GT6 Duel of the Week #70: The Grand Finale (well, not really)

[Cowboy]

I'll start with the 300ZX. A car that would live on until 1999, though I'm reviewing the '89 model. Interesting enough, the '89 has a higher PP rating than the other 300ZXs in the game. So how does it drive? Driving it was a bit of a toss up. It did feel more planted than the RX7, but aslo a bit more...boring. Going through the esses on Suzuka East, this car has a sweet spot which is third gear, and manages a considerable speed on the straight.

The RX7 on the other hand is VERY tail happy. The car really felt like it was set up for drifting, but that oversteer is what made it fun to drive. Going through the esses the car would stick the tail end out but in a good way. Plus, who doesn't like that '90s interior, and most of all, Rotary! After testing idecided to throw on some comfort hards and drifted it stock, which it did well at. So just how did they compare in lap times?

3 laps on Suzuka East, both cars CS tires (had to degrade the RX7 to CS), not aids except ABS.

éfini RX7: 1:00.986
300zx: 1:02.137

Even on CS tires, the RX7 still beats by over a second. Which would I choose? The obvious answer is...

The RX7. And judging by your votes...

RX7: 8
300ZX: 3

And the winner is...

The '91 éfini RX7!!!​

As always, I will announce the next duel tomorrow, so be sure to stop back here.

 

[MisterWaffles]

I have the times for no TC now.
In my first test both cars were on their stock tires so the RX7 had much more grip, so for this test down to comfort soft it went.

Fastest Times:
300ZX: 2:32.365
RX7: 2:32.637

I tried many times to get the RX7 to go faster than the Z but I just kept invalidating my laps so I gave up!

After being frustrated by that I determined that the root cause of the RX7 slowing down where the initial hairpins and the long straight up the hill. The RX7 spent most of my time fidgeting about in the corners struggling for grip, while the 300ZX had too much of it. On the hill it seemed to top out at 165-ish km/h while the 300ZX could go a little farther thanks to its bigger engine and torque.

Point to the 300ZX

As for tuning, it really comes down to which car you like better, because they can both be good supercar beaters and drifters *cough* RX7 *cough*.

Point to both

Body kits and customization are limited for the RX7, only having four unique options for aeroparts, with simple extensions, a barely noticeable flat floor and two wings: a tiny one that looks like it offers little aerodynamic benifits but is still cool while the second looks pretty cool as well. As for the Nissan has five unique options, with two different options for bodykits, a barely noticeable flat floor and two wings, one ripped straight off a supra and one racing wing.

Point to the 300ZX

The base MSRP for the Mazda (in Canadian credits) is:
38,500
That will put a dent into your real life wallet

The price for the Nissan is:
39,500
A whopping 1,000 credits more, that's three whole minutes of driving in the Sunday Cup!!!!

The Mazda turns the tables

Colour options for the Mazda include: Red, Black, Dark Blue, Yellow and Silver. 5 different colours.
The Mazda has White, Two Silvers, Black, Dark Blue, Two Reds and Yellow. That's 5 colours and 8 shades.

Point for the Nissan

I pitted them both in a drag race on the famous Eifel Flat Drag Strip to test their sound and speed, both without TC and on comfort soft.
The 300ZX sound like your typical V6 sports car, but has a nice throatyness about it, while the RX7 sounds like a typical rotary car, however its head on view camera has this annoying screeching sound, plus I like throatynes better.
The 300ZX also won the drag race, the RX7 was matching the 300's speed for the entire time but the 300 was always one step ahead.
The 300ZX did it in 46 seconds at 272km/h and the Mazda was 47 seconds at 263km/h

The winner of the drag race is the 300ZX

As for drifting and töge and whatever you JDM people do,

No contest, RX7.

For looks,

RX7.

Engine?

RX7.

Interior?

300ZX.

So, with a 6/5 victory over the Mazda the 300ZX wins this battle and wins my vote as the unpopular opinion.

And the verdict is......

BUY AN R34.

 

[MisterWaffles]

I'll start with the 300ZX. A car that would live on until 1999, though I'm reviewing the '89 model. Interesting enough, the '89 has a higher PP rating than the other 300ZXs in the game. So how does it drive? Driving it was a bit of a toss up. It did feel more planted than the RX7, but aslo a bit more...boring. Going through the esses on Suzuka East, this car has a sweet spot which is third gear, and manages a considerable speed on the straight.

The RX7 on the other hand is VERY tail happy. The car really felt like it was set up for drifting, but that oversteer is what made it fun to drive. Going through the esses the car would stick the tail end out but in a good way. Plus, who doesn't like that '90s interior, and most of all, Rotary! After testing idecided to throw on some comfort hards and drifted it stock, which it did well at. So just how did they compare in lap times?

3 laps on Suzuka East, both cars CS tires (had to degrade the RX7 to CS), not aids except ABS.

éfini RX7: 1:00.986
300zx: 1:02.137

Even on CS tires, the RX7 still beats by over a second. Which would I choose? The obvious answer is...

The RX7. And judging by your votes...

RX7: 8
300ZX: 3

And the winner is...

The '91 éfini RX7!!!​

As always, I will announce the next duel tomorrow, so be sure to stop back here.

You did all that while I wrote my reviews, damn your fast

 

[Max911]

Landslide victory to the RX-7.
Well, I wouldn't choose either as there are things I love in both cars. I prefer their first gen variants, so the SA22C and the S30. To me their story and history play a huge factor.

 

[Cowboy]

You did all that while I wrote my reviews, damn your fast

Doesn't take me too long actually.

 

[Cowboy]

Well since I cannot sleep at the moment I will announce the next duel. This week's duel is one that I came across that seemed rather interesting, so this week's duel is.....

The 2008 Mercedes Benz C63 AMG

vs

The 2011 Dodge Charger SRT8!!!
(Thanks to @=drifting24/7= for the original suggestion)
​

Two powerful cars, two heavy cars, one winner. Take these two for a spin and let me know what you think and if you have any suggestions, feel free to start a conversation with me.

 

[Pete05]

These two are another duo I've already tested on the Nordschleife. They were both fitted with Sport Hard tyres and given 2 laps in Arcade Mode Time Trail with grip set to real. The results:

Dodge Charger SRT8
- 7:56:239
Mercedes Benz AMG C63
- 7:45:853

More one sided than I thought it would be before any keys were inserted into ignitions and, again, a result of the penalty suffered by carrying extra weight.
Another factor 'weighing' against the American is narrow power & torque curves compared to zee German. That combined with the gear ratios chosen by Dodge makes it noticeable when up against such a formidable opponent.
Yes, they're both sporting 4-doors, but I think the difference in physical size means a shopper in the 3D world would be comparing the Charger against the AMG E class, not the smaller C class. Either way I'm walking straight past the Dodge dealer and into the one with the AMG build quality.
Yes there's a price premium for the AMG but you get what you pay for.

Vote 1 AMG C63

 

[lxmmy]

C63. M156 6.2 V8 was one of the best engines to be produced by AMG.

C63 has better handling & is way better looking. I hate how the Charger only has 5 gears and it feels sluggish and not responsive but if GT was to put the Hellcat version then it may be a different story.

 

[MidFieldMaven]

I feel your pain, Cowboy. I was granted only 4 hours of sleep before I randomly awoke and can't fall back to sleep

At Mid-Field Raceway, stock on Comfort Softs, these are my best laps in the two brute sedans.

1:22.673 - 499 - Mercedes Benz C 63 AMG '08
1:22.931 - 498 - SRT Charger SRT8 '11

The Benz got up to 148 mph while the Charger saw a maximum of 146 mph on the front straight.

C 63 AMG
6.2L
450 hp / 7,000 rpm
443 ft-lb / 5,000 rpm
1,730 kg (3,814 lbs)

Charger SRT8
6.4L
469 hp / 6,000 rpm
470 ft-lb / 4,500 rpm
1,980 kg (4,365 lbs)

There is no good reason for the Charger to weigh nearly 2 tons. While it weighs 551 lbs more than the Benz, the SRT only adds 19 horses and 27 ft-lbs of torque. The Benz wins this for me, hands down.

 

[Pete05]

C63. M156 6.2 V8 was one of the best engines to be produced by AMG.

C63 has better handling & is way better looking. I hate how the Charger only has 5 gears and it feels sluggish and not responsive but if GT was to put the Hellcat version then it may be a different story.

I agree with you about the AMG engine. R.I.P M156
If we had the Hellcat Dodges in GT (we better get them in GT7 ), things would be a whole lot more competitive.

I feel your pain, Cowboy. I was granted only 4 hours of sleep before I randomly awoke and can't fall back to sleep

At Mid-Field Raceway, stock on Comfort Softs, these are my best laps in the two brute sedans.

1:22.673 - 499 - Mercedes Benz C 63 AMG '08
1:22.931 - 498 - SRT Charger SRT8 '11

The Benz got up to 148 mph while the Charger saw a maximum of 146 mph on the front straight.

C 63 AMG
6.2L
450 hp / 7,000 rpm
443 ft-lb / 5,000 rpm
1,730 kg (3,814 lbs)

Charger SRT8
6.4L
469 hp / 6,000 rpm
470 ft-lb / 4,500 rpm
1,980 kg (4,365 lbs)

There is no good reason for the Charger to weigh nearly 2 tons. While it weighs 551 lbs more than the Benz, the SRT only adds 19 horses and 27 ft-lbs of torque. The Benz wins this for me, hands down.

Wow! Those times were closer than I expected to see on CS rubber.
If you want to know why the SRT weighs almost 2 big ones, compare the dimensions of the two cars. As I said in my post, the Charger is another class up in size.

 

[MidFieldMaven]

Oh indeed, the Hellcat would destroy the C 63 AMG, but if we're being fair, the new C63 AMG S might still beat it around a racetrack. Downsized from the 6.2L V8 to a 4.0L twin-turbo V8, it packs over 500 hp and torque for $73,000 or $9,000 more than the Charger Hellcat. If you're looking at $65k sport sedans, an extra $9k isn't (shouldn't be) a big deal, especially with how much more you're getting for that money. The Benz is quieter, higher quality inside and out, more luxurious, much lighter, etc...

https://www.mbusa.com/mercedes/vehicles/model/class-C/model-C63WS

Neither the C63 S nor the Hellcat can be ordered with a manual transmission

 

[Pete05]

Oh indeed, the Hellcat would destroy the C 63 AMG, but if we're being fair, the new C63 AMG S might still beat it around a racetrack. Downsized from the 6.2L V8 to a 4.0L twin-turbo V8, it packs over 500 hp and torque for $73,000 or $9,000 more than the Charger Hellcat. If you're looking at $65k sport sedans, an extra $9k isn't (shouldn't be) a big deal, especially with how much more you're getting for that money. The Benz is quieter, higher quality inside and out, more luxurious, much lighter, etc...

https://www.mbusa.com/mercedes/vehicles/model/class-C/model-C63WS

Yeah the new C63 S is in another world as far as performance is concerned. Better everywhere but, somehow I don't think the ears would agree.

 

[Rotorist]

E-class is natural competitor to Charger, so not the best duel here, sorry. Nevertheless C63 is much better. I would compare it to IS-F though.

 

[Pete05]

E-class is natural competitor to Charger, so not the best duel here, sorry. Nevertheless C63 is much better. I would compare it to IS-F though.

Just to add a little extra information, I've also tested these 4-door cars to the exact same conditions as the AMG & SRT.
This what I found:

BMW M5 - 7:33:945
Lexus ISF - 7:40:568
Subaru S206 - 7:45:042
Mitsubishi EVO X - 7:58:174

Food for thought

 

[MisterWaffles]

Mercedes C63 vs Dodge-SRT Charger SRT8 Review/Comparison
"This is going to be a long week for the Dodge..."​

Well time for my review that's now on time
I took the cars out to my hill climb track and the Mercedes won by three seconds:
SRT:2:23.174
Merc:2:20.114
This test was done on stock tires with stock parts. No playing field levelling here.

Point to the C63.

(My drag racing times are a bit inflated because it takes time to set the cars up)
Now on to the drag race! I do this in two player battle on a four kilometre strip with no traction control.
Srt:1:04.7
Merc:1:03.4
So the winner in straight line speed is the c63, even when the cars maxed out it was still the c63 pulling ahead, and it was a faster launch too due to the short gearing.

Point to the merc again.

In terms of drifting, I see them both used equally as often, neither of them seems to be the preferred car because they both have their fans.

Point to both

In terms of paint colour the merc has more, but not much variation. Most colours are your typical Mercedes deep deep dark metallic that almost appears black. The srt also is like that, with only blue and red being true colours and the rest being shades. Well you can paint them both anyways.

Point goes to the merc.

In terms of customization, both are fully tuneable. As for body kits the C63 has five unique options, with two front spoilers with side splitters, a very nice looking flat floor and two different racing wings, as well as the option to remove the factory wing. The Charger has only three unique options with them all being front spoilers. And the ability to remove the wing. Somewhat disappointed.



Point to the Mercedes

The Mercedes also sounds much better, the Charger sounds too generic.

Point to da merc.

As for looks, I also think the merc looks much better than the SRT

Point to the merc.

And that concludes my review. The winner by a landslide and the winner of my vote is the Mercedes. Perhaps try something more in its league next time.

And the verdict is....

BUY AN M5

Also, for next week it should be something like the 458 vs the Gallardo because as much as I want to see the MP4 go at the Ferrari, it's just an unfair battle. Save the McLaren for the Lamborghini Aventador or do an MP4 vs F1, that would be fun.

 

[Ameer67]

You know, I tried using the Charger once as a cop car in my cruise rooms. NEVER. AGAIN. It makes a good roadblock vehicle... and that's it. Just choose the German car this time, folks.

 

[ThrasherDBS]

Well, looks like everyone is batting for the Germans. While I'm certain the Mercedes is the more comfortable luxury car, you don't get to feel the quality of the leather seats in a racing simulator. Driving both cars, I find it surprising how many people are going with the Mercedes, but then again we all have our reasons for preferring one car over another.

So here we have two four-door sedans that both nearly weigh two tons. One performance sedan and another which is both a performance and a luxury sedan. Mercedes is one of the forefront names in the European performance saloon market, and the C 63 AMG is a good example of this. The Charger, while not having quite as much flair as the Mercedes or as much bravado as its grandfather from the late 60's and early 70's, is still a good looking performance sedan with a countenance that commands respect.

Mountain Trial:
C 63 - 1:49.043
Charger - 1:50.482

City Trial:
C 63 - 1:36.846
Charger - 1:36.365

The Mercedes certainly felt like it had more power than the Charger, though it's only by virtue that it's a good 250kg lighter than the Charger. It actually has 19 less horses. What bothers me about this car, is that the power is delivered way too early on the power band. Driving this car, I felt scared to hit the gas pedal. Breathe on the gas pedal just a little too much than what you needed, and it flings you aside like an ill-tempered gorilla. On the Matterhorn, the elevation changes constantly threw this car off balance. It was difficult to get consistency with this car and frustratingly so. I had to restart several times because I wound up stuffing it in the guardrail. The problem wasn't quite as pronounced on SSR5, but still very present.

The Charger on the other hand felt much more easy to control. Yes, the weight bogged it down on the uphill sections of the Matterhorn and is chiefly the reason why the car was a second and a half slower than the Mercedes. But the power is delivered at the right time. Taking a long easy corner? Give it a reasonable amount of gas, and it will get you through it nice and stable. Wanna impress the nonexistent lady in the passenger seat? Give it a bit more, and you can kick the tail end out, but controllably so. While the Mercedes is a beast in a cashmere suit and high on cocaine, the Charger is a mostly conservative steed that's willing to be fun when you want it to be.

Yes there's a tie. But I favor the Charger's behavior. It's not too conservative and it's not too wild either. While many people would prefer the silver arrow, I'll bat for the stars and stripes on this one. The Charger gets my vote.

 

[MOPARbarrett5]

I'm sure my pick is obvious, the Charger. It's big, it's loud, it's fast, and it's a good dirty racer.

 

[ALeftRighter]

I'm choosing the Merc, if two people have the same tunes, and race a bit dirty, like DTM dirty, then you have some great races, the charger is too, non race car-ish.

 

[kolio]

Gotta go with the C63 AMG.

As much as I like American cars, this just isn't my favorite. It doesn't really "perform" much at all.

 

[Ryk]

Two cars enter - One car leaves.

C 63 AMG 2008

11 paint chips - Not a very colourful selection but... Periklasgrun Metallic - no idea what that means but I am magnetically drawn to it. Dark and green so it can't be bad. In fact it has 9 metallic options and two solid options Fire Opal Red or Calcium White.
Looks - 4 door Autobahn cruiser.

Looks a bit KIA Optima to me on first look. The twin double exhausts at the back is the second real hint of something under the bonnet, the two ridges in the very same bonnet are the other.

To be fair to the styling it is sober and the car itself doesn't look that large or threatening.

----------------

SRT Charger SRT8 2011

6 paint chips. Black, White, Silver, Wolfram, and two nice colourful chips, Blue and Red - trim swaps about dependant on your choice, (Black and White get you Red Leather seats.) I chose Black.

Looks - The front of the car looks more like a RAM pick up truck or a GT-R. Black Is a colour that hides a lot of vices. The Charger is oddly like a brassy girl who has a few too many pounds but puts on a brave face and has some sassy come back. Maybe she is crying on the inside, but at least she is living it large. The styling tries but fails, but I kind of like it for at least having a go to be different.


Let's play Top Donald Trumps
Stat-------------- Charger -----------"C63"
PP ------------------498------------------499
Weight ------------1980kg ------------ 1730kg
Power -------------470bhp ------------ 450bhp
Torque -------------65.5 -----------------61.2
Length -------------5088mm ----------4720mm
Width --------------1886mm -----------1795mm
Height -------------1480mm -----------1440mm
Cylinders -----------V8 ----------------- V8
Displacement -----6417cc ------------6208cc
Paint Chips --------6 Chips ------------9 Chips
A Dark Green? ------ No------------------Yes
Reno Fernley------203.8s------------202.5s
Cost - -------------- 46,660cr---------- 104,400cr

The Charger dominates the C63, It only loses in Paints chips (No Dark Green paint virtually makes the car undrivable. And it only costs 46,660cr... what is it made from recycled plastic and melted down Milwaukee's Best beer cans?

-------------------------

I raced the cars in the lowest part of California (Los Angeles?), Death Valley, where gravity acts even more than for the rest of the world. Reno Fernley Racetrack. (Which is in Nevada but GT6's course maker has al kinds of made up tracks in Germany now... ho hum)

The track is pretty twisty and lumpy so a real work out for handling and the suspension - these cars both dealt with the changing cambers well. I expected the C63 to do well just from the initial reports here. The laps went well enough, Car was predictable and easy enough to drive. but I think the heavy load on the suspension was a bit too much - on a smoother layout it may have been able to cope better.
Merc setting a benchmark of 202.5 seconds. The charger sounded quite good, deep V8 rumble but the gears felt a bit low and long, did my bast lap of 203.8 seconds.

On the easy going sections the C63 pulled away in the twisty bits they were more evenly matched... which goes against everything I thought about weight not being important in top speed and everything in low speed handling and acceleration!

They both felt fairly neutral to drive, The Heavier Charger was predictable. And the end result was closer than I thought - which made me like the Charger, as it did a lot better than I expected.


The Verdict
Well the Merc has a lot of cash behind it, but oddly it is the Charger that has more heritage - It evokes the General Lee from the Dukes of Hazzard and the bad guys car in Bullitt. The Merc; That awful guy from the Stuttgart test lab with the dodgy suit, and wrist watch only a deep sea diver would need.

Is the Merc worth more than twice the credits? No. It is a faster car but doesn't offer that much more. If the prices were much closer then maybe I could say it is worth it, but neither look great so the huge price on the Merc makes it feel much worse. The C63 is more expensive and not a stunner.


Hmm I think I'd have to pick the Charger. it is half the price but the Merc is no where near twice the car to drive.

The Merc is a bit of a Ringo... Is it the best car in the world? It isn't even the best car from Stuttgart.

Verdict - Dodge... SRT Charger and I'll put my saved credits for a Gnome Stick! Girls Love a Gnome Stick.

 

[Cowboy]

Let's get this underway.

The Charger. The redesigned model in 2011 gave it a more aggressive look, and a respectful 425 horses under the hood. There are some decent paint colors available, two of which having a red interior. Driving it in GT6 reminded me of another car I tested recently, the Aston Martin Vanquish. The Charger has plenty of understeer thanks to the 1,980 kg that it carries, but once managed it turned out to be an OK car, not good, but OK.

The C63. The AMG name lives on in this trusty steed of a vehicle, and it drove, well, about the same as the Charger. This car looks less aggressive, but has a more "luxurious" look, something that the Silver Arrow doesn't disappoint with. Driving it was interesting, because it stuck the tail out on nearly every corner I went through. Other than that its hard to differantiate between that Charger. Though this car is over double the price of the Charger, I will still choose it because it feels more challenging to drive and it is a car that I've had a great experience with in GT6. Lap times you ask?

C63: 1:26.461
Charger: 1:27.429

And the votes:

Charger: 3
C63: 9

And the winner is.....

The 2008 C63 AMG!!!​

Well that'll do it for this week, so be sure to stop back here tomorrow for the next duel of the week!

 

[ALeftRighter]

Autobianchi A110 vs Fiat Panda?

 

[Boxer16Turbo]

Maybe for the next
Ferrari Dino 246 vs Chevy Camaro Z/28

 

[ImmalovemaGTR]

Minolta 88C-V vs. R89C

 

[MisterWaffles]

Come on, 458 vs something, I'm in the mood for some mid engine cars to test!

 

[JDMKING13]

Is this comparison still going between the charger and the Benz? This thread is awesome, I would love to do a review PGTR (project granturismo reality) style.

 

[Cowboy]

Come on, 458 vs something, I'm in the mood for some mid engine cars to test!

Well alright then, I thought of something that may satisfy you. It's not the 458, but instead.....

The 1992 Honda NSX Type R

vs

The 1994 TVR Griffith 500!!!

Honda vs TVR, MR vs FR, should be interesting. Take these for a drive and cast your vote on which one is better.​

 

[MisterWaffles]

i may have some bias towards tvr, but that may change if the nsx is better. I will be back with my verdict. I may need to set up my wheel for this! 👍

 

[XtremeEdward]

I believe the TVR has about 20 hp more and weighs 200 kg less then the NSX. But I've always believed that the Honda was better in lap times. Can't remember, but both great cars!