Makeshift Shuffle Club - Time Trials & Testing for club car lists - all welcomeOpen 

Cars being considered for a club spec 1-make list (tuning prohibited) (cars to have ready)

  • Total voters
    13
  • Poll closed .
This is how the traffic list has shaped up... I have 6 sets of times (see post #2 of course)... I think I got everyone's traffic time added there...

(this would be the order - disregard those numbers those are just the counts of the ordering of all the sets of times)

  1. 092 -- Chrysler PT Cruiser '00
  2. 090 -- Eagle Talon Esi '97
  3. 078 -- Alfa Romeo 147 TI 2.0 TWIN SPARK '06
  4. 075 -- Infiniti G20 '90
  5. 067 -- Volkswagen Golf IV GTI '01
  6. 064 -- Lexus IS 200 '98
  7. 063 -- Chevrolet SSR '03
  8. 054 -- Peugeot 307 XSi '04
  9. 044 -- BMW 120i '04
  10. 040 -- Abarth Grande Punto '09
  11. 039 -- Toyota CELICA SS-II (ST202) '97
  12. 037 -- Pontiac Vibe GT '03
  13. 033 -- Land Rover Range Stormer Concept '04
  14. 017 -- Mini COOPER S '07
  15. 014 -- Toyota Tacoma X-Runner '04
  16. 009 -- Seat Ibiza Cupra '04

Oh, and I forgot about the hot hatches...
that's another set we could roll out pretty quickly too.

And I think maybe from now on we'll use 3 lists per session. Always making sure to use an older list with newer lists... so that if peeps show up without the newest list we could default back.
 
Been picking at @LongbowX 's '90s Sports list, finally finished collecting a set of times today.

Laguna Seca/Offline/abs1/CS tyres/grip 'real'/3 clean flying laps

1:40.361 -- Lotus Elise Sport 190 '98 = amarynceos
1:41.617 -- Nissan SKYLINE GT-R V・spec II (R32) '94 = amarynceos
1:42.334 -- Chevrolet Corvette GRAND SPORT (C4) '96 = amarynceos
1:42.431 -- Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VI GSR T.M. EDITION Special Color Package '99 = amarynceos
1:42.592 -- Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution V GSR '98 = amarynceos
1:43.035 -- Nissan SKYLINE GT-R V・spec (R33) '97 = amarynceos
1:43.069 -- Toyota SUPRA RZ '97 = amarynceos
1:43.126 -- Subaru IMPREZA Sport Wagon WRX STi Version VI '99 = amarynceos
1:44.403 -- TVR V8S '91 = amarynceos
1:44.431 -- Mazda éfini RX-7 Type R (FD) '91 = amarynceos
1:44.665 -- Mitsubishi GTO Twin Turbo MR '98 = amarynceos
1:45.123 -- Chevrolet Camaro Z28 Coupe '97 = amarynceos
1:45.599 -- Acura NSX '91 = amarynceos
1:45.648 -- Nissan Fairlady Z 300ZX Version S TwinTurbo 2seater (Z32) '98 = amarynceos
1:46.003 -- Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution II GSR '94 = amarynceos
1:46.027 -- Toyota MR2 GT-S '97** = amarynceos
1:46.144 -- Toyota CELICA GT-FOUR (ST205) '98 = amarynceos
1:46.614 -- Toyota SUPRA 2.5GT Twin Turbo R '90 = amarynceos

**MR2 time set with CMs up front as I couldn’t manage a clean lap with CSs all round.

Seems they've improved the C4 Grand Sport; compared to previous GTs, it's rather more nimble now.
 
List Idea!

American (left out the old muscle as they don't have enough gears) -

Plymouth XNR Ghia Roadster '60 – 404 PP
DMC DeLorean S2 '04 – 405 PP
Ford Taurus SHO '98 – 407 PP
Chevrolet SSR '03 – 414 PP
Pontiac Firebird Trans Am '78 – 415 PP
Chrysler Crossfire '04 – 417 PP
Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z Concept '88 – 422 PP
Chrysler Prowler '02 – 427 PP
Buick GNX – 427 PP
SRT 4 '03 – 428 PP
Ford Focus ST '13 – 429 PP
Pontiac Solstice Coupe Concept '02 – 434 PP
Ford SVT F-150 Lightning '03 – 442 PP
Ford Mustang V8 GT Coupe Premium '04 – 443 PP
Chevrolet Camaro Z28 Coupe '97 – 443 PP
 
Did someone already do the top speeds/limiter, pp, price stuff for the Traffic list?
I can't find it. I thought I had it already though.
  1. 092 -- Chrysler PT Cruiser '00
  2. 090 -- Eagle Talon Esi '97
  3. 078 -- Alfa Romeo 147 TI 2.0 TWIN SPARK '06
  4. 075 -- Infiniti G20 '90
  5. 067 -- Volkswagen Golf IV GTI '01
  6. 064 -- Lexus IS 200 '98
  7. 063 -- Chevrolet SSR '03
  8. 054 -- Peugeot 307 XSi '04
  9. 044 -- BMW 120i '04
  10. 040 -- Abarth Grande Punto '09
  11. 039 -- Toyota CELICA SS-II (ST202) '97
  12. 037 -- Pontiac Vibe GT '03
  13. 033 -- Land Rover Range Stormer Concept '04
  14. 017 -- Mini COOPER S '07
  15. 014 -- Toyota Tacoma X-Runner '04
  16. 009 -- Seat Ibiza Cupra '04
 
Here's a "Slowest Race Cars" list I did at some point (just putting it here for future reference).

LOW END RACE CARS

200,000cr. = BMW 320i Touring Car '03
250,000cr. = Honda S800 RSC '68
110,000cr. = Honda CIVIC TYPE-R (EK) Touring Car ’97
50,000 cr. = Honda Gathers Drider CIVIC’'98
45,000 cr. = Honda MUGEN MOTUL CIVIC Si '97
50,000 cr. = Mitsubishi Lancer 1600 GSR Rally Car '74
125,000cr. = Nissan BLUEBIRD Rally Car (510)’'69
25,000 cr. = Nissan mm-R Cup Car '01
50,000 cr. = Spoon FIT Race Car '03
114,500cr. = Suzuki Cappucino (EA21R) Race Car '95
50,000 cr. = Toyota 86 Race Car Base Model '12
156,500cr. = Volkswagen Golf IV GTI Touring Car '01
30,000 cr. = Volkswagen Lupo Cup Car '00
30,000 cr. = Volkswagen Lupo GTI Cup Car (J) '03
25,000 cr. = Volkswagen New Beetle Cup Car '00
total: 1,311,000 cr.

They run about a 7 1/2 second spread at Deep Forest:

Deep Forest - SM Tyres

1:25.885 -- BMW 320i Touring Car '03
1:26.275 -- Honda MUGEN MOTUL CIVIC Si '97
1:26.942 -- Honda CIVIC TYPE R (EK) Touring Car '97
1:27.137 -- Volkswagen Golf IV Touring Car '01
1:28.384 -- Toyota 86 Race Car Base Model '12
1:28.918 -- Honda Gathers Drider Civic '98
1:29.012 -- Volkswagen New Beetle Cup Car '00
1:29.692 -- Mitsubishi Lancer 1600 GSO Rally Car '74
1:30.269 -- Nissan mm-R Cup Car '01
1:31.803 -- Volkswagen Lupo GTI Cup Car '03
1:31.886 -- Volkswagen Lupo Cup Car '00
1:32.046 -- Suzuki Cappucino (EA21R) Race Car '95
1:33.184 -- Honda S800 RSC ’68
1:33.445 -- Nissan BLUEBIRD Rally Car (510) '69
1:33.560 -- Spoon FIT Race Car '03

Also, updated my earlier post with more info on the Mid-Range Race Car list idea.
 
I suppose I could do the info for the Traffic list today. I think for many of the cars on the list you could go back to your GT5 data? Because that's where the list originates?

@amarynceos I see you did the list I created with CS tires. I did it with SH, simply because I thought the PP levels indicated it should be SH (as the Luxury list is SM). But the data looks somewhat similar regardless. I think the less traction the rear-drive cars have, the more advantage the AWD cars have as well.

It also might make the MR2 more drivable. :lol: It is a handful...I didn't want to include it but I was urged to keep it!

I will test your Mid-range and Low-Powered Race Car list at some point when I'm feeling better. Interesting you chose to test the Mid on both SS and RH. The results were stable though. Any idea which you would prefer?
 
I don't know that changing the tires would be a big difference in re-ordering... Not sure how to put that, but I'm sure data will be okay even if it's with different tires... so long as all the same set have the same tires of course.
Just be sure to mention which tires were used, and we should be fine I think.

I definitely don't want to rule out cars because they're interesting. That would be a shame I think.
But ideally I wouldn't like to have just one ringer & one crazy car in a list. It should be more balanced. In that there isn't just one car everybody hates for any track that's NOT the #1 car. In other words, if a car stinks in every way on any possible track... it should be the #1 car. (or there should be other cars like that in the list)
But it's okay to have 1 or 2 cars that could be stinkers on the wrong track. Sort of like the Marcos or the Autozam... they're not always bad cars to get... but they sometimes can be a stinker to get on some tracks... and that's okay. It spices things up I think. It also gives you an opportunity to do your best in the stinker, and then feel at least you had fun with the challenge, & the fun of accomplishing not totally blowing it in the stinker. :lol:
 
Sometimes changing compounds does make a surprising difference (most of the time it doesn't though). For instance, with my Mid-range race car list at Deep Forest, going from RH to SS added a pretty even 2 seconds to most cars. However, the Elise 111R was only slowed by 7 tenths :odd:, while the Impreza was slowed by over 3 seconds! The BRZ lost almost 3 seconds as well. These weren't due to outlier laps, either; the Elise SS times were in a 2 tenth cluster, and I ran quite a few more laps with the Subarus and couldn't drive the lap times down any further.

I think the Mid-range RCs feel much better on SS, personally; they're livelier and show more individual character than on RHs.

Anyway, I got ambushed by a spring cold (in February?!) :rolleyes::yuck: so gonna lie low, drag the computer over to the bed and watch cartoons while sleeping or vice versa. No testing for me for a while, though now I'm curious to re-run the '90s list on SHs to see what effect if any it has on the spread.
 
I just thought I would mention it to have this discussion! I didn't see so much variation in the 90s Sports list, I only mentioned that it could disadvantage the RWD cars more.

Funny you say you like SS more as it's the one with more list variation. :lol: I suppose in that sense the RH list is only one to properly consider. Even if it makes the cars boring. I would prefer SS myself. Now I can't decide, haha.

Yeah, cartoons sounds good. *coughs* Hope you feel better soon. Seems to be something going around!
 
What are we all sick now? 👎
Can't wait for springtime!!! :grumpy: Fairly warm weekend here... but now won't get above freezing they say for the next week. It's total dumpy. Tired of being sick, sick of being tired, sick & tired of being sick & tired. :ill:

Anyhow... I see what you mean... Generally I don't like Sports soft or Sports Hard for the reason that there's something odd about those demarcations or something. I always tend to veer toward Comfort Soft or Sports Medium. They seem somehow more predictable... if that makes sense?

Anyway, I want at least 6 sets of times - with at least 3 different drivers on at least 3 different tracks, before setting a list order. Minimum. For any list.

The difference between Comfort Softs & Sports Softs or even between SH & SS, I think is more dodgy to consider than say... having a set of times on Comfort softs mixed in with Sports Hards. Or say a set on Comfort Mediums with CS... I mean that the tire grades are just 1 different, I think the instances of a real problem difference will be the exception. But yeah, if you're going between SM & RH, or CS & SS... I think the differences might exhibit more prominently in some cases. Especially like was said, involving some drivetrains.
But I think it's good to take a look at these things closely, just for the information. So I'm not complaining about the discussion, absolutely we should consider it.

Oh, for example... I'm CONVINCED that with FWD... and maybe this is the difference with 4WD... because it involves the understeer factor... I think hard vs soft tires really disadvantage there. I think that's originally why we went with Sports Medium for the Luxury Cars. Sports Soft would've advantaged some too much, and SH would've disadvantaged some more than not. And comfort softs were out of the question with the luxury cars. And slicks would've just advantaged better drivers too much, also making things kind of not ideal with the system.

And I tend to stay away from racing tires just because slicks have such a stigma for a lot of people. The only list I can see maybe using slicks with would be race cars... like particularly if we ever make a historic race car list using like the 2J & the other couple of historic race cars that are close.

Anyhow, the bottom line is this...
You see first - what tires do MOST of the cars come with in a given list?
Can we use that tire type for them all?
If not, why not, and which way should we go - 1 up or 1 down?

Make sense?

Oh... like some of the low power cars came on CS, but several I think come on CM.
But though I like them on CM... my main reason for going 1 better to CS was so the cars could be just a touch faster. I don't think it took any challenge away. And I don't think CM would've made them more exciting - just slower. And I mean let's face it, they're really slow to begin with and I love Low HP racing... but there is some compromise there to be made. :lol:
 
Last edited:
(362pp)(136mph#) Chrysler PT Cruiser '00
(359pp)(159mph) Eagle Talon Esi '97
(364pp)(150mph#) Alfa Romeo 147 TI 2.0 TWIN SPARK '06
(366pp)(159mph#) Infiniti G20 '90
(368pp)(153mph#) Volkswagen Golf IV GTI '01
(374pp)(138mph*) Lexus IS 200 '98
(420pp)(162mph) Chevrolet SSR '03
(362pp)(144mph#) Peugeot 307 XSi '04
(374pp)(155mph) BMW 120i '04
(383pp)(148mph#) Abarth Grande Punto '09
(404pp)(155mph*) Toyota CELICA SS-II (ST202) '97
(382pp)(152mph) Pontiac Vibe GT '03
(401pp)(155mph#) Mini COOPER S '07
(421pp)(164mph#) Toyota Tacoma X-Runner '04
(409pp)(158mph#) Seat Ibiza Cupra '04

#=redline *=limiter


--

Yes, we're all sick apparently. I don't mind the cold so much, but the being sick part is one of its least liked attributes. :lol:

I never found anything wrong in particular with the SH tires, I always felt the mediums were less to my liking. Perhaps it's an issue of running time, but I never liked SM tires, haha.

I think the 90s Sports list comes almost entirely with SH, so I think it works for the group fine. As for the Medium Race Cars, I would prefer SS, but RH is fine. Racing tires have some stigma, but they are race cars. Especially if they seem to provide more stable results.
 
Yeah well definitely I think more consistency in testing the cars, overall, is more important than anyone's personal tire preference... which will likely always vary driver to driver.
Also, the frustration factor. There's a fine line between keeping the cars interesting and exciting... and making the cars annoying.
 
Okay - everybody check post #2! (naturally)
and Let me know if someone's done times on either of those 2 lists & I don't have them there because I've :dunce: missed it somehow.

Also, look at the Hot Hatches list and say now if any of them are bitterly objectionable for some reason. That way we wont' ask anyone else to test drive a car that we could probably cut. (Though I think most of those I thought were good.)

As for the 90s Sport list...
We have to cut at least 2 because there are 18, obviously.
But I suggest we cull these dupes, because dupe models is going to get confusing :boggled:

Test times:

Grand Valley East Reverse

  1. 1:11.000 -- Lotus Elise Sport 190 ’98 = LongbowX
  2. 1:11.648 -- Chevrolet Corvette GRAND SPORT (C4) ’96 = LongbowX
  3. 1:11.970 -- Toyota SUPRA RZ ’97 = LongbowX
  4. 1:12.209 -- Nissan SKYLINE GT-R V・spec (R33) ’97 = LongbowX
  5. 1:12.251 -- Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VI GSR T.M. EDITION Special Color Package ’99 = LongbowX
  6. 1:12.305 -- Nissan SKYLINE GT-R V・spec II (R32) ’94 = LongbowX
  7. 1:12.590 -- Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution V GSR ’98 = LongbowX
  8. 1:12.655 -- Subaru IMPREZA Sport Wagon WRX STi Version VI ’99 = LongbowX
  9. 1:13.324 -- Mazda éfini RX-7 Type R (FD) ’91 = LongbowX
  10. 1:13.473 -- TVR V8S ’91 = LongbowX
  11. 1:13.625 -- Acura NSX ’91 = LongbowX
  12. 1:13.822 -- Mitsubishi GTO Twin Turbo MR ’98 = LongbowX
  13. 1:13.903 -- Chevrolet Camaro Z28 Coupe ’97 = LongbowX
  14. 1:14.099 -- Toyota MR2 GT-S ’97 = LongbowX
  15. 1:14.709 -- Nissan Fairlady Z 300ZX Version S TwinTurbo 2seater (Z32) ’98 = LongbowX
  16. 1:14.877 -- Toyota SUPRA 2.5GT Twin Turbo R ’90 = LongbowX
  17. 1:15.899 -- Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution II GSR ’94 = LongbowX
  18. 1:16.071 -- Toyota CELICA GT-FOUR (ST205) ’98= LongbowX

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

Laguna Seca

  1. 1:40.361 -- Lotus Elise Sport 190 '98 = amarynceos
  2. 1:41.617 -- Nissan SKYLINE GT-R V・spec II (R32) '94 = amarynceos
  3. 1:42.334 -- Chevrolet Corvette GRAND SPORT (C4) '96 = amarynceos
  4. 1:42.431 -- Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VI GSR T.M. EDITION Special Color Package '99 = amarynceos
  5. 1:42.592 -- Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution V GSR '98 = amarynceos
  6. 1:43.035 -- Nissan SKYLINE GT-R V・spec (R33) '97 = amarynceos
  7. 1:43.069 -- Toyota SUPRA RZ '97 = amarynceos
  8. 1:43.126 -- Subaru IMPREZA Sport Wagon WRX STi Version VI '99 = amarynceos
  9. 1:44.403 -- TVR V8S '91 = amarynceos
  10. 1:44.431 -- Mazda éfini RX-7 Type R (FD) '91 = amarynceos
  11. 1:44.665 -- Mitsubishi GTO Twin Turbo MR '98 = amarynceos
  12. 1:45.123 -- Chevrolet Camaro Z28 Coupe '97 = amarynceos
  13. 1:45.599 -- Acura NSX '91 = amarynceos
  14. 1:45.648 -- Nissan Fairlady Z 300ZX Version S TwinTurbo 2seater (Z32) '98 = amarynceos
  15. 1:46.003 -- Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution II GSR '94 = amarynceos
  16. 1:46.027 -- Toyota MR2 GT-S '97 = amarynceos (offset tires)
  17. 1:46.144 -- Toyota CELICA GT-FOUR (ST205) '98 = amarynceos
  18. 1:46.614 -- Toyota SUPRA 2.5GT Twin Turbo R '90 = amarynceos

****Comfort Soft Tires****
 
Alright here's my idea for a compact sports list. I may need to make adjustments and cuts based on tests but its my first list and I hope it's one we would like to race.
Opel speedster turbo
Lotus Elise 111r
Audi tt coupe 3.2 Quattro '03
BMW z4
Honda s2000 '06
Mitsubishi cz3 Tarmac
Hyundai hcd 6
Renault Sport Clio v6 24v
Lancia stratos
Alpine a110 1600s '72
Ford rs200
Chrysler crossfire
Toyota mr2 gts
Ferrari Dino 246 GT
Volkswagen golf iv r32
Pontiac solstice coupe concept
Tesla roadster
Autobacs garaiya
Suzuki gsx r/4
Tommy kaira zzs
Tvr v8s
Mazda roadster rs (Nc) '07


I'm not sure all of these cars capture the true spirit of a compact sports car. The golf may be more of a hot hatch and so might but the Tarmac however I really remember liking the Tarmac. It was light quick and peppy from what I remember. The focus could be considered a hot hatch also. I think the brz s would be able to work with the class but the dimensions seemed a bit large for the concept of this list. I like how the list contains not only modern petite sports cars but also some old ones in there to mix things up. I'm not sure how they will perform together. Like I said before this is my first list so don't be afraid to critique it. I would like some feedback on it so I can see what I can do to improve it. I will probably purchase the list and get it ready for testing after I purchase the traffic list because I need to get that ready for next week.
 
Last edited:
We can probably cut one of the two Skylines, and one of the two Evos. For the Skylines it doesn't really matter which, just whichever is better driving or whatever other way to decide. For the Evos...the '99 Evo VI GSR TME SCP acronym explosion is a prize car. So we can save $$$ that way. However, the '98 has a higher top speed (166 vs. 156). So it depends on which is valued more...saving money or having a better top end for those longer tracks.
 
LongbowX
We can probably cut one of the two Skylines, and one of the two Evos. For the Skylines it doesn't really matter which, just whichever is better driving or whatever other way to decide. For the Evos...the '99 Evo VI GSR TME SCP acronym explosion is a prize car. So we can save $$$ that way. However, the '98 has a higher top speed (166 vs. 156). So it depends on which is valued more...saving money or having a better top end for those longer tracks.
Click to expand...
Well lancers generally aren't very expensive in the first place so I don't know if its going to matter at all.
 
Well I see
3 Lancer Evos
2 Skylines
2 Supras

And in my crystal ball, I foresee confusion in the lobby about which one someone should be in. :lol: :nervous:
So that was pretty much my thinking.
 
Indeed, so...The '99 Evo will be cut. The Skyline to be cut is a flip of a coin really. I would say the '97 (even though it is a pure 90s car and the other is originally from the late 80s).

The Supra I'm not so sure about. I would cut the 2.5GT, but it reminds me that I wanted to test the 300ZX 2+2 and include it instead of the 300ZX I have now. I mentioned that before, but never did it. So, I will try to do that today.

I have faith in the ability of people to read properly. :lol: I'm going to keep the 2 Evos. Probably.

EDIT: I tested the 2+2 300ZX and I managed a fractionally faster laptime (somehow)...so we'll keep the one we have on the list.
 
Last edited:
Why do we need 3 Evos?? :boggled: edit: or even 2 I mean?
remember - you're not the one who's always going to be there to have to be checking between them, and I'm not getting any younger here!
edit: I mean checking the cars

Also do you have to use the people screen to see which model it is in the lobby?
 
I have to agree with watermelon on this one. Having more than one car of the same base name such as lancer evo and impreza would be quite confusing and redundant. It also increases the chance of getting the same car. I know not all evos are the same but they are all similar and can be almost exactly the same depending on which models you pick.
 
I was feeling better today, so I retested the '90s Sports list on SH tyres. You can chuck the times on CSs. :)

1:37.398 -- Lotus Elise Sport 190 '98 = amarynceos
1:38.788 -- Chevrolet Corvette GRAND SPORT (C4) '96 = amarynceos
1:38.933 -- Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VI GSR T.M. EDITION Special Color Package '99 = amarynceos
1:39.212 -- Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution V GSR '98 = amarynceos
1:39.560 -- Nissan SKYLINE GT-R V・spec II (R32) '94 = amarynceos
1:39.561 -- Nissan SKYLINE GT-R V・spec (R33) '97 = amarynceos
1:39.742 -- Subaru IMPREZA Sport Wagon WRX STi Version VI '99 = amarynceos
1:40.302 -- Toyota SUPRA RZ '97 = amarynceos
1:41.375 -- TVR V8S '91 = amarynceos
1:41.621 -- Mazda éfini RX-7 Type R (FD) '91 = amarynceos
1:41.751 -- Mitsubishi GTO Twin Turbo MR '98 = amarynceos
1:41.908 -- Acura NSX '91 = amarynceos
1:41.932 -- Chevrolet Camaro Z28 Coupe '97 = amarynceos
1:42.382 -- Nissan Fairlady Z 300ZX Version S TwinTurbo 2seater (Z32) '98 = amarynceos
1:42.861 -- Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution II GSR '94 = amarynceos
1:43.245 -- Toyota MR2 GT-S '97 = amarynceos
1:43.383 -- Toyota SUPRA 2.5GT Twin Turbo R '90 = amarynceos
1:43.825 -- Toyota CELICA GT-FOUR (ST205) '98 = amarynceos

(MR2 time on SH all around. Much tamer on SH than CS though still evil.)
Note on the two skylines: on CS, they were split by 1.4 seconds, on SH they were virtually identical. Personally I dislike the '97 more than the '94. :yuck: Wouldn't miss the Supra 2.5GT either if it were cut. :lol:

I may give @daddyo845 's Compact Sports list a run later this week.
 
I think I may want to cut the mr2 just because everyone including me seems to hate it. I may want to edit the list based on testing so actually I may add in a few other cars as well but I will need to take another look at the dealership. I'll get back to you if there are any more cars I want to try.
 
The only reason I kept the two Evo's is because they are quite different. I'm sort of forced to keep the Evo II (I think you can see the Roman numerals that denote each model) as it's slow. And I kind of think that would be a shame to only include that one and not one that was better and actually representative of how good the Evo's were. If you feel the '98 Evo V must be cut then, well. If we must.

The same sort of effect with the Supras. Because of the speed differential...I would really have to keep the 2.5GT '90. But c'mon, how can you have a 90s Sports list without the later Supra!

I think the reason watermelon wants to include the MR2 is for the same effect as the AZ-1 in the low power list. It would be a bit of a wild card car. I'm not opposed to its inclusion, but it's definitely not my favourite.

And the '97 Skyline GT-R it is then... *removed*.
 
Alright I see your point and I really like that later supra. I don't think 3 cars of the same name is a good idea. Also longbow I wasn't referring to the mr2 in your list but possibly the mr2 in my compact sports car list. I need to do testing and I will probably try to start testing this weekend.
 
I agree about the 3 cars, which is why I eliminated the Evo VI variant. I think I actually meant to eliminate one of the higher performing Evos...But anyway. It's fine if the Evo V must be removed as well.

And ah, I see. Well then, carry on. :P
 
Alright I've updated my list of compact sports cars. I want to test the Elise 111r instead of the 111s. Also take a look back at it if you want to test it as I've added a few more cars. I'm sure I will need to make changes after testing. I'm finding the pp system quite confusing. The Elise 111r with 189 hp has the same amount of pp as the 350zs which have 276 hp. I don't think that's fair but then again the 350zs are almost twice as heavy. I started looking at horsepower figures and I've decided that for now I would like to try and keep all of the cars within 50-60 hp between them. I'm probably gonna need a lot of time to get this together so just work on longbows list for now unless you can do both. Amar I appreciate the help and you already tested longbows list so if you want to test this you can. I will try to put it together as best as I can.
 
GranTurismo916
Are we allowed to do whatever track we want? If so, I'll be doing my testing on Stowe Circuit.
Click to expand...
As far as I know, we can test on any track we want but it should probably be a track that's not too long that way you can run consistent laps.
 
Ah I see you've added the Garaiya -- I was actually going to suggest it as a candidate, though it might prove to be on the quick side. I would also suggest trying the Mazda Roadster '07 -- a Compact Sports list with no Miata seems wrong, somehow. ;) The '07 should do similar times to the Z4 or the Alpine, at least on twistier tracks

Would be great if the Suzuki GSX fit in, though I worry about it being too fast. I loved that car in previous GTs; it was my go-to steed for the Nurburgring 4h races.

Regarding Elises, remember that they have ungodly cornering abilities, almost more so than their light weight should allow; unless long straights are involved, chances are good that they will absolutely smash other cars with similar pp. The twistier the track, the more advantage they have. I've been testing my mid-range race car list concept on various tracks, and there are certain corners I can take a full 10mph faster in the Elises than in anything else! :lol:

---

Regarding Evos, obviously the director has the final call 👍 but this newcomer's 2 cents is that given their probable wide separation on the future final list, the confusion danger doesn't seem too large. Easy for me to say, though, since all I have to check on race day is the car of the person who finished ahead of me in the previous race. :rolleyes:

---

On the tyre question on my race car list, I'm still torn. I just finished a set of runs at Laguna on RHs and have to say that the cars exhibited plenty of personality on them, more than at Deep Forest. Going to do them again on SSs, and then repeat the experiment at Tsukuba. Once I have that data I might have enough to make a more rational assessment than 'I think they feel better on Sports Softs than Racing Hards.' If the spreads are consistently more inconsistent on SSs than on RHs, then RHs would be the way to go. (Besides, all the cars come with them when bought :P )

One thing is for sure, though -- it's easier to find the limit on SSs than RHs. I would think that better drivers would have more advantage on RHs (so naturally as a midfielder I prefer SSs :sly: ). Sports tyres offer better/more progressive audio feedback as well; the racing slicks only start to become really audible when something is going wrong!

(edit: grammar/spelling)
 

Similar threads

gkgamer
Makeshift Shuffle Racing - next race day June 17th 9AM GMT
Replies
3
Views
1K
IfAndOr
IfAndOr
S
GT7 Time Trial Challenges
Replies
7
Views
819
StrykerZero
S
H
Livery Design Request for Local Car Club GT7 Nights
Replies
2
Views
1K
Hobbes1301
H
sirjim73
The Nordschleife time trials thread
Replies
15
Views
3K
Alex p.
Alex p.
BroncosXR8
Time Trials - PP Rankings incorrect
Replies
6
Views
2K
BroncosXR8
BroncosXR8

Latest Posts

Back