GT4 Weekly Arcade Time Trial Challenge
- Thread starter shotamagee
- 265 comments
- 19,681 views
- 8,100
- Guelph, Ontario
Road car: 1'48.712
Race car: 1'32.918
shotamagee, regarding the track limits (lol, I will try to make this the last one), is the raised section on street courses considered in?
Like the right hander right after the jump at Seattle, can you run to the wall on the raised bit or do you have to have 2 wheels on the painted section?
Race car: 1'32.918
shotamagee, regarding the track limits (lol, I will try to make this the last one), is the raised section on street courses considered in?
Like the right hander right after the jump at Seattle, can you run to the wall on the raised bit or do you have to have 2 wheels on the painted section?
- 624
- Australia
Yeah that's a good question, but for all city circuits the OLR rules state that the track boundary (therefore the walls) is the track limit not the outside edge of the kerbs.
So for all City tracks; if you keep it off the walls, you're ok.
So for all City tracks; if you keep it off the walls, you're ok.
- 624
- Australia
Ok here are the results for week17.
GT4 Weekly Arcade Time Trial Challenge: Week 17
Chevrolet Corvette Stingray L46 (C3) ‘69 & Chevrolet Z06 (C2) Race Car ’63 @ Seattle
Position - Driver – Chevrolet Corvette Stingray L46 (C3) ‘69 – Chevrolet Z06 (C2) Race Car ’63 - Bonus - Final Standing
1 - Bopop4____ - 1:48.712 – 1:32.918 - Yes - 1:47.712
2 - Thc118____ – 1:49.607 – 1:33.698 – Yes – 1:48.607
3 - Shotamagee – 1:50.611 – 1:34.703 – Yes – 1:49.611
Congratulations to Bopop4 and thanks to everyone else who took part, now on to week 18.
GT4 Weekly Arcade Time Trial Challenge: Week 17
Chevrolet Corvette Stingray L46 (C3) ‘69 & Chevrolet Z06 (C2) Race Car ’63 @ Seattle
Position - Driver – Chevrolet Corvette Stingray L46 (C3) ‘69 – Chevrolet Z06 (C2) Race Car ’63 - Bonus - Final Standing
1 - Bopop4____ - 1:48.712 – 1:32.918 - Yes - 1:47.712
2 - Thc118____ – 1:49.607 – 1:33.698 – Yes – 1:48.607
3 - Shotamagee – 1:50.611 – 1:34.703 – Yes – 1:49.611
Congratulations to Bopop4 and thanks to everyone else who took part, now on to week 18.
Last edited:
- 624
- Australia
GT4 Weekly Arcade Time Trial Challenge: Week 18
This week’s challenge is;
British Lightweights.
The British have a proud history of building sports cars with a focus on maintaining low weight to aid performance, so for this week we’ll see how well these two turn of the century lightweight British sports cars fare. Your primary car will be the Lotus Elise, while your secondary car will be the TVR Tuscan Speed 6. The lower grip tyres used this week means you will need to find ways to overcome the lack of front end bite these cars now have.
Track: Infineon Sports Car Course
Primary Car: Lotus Elise ‘00
Transmission: Either
Driving Aids: Off
Tyres: N3 (Standard Road)
Quicktune: None (Stock)
Optional Bonus Car: TVR Tuscan Speed 6 ‘00
Transmission: Either
Driving Aids: Off
Tyres: N3 (Standard Road)
Quicktune: None (Stock)
Optional bonus Car Time: For this week, you need to be quicker in the TVR by at least 5.000 seconds to get the 1.000 second bonus.
My Times (so Far)
Lotus Elise ‘00: 1:52.700
TVR Tuscan Speed 6 ‘00: 1:44.510
These are the specs the cars should have on the track menu screen just before you start driving;
Lotus Elise ‘00: HP-120 KG-714 Tyres-RD
TVR Tuscan Speed 6 ‘00: HP-361 KG-1100 Tyres-RD
You have until Tuesday 20th March 2012 1:00 PM GMT to post your best time(s) in this thread (you can edit/improve them if you wish). All other rules are as per post No1.
Good Luck.
Week 18 Results
This week’s challenge is;
British Lightweights.
The British have a proud history of building sports cars with a focus on maintaining low weight to aid performance, so for this week we’ll see how well these two turn of the century lightweight British sports cars fare. Your primary car will be the Lotus Elise, while your secondary car will be the TVR Tuscan Speed 6. The lower grip tyres used this week means you will need to find ways to overcome the lack of front end bite these cars now have.
Track: Infineon Sports Car Course
Primary Car: Lotus Elise ‘00
Transmission: Either
Driving Aids: Off
Tyres: N3 (Standard Road)
Quicktune: None (Stock)
Optional Bonus Car: TVR Tuscan Speed 6 ‘00
Transmission: Either
Driving Aids: Off
Tyres: N3 (Standard Road)
Quicktune: None (Stock)
Optional bonus Car Time: For this week, you need to be quicker in the TVR by at least 5.000 seconds to get the 1.000 second bonus.
My Times (so Far)
Lotus Elise ‘00: 1:52.700
TVR Tuscan Speed 6 ‘00: 1:44.510
These are the specs the cars should have on the track menu screen just before you start driving;
Lotus Elise ‘00: HP-120 KG-714 Tyres-RD
TVR Tuscan Speed 6 ‘00: HP-361 KG-1100 Tyres-RD
You have until Tuesday 20th March 2012 1:00 PM GMT to post your best time(s) in this thread (you can edit/improve them if you wish). All other rules are as per post No1.
Good Luck.
Week 18 Results
Last edited:
- 624
- Australia
- 624
- Australia
Ok here are the results for week18.
GT4 Weekly Arcade Time Trial Challenge: Week 18
Lotus Elise ‘00 & TVR Tuscan Speed 6 ‘00 @ Infineon Sports Car Course
Position - Driver – Lotus Elise ‘00 – TVR Tuscan Speed 6 ’00 - Bonus - Final Standing
1 - Shotamagee – 1:52.700 – 1:44.510 – Yes – 1:51.700
2 - Thc118____ – 1:53.287 – 1:44.932 – Yes – 1:52.287
Thanks to everyone else who took part, now on to week 19.
GT4 Weekly Arcade Time Trial Challenge: Week 18
Lotus Elise ‘00 & TVR Tuscan Speed 6 ‘00 @ Infineon Sports Car Course
Position - Driver – Lotus Elise ‘00 – TVR Tuscan Speed 6 ’00 - Bonus - Final Standing
1 - Shotamagee – 1:52.700 – 1:44.510 – Yes – 1:51.700
2 - Thc118____ – 1:53.287 – 1:44.932 – Yes – 1:52.287
Thanks to everyone else who took part, now on to week 19.
- 624
- Australia
GT4 Weekly Arcade Time Trial Challenge: Week 19
This week’s challenge is;
UK Vs USA Fantasy LM Wk1.
It’s been a while since we’ve used race cars, so this week we’ll be using two very low slung race versions of two of the most desirable and iconic cars in the game; the Ford GT LM and the Jaguar XJ220 LM. The Ford has the better stats, but I found the Jaguar to be easier to drive, so let’s see which comes out on top
Track: Grand Valley Speedway Reverse
Primary Car: Jaguar XJ220 LM Race Car ‘01
Transmission: Either
Driving Aids: Off
Tyres: R2 (Race Hard)
Quicktune: None (Stock)
Optional Bonus Car: Ford GT LM Race Car ‘02
Transmission: Either
Driving Aids: Off
Tyres: R2 (Race Hard)
Quicktune: None (Stock)
Optional bonus Car Time: For this week, you need to be quicker in the Ford by at least 0.001 of a second to get the 1.000 second bonus.
My Times (so Far)
Jaguar XJ220 LM Race Car ‘01: 1:44.871
Ford GT LM Race Car ‘02: 1:43.553
These are the specs the cars should have on the track menu screen just before you start driving;
Jaguar XJ220 LM Race Car ‘01: HP-542 KG-1180 Tyres-RH
Ford GT LM Race Car ‘02: HP-607 KG-1140 Tyres-RH
You have until Tuesday 27th March 2012 1:00 PM GMT to post your best time(s) in this thread (you can edit/improve them if you wish). All other rules are as per post No1.
Good Luck.
Week 19 Results
This week’s challenge is;
UK Vs USA Fantasy LM Wk1.
It’s been a while since we’ve used race cars, so this week we’ll be using two very low slung race versions of two of the most desirable and iconic cars in the game; the Ford GT LM and the Jaguar XJ220 LM. The Ford has the better stats, but I found the Jaguar to be easier to drive, so let’s see which comes out on top
Track: Grand Valley Speedway Reverse
Primary Car: Jaguar XJ220 LM Race Car ‘01
Transmission: Either
Driving Aids: Off
Tyres: R2 (Race Hard)
Quicktune: None (Stock)
Optional Bonus Car: Ford GT LM Race Car ‘02
Transmission: Either
Driving Aids: Off
Tyres: R2 (Race Hard)
Quicktune: None (Stock)
Optional bonus Car Time: For this week, you need to be quicker in the Ford by at least 0.001 of a second to get the 1.000 second bonus.
My Times (so Far)
Jaguar XJ220 LM Race Car ‘01: 1:44.871
Ford GT LM Race Car ‘02: 1:43.553
These are the specs the cars should have on the track menu screen just before you start driving;
Jaguar XJ220 LM Race Car ‘01: HP-542 KG-1180 Tyres-RH
Ford GT LM Race Car ‘02: HP-607 KG-1140 Tyres-RH
You have until Tuesday 27th March 2012 1:00 PM GMT to post your best time(s) in this thread (you can edit/improve them if you wish). All other rules are as per post No1.
Good Luck.
Week 19 Results
Last edited:
- 624
- Australia
Ok here are the results for week19.
GT4 Weekly Arcade Time Trial Challenge: Week 19
Jaguar XJ220 LM Race Car ’01 & Ford GT LM Race Car ’02 @ Grand Valley Reverse Course
Position - Driver – Jaguar XJ220 LM Race Car ’01 – Ford GT LM Race Car ’02 - Bonus - Final Standing
1 - Thc118____ – 1:44.807 – 1:43.527 – Yes – 1:43.807
2 - Shotamagee – 1:44.871 – 1:43.553 – Yes – 1:43.871
Congratulations to Thc118, now on to week 20.
GT4 Weekly Arcade Time Trial Challenge: Week 19
Jaguar XJ220 LM Race Car ’01 & Ford GT LM Race Car ’02 @ Grand Valley Reverse Course
Position - Driver – Jaguar XJ220 LM Race Car ’01 – Ford GT LM Race Car ’02 - Bonus - Final Standing
1 - Thc118____ – 1:44.807 – 1:43.527 – Yes – 1:43.807
2 - Shotamagee – 1:44.871 – 1:43.553 – Yes – 1:43.871
Congratulations to Thc118, now on to week 20.
- 624
- Australia
GT4 Weekly Arcade Time Trial Challenge: Week 20
This week’s challenge is;
Europe Vs Japan Fantasy LM Wk2.
Continuing the theme from last week, now it’s a Japanese Vs European Race Car show down. The cars for this week will be the Pagani Zonda LM Race Car and the Fairlady/350 Z LM Race Car.
Track: Tokyo R246 Reverse
Primary Car: Pagani Zonda LM Race Car ‘01
Transmission: Either
Driving Aids: Off
Tyres: R2 (Race Hard)
Quicktune: None (Stock)
Optional Bonus Car: Nissan Fairlady/350 Z Concept LM Race Car ‘02
Transmission: Either
Driving Aids: Off
Tyres: R2 (Race Hard)
Quicktune: Power +18% or -3% depending on your console apart from that: None (Stock)
Optional bonus Car Time: For this week post times in both cars within 3.000 seconds of each other to get the 1.000 second time bonus.
My Times (so Far)
Pagani Zonda LM Race Car ‘01: 1:29.106
Nissan Fairlady/350 Z Concept LM Race Car ‘02: 1:30.143 (amended to -3% HP)
These are the specs the cars should have on the track menu screen just before you start driving;
Pagani Zonda LM Race Car ‘01: HP-651 KG-1150 Tyres-RH
Nissan Fairlady/350 Z Concept LM Race Car ‘02: HP-590 KG-1120 Tyres-RH
EDIT: Due to the differences between PAL & NTSC you should adjust your Nissan so that it has 590HP, which should be either +18%HP or -3%HP depending on where you are.
You have until Tuesday 10th April 2012 1:00 PM GMT to post your best time(s) in this thread (you can edit/improve them if you wish). All other rules are as per post No1.
Good Luck.
Week 20 Results
This week’s challenge is;
Europe Vs Japan Fantasy LM Wk2.
Continuing the theme from last week, now it’s a Japanese Vs European Race Car show down. The cars for this week will be the Pagani Zonda LM Race Car and the Fairlady/350 Z LM Race Car.
Track: Tokyo R246 Reverse
Primary Car: Pagani Zonda LM Race Car ‘01
Transmission: Either
Driving Aids: Off
Tyres: R2 (Race Hard)
Quicktune: None (Stock)
Optional Bonus Car: Nissan Fairlady/350 Z Concept LM Race Car ‘02
Transmission: Either
Driving Aids: Off
Tyres: R2 (Race Hard)
Quicktune: Power +18% or -3% depending on your console apart from that: None (Stock)
Optional bonus Car Time: For this week post times in both cars within 3.000 seconds of each other to get the 1.000 second time bonus.
My Times (so Far)
Pagani Zonda LM Race Car ‘01: 1:29.106
Nissan Fairlady/350 Z Concept LM Race Car ‘02: 1:30.143 (amended to -3% HP)
These are the specs the cars should have on the track menu screen just before you start driving;
Pagani Zonda LM Race Car ‘01: HP-651 KG-1150 Tyres-RH
Nissan Fairlady/350 Z Concept LM Race Car ‘02: HP-590 KG-1120 Tyres-RH
EDIT: Due to the differences between PAL & NTSC you should adjust your Nissan so that it has 590HP, which should be either +18%HP or -3%HP depending on where you are.
You have until Tuesday 10th April 2012 1:00 PM GMT to post your best time(s) in this thread (you can edit/improve them if you wish). All other rules are as per post No1.
Good Luck.
Week 20 Results
Last edited:
- 624
- Australia
We're both talking about the same car right?
(Yes thats from GT5 but you get the picture)
EDIT: I've been corrected, this pic is from GT4. Now that it's been pointed out the water mark does make it pretty obvious. (I copied it from the GT5 forum and just assumed...)
EDIT: I've done some googling and you're right it does say 500HP on the driving screen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TevUKpjZki8
I took those stats (608HP) off my screen (as per always) before I started driving.
And I have support from other parts of the forum: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=80095
So maybe the name isn't the only difference between the PAL & NTSC versions.
As a way of checking, for me the Nissan was just hitting 300kph (though you're prob using mph) just before braking for turn1, if you get to that speed then the label may be wrong, as I would have thought that cars will have the same physics no matter whether PAL or NTSC, and the HP labels for GT4 are renowned for being different everywhere. Let me know, I'll try to sort something else out if necessary.
(Yes thats from GT5 but you get the picture)
EDIT: I've been corrected, this pic is from GT4. Now that it's been pointed out the water mark does make it pretty obvious. (I copied it from the GT5 forum and just assumed...)
EDIT: I've done some googling and you're right it does say 500HP on the driving screen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TevUKpjZki8
I took those stats (608HP) off my screen (as per always) before I started driving.
And I have support from other parts of the forum: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=80095
So maybe the name isn't the only difference between the PAL & NTSC versions.
As a way of checking, for me the Nissan was just hitting 300kph (though you're prob using mph) just before braking for turn1, if you get to that speed then the label may be wrong, as I would have thought that cars will have the same physics no matter whether PAL or NTSC, and the HP labels for GT4 are renowned for being different everywhere. Let me know, I'll try to sort something else out if necessary.
Last edited:
- 157
- Pennsylvania
Yeah that's the car.
1'29.099 with the Zonda.
After a few laps with the 350Z, it's hitting 300kph on the straight and about 1.5 sec outside the 2 sec limit.
1'31.660 with the 350Z. (With +18% HP, 1'29.649) I'm running consistent low 1'32's. I've gone around at least 40 times. Could someone find .6 seconds? Sure. Could he find 1.660 seconds? I don't think so. Given it usually only takes me a few laps to get within the bonus time limit, I'd say there's two versions of the same car.
Maybe somebody else will chime in and prove that my driving is just
1'29.099 with the Zonda.
After a few laps with the 350Z, it's hitting 300kph on the straight and about 1.5 sec outside the 2 sec limit.
1'31.660 with the 350Z. (With +18% HP, 1'29.649) I'm running consistent low 1'32's. I've gone around at least 40 times. Could someone find .6 seconds? Sure. Could he find 1.660 seconds? I don't think so. Given it usually only takes me a few laps to get within the bonus time limit, I'd say there's two versions of the same car.
Maybe somebody else will chime in and prove that my driving is just
Last edited:
- 624
- Australia
This is interesting, I'll change the bonus time zone.
Its strange that the top speed looks ok but the lap time is slower, you would expect that if it truly did have less power the top speed would be the most obviously affected.
(you're just as quick as my Zonda time, and my times from last week, so I don't think its you)
We might need to do some B-spec / test track comparisons to be fully sure. (I'll hopefully find time to do some more testing tonight)
I'd be interested to know if any members have any knowledge about cars which appear to have differences when the PAL version is compared to their NTSC variant.
Its strange that the top speed looks ok but the lap time is slower, you would expect that if it truly did have less power the top speed would be the most obviously affected.
(you're just as quick as my Zonda time, and my times from last week, so I don't think its you)
We might need to do some B-spec / test track comparisons to be fully sure. (I'll hopefully find time to do some more testing tonight)
I'd be interested to know if any members have any knowledge about cars which appear to have differences when the PAL version is compared to their NTSC variant.
Last edited:
- 14,417
- Wellington
(Yes thats from GT5 but you get the picture)
Just a heads up, thats sadly not a GT5 picture. The car is a standard in GT5 and no standards are allowed in phototravel, and its got the GT4 watermark in the lower right corner.
- 624
- Australia
Smallhorses
Staff Emeritus
- 7,260
My 2 cents here:
I seem to recall this being an issue when the Fairlady / 350Z LM Concept was used in one of the official GT4 WRS races and the difference between PAL & NTSC was highlighted then.
There was thus a quick tune adjustment required to make sure everyone was on the same power stats (WRS events always used -10% weight to avoid anyone disputing weights used) but in this case to get both NTSC & PAL cars to the same power setting PAL used -3% and NTSC +18%!
This thread was also created to highlight and test the differences between PAL / NTSC format games.
It's probably a good idea to put these markers in for this week too.
Still no joy with pedals, but I've been on vacation, and am off on vacation again in a few weeks, so I'm enjoying the break.
I seem to recall this being an issue when the Fairlady / 350Z LM Concept was used in one of the official GT4 WRS races and the difference between PAL & NTSC was highlighted then.
There was thus a quick tune adjustment required to make sure everyone was on the same power stats (WRS events always used -10% weight to avoid anyone disputing weights used) but in this case to get both NTSC & PAL cars to the same power setting PAL used -3% and NTSC +18%!
This thread was also created to highlight and test the differences between PAL / NTSC format games.
It's probably a good idea to put these markers in for this week too.
Still no joy with pedals, but I've been on vacation, and am off on vacation again in a few weeks, so I'm enjoying the break.
- 157
- Pennsylvania
I B-spec'd 10 laps at the track.
1'38.743
1'39.725
1'39.392
1'38.866
1'39.330
1'38.928
1'39.160
1'39.840
1'38.629
1'38.994
I also took another 20 lap run and only managed to drop a tenth. If I put my best splits together, I'd be just inside 2 seconds off the Pagani.
I'll see what I can do with +18%. Oh and Smallhorses, have you tried graphite to solve your sticky pedal issue?
1'38.743
1'39.725
1'39.392
1'38.866
1'39.330
1'38.928
1'39.160
1'39.840
1'38.629
1'38.994
I also took another 20 lap run and only managed to drop a tenth. If I put my best splits together, I'd be just inside 2 seconds off the Pagani.
I'll see what I can do with +18%. Oh and Smallhorses, have you tried graphite to solve your sticky pedal issue?
- 624
- Australia
I ran 3 laps (Arcade) in both the Zonda and then the Fairlady/350Z again @ R246 Reverse using R2 Tyres, no quicktune & B-spec @ Pace 3, Results;
Pagani:
1:39.575
1:41.948
1:41.274
Nissan:
1:40.610
1:42.845
1:42.274
So me and B-spec seem to agree that in PAL the Zonda is about 1.000 seconds faster.
I Then sent B-spec to the Test Track in the Nissan (same settings as above) where Bob ran a 1:59.955 lap time. (was going 312 Kph down the straights & 311Kph through the turns)
Thanks for link & insight SH,
Sounds like I'll try the Nissan again @ -3% power and see where we come out.
(I'm glad this car is secondary so it won't really affect the results)
Pagani:
1:39.575
1:41.948
1:41.274
Nissan:
1:40.610
1:42.845
1:42.274
So me and B-spec seem to agree that in PAL the Zonda is about 1.000 seconds faster.
I Then sent B-spec to the Test Track in the Nissan (same settings as above) where Bob ran a 1:59.955 lap time. (was going 312 Kph down the straights & 311Kph through the turns)
Thanks for link & insight SH,
Sounds like I'll try the Nissan again @ -3% power and see where we come out.
(I'm glad this car is secondary so it won't really affect the results)
- 624
- Australia
I'm going to extend this round for another week, as I haven't done my amended Nissan run and because I also haven't yet figured out which cars to run next week.
- 624
- Australia
Ok here are the results for week20.
GT4 Weekly Arcade Time Trial Challenge: Week 20
Pagani Zonda LM Race Car ‘01 & Nissan Fairlady/350 Z Concept LM Race Car ‘02 @ Tokyo R246 Reverse Course
Position - Driver – Pagani Zonda LM Race Car ‘01 – Nissan Fairlady/350 Z Concept LM Race Car ‘02 - Bonus - Final Standing
1 - Thc118____ – 1:29.099 – 1:29.649 – Yes – 1:28.099
2 - Shotamagee – 1:29.106 – 1:30.143 – Yes – 1:28.106
Congratulations to Thc118.
GT4 Weekly Arcade Time Trial Challenge: Week 20
Pagani Zonda LM Race Car ‘01 & Nissan Fairlady/350 Z Concept LM Race Car ‘02 @ Tokyo R246 Reverse Course
Position - Driver – Pagani Zonda LM Race Car ‘01 – Nissan Fairlady/350 Z Concept LM Race Car ‘02 - Bonus - Final Standing
1 - Thc118____ – 1:29.099 – 1:29.649 – Yes – 1:28.099
2 - Shotamagee – 1:29.106 – 1:30.143 – Yes – 1:28.106
Congratulations to Thc118.
- 624
- Australia
I've decided that week 20 (was) will be the last week of this competition. (at least for the moment)
I thank everyone who competed, and congratulations again to anyone who managed to win any of the weeks.
I thank everyone who competed, and congratulations again to anyone who managed to win any of the weeks.
Similar threads
