Beat Of The Rising Sun
Mode: Simulation Mode
Test Circuit: Laguna Seca
Tires: Normal tires
TCS/ASM: 0/0
Car: Mazda RX-7 Type RZ '00 /
Mazda RX-7 Type RS '98
Price: 39,980 Cr. /
37,780 Cr.
Drivetrain: FR /
FR
Power: 276 hp / 6500 rpm /
276 hp / 6500 rpm
Torque: 231.45 ft.lb / 5000 rpm /
231.45 ft.lb / 5000 rpm
Weight: 1270 kg /
1280 kg
Although dealership often tries to proclaim it differently, the attraction of the entire manufacturer in reality lies exclusively on one model - RX-7. There is nothing strange about this; if one car should bear the entire pride of its manufacturer, then it shouldn't have any weakness on display, which in case of RX-7, is completely true.
It offers excellent agility, decent look and easy learning curve - the characteristics of the ideal sports car, which none of the rivals can offer simultaneously. It is also the lightest in the pack, which brings you enormous advantage on endurance events over the fastest rivals. Constant alignment of trophies in your garage can be initiated either by the RS or the limited RZ edition. Let's put aside all cosmetic and mechanical differences; one thing you should look for is the maneuverability that never stops being an appealing factor. The RZ is in better position here as it allows for more freedom on corner entries and exits. Those who need more grip and steady feel in corners should buy the standard RS, albeit they will have to deal with some mechanical resistance at the front end once the limit of the car is reached.
However, it doesn't really matter which model you prefer; once RX-7 starts unleashing its potential, very few cars will remain close enough to monitor its abilities. Trim badges become really trivial then.
Verdict:
(RS:
/
)
Car: Honda NSX Type R '92 /
Honda NSX Type S Zero '97
Price: 99,570 Cr. /
98,570
Drivetrain: MR /
MR
Power: 276 hp / 7300 rpm /
276 hp / 7300 rpm
Torque: 216.98 ft.lb / 5400 rpm /
224.21 ft.lb / 5300 rpm
Weight: 1230 kg /
1270 kg
A profusion of the beautiful and gentle colors or the freshly crafted, red Type R badge? This tough decision should be made based on your preferred driving style and particularly, your level of MR cocktail-handling toleration.
The Zero is said to be slightly inferior when compared with the Type R, but that doesn't have to be true. Due to a different suspension settings, the Zero conceals understeer to a slightly higher degree and yet, it leaves you enough space to sway its end at the corner entries and experience some fun. The Type R is not in the mood for such games, so its composure will make the best use in traditional, grip driving. However, its tenacious grip on the road, especially high-speed corners, is beyond the Zero's reach, by which side it feels like a sluggish and sometimes annoying ride.
It is almost impossible to declare which of the cars offer better experience, but if you can't digest the
cocktail traditionally reserved for MR class, than the Zero is the one you should target at. Hopefully, you'll have enough money to withstand the experience it offers.
Verdict:
/
Car: Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IV GSR '96
Price: 29,980 Cr.
Drivetrain: 4WD
Power: 276 hp / 6500 rpm
Torque: 260.38 ft.lb / 3000 rpm
Weight: 1350 kg
The introduction of the Evolution IV did not only change the repetitive design of the previous models, but it also helped increase overall performance of the later models in the series significantly by introducing the newest Mitsubishi technology known as the AYC (Active Yaw Control). By measuring throttle, braking and steering inputs, this device distributes required amount of torque on the side of the rear axle that has the highest amount of grip, allowing the car to become prone to rear-end sliding.
However, as a pioneer of such technology, the Evo IV takes all the responsibility for eventual problems that may emerge when overly relying on it. The Evo IV's chassis is not as sophisticated as that of the recent models, so the front axle may not have enough grip to keep the car on the line when sliding starts, resulting in unbalanced movements of the vehicle. In addition, the AYC is mostly effective on medium-speed corners or when approaching to sharp ones from higher speeds, so it becomes impossible to use it all the time.
All in all, this car shouldn't be treated as a replacement of the later Evos or time trial domination, but rather as a good reminder of what we used to drive in the earliest days of the GT series.
Verdict:
Car: Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution V GSR '98
Price: 32,480 Cr.
Drivetrain: 4WD
Power: 276 hp / 6500 rpm
Torque: 274.85 ft.lb / 3000 rpm
Weight: 1360 kg
This is the one. The Evo V is responsible for relieving the legendary 3000GT from the position of manufacturer leader, suggesting the outset of the savage performance the future Evo models would eventually seize. After this model, nobody doubted the competitiveness of the Evo fleet. The sixth generation may be more popular among fans, but let's not forget which model set the principles we all worship so much these days.
The comparison with the Evo IV is pointless because there is a
huge gap between possibilities of the two, especially if lap times are discussed. Several fields do require improvements, though. For instance, the LSD is not a device I want to see on a 4WD car, yet the Evo V seems to crave for one as the inside rear tire spins if there is not enough weight pushing the rear axle on your way out. Also, even though the car softly grips the road with confidence, more mechanical feedback during those moments would be a welcome addition.
The Evo V is the first model in the Evo lineup to feature adjustable rear downforce.
Verdict:
/
Car: Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VI GSR '99 /
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VI GSR T.M.E.(s) '00 /
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VI RS '99
Price: 32,480 Cr.
/ 32,780 Cr. / 25,980 Cr.
Drivetrain : 4WD
/ 4WD / 4WD
Power: 276 hp / 6500 rpm
/ 276 hp / 6500 rpm / 276 hp / 6500 rpm
Torque: 274.85 ft.lb / 3000 rpm
/ 274.85 ft.lb / 2750 rpm / 274.85 ft.lb / 3000 rpm
Weight: 1360 kg
/ 1360 kg / 1260 kg
* I didn't include the plain T.M.E. model to make the lineup more clear. Its numbers and abilities are completely identical to the striped version.
Another number, another
evolution of our Evolution fleet… or is it? Considering that the Evo VI was built to satisfy
up-to-date policy, it should be classified as an
upgrade to the previous Evo V model. Thus, fans seeking substantial improvements over the previous model could remain disappointed; barely anything has changed. Surprisingly, our game features even four models to emphasize this 'improvement', so some differences should attract our attention, no?
Performance-wise, distribution of the Evolution models in Gran Turismo is simple: you either want the RS or the GSR model. The RS models are lighter, more rigid and hence adequate for actual racing, but they don't come with AYC device or the ability to be upgraded with one, which makes them less prone to oversteer on corners as opposed to the GSR models
(see the Evo IV review above for more details).
The base GSR is the worst model in the group. The engineers not only forgot to eliminate the inner wheelspin of the previous model, but they also made the car painfully prone to unrealistic amount of body-sway oversteer. Losing complete control over this vehicle is not really impossible
(although it is absurd) and the flaw appears even when opposite driving style was meant to be achieved, not allowing the drive to inspect full potential of the car at its limits. The grip on the front axle variates while cornering, so you'll likely spend most of your time playing around, using one handling trim to recover from another. Good luck with that. The adjustable rear downforce continues to exist on this generation, so use it to trim the handling of this model.
The GSR T.M.E. pays the tribute to the famous rally driver Tommi Makinen, who won four WRC titles for Mitsubishi using Lancer Evo models. This model reduces effects of the AYC device to acceptable, realistic level, so you can easily trim handling to match your driving preferences. After coming from the base GSR, the T.M.E. model may feel as a bit unresponsive model, but in reality - it isn't. Just more comfortable to drive.
The spartan RS model produces the least amount of oversteer. Absence of sophisticated gadgets makes the RS one-sided choice for people who prefer serious competition on time trial encounters where initiating rear sliding is rarely used, apart from when you direct the nose of the car microscopically in order to increase speed on the exits.
Responsive turning abilities and steady behavior greatly copes with understeer once the throttle is applied, so I found it to be the most balanced choice of the three. Gently driving sometimes wouldn't help on the other two, but the RS can be driven very neutral that way. I should also point out that the RS
can be power-oversteered, which proved to be helpful on sharp corners of Laguna Seca. No more inner wheelspin, the rear tires now work in synergy. Finally!!
Any drawbacks? The steering seems to be rougher when compared with that of the GSR T.M.E., so attention is required on corners where sudden change in direction is unavoidable. In addition, the car's short gear ratio isn't very useful on longer tracks while several complaints could be addressed to the fact that the RS is only available in white color. Both models have some flaws, but I can't decide which one should be better. That is probably up to your driving preference to decide.
To conclude, the sixth generation of the Evolution models hasn't evolved that much, but miscellaneous micro-improvements easily justify the popularity the generation has among fans.
Verdict:
/
(base GSR:
)
Car: Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VII GSR '01 /
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VII RS '01
Price: 29,980 Cr. /
25,180 Cr.
Drivetrain: 4WD /
4WD
Power: 276 hp / 6500 rpm /
276hp / 6500 rpm
Torque: 282.08 ft.lb / 2750 rpm /
282.08 ft.lb / 2750 rpm
Weight: 1400 kg /
1320 kg
Is this the lucky number seven? The one number we all want to get? Thanks, but as long as the Evolution series is being considered I'm sticking with other numbers.
The Evo VII retains the level of performance of the previous generations and there is nothing that could disprove this - just check lap times below. However, I feel that we have the same situation as with the new Impreza STI. Intolerable amount of comfort, inadequate amount of joy. This generation lost some of the "fat" and visual aggression previous two generations had, so visually they may look a bit... cheap. The looks obviously isn't the most important factor on the Evo, but given I didn't complain about this on the older models means I have to treat this as a problem.
Moving along to performance. Separation of the models is well-known; plain RS for grip and multi-coloured GSR for sliding around. Unfortunately, the RS is not as rigid and active as it was the RS of the sixth generation, neither it differs from the GSR too much - I've actually fallen under the impression that both cars could be interchangeable at some point.
The sixth generation proved us that even small, but fine steps can do miracle in long-running series of production. This generation forgot that. The final grade is objectively quite good, but it should be noted this is definitely the last Evo generation I would take for a drive.
Verdict:
/
Car: Subaru Impreza Wagon WRX STi Version VI '99 /
Subaru Impreza Sedan WRX STi Version VI '99 /
Subaru Impreza 22B STi Version '98
Price: 29,190 Cr. /
29,190 Cr. / 50,000 Cr.
Drivetrain: 4WD /
4WD / 4WD
Power: 276 hp / 6500 rpm /
276 hp / 6500 rpm /
276 hp / 6000 rpm
Torque: 260.38 ft.lb / 4000 rpm /
260.38 ft.lb / 4000 rpm / 267.61 ft.lb / 3200 rpm
Weight: 1310 kg /
1270 kg / 1270 kg
Introduced in 1999, the sixth version of the Impreza marked ceasing of the countless updates of this legendary car once and for all. At last!
The last version doesn't offer anything new aside from enhanced aerodynamics, but we are already used to these baby steps, aren't we? The Impreza is now complete as never before and its competitiveness should be now used against the Evo range without hesitations. Or should it be? Lap times suggest otherwise.
Joking aside, the Impreza has plenty of materials to keep you occupied. Check out the Wagon model, for instance. Although it isn't as responsive as the estate model (due to lower rigidity), it compensates with better agility on corner entries and occasional power-sliding when going out. Nice, and it looks very trendy too!
The real deal is obviously the 22B, road-going replica of the WRC machine. It is different in so many things, mechanics first. It is really stunning how it manages to neutralize understeer during the weight transfer from one side of the car to the other, assuring maximum grip and "sticky" feeling at all time. Unnecessary sliding is kept at minimum level, which consequently leads us to a small controversy that depicts the 22B as overly stiff and sluggish car in relation to the estate model.
Indeed, when it comes to pure agility the regular estate model is a bit more superior. Does that make it more enjoyable drive? Not this time. There is a reason why the 22B demands almost double the price of the "regular" Impreza '99. Let me tell you this, it ain't about exclusivity only. Take it for a spin and you'll find out.
Verdict:
/
(22B:
)
Car: Subaru Impreza WRX STi '00 /
Subaru Impreza Sports Wagon WRX STi '02
Price: 31,980 Cr. /
29,980 Cr.
Drivetrain: 4WD /
4WD
Power: 276 hp / 6400 rpm /
276 hp / 6400 rpm
Torque: 274.85 ft.lb / 4000 rpm /
274.85 ft.lb / 4000 rpm
Weight: 1430 kg /
1430 kg
This generation raised so many controversies. The round headlights won't appeal to everyone, neither will significant amount of additional weight. Clearly, the latter is what unsettles me most, given that the car has lost the responsiveness of the previous generation models, at the same time allowing the understeer to trim the behaviour of the car whenever you wish to exit corner with more punch on the throttle. Yes, this Impreza is a heavy car and it will take few
Weight Reduction levels to recover from this state. At least you won't have to spend extra grands on the VCD as it comes together with the car.
The new Wagon mends the situation to small extent by adding some body-sway oversteer into equation, but the overall effect in comparison with the first gen. Wagon isn't really sensational; the power-oversteer is gone, among everything else.
Of course, since we are still discussing an
Impreza - however bad it may be - rest assured both will use their potential to do whatever you expect them to do. Nevertheless, the fact that the advantage over the first generation models was found on straights, whereas the cornering potential has degraded, is not satisfying.
Subaru continues with high-performance models albeit their work got too civilized this time. I'm sure that is not the reason why we crave for spicy WRX STi editions, right?
Verdict:
Car: Nissan 300ZX TwinTurbo 2seater '98 /
Nissan 300ZX TwinTurbo 2 by 2 '98
Price: 39,900 Cr. /
43,980 Cr.
Drivetrain: FR /
FR
Power: 276 hp / 6400 rpm /
276 hp / 6400 rpm
Torque: 286.42 ft.lb / 3600 rpm /
286.42 ft.lb / 3600 rpm
Weight: 1520 kg /
1580 kg
The winner of numerous awards and recognitions;
The bearer of the gathered heritage;
The portion of refreshment to always repetitive Nissan lineup...
... The fourth generation is all that. Although generally too heavy and delicate to compete with the best, the 300ZX is still frighteningly balanced and competitive machine for those who may dare to challenge its abilities at the bottom of the class 276. The 2seater is more adaptable to my statement, though. In spite of its enlarged body dimensions and 120mm longer wheelbase, the general handling of the 2 by 2 is more prone to understeer, once you carefully inspect abilities of the both.
Small distinction, but strong enough to give slight advantage to the compact 2seater. But should the fans really care? Of course not. Why?
Because measuring those body lines is still worth of your time;
Because vibrations of the V6 engine never sounded so lovely before;
Because disobeying the authority of the Skyline lineup is still a necessary job.
Reasons there are many and yet you don't need any of them. The 300ZX is a car with such privilege.
Verdict:
(2 by 2:
/
)
Car: Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 Turbo '95 /
Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 '99
Price: 43,230 Cr. /
43,230 Cr.
Drivetrain: 4WD /
4WD
Power: 276 hp / 6000 rpm /
276 hp / 6000 rpm
Torque: 314.63 ft.lb / 2500 rpm /
314.63 ft.lb / 2500 rpm
Weight: 1710 kg /
1680 kg
It has been a while, since the position of Mitsubishi's flagship was taken over by perpetual upgrades of the Evolution models. It was a moment we are going to remember for sure, when this indisputable dominator of the straights and bearer of many connotations was pushed far away from the main stage.
But frankly, a car with such ill-mannered weight shouldn't be a subject to better treatment. The 3000GT is marginally heavier than any other car in the class. Even though it copes with this burden well due to all of the electronics, the fact we're dealing with a bunch of kilos is something your nose will be continuously rubbed with. The upgraded '99 version lost some of the original charm, but because it corners slightly better it can actually be used for some serious racing.
Don't expect miracles though. This car is most useful on open roads and long straights where its speed can compensate for the lack of cornering potential. With the exception of the V6 soundtrack, there is no advantage on this car that rivals (such as the GT-R) couldn't offer. Quite unfortunate, but you can still take it for a ride on the
Like The Wind event, the the only place where it can live up to its reputation.
Verdict:
(VR-4 '95:
/
)
Car: Subaru Legacy B4 Blitzen '00 /
Subaru Legacy B4 RSK '98
Price: 30,000 Cr. /
26,430 Cr.
Drivetrain: 4WD /
4WD
Power: 276 hp / 6500 rpm /
276 hp / 6500 rpm
Torque: 249.53 ft.lb / 5000 rpm /
249.53 ft.lb / 5000 rpm
Weight: 1470 kg /
1410 kg
Spawning various editions of the existing model is Subaru's well known pattern of redemption for the lacking offer given in the Gran Turismo series. This, usually disturbing fact, can be slightly excused once unique models like the Blitzen appear.
Visually imposing, its sports character was further highlighted with increased turn-in ability on corner entries. This allows the Blitzen to run away from traditional
family car image. There is no doubt that Porsche Design did a good job on making the car more attractive to wider selection of drivers, but the result could've been better. All those additional aerodynamic parts reduce mechanical sensation of the axle in action, so it gets hard to predict what may happen on the next corner. This affects the steering as well, so the overall driving is a bit blunt. The boxer soundtrack is also thinner than that of the GT-B or the RSK. Hm, should we really expect more from the studio that delivers items like chairs and pencils?
The RSK keeps those enjoyable factors on your side while simultaneously eliminating the 'aero issues' of the Blitzen. You also have to be more cautious on corners since the RSK is set on the gentle, family side, so if understeer takes control of the car, your cornering line may become really wide. Great, that makes the RSK even more enjoyable car than the Blitzen! I just wish it was the opposite...
Although the grades are the same for both cars, I remark that the Blitzen
is not as rewarding as the RSK.
Verdict:
Car: Subaru Legacy Touring Wagon GT-B '96
Price: 29,330 Cr.
Drivetrain: 4WD
Power: 276 hp / 6500 rpm
Torque: 249.53 ft.lb / 5000 rpm
Weight: 1430 kg
Let's be honest, the GT-B is not the most tempting car out there, neither it's a car whose abilities on the track deserve much attention. However, if we compare the GT-B with other Legacy models, things may change a bit.
The
Bilstein struts provides that sturdy feel that makes the GT-B very steady and refined on corners, something I couldn't sense on the RSK or the Blitzen. The weight transfer occurs almost imperceptibly, making corner entries somehow fun to execute. But that is all. Clearly, the advantages of this car end here, but at least we've found something the new Legacy models can't provide. Interesting.
Verdict:
Car: Nissan Skyline GT-R V-spec '99 /
Nissan Skyline GT-R V-spec II '00
Price: 55,980 Cr. /
57,480 Cr.
Drivetrain: 4WD /
4WD
Power: 276 hp / 6800 rpm /
276 hp / 6800 rpm
Torque: 289.31 ft.lb / 4400 rpm /
289.31 ft.lb / 4400 rpm
Weight: 1560 kg /
1560 kg
The ability to act as a completely different car is what separates the R34 from other 4WD models in the range. Most of them
pretend to be something else until you expose them to heavy treatment, at which point they sadly confess how they can't actually run away from traditional 4WD paradigm of handling. Fortunately, our R34 squad can, which makes them more desirable choice.
The turn-in of the R34 is very fast and responsive. Some people could notice how it leaves unnecessary
blank space, making the entries less precise and a bit unstressed, almost as the car doesn't care if you'll commence with the cornering or not. It is hard to explain
what is it, but I can confirm that it matches well to general cornering abilities of the car.
Even when understeer interferes, mostly at mid sections, the R34 will confidently continue to grip the road as nothing ever happened. Initiating oversteer on entries by relying on your brake pedals and then switching back to throttle controlling is a valuable ability that only the Evo VI RS could offer - although not at such rate. Clearly, the R34 is a very refined car with several operable paths of control. Its agility will become very important once you start messing around with power upgrades, so pay attention not to lose its inborn characteristics. Those makes the R34 among the most competitive production cars in the game.
One thing that may diminish the popularity of the R34 is the number of models separated by few pointless distinctions, often popular way of working in GT series. The R34 V-spec II is another model that features stiffer suspension and carbon fiber hood on which you can find NACA duct. Great, but none of this things affect its abilities, so it doesn't matter whether you buy the one with puncture on the hood or without - identical vehicles is what you get*. I would rather pay attention to lack of red an yellow shades on the V-spec II model as those are quite interesting.
* Actually, this may not be true. The V-spec II seems to resist the understeer at mid-section microscopically more than its original counterpart. However, if you don't pay attention, you may never notice the difference - even the term microscopically is a bit generous.
Verdict:
Car: Nissan Skyline GT-R V-spec '97
Price: 53,900 Cr.
Drivetrain: 4WD
Power: 276 hp / 6800 rpm
Torque: 271.23 ft.lb / 4400 rpm
Weight: 1540 kg
The R33 never got the publicity the R32 and R34 models had enjoyed. I'm not sure what caused this, but it probably has something to do with the pompous racing charisma and countless compliments of the other two models. Fortunately, meaningful clues can be found while driving the R33 in the game, so I hope we'll find out why the R33 dropped off the radar.
Contrary to my expectations, the R33 is not far from the R34 generation. Few details reveal its inferiority, but that is what you should expect from older model. Anyway, the handling of the R33 is biased towards the front end, which is particularly noticeable on corner entries
(when it gets harder to initiate some kind of oversteer) and occasionally on exits
(cornering line widens generously as the speed increases). The car can be oriented with the throttle more progressively than the R34, though you probably won't be able to use this merit this unless you learn to loosen that rear grip on corner properly.
In comparison to the other GT-R models the R33 could be depicted as gentle and civilized. It doesn't feel that way when judging the exterior, but that is how it is. It is a good car overall, but not the best GT-R driving-wise.
Verdict:
/
Car: Nissan Skyline GT-R V-spec II '94
Price: 52,600 Cr.
Drivetrain: 4WD
Power: 276 hp / 6800 rpm
Torque: 260.38 ft.lb / 4400 rpm
Weight: 1500 kg
The legendary R32 is a common guise in this series and one some people can't stop cursing for its repetitive presence. Luckily, they never stop praising its abilities at the same time. This is from many aspects the most iconic and joyful GT-R model ever produced.
What I particularly like about this car is the level of agility you can get from its sophisticated AWD system. I also like the the car feels mechanically all the time, not having any additional "downforce grip" you can feel on the younger models. That allows for plenty of outputs explaining what is going with the car. Adding firmness of the chassis, we can conclude the R32 encourages driver to actively participate in cornering sequences.
Level of understeer is negligible. Sometimes I could wish for more oversteer in general (inducing some can be tricky), but fortunately, the car shines in every other aspect so bright I don't think about this minority that often.
Verdict:
Car: Toyota Supra RZ '97
Price: 44,800 Cr.
Drivetrain: 4WD
Power: 276 hp / 5600 rpm
Torque: 332.71 ft.lb / 3600 rpm
Weight: 1510 kg
The Supra has raised many generations of drivers, allowing them to experience fun side of drifting, hazardous lack of traction and many other miscellaneous factors, considered important in the world of motorsports. It will continue to do so as long as driving games are wealthier by that important product of Toyota's car cluster.
What makes the heavy Supra competitive on the track is the sophisticated suspension system that allows it to perform unusual (for this weight) activities. This is a heavy grand tourer, but is also the only one that acts like a real sports car. Really impressive. Imagine face of the RX-7 when it sees one of these closing in from behind...
Still, don't be overconfident. You can't fight against the law of physics. Although perfectly concealed at first glance, both understeer and body roll can appear suddenly. Tire wear is another factor that can't match the RX-7's. Finally, the engine is grateful for tuning, but keep in mind that traction on the rear axle will become very fragile once all that power comes to play.
Verdict:
BONUS MATERIALS
The following list displays acceleration and estimated lap times along with real power and weight values taken from the Car Settings screen.
Important notes:
* 0-400 and 0-1000 acceleration tests were conducted using TCS set on 3;
* Average lap times were set on Laguna Seca with driving aids disabled;
* The cars were ranked based on their performance on the 0-400 test. Notice how some cars were more effective on the 0-1000 test, particularly the Supra and the NSX models.
Legend: 0-400m --- 0-1000m --- Lap time --- HP on Kg --- Car
13.216 --- 24.521 --- 1'34.5 --- 305 on 1320 --- Evo VII RS
13.244 --- 24.628 --- 1'34.0 --- 321 on 1560 --- GT-R34 (both)
13.352 --- 24.747 --- 1'34.5 --- 281 on 1270 --- Impreza 22B
13.380 --- 24.818 --- 1'34.5 --- 305 on 1400 --- Evo VII GSR
13.473 --- 24.591 --- 1.34.5 --- 277 on 1270 --- NSX Type S Zero
13.497 --- 24.973 --- 1'35.0 --- 305 on 1540 --- GT-R33 Vspec '97
13.508 --- 24.948 --- 1'35.5 --- 301 on 1430 --- Impreza Sedan '00
13.534 --- 24.999 --- 1'36.0 --- 301 on 1430 --- Impreza Wagon '00
13.590 --- 25.137 --- 1'35.5 --- 297 on 1500 --- GT-R32 Vspec '94
13.615 --- 24.923 --- 1'34.0 --- 265 on 1320 --- NSX Type R
13.805 --- 25.259 --- 1'35.5 --- 302 on 1360 --- Evo VI GSR T.M.E. (both)
13.821 --- 25.325 --- 1'35.0 --- 297 on 1360 --- Evo V
13.826 --- 25.433 --- 1'36.0 --- 277 on 1270 --- Impreza Sedan '99
13.833 --- 25.294 --- 1'35.5 --- 302 on 1360 --- Evo VI GSR
13.931 --- 25.750 --- 1'37.0 --- 306 on 1680 --- 3000GT VR-4 '99
13.956 --- 25.274 --- 1'35.0 --- 302 on 1260 --- Evo VI RS
14.023 --- 25.806 --- 1'37.5 --- 306 on 1710 --- 3000GT VR-4 '95
14.041 --- 25.428 --- 1'34.0 --- 281 on 1270 --- RX-7 RZ '00
14.072 --- 25.787 --- 1'36.5 --- 274 on 1310 --- Impreza Wagon '99
14.086 --- 25.523 --- 1'34.0 --- 278 on 1280 --- RX-7 RS '98
14.088 --- 26.139 --- 1'39.0 --- 263 on 1350 --- Evo IV
14.180 --- 25.297 --- 1'34.0 --- 316 on 1510 --- Supra RZ
14.216 --- 26.309 --- 1'40.0 --- 268 on 1410 --- Legacy B4 RSK
14.346 --- 26.521 --- 1'40.0 --- 268 on 1470 --- Legacy Blitzen
14.358 --- 26.465 --- 1'40.0 --- 267 on 1430 --- Legacy GT-B
14.806 --- 26.696 --- 1'39.0 --- 267 on 1520 --- 300ZX 2seater
14.895 --- 26.863 --- 1'39.0 --- 267 on 1580 --- 300ZX 2 by 2