Infamous Tunes * New Garage Name * New Release The R-Evolution *

[dr_slump]

You're absolutely right Stotty.

(Competition? Never, you're just too fast)

 

[Stotty]

You're absolutely right Stotty.

(Competition? Never, you're just too fast)

No matter how fast you are, there's always someone faster.

There are a few on here GTP who are a lot faster than me

 

[No_OBsT33R]

Vague? I just answered to your vague points!

No you didn't, not at all. You said 1:36 is easy. If it's so easy why is it out of the average drivers ability. If 1:36 is easy, it should be easily bearable, .2 doesn't say much.

More importantly you said you C63 was faster but gave up before proving it, wait, do you intend to prove any of your times or you gonna pull the PAL card all the time?

Like you said, the most couldn't drive that fast. When you drive that fast, the space for improvement gets smaller and smaller. Maybe you haven't done this experience yet.

I agree

Replay? Yes I can upload it but you still couldn't watch it, cause it's PAL!
The lap is almost WRS standard, I just came a little bit off the track (10-20cm on the outside) at corner 1. (without aids, except ABS1)

Upload your PAL replay, but, never mind, you went off track. Either way you could always record it with a phone they pretty much all have cameras, there's no more excuses on posting replays, yours doesn't I'm sure you know somebody who does. If you can't show it, I'll buy it when you do. Joe Blow could claim a 1:32 if they wanted to...

I expect that the C63 would be a bit faster, but I'm too lazy to test it.

.

Assumptions?

EDIT: And I still think that Stotty is much faster than I (to prevent 🤬 comments.......)

I agree, he's shown himself to be faster, but that doesn't mean you can't catch up. He proves his times possible, if he can do it's possible for anybody. The same with any time posted.

My Bad Stotty, my eyes aren't that great anymore.

I agree live and let live, All I ask is people try the Tunes before bashing them.

RJ if you have a problem with me, let's work it out, or leave each other alone, how does that sound?

 

[praiano63]

I've try now your mercedes c63 AMG ,first i drive it on Deep forest, perfectly equilibrate like i was expecting, fun to drive and with a good line for low speed medium corners like this. 1'12"200 is not too bad for a big sedan like this just don't like the 7 gear box. It let the car unstable when you have to change gear entry of a corner under brake or out of it. With this torque ,i've made a 6 almost 5 gear box and it is better to use, same thing speaking about acceleration (thanks to the huge torque).
On Fuji i run 1'37" but good for me i know lambada dance , the car swing a lot on this track. I try all the kind of setups but nothing change.
And also the BMW M5 with 190 hp less same weight is a lot faster 1'10" deep forest...
Conclusion, it's a wonderfull car to have in my garage ,it will stay with your setup because it's very equilibrate and fun, but not to compete against other cars of this kind.

Congratulations for another very good tune.

 

[dr_slump]

@ No_OBsT33R

1. I haven't driven the C63, my comment was about what I expect.

2. I thought I said that I'll try it tomorrow again.(?) And hey this is not the WRS! The lap was NOT red flagged and NOT cheated.

3. I'll upload my final time tomorrow.

4. Sorry, I've no problem with you yet, but when you continue your style to quote sb...............

 

[Adrenaline]

You said 1:36 is easy. If it's so easy why is it out of the average drivers ability. If 1:36 is easy, it should be easily bearable, .2 doesn't say much.

I agree, he's shown himself to be faster, but that doesn't mean you can't catch up. He proves his times possible, if he can do it's possible for anybody. The same with any time posted.

As usual, using your own logic against you, is the only logical way to argue with you...

In one sentence you're using the 'average' drivers ability or lack there of to prove the point you need it to. Then you turn around and use the reverse against Slump, trying to belittle hit lap times, because "anyone can run 1:35's".

Either 'anyone can do it' and 'it's easy' or everyone can't and Slump is a good driver. You don't get to pick and chose when to apply logic because it suits your arguments. The fact that you regularly do, is the reason no one can take you seriously when it comes to any form of debate.

 

[-raVer-]

@ No_OBsT33R

1. I haven't driven the C63, my comment was about what I expect.

2. I thought I said that I'll try it tomorrow again.(?) And hey this is not the WRS! The lap was NOT red flagged and NOT cheated.

3. I'll upload my final time tomorrow.

4. Sorry, I've no problem with you yet, but when you continue your style to quote sb...............

@ 2
Yes this isn´t the WRS.That doesn´t mean you can do what you want.
If you want to post a time do it clean (at least with 2 wheels between the white lines) or don´t post it.


raVer

 

[No_OBsT33R]

@ No_OBsT33R

1. I haven't driven the C63, my comment was about what I expect.

2. I thought I said that I'll try it tomorrow again.(?) And hey this is not the WRS! The lap was NOT red flagged and NOT cheated.

3. I'll upload my final time tomorrow.

4. Sorry, I've no problem with you yet, but when you continue your style to quote sb...............

What you expect and what you get are not often the same thing.

I would love to see a 1:35 lap with the C63, speaking from experience actually driving it, it's not going to be easy...

 

[Adrenaline]

@ 2
Yes this isn´t the WRS.That doesn´t mean you can do what you want.
If you want to post a time do it clean (at least with 2 wheels between the white lines) or don´t post it.

It was clean by GT5 standards.
Your (area) is a WRS rule, therefor your point is moot.

 

[No_OBsT33R]

As usual, using your own logic against you, is the only logical way to argue with you...

In one sentence you're using the 'average' drivers ability or lack there of to prove the point you need it to. Then you turn around and use the reverse against Slump, trying to belittle hit lap times, because "anyone can run 1:35's".

Either 'anyone can do it' and 'it's easy' or everyone can't and Slump is a good driver. You don't get to pick and chose when to apply logic because it suits your arguments. The fact that you regularly do, is the reason no one can take you seriously when it comes to any form of debate.

Anybody can do it because it's possible. It's still not going to be easy for everybody.

Ohh and we already went over the rules. By GTP standards it don't count, but it's irrelevant, nobodies denies a 1:36 is POSSIBLE with an NSX, or even a C63, both have already proven to be possible.

 

[Adrenaline]

Anybody can do it because it's possible. It's still not going to be easy for everybody.

Easy is a relative term. I think that's what you don't understand. I know English isn't your first language, so I assume it was just a miscommunication between you and Slump. But for future reference, Slump, nor any single person, is not responsible for the other 5.999 billion people in the world, when he says something is easy. It was easy for him, and logically who else could he speak for, other than himself?

 

[No_OBsT33R]

Easy is a relative term. I think that's what you don't understand. I know English isn't your first language, so I assume it was just a miscommunication between you and Slump. But for future reference, Slump, nor any single person, is not responsible for the other 5.999 billion people in the world, when they say something is easy. It was easy for him, and logically who else could he speak for, other than himself?

No I think you haven't read up and are talking out your but hole.

THAT is MY point. What Is "easy" for some is not "easy" for everybody. dr says it's "easy". I disagree, I think it's doable by the capable.

That doesn't say it's impossible for anybody to achieve. If anybody practices enough they should be able to get close to any time, some may need more practice then others, but Stotty has shown 1:35's possible, does that mean that 1:35 is "easy"? Hell no. It does show it's possible with enough practice.

 

[dr_slump]

Oh I'M REALLY SORRY!!!
It seems that the lap was WRS clean. (Or not?)

 

[Adrenaline]

Stotty has shown 1:35's possible, does that mean that 1:35 is "easy"?

Yes, for him.
Stotty isn't responsible for anyone else's driving abilities but his own.
So yes, it was 'easy' for him, and he proved that.
Did Slump say it was 'easy for everyone'? No, he said it was 'easy' he proved it with his lap times. You don't get to add words to his claims and force him to prove something he never claimed.

If Slump said that it was 'easy for anyone' then you would be right.

But he didn't. he said it was 'easy' with no implication to anyone else in the world.

Yes, that is WRS clean.

 

[dr_slump]

So I'm pissed off now!

Here's the replay! (I'm not a liar!)

Replay is PAL! Seems that you've to buy one now, right?
(And remember: It's not the max possible)

 

[No_OBsT33R]

Oh I'M REALLY SORRY!!!
It seems that the lap was WRS clean. Ups!

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/195/fujispeedwayfl.jpg/

That's wonderful what's the pic prove, and what's your point?

While it would be nice to see a replay (if you did indeed keep it in the lines) seeing it wouldn't change anything. 1:36 is indeed obtainable, so is 1:35.

What's your point? Do you think that proves 1:36 is easy? Or that the C63 is faster at Fuji?

 

[No_OBsT33R]

So I'm pissed off now!

Here's the replay! (I'm not a liar!)

Who said you were a liar?

 

[dr_slump]

Who said you were a liar?

Hmm, have a look at post 328/333. You didn't say it exactly with this words, but for me it is.

 

[Adrenaline]

Hmm, have a look at post 328/333. You didn't say it exactly with this words, but for me it is.

346 too

 

[Stotty]

Oh I'M REALLY SORRY!!!
It seems that the lap was WRS clean. (Or not?)

[/URL]
[/IMG]

That is WRS legal.

Saying that a certain lap time is possible for all because one person has run it might be logical, but it's not reality.

I have a decent amount of talent, and a deep technical understanding of driving, but even having a ghost from one of the super fast guys (like Ramon, Zoky or Dan Holland), I still can't match their laps. Knowing what to do and actually being able to do it yourself are 2 different things... if they weren't, I'd be 1) faster in GT5 than I am and 2) a scratch handicap golfer rather than a 18 handicap hacker.

 

[-raVer-]

Hey Dr.Slump

For originality I give you 8 of 10 points.

👍 keep up the good work



raVer

 

[dr_slump]

Hey Dr.Slump

For originality I give you 8 of 10 points.


👍 keep up the good work



raVer

What?!? 8?
I'm just kidding! Thanks!

Hmm, yeah very close! (check this out too, woah!) But still slow......damn 1:35 should be possible. I HAVE TO TRY IT TOMORROW! But I'm not going to post the result, even if I could beat the 1:36. It was just too much today.

 

[No_OBsT33R]

Yes, for him.

No, that's his personal best, doesn't mean repeating it is "easy". It obviously too many laps and wasn't achieved on the first try, doesn't seem "easy" at all. Doable, yes.

Stotty isn't responsible for anyone else's driving abilities but his own.

Neither is anybody else.

So yes, it was 'easy' for him, and he proved that.

No, still hasn't proved it was easy, if it was easy it probably wouldn't be his personal best.

Did Slump say it was 'easy for everyone'? No, he said it was 'easy' he proved it with his lap times. You don't get to add words to his claims and force him to prove something he never claimed.

His absence of specifying himself generalized the comment (Mr English teacher) it's not me adding words, it's his lack of using them

If Slump said that it was 'easy for anyone' then you would be right.

As I said, he said "easy", not "easy for me". I already tried to make the point that there is a difference, he even then didn't clarify & still didnt when I specifically asked him to clarify, so what's your point? Oh that easy for him is not easy for everybody? Thanks for helping me make my point then

But he didn't. he said it was 'easy' with no implication to anyone else in the world.

Or any implication it was specifically to himself, in that absence the statement is generalized, even more so when they didn't clarify when specifically asked.

Yes, that is WRS clean.

Not GTP clean.

It's wasn't GTP clean (well as he says now he's stayed in the lines) so & if so, it is clean, but when you cross the lines it's not.

Sorry Dr_Slump, but you said you went off track then changed your statement. According to you, you went off track. I never said you were a liar. I won't buy times that are above average without proof especially when the guy who post them says they went off track, then changes their story. That doesn't call anybody a liar. I never doubted your ability, I commend you on it. I think 1:36 is quite respectable. It's just irrelevant, as my point is it is not easy generally.

 

[dr_slump]

Sorry Dr_Slump, but you said you went off track then changed your statement. According to you, you went off track. I never said you were a liar. I won't buy times that are above average without proof especially when the guy who post them says they went off track, the changes their story. That doesn't call anybody a liar. I never doubted your ability, I commend you on it. I think 1:36 is quite respectable. It's just irrelevant, as my point is it is not easy generally.

Oh 🤬, you're right I kinda lied, but not intentional!
I drove a couple fast laps and unluckily mixed them up in my mind, sorry!

"Easy" puhh...... you remember what I said? It's "easy" for me to do some high 1:36 laps (give me 1-2 tries and I'll do it). You understand?
The difference between a high and a low time is 0.333-0.999sec. And that's a lot!

And I know I wrote that it's not difficult to do a 1:36 with this car. I'm sorry if this is hard to understand. What I meant with it is that there are 100% some guys who could drive 1:36 times = the car is able to do 1:36 times!

Clear?

 

[No_OBsT33R]

Oh 🤬, you're right I kinda lied, but not intentional!
I drove a couple fast laps and unluckily mixed them up in my mind, sorry!

I don't think making an error is Lying. Its still stupid for you to get mad at me over your mistake, and misunderstanding.

"Easy" puhh...... you remember what I said? It's "easy" for me to do some high 1:36 laps (give me 1-2 tries and I'll do it). You understand?
The difference between a high and a low time is 0.333-0.999sec. And that's a lot!

No, you said

ehhmm I'm sorry, it's not that difficult to do 1:36 lap times with it.
But yeah, I don't like the tune with race tires and a C63 is of course more exciting (and faster on Fuji).

Where do you specify to yourself???

And I know I wrote that it's not difficult to do a 1:36 with this car. I'm sorry if this is hard to understand. What I meant with it is that there are 100% some guys who could drive 1:36 times = the car is able to do 1:36 times!

It's easy to understand, it just doesn't mean "that there are 100% some guys who could drive 1:36 times = the car is able to do 1:36 times!" next time say what you mean.

Even though. To answer what you actuslly mean. No kidding, as I and Stotty already proved. What's your point?

Clear?

Yeah when you actually say what you mean, but even after you clarified it, your point escapes me.

No kidding 1:36 is possible, Stotty and I have already proved this, I'm sure many more can repeat it, while it will not be easy for everybody.

 

[Adrenaline]

No, that's his personal best, doesn't mean repeating it is...

I could drive a high 1:36 almost every lap (as long as I don't do a mistake, of course).

Luckily for me I can read. He clearly stated that as long as he was mistake free, he can consistently run 36's. Knowing you, now you'll start clawing at what constitutes easy, rather than just moving on.

His absence of specifying himself generalized the comment (Mr English teacher) it's not me adding words, it's his lack of using them

If you want to get technical on English, I guarantee you'll lose.
Case in point, Implied meaning vs Implicit assumptions. Look it up.

As I said, he said "easy", not "easy for me". I already tried to make the point that there is a difference, he even then didn't clarify & still didnt when I specifically asked him to clarify, so what's your point? Oh that easy for him is not easy for everybody?

Under your flawed logic, this would render the entire word 'easy' meaningless. It's an ambiguous word, because there is no universal level of anything that the word can be applied to. Therefore it's only logical to understand that anytime the word is used, it's based on personal experience, because as I've already tried to explain to you, the word is relative. Maybe that's just another word that is over your head? Maybe you need a dictionary to reference before you respond.

Or any implication it was specifically to himself, in that absence the statement is generalized, even more so when they didn't clarify when specifically asked.

Again, it appears you need a dictionary. It was implied, because it wasn't stated. If he had to spell it out for you, it's no longer implied, so you're contradicting yourself, by expecting him to specify an implication. A paradox in itself.

It's wasn't GTP clean (well as he says now he's stayed in the lines) so & if so, it is clean, but when you cross the lines it's not.

Aparently it was GTP clean, but instead of actually checking for yourself, you just jumped to conclusions and assumed it wasn't. Which, humorously enough, is what you claim RJ did in the post that began this discussion. So again, you're a hypocrite. Saying one thing, turning around and doing the exact opposite and then trying to convince us all, that you were right on both occasions.

my point is it is not easy generally.

Good thing no one said it was.

 

[dr_slump]

I don't think making an error is Lying. Its still stupid for you to get mad at me over your mistake, and misunderstanding.

No, that was another story.

No, you said



Where do you specify to yourself???



It's easy to understand, it just doesn't mean "that there are 100% some guys who could drive 1:36 times = the car is able to do 1:36 times!" next time say what you mean.

Ehmm, I said I'm sorry that I wasn't clear enough. No reason to repeat....

Even though. To answer what you actuslly mean. No kidding, as I and Stotty already proved. What's your point?

You wrote that the NSX isn't able to do 1:36 times, just to defend your C63 time. That's why.

No kidding 1:36 is possible, Stotty and I have already proved this, I'm sure many more can repeat it, while it will not be easy for everybody.

...........again:

Ehmm, I said I'm sorry that I wasn't clear enough. No reason to repeat....

 

[Basilea]

Ohhhh my gosh 👎

Your tuning garage is getting bigger and bigger with all off topic related discussions going on, whatsoever... turning it into a best of drama collection... just to remind you of your own words, that you ignore every now and then:

A little code of conduct
I would also humbly request any personal drama to be kept out of the Garage. I’m about posting up my setting here and not interested in any Drama. While I’m posting my settings members are free to give their opinions on them but when doing so, please be respectful and keep in mind what may work or not work for you is not necessarily going to be the same for everybody, or every Track. While I do try to keep my Tunes Track General, some tracks will always require some tweaking the settings to get the most out of them. You may also tweak something’s for your own style of driving; this is fine, just remember to keep things positive. It is possible to give negative feedback in a positive way, let’s try to keep it all in good spirits, negative behaviour insulting, or dissecting of settings to point out what in your opinion are flaws will be reported and ignored.

I mean we all know, that Adrenaline gets involved in most dramas, he even said once to ignore himself (true story) ... but since you, yes you No_OBsT33R, are around you are involved in every possible drama and you can't just leave it alone...

 

[No_OBsT33R]

Okay, so still nothing, no problem. I wasn't expecting much.

 

[No_OBsT33R]

Moved