- 3,202
- Philippines
- skygrasper_550--
I've finally managed to upload my lap times for the two cars. The laps are available in both Onboard and Replay Cam, as displayed below.
BMW M5 '08:
Ferrari California '08:
On paper, the two cars seem to be a dead heat, what with the M5 having a more powerful engine but the California being lighter. Initial thoughts were, I thought the M5 was going to win this; well, mainly because it's a high-performance sedan (It's an ///M car, for goodness' sake), and that the California is more of a gran tourer designed for relaxed cruising. But that quickly changed when I looked at the stock settings of both cars. To my surprise, the Ferrari has a very high amount of downforce, almost reaching that of race car levels. Which is scary, considering the M5 has none. This is something I kept in mind when I started to drive both cars. And judging from the lap times videos above, the end result is quite clear.
First off, the Ferrari shows hints of understeer. But it's not understeer that punishes you for going too fast. Instead, it's understeer that kindly tells you to ease off a little. And it's quite easy to ease off, because of that downforce that ensures all four tires are firmly planted to the ground. Driving this car as fast as I could was a blast. Despite being a convertible, it feels sooooo good. Grip is practically everywhere, and so you are urged to go faster and faster and faster on every lap. Having a couple of milliseconds shaved off from the previous lap repeatedly never gets old.
The M5, however, is a completely different story. Barrelling down the main straight it has a higher speed trap than the Ferrari, but that's all there is. The M5 has to work harder, a lot harder, just to be able to catch up to the Ferrari. A perfect example is the speed trap leading up to Turn 1, as shown in the Replay Cam videos for both cars. The M5's front brakes glow more brighter than the California's, because it has to brake earlier and harder. I also had to make a lot of corrections to the steering input, all because it doesn't have the luxury of downforce, and therefore more grip. And speaking of grip, the rear end likes to kick out a lot. You will really have to adjust your driving style if you want to maximize the car's potential. But because the rear end tends to kick out, it's a lot more fun in the corners.
I did mention in an earlier post that I planned on taking the two cars to other tracks for more lap times, but I didn't bother because the California has the huge downforce disadvantage. Laguna Seca? Downforce + lighter weight = immense stopping and ownage from the Ferrari. Trial Mountain? Even more of a nightmare for the M5 since the track is filled to the brim with high-speed corners. Deep Forest? a combination of both.
And so, now we come to decision time. Performance wise, no doubt the Ferrari trumps over the BMW. But, as a car, the M5 is better because it's a sedan, and it has incredible amounts of performance because of it being an ///M car. I don't like the California that much, despite it being a Ferrari. I would much prefer the BMW because it's a sports sedan, and I love sports sedans. But the Ferrari caught me off guard. It really did surprise me, and so my vote goes to the California. 👍👍
BMW M5 '08:
Ferrari California '08:
On paper, the two cars seem to be a dead heat, what with the M5 having a more powerful engine but the California being lighter. Initial thoughts were, I thought the M5 was going to win this; well, mainly because it's a high-performance sedan (It's an ///M car, for goodness' sake), and that the California is more of a gran tourer designed for relaxed cruising. But that quickly changed when I looked at the stock settings of both cars. To my surprise, the Ferrari has a very high amount of downforce, almost reaching that of race car levels. Which is scary, considering the M5 has none. This is something I kept in mind when I started to drive both cars. And judging from the lap times videos above, the end result is quite clear.
First off, the Ferrari shows hints of understeer. But it's not understeer that punishes you for going too fast. Instead, it's understeer that kindly tells you to ease off a little. And it's quite easy to ease off, because of that downforce that ensures all four tires are firmly planted to the ground. Driving this car as fast as I could was a blast. Despite being a convertible, it feels sooooo good. Grip is practically everywhere, and so you are urged to go faster and faster and faster on every lap. Having a couple of milliseconds shaved off from the previous lap repeatedly never gets old.
The M5, however, is a completely different story. Barrelling down the main straight it has a higher speed trap than the Ferrari, but that's all there is. The M5 has to work harder, a lot harder, just to be able to catch up to the Ferrari. A perfect example is the speed trap leading up to Turn 1, as shown in the Replay Cam videos for both cars. The M5's front brakes glow more brighter than the California's, because it has to brake earlier and harder. I also had to make a lot of corrections to the steering input, all because it doesn't have the luxury of downforce, and therefore more grip. And speaking of grip, the rear end likes to kick out a lot. You will really have to adjust your driving style if you want to maximize the car's potential. But because the rear end tends to kick out, it's a lot more fun in the corners.
I did mention in an earlier post that I planned on taking the two cars to other tracks for more lap times, but I didn't bother because the California has the huge downforce disadvantage. Laguna Seca? Downforce + lighter weight = immense stopping and ownage from the Ferrari. Trial Mountain? Even more of a nightmare for the M5 since the track is filled to the brim with high-speed corners. Deep Forest? a combination of both.
And so, now we come to decision time. Performance wise, no doubt the Ferrari trumps over the BMW. But, as a car, the M5 is better because it's a sedan, and it has incredible amounts of performance because of it being an ///M car. I don't like the California that much, despite it being a Ferrari. I would much prefer the BMW because it's a sports sedan, and I love sports sedans. But the Ferrari caught me off guard. It really did surprise me, and so my vote goes to the California. 👍👍
Last edited:
. Anyways, this week I have dug way back to the beginning of this thread and found an interesting suggestion withing the first few posts. So this week's duel is.....
