous of a gap 20sec is out of 90sec!!!!! this thing the fastest cars made yet look like bottom feeders ( virtually of course )

    2. Sigmaviper11

      It is by far impressive, and I know its an incredible car and all but. . . Don’t you think this thing is going to the most violently defiant car ever to feature in a GT game?

      I mean that much power, and capability? I just have this feeling its not going to be a very easy machine to drive.

    3. Rotard12a

      @ Sigmaviper11

      Keep in mind that they’ve been able to use all kinds of aero tricks that almost all other forms of motorsport have banned. It’ll likely stick like glue and completely shrug off over/understeer. Not that it’ll be easy to drive, you’ll just have to have the reflexes of a housefly to do it right.

      Oh, and that CVT means you won’t hear shifts, so you’ll probably underestimate your speed and brake too late until you get used to it. Bring it on =D

    4. Sigmaviper11

      Haha! Bring it on! It’ll be an interesting challenge. I can imagine an online race with nothing but these things. can you say BATS**T INSANE!!!?

  44. Ollie

    The picture caption “Like a vacuum cleaner”; they must of tried it in game with the sound on. Actually, I bet this thing is going to sound awesome in game.

    1. Dunavantj

      it has to it has near to 1500Hp if u trim the aero out it should go in 275-300 range. I can’t to see the lap times on Old Le Mans with that baby.

    1. KopparbergDave

      I think you’ll find it may be from Family Guy, but as you know Family Guy basically mocks anything and everything (but I love it for it). I believe these words are actually from the film Contact! Most people hated it, but I loved that film!

    2. Erik

      How about a sonnet?

      “Shall I compare thee to a former king?
      Thou art more agile and more powerful:
      Rough turns do shake the bends of Nürburgring,
      And not even Daytona could be dull:
      Perhaps the Veyron’s faster on the straights
      And probably his body is more slimm’d:
      And maybe one day Kazu-san creates,
      Another beast more agile and more trimm’d;
      But thy eternal madness shall not fade,
      Nor lose possession of that race thou ow’st,
      Nor shall you ever stand in others’ shade,
      When from eternal skidmark lines thou grow’st;
      So long as gas can burn, or tyres skid,
      So long shall thou bring terror to the grid.”

  45. DC9990

    Wow, only 527lbs of torque? Thats going to be sluggish at low revs, you’ll HAVE to stay as high as possible.

    1. pasigiri

      at 545 kg (~1201.51933 lbs.), I’m sure 527 lb ft of torque is plenty. With a CVT also … you’d have to seek out a sluggish spot and if you do find it, look to the right of that “sluggish area” and congratulate yourself; you just found the solution to world hunger.

      … just kidding. But it should never be sluggish. Just smooth power delivery.

  46. GT_Prologue5

    Stage 4 Turbine….hehe.

    No really, I nearly had an orgasm when I saw that on my FB page. I logged out at light speed!

    1. Dave-o

      gas turbines are very small and light. Just look at any piston powered aircraft that has been converted to turbo prop. Often the engine bay is half empty or they have to extend the cowls to mount the engine further forward to keep the C of G in the right place.

      (e.g. Fletcher piston top dresser (400HP) converted to Cresco turbo prop (950+HP))

    2. Luke

      Ok thanks :) I didn`t knew that. I automatically thought of this ugly turbine motorcycle, which is much larger than any “normal” motorcycle because of the turbine.

    3. tvensky

      nowdays even electric motor can beat gasoline! now its just matter of time, but our favorite “musical engine” with plenty of mechanics, will die sooner or later! and stay just for fun just like horses nowdays. you can even race now on poo and win!

    1. Tim

      I am not sure about the 0-60 seems a little unrealistic. but since this is a prototype that will never see the light an accurate figure will never be known.

      however if it was true it would be quicker than a 787 which according to some reports i read has a 0-60 time of around 3.0 seconds which places it near the Veyron 2.8

    2. viejaloca

      @ Tim
      It also depends on how well the tires grip during the start. I highly doubt that a car will reach 0-60 in less that a second because of the amount of power going to the wheels making it burnout.

    3. grbmrdj

      what i don’t understand is, why does a car that weighs a quarter of the Veyron SS’s weight, has 283 more bhp, and is designed aerodynamically by the best team and driver in F1, have a lower top speed than the SuperSport? and by the way guys, its not gonna go to 0-60 in 0.6 seconds. F1 cars have a theoretical 0-60 time of about half a second, but they cant get all that power down. the wheels will just spin and probably burnout.

    4. Erik

      @ grbmrdj : Weight is only important when it comes to changing direction of an object, i.e. turning or accelerating. For example, if you kick an inflated balloon it’s gonna change direction very easily compared to if you kick a bowling ball (which is why the bowling ball will hurt your foot).
      When it comes to high velocities, weight is not your enemy any more. The weight of the Veyron actually contributes to the high speed because it makes it less affected by drag. It’s the same reason why heavy objects usually falls faster to the ground than light objects, because the mass to drag ratio is generally higher for heavier objects (depending a lot on their shape), meaning that the inflated balloon will fall to the ground slower than the bowling ball.

    5. Erik

      Also, it’s pretty safe to assume that the X1 is designed to spoil the airflow in a way that it produces a lot of downforce (just look at all those wings). That increases the drag.

    6. Phil


      I’m sorry but when does the mass of an object have any relation to the drag (force) applied to it? Has there ever been an equation to find the force of drag applied to an object that requires the mass of the object?

    7. Erik

      @ Phil: Yeah, I mixed up my physics. The drag is of course the same for objects with the same shape regardless of their mass, but what I thought made the difference was that the kinetic energy is much higher for in this example the Veyron. If the Veyron is four times heavier than the X1 it will have 4x as high kinetic energy as the the X1 if they travel at the same speed, and thought that the kinetic energy could help to reduce the impact of drag on the car. But energy and force is not the same, i.e. kinetic energy doesn’t contribute to acceleration, it only makes it harder for drag to slow down the car. And that is two very different things…

      Then the only reasonable explanation is that the X1 suffers from more drag than the Veyron, maybe because it has a lot of spoilers to increase downforce. Cause if it doesn’t suffer from more drag than the Veyron there isn’t any reason for it to be geared in the way it is. Unless the engine is tweaked in a way that it only produces torque at insane RPM…

    8. Phil

      @ Erik

      There is no proof that the X1 suffers any more drag then a Veyron would. If it’s been designed by Adrian Newey then it’s fairly safe to say that he has some clue as to what he’s doing regarding aerodynamics.

      RE. gearing then yes there is a reason as to why it’s been geared the way it is and the proof is within the lap times, how many times do you see a race car be geared to only reach a high top speed? Many race cars are never geared so that they will reach an incredibly ridiculous top speed it’s just going in the wrong direction of what you want to do. Just take a look at Formula 1 cars, insane acceleration, the top speed isn’t anywhere near Veyron spec but check out the lap times and you’ll realise their is more then having a high top speed to get around a track quick.

    1. FlareKR

      0.6 seconds!?! It’s over 9000 GS!!!
      Well actually no; it’s 4.57 Gs! That Physics Honors class has gotten to my head.
      For all of you crazy enough to see the work it’s:
      60mph = 26.9 m/s (all values must be the same unit, bla bla bla)
      26.92/0.6 (Change of time in seconds) = 44.87 m/s squared
      44.870/9.8 (9.8 is the constant acceleration of gravity) = 4.578 G Force!
      Superbly damn amazing for a car that can turn God-ly well. Space shuttles put up about 3 Gs while dragsters pull in about 4 Gs.
      Now imagine if they built this car…
      Looking foward to buying it in GT5; one more reason to skip the “glorious” work your way up from a Miata, I’m gonna use my pre-order McLaren!


      i can’t find any words for it
      2.if this car will be in GT 5 then i think the Red Bull F1 car will too because some parts of this car seem like from the F1 car

    3. Chad.D

      the only land based, engine block vehicles i know of that can do 0 to 60 in less than a second are top fuel dragsters and funny cars (hell, they can do 0 to 100 in less than a second) so i kinda doubt its less than a second, but, i dont see why it cant be within a second or so, just not under, that seems just too unlikely for me, oh we’ll, well see soon enough

    4. Chad.D

      nevermind, i thought it ran with an engine block, i didnt know it was a gas turbine, that might be different, but still, like i said, under a second seems unlikely

    5. Erik

      Looks like an agile beast. I’m not so sure about the 0.6 seconds though, guess we’ll have to wait and see about that :)

    6. MrSkyline

      there’s only one way to find out how fast this thing would be.

      Who’s got enough money to make red bull build one for him?

      if i had as much money as for example bill gates i’d make sure i’d get one of theise.

    7. Zowne


      Your calculation is correct, however, that is the AVERAGE G-force over the 0.6 seconds it takes to reach 60mph. It is more likely to take off with about 3G’s, and hit maybe 6G’s to average out to your calculated value of 4.578G

Comments on this post are now closed.

About the Author