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

  • Thread starter Cowboy
  • 1,338 comments
  • 192,863 views
F1 all the way! 23 years after its debut and it still is modern by all standards of performance, handling, aerodynamics, technology. Only brakes, electronics and number of airbags makes it a bit dated. All in all, F1 is much more appealing and Gordon Murray is THE genius in engineering which still shows on it. And what an engine from BMW: Starts from idle in 5th at 50kph without a hitch up to the max of 380. Only Regera does that now using electric motors.
 
I just drove both on GT6... And I must day WOW. My vote does not change, F1 all the way, but the veyron does not understeer at all for me. It's just plain heavy and needs some serious braking to be fast.

But as said, the F1 is still the winner for me as it is so much fun to drive.
 
Oh look....week 6 and I already have 2 suggestions chosen on 2 weeks...:D

Would I rather have a legendary Super car that considered the best car made ever by car enthusiasts? Or do I want a ugly boat-ish overpowered car made by French...?

F1?? Hell yeah!!!
Veyron? No thanks but I rather have a fiat 500 instead...
 
I know the Veyron is a rather brilliant piece of engineering, but the F1 is the one for me. It feels like a road legal race car. Insane power to weight ratio. Middle seat driving position like a Formula 1 car. It's awesome

Edit: I have a suggestion for the next week: BMW M4 Coupe vs Mercedes SL55 AMG or Audi R8 4.2 FSI '07 vs Dodge Viper GTS '02
 
Last edited:
Well... I certainly had quite an interesting result pitting these two cars against each other. My thoughts when I saw this matchup painted the McLaren as the obvious winner. After all, it was built to be fast, not only in a straight line, but in the corners and bends as well. McLaren F1s have been used as racing cars in Super GT and in LeMans. This is something that certainly can't be said about the Veyron. F1s are agile and lightweight. Veyrons, while certainly very quick in a straight line, comes up short in the corners. With most performance cars, especially hypercars, creature comforts are cast aside in the name of weight reduction to help the car corner better and make it more responsive. The Bugatti is a car that is very fast and very luxurious, but responsiveness in the corners naturally suffers due to the extra weight.

For this comparison, I added two extra trials, since these are both cars known for their speed. The F1 is the fastest normally aspirated car in the world, and the Veyron is the fastest turbocharged car.

Mountain Trial (Matterhorn Rotenboden):
F1 - 1:43.812
Veyron - 1:39.404

City Trial (SSR5):
F1 - 1:29.360
Veyron - 1:29.911

LeMans Trial (Circuit de la Sarthe 2013):
F1 - 4:08.207
Veyron - 4:03.708

Top Speed Trial (SSRX):
F1 - 5:17.914 w/ Top Speed of 216mph
Veyron - 4:41.128 w/ Top Speed of 255mph

The results were staggering. Did the Veyron seriously beat out the F1? By such a significant margin no less? I mean, I added those last two trials in order to give the Veyron a fighting chance, because I thought the F1 was going to destroy the Veyron in my usual two trials. As it turns out, I guess that extra 350 horsepower between the two was enough to make a difference.

The reason I pick Matterhorn as the mountain trial is because the sudden elevation changes magnify any cornering issues the cars have. The F1 certainly wanted to fishtail as much as it could on the uphill, but oddly enough, the downhill portions of the track didn't exacerbate the Veyron's understeer. The extra power also put it four seconds ahead of the F1 in the trial.

In the city, where it was more flat, the F1 did quite a bit better in the corners, but that sizable straight is probably where the Veyron made up most of the ground it lost in the corners. While it didn't beat the F1 in that trial, it came fairly close to doing so.

Circuit de la Sarthe for its tight and complicated corners still has the Mulsanne straight, where the Veyron clearly shined. The F1 didn't shave enough time in the corners to make it up.

For the top speed trial, I recorded the time around the track taking into account how much the cars would have to slow down on the banked turns (so as not to slam on the outer guard rail). The F1 made it around the track at pretty much full-throttle, but the Veyron needed to slow down quite a bit. But even then, the Veyron's speed in the corners was still higher than the F1's speed. In terms of top speed, I made note of what speed each car reached before beginning on the corner before the start. The point of this was to measure how fast these cars could go on their own steam, without elevation playing a factor. The F1 is known for being able to hit 240 mph, but could only manage 216 mph on its own steam. The Veyron surpassed its 252 mph record and was able to hit 255 mph on flat ground.

So yeah, I found this quite surprising. The McLaren is a lot better looking, was designed with overall performance in mind, as opposed to the single-minded "we wanna be the fastest in a straight line, but also want to be sipping on a dry martini while we're doing so" philosophy that the Veyron was founded on. Yet, in the tracks I tried both cars on, the Veyron was faster overall chiefly due to its speed in the straights. I suppose it also plays a factor that the F1 requires much more skill to drive than the Veyron, as it can be fairly tail-happy around corners if you're not careful with the gas.

I would much rather own an F1 over a Veyron, no question. However... and I really don't want to say this... the Veyron is... actually the better car.

And on that bombshell... good night!
 
ThrasherDBS
Well... I certainly had quite an interesting result pitting these two cars against each other. My thoughts when I saw this matchup painted the McLaren as the obvious winner. After all, it was built to be fast, not only in a straight line, but in the corners and bends as well. McLaren F1s have been used as racing cars in Super GT and in LeMans. This is something that certainly can't be said about the Veyron. F1s are agile and lightweight. Veyrons, while certainly very quick in a straight line, comes up short in the corners. With most performance cars, especially hypercars, creature comforts are cast aside in the name of weight reduction to help the car corner better and make it more responsive. The Bugatti is a car that is very fast and very luxurious, but responsiveness in the corners naturally suffers due to the extra weight.

For this comparison, I added two extra trials, since these are both cars known for their speed. The F1 is the fastest normally aspirated car in the world, and the Veyron is the fastest turbocharged car.

Mountain Trial (Matterhorn Rotenboden):
F1 - 1:43.812
Veyron - 1:39.404

City Trial (SSR5):
F1 - 1:29.360
Veyron - 1:29.911

LeMans Trial (Circuit de la Sarthe 2013):
F1 - 4:08.207
Veyron - 4:03.708

Top Speed Trial (SSRX):
F1 - 5:17.914 w/ Top Speed of 216mph
Veyron - 4:41.128 w/ Top Speed of 255mph

The results were staggering. Did the Veyron seriously beat out the F1? By such a significant margin no less? I mean, I added those last two trials in order to give the Veyron a fighting chance, because I thought the F1 was going to destroy the Veyron in my usual two trials. As it turns out, I guess that extra 350 horsepower between the two was enough to make a difference.

The reason I pick Matterhorn as the mountain trial is because the sudden elevation changes magnify any cornering issues the cars have. The F1 certainly wanted to fishtail as much as it could on the uphill, but oddly enough, the downhill portions of the track didn't exacerbate the Veyron's understeer. The extra power also put it four seconds ahead of the F1 in the trial.

In the city, where it was more flat, the F1 did quite a bit better in the corners, but that sizable straight is probably where the Veyron made up most of the ground it lost in the corners. While it didn't beat the F1 in that trial, it came fairly close to doing so.

Circuit de la Sarthe for its tight and complicated corners still has the Mulsanne straight, where the Veyron clearly shined. The F1 didn't shave enough time in the corners to make it up.

For the top speed trial, I recorded the time around the track taking into account how much the cars would have to slow down on the banked turns (so as not to slam on the outer guard rail). The F1 made it around the track at pretty much full-throttle, but the Veyron needed to slow down quite a bit. But even then, the Veyron's speed in the corners was still higher than the F1's speed. In terms of top speed, I made note of what speed each car reached before beginning on the corner before the start. The point of this was to measure how fast these cars could go on their own steam, without elevation playing a factor. The F1 is known for being able to hit 240 mph, but could only manage 216 mph on its own steam. The Veyron surpassed its 252 mph record and was able to hit 255 mph on flat ground.

So yeah, I found this quite surprising. The McLaren is a lot better looking, was designed with overall performance in mind, as opposed to the single-minded "we wanna be the fastest in a straight line, but also want to be sipping on a dry martini while we're doing so" philosophy that the Veyron was founded on. Yet, in the tracks I tried both cars on, the Veyron was faster overall chiefly due to its speed in the straights. I suppose it also plays a factor that the F1 requires much more skill to drive than the Veyron, as it can be fairly tail-happy around corners if you're not careful with the gas.

I would much rather own an F1 over a Veyron, no question. However... and I really don't want to say this... the Veyron is... actually the better car.

And on that bombshell... good night!
Click to expand...
You put some serious time in testing these two, but also with your conclusion I don't think that the Veyron is the better car. It just has incredible power massive torque which helps on uphill and out of slow corners. I would be more interested in the sector times at the ring.

Look at it like this, I know this example is extreme:

The NA MX-5 vs an AMG C-Class. Now which one is the better car? That, of course depends on taste.
Which one is the better sports car? Looking at lap times, acceleration and top speed, of course the AMG.

But which one is the better sports car in a subjective way? For me it would be the Miata. I have neither driven the AMG nor the Mazda in real life, but I am sure that the Mazda gives a more sports car like feel while the AMG has tons of power and maybe also great handling, but it is still a heavy saloon.

Just my two cents on your conclusion tho :)

Edit: I think I will try to get clean laps with both on the Nürburgring. Maybe I am completely wrong.
 
The way I've done comparisons in these duels is largely on the objective side of things. After all, since this is between cars in a racing game rather than actual tests of the cars in real life, I'm picking the car that is going to be a better performer. The premise of this thread is to compare two different cars, and it's left up to the reviewers to determine what criteria they will use in their votes. In my case, the criteria is to answer the question of "which of the two has the better practical capabilities?"

In the past two comparisons I've done, my objective results matched my subjective results. In essence, the car I enjoyed more wound up being the better performer. This is the first time where the two didn't match.

Subjectively, I feel the F1 tops the Veyron. It's a lot more fun to drive, loads more responsive, and it's far more charismatic.

Objectively, based on the trials I've put the cars through, the Veyron is on top. However now that I think of it, I believe you may be right that my conclusions may very well be flawed. Had I not thrown in the extra two tests, there would have been a tie between the two cars. The last two tests specifically catered to the Veyron, since I thought the F1 was going to win. Despite my general preference for the F1, I at least wanted to give the Veyron a fighting chance. Hence why the Veyron ended up winning.

It's rather clear that on the tighter and twistier tracks, the F1 would beat the Veyron. However, if there's any straightaway of considerable length, the Veyron will draw much closer to the McLaren. Thinking more about it now, I suspect that if I were to have these cars hotlap every track in the game, (minus of course the dirt/snow tracks) the F1 would come out on top.

My vote is now subject to change. I'd like to see what sort of lap times you can get on the Nurburgring with both cars.
 
Last edited:
I already have an F1 in my garage, so I bought myself a Veyron. The acceleration is phenomenal, but it is really heavy. There's loads of grip, but this isn't the kind of car that you want to take to the track.

The F1 on the other hand can be very tricky to drive, but once you get the hang of it, you'll have a massive grin on your face.

My vote goes to the F1.
 
Tested these two at the streets of willow springs and the results are:

Veyron - 1:17.033
F1 - 1:18.488

Cannot post a pic of the results as my laptop broke and I am posting this from my phone.

Even thought the Veyron manages faster laps on track, I still believe the F1 is a better super car. The Veyron's main problem is the understeer caused mainly by its weight. The F1's problem on the other hand is how delicate it is and the amount of wheel-spin when getting off the line. The F1 is still however more enjoyable to drive.

Therefore my vote goes to the F1
 
I havent played much for a while as ive had to clean this house for 2 weeks so my skills arent as sharp as they were.

DS3, No aids (McLaren has TCS though), Oil change, 1 lap

Veyron: 4:11.709
F1: 4:18.327

The F1 has a lot of oversteer while the Veyron has a lot of understeer. I felt the McLaren was a bit of a handful. Im probably going to try again soon when i have more time but for now my vote goes to the Veyron
 
I choose the Veyron.

But-why-meme-generator-but-why-84103d.jpg


Let me explain why. Bring up the Veyron, and the first thing that comes to your mind is its infamous reputation. This car is very easy to make fun of. Ugly, big, and overrated. Sort of the Tom Brady of cars. To really understand what the car is about and why it exists, you have to look past that thick reputation. It really isn't that bad of a car, and to me, it's actually beautiful.

1920px-Bugatti_Veyron_16.4_%E2%80%93_Frontansicht_%281%29%2C_5._April_2012%2C_D%C3%BCsseldorf.jpg


See? It's not that bad, at least to me. The looks are really only there to keep the car on the ground. It goes faster than some Jumbo Jets at takeoff, so if something generates lift, this thing would be flying. Literally.

This car is able to go 253 mph and still be a comfortable car to buzz around on public roads. It has (and had) the latest safety requirements met and had drivings assists for the idiots owner to stay alive. The McLaren F1 can go super fast, also, even with a NA engine. The difference? It isn't the most practical supercar you could get. The Veyron to a certain extent could be a daily driver (but don't quote me on that, haven't seen luggage space stats). Comfortable and quiet, which doesn't sound like a car that can go +250 mph. It's just..... more innovative. The car is comfortable to drive in GT6, and the F1 is scary

The F1 ushered in the real dawn of true supercars, but the Veyron changed the game forever. Supercars that emerge with tons of power and good top speed nowadays are compared to the Veyron, because after 2005, that its territory.

It's still ugly, big, bloated, an elephant, understeery, owned typically by snotty rich people, and gets scoffed at. But hey, in GT6, install all the weight reduction upgrades, and thank me later.
 
Not related to the Duel, more of GT6...

...But why the hell there's a 2013 Veyron 16.4??? :odd:
Didn't Bugatti stopped doing the normal 16.4 in 2011?? :confused:

The guys at PD must be really drunk, they took a 2009 Veyron 16.4, changed the headlights and side mirrors to the Super/Grand Sport one's and then slap 2013 on it....:ouch:

At least it's premium and not standard like in GT5. :irked:
 
iName
I choose the Veyron.

But-why-meme-generator-but-why-84103d.jpg


Let me explain why. Bring up the Veyron, and the first thing that comes to your mind is its infamous reputation. This car is very easy to make fun of. Ugly, big, and overrated. Sort of the Tom Brady of cars. To really understand what the car is about and why it exists, you have to look past that thick reputation. It really isn't that bad of a car, and to me, it's actually beautiful.

1920px-Bugatti_Veyron_16.4_%E2%80%93_Frontansicht_%281%29%2C_5._April_2012%2C_D%C3%BCsseldorf.jpg


See? It's not that bad, at least to me. The looks are really only there to keep the car on the ground. It goes faster than some Jumbo Jets at takeoff, so if something generates lift, this thing would be flying. Literally.

This car is able to go 253 mph and still be a comfortable car to buzz around on public roads. It has (and had) the latest safety requirements met and had drivings assists for the idiots owner to stay alive. The McLaren F1 can go super fast, also, even with a NA engine. The difference? It isn't the most practical supercar you could get. The Veyron to a certain extent could be a daily driver (but don't quote me on that, haven't seen luggage space stats). Comfortable and quiet, which doesn't sound like a car that can go +250 mph. It's just..... more innovative. The car is comfortable to drive in GT6, and the F1 is scary

The F1 ushered in the real dawn of true supercars, but the Veyron changed the game forever. Supercars that emerge with tons of power and good top speed nowadays are compared to the Veyron, because after 2005, that its territory.

It's still ugly, big, bloated, an elephant, understeery, owned typically by snotty rich people, and gets scoffed at. But hey, in GT6, install all the weight reduction upgrades, and thank me later.
Click to expand...
I must also admit, that my the Veyron was not too bad to drive, I actally thought that it would be faster than the F1 around the Ring. But then I drove the F1 and it was about 10 times better, you can really scratch the limits with the F1 while you need to make everything perfect with the Veyron. And I don't think either of them are much of a daily driver, considering that you need a petrol station every few metres :lol:
 
ImmalovemaGTR
I must also admit, that my the Veyron was not too bad to drive, I actally thought that it would be faster than the F1 around the Ring. But then I drove the F1 and it was about 10 times better, you can really scratch the limits with the F1 while you need to make everything perfect with the Veyron. And I don't think either of them are much of a daily driver, considering that you need a petrol station every few metres :lol:
Click to expand...
The F1 is more of a driver's car, so it's easy to love. They Veyron is a big supercar that beat records and is driven by mostly snotty people who think they are better than everyone, so it's easy to hate. If in real life somebody gave me the keys to a Veyron or a F1, I'd take the F1 no question (what you think I'm stupid? :lol:). But, on the other hand, the Veyron did a lot for cars. It made companies push harder to make a Veyron killer, and where would we be if that car never existed? I bet it's also pretty easy to drive (in real life), minus the extreme paranoia of scratching anything on it. The car is so overrated that it's underrated.
 
iName
The F1 is more of a driver's car, so it's easy to love. They Veyron is a big supercar that beat records and is driven by mostly snotty people who think they are better than everyone, so it's easy to hate. If in real life somebody gave me the keys to a Veyron or a F1, I'd take the F1 no question (what you think I'm stupid? :lol:). But, on the other hand, the Veyron did a lot for cars. It made companies push harder to make a Veyron killer, and where would we be if that car never existed? I bet it's also pretty easy to drive (in real life), minus the extreme paranoia of scratching anything on it. The car is so overrated that it's underrated.
Click to expand...
But, the F1, it was the last road car to win Le Mans, that will probably never happen again it held every record that the veyron had, and had them for longer too. :P

I think part of the reason why the F1 held the throne for the speed record for so long was because nobody really wanted to beat it. Even if someone is not interested in race cars (how could anyone not be interested in race cars?) They would still know that the F1 is a great car.

Clearly the winner here is the F1, the Veyron may be faster in some ways, but it had 16 years or so of technical development so it's really not that impressive. I would find the P1 a better opponent to the F1. But the F1 would still win. It won Le Mans.
 
The F1 vs Veyron battle was pretty interesting for me. Both cars seem to be the opposite of each other driving wise. The F1 does better in the corners while the Veyron excels in a straight line. So here we go.....

1 lap on Sarthe 2013, no tuning, no aids.

Veyron: 4:01.553
F1: 4:04.729

F1 got beat by ~3 seconds. But I still choose the F1 over the Veyron because the F1 likes to give you a challenge. You can't make sudden movements or else you get that snap oversteer. The Veyron on the other hand has more of an understeer issue, mainly due to the massive power and weight. But once you get to know both of these cars they will become your friends pretty quickly.

I'm not going to go back and quote all the posts you guys made on which one you prefer, but I can tell which one is the winner.

And the winner is......

1994-mclaren-f1.jpg

The 1994 F1!!!!!​

Another week down, another battle to follow. Check back tomorrow for the next duel of the week.
 
For The Next duel maybe
Lotus europa special vs alpine a110
Lambo Miura vs Ford GT40
BMW 2002 turbo vs Dodge Challenger(or other classic muscle)
Toyota Chaser vs Lotus Carlton
 
Alright, it's time for the next duel of the week. Thought I'd finally get back to Japan for this one, so this week's duel of the week is.....

2002-Mazda-RX-7-Spirit_R_Type_A_1.jpg

The 2002 Mazda RX7 Spirit R Type A​

vs​

508350d1182347880-honda-nsx-fan-club-honda-nsx_2002_1600x1200_wallpaper_1a_o5s_pakwheels-com-.jpg

The 2002 Honda NSX Type R
(Thanks to @=drifting24/7= for the suggestion)​

Another great rivalry next to the Supra and R34. Take these for a drive and let me know what you think and if you have any suggestions, feel free to start a conversation with me.
 
Last edited:
FD all the way to me. Rotary engine, ageless style (one of the most beautiful design of all times imo), much cheaper, great and balanced handling, tuned easily and very strong after one tunes it. Keeps the title of champion in Touge of Best Motoring against NSXs, GTRs, and all the big names of Japan sportscars.

NSX is a great one too, a bit faster in Tsukuba battles, great sound when revving, too pricey too.


I was thinking of this exact duel once I entered the topic to check what's up...
 

Similar threads

MisterWaffles
  • Poll
GT6 Duel of the Week 2 - The Last Lap
33 34 35
Replies
1K
Views
100K
MisterWaffles
MisterWaffles
MisterWaffles
  • Poll
GT Sport Duel of the Week (Inactive)
18 19 20
Replies
570
Views
50K
XSquareStickIt
XSquareStickIt
rlx
How to record telemetry data of AI-driven cars
Replies
5
Views
2K
hyperspeed980
hyperspeed980
XSquareStickIt
Car of the Week | Toyota S-FR '15
36 37 38
Replies
1K
Views
365K
SomePlayaDude
SomePlayaDude
rlx
The top 50 fastest road cars in GT7 as of April 2024
Replies
10
Views
12K
rlx
rlx

Latest Posts

Back