Simulation tires in GT2...

[loulou221]

Hello everyone,
I have spent a few days driving all my cars with simulation tires, and I got interesting results.
I compared some cars with their real counterparts on the Laguna Seca track.
I began with the Honda NSX Type R (1997 3.0 liter model). The car had a good feeling on the track, and I was able to lap the track in 1.40.619. Jeremy Clarkson drove a 2004 Honda NSX around the track in 1.57, which is slower. There could be many reasons for that :
- Power. But my Honda is a 3.0 liter with 272 hp, whereas Clarkson's NSX is a 3.2 with 280 hp and more torque.
- Weight. My NSX was lighter than the more modern 3.2 NSX by a hundred kilograms. But it can't explain a 17 second difference on its own.
- Jeremy Clarkson is a bad driver. I don't think so, because I'm not a good driver too.
- Tires in GT2 have more grip. But don't forget my NSX wears simulation tires.

So I did the same thing with another car, the Honda S2000. A 1999 S2000 clocked 1.50.74 in the hands of a Motor Trend test driver. Therefore I took my S2000 to the track. The result is 1.40.943, 10 seconds faster than the real S2000. The engines are exactly the same, there's no weight difference.
Now there's a proof that GT2 simulation tires outperform real life radial tires.

I've done the same thing with other cars, here are the results :
- Peugeot 406 Coupe 3.0 V6 : 1.47.xxx (as fast as a Porsche Cayman S)
- Chevrolet Camaro SS 1997 : 1.41.6xx (faster than a M3 E92)
- Nissan Skyline GT-R R34 : 1.41.3xx
- Dodge Viper RT/10 : 1.37.5xx (faster than a 2010 Porsche 911 Turbo)
- Lister Storm V12 with mild suspension tuning, race modification, and 709 hp : 1.30.2xx (3 seconds faster than the record set by the Dodge Viper ACR for production cars)

And with those tires you can have a lot of fun sliding, and it makes you realize how important is the way you enter or exit the corners. They emphasize understeer and oversteer, so they require professionnal driving, and that's what makes them fun. You can also perform lots of drifts.
Those results are thought-worthy...

 

[F40LM]

What you gotter realise is pal, he might have had some other tires like sports tires or some other tires pallie?

I have know he had different tires to the ones he had ingame pal.

Anyway nice time

 

[Parnelli Bone]

There's a couple explanations I can think of. The difference between reality and fantasy has always been classified by a lack of fear. The real driver is experiencing what could be a huge accident and/or broken bones/death if he makes a mistake and crashes.

Also, you have to think about GT2's drawing of the Laguna Seca track. The corkscrew in particular isn't as accurate as it is in real-life; GT2's version hasn't got as sharp a chicane, which means the virtual driver doesn't have to slow down as much.

...still, those are pretty damn good times for sim tires! Gotta admit. You get a cookie.

 

[LeGeNd-1]

And here I thought Sim tires are way too slippery. This was back in my early GT2 days though. After getting used to GT5 I'll probably think Sim tires are the norm and SS tires are way too grippy. You're right though, they're great for drifting.

Like Parnelli, I think the lap time differences are due to fear. But if those real life drivers are pro racers this might not apply. The track difference is a more plausible explanation I think. GT2's Laguna is very inaccurate in places. The gravel traps do nothing, for a start (though I trust in that you don't cut corners, you can go a bit wider without fear of spinning out, so you can take corners at higher speeds with less hesitation). Like PB said, the corkscrew is less tight, steep and bumpy. I also recall the 90 degree turn before the climb to the corkscrew is much shallower. In GT2 I almost always take it flat out, while in GT5 I have to lift off or tap the brake a bit to avoid running wide. Generally the track is much less demanding in GT2.

Which is odd, because it's the first ever real life track in the GT2 series. You would've thought PD wanted to make it as realistic as possible.

 

[loulou221]

Thanks everyone !
I haven't thought about the track itself, but it could explain the difference. Indeed I thought it was more realistic.
I agree about super-soft tires. I only use them for the Gran Turismo All Stars (to win more money faster).
Simulation tires are probably the norm as Legend said. And they provide driving pleasure, even if it comes at the expense of overall efficiency.

PS : I've just beaten my record at Laguna Seca on simulation tires : 1.29.599 in a 556hp Vector M12, and 1.29.702 in a 581hp Skyline R34. Great cars by the way...
Maybe we should make a contest to see who is the fastest on Laguna Seca with simulation tires. Could be a good idea...

 

[Parnelli Bone]

Which is odd, because it's the first ever real life track in the GT2 series. You would've thought PD wanted to make it as realistic as possible.

They did the best they could, from what I understand. I remember reading somewhere they painstakingly walked around and photographed and compared every inch of that track. But with time constraints, bla bla bla, things didnt' get done right.

 

[LeGeNd-1]

^ Including the glitch-able wall on the first corner.

I have to say though, Laguna has the worst pit entry and exit out of all tracks. The entry is way too tight and sharp, even with full steering lock you could barely get through. Then there's the looooooong exit which requires you to drive on the narrow service road on the inside of turn 1.