Stock car race comparison/challenge

[alhajoth]

Special Conditions: Tsukuba Wet Race : Easy difficulty
Car: Nissan Bluebird Rally Car '69 (Stock R1 tires) / FR / 129HP / 965kg / 7.5kg/HP / vs. Nissan Skyline GT-R V-spec '02 200 A-spec


Special Conditions: Tsukuba Wet Race : Normal difficulty
Car: Pontiac GTO 5.7 Coupe '04 / FR / 352HP / 1690kg / 4.8kg/HP / vs. Saleen S7 '02 200 A-spec

 

[GTsail]

Nissan Club "Z": Race 1 - New York
Car: Nissan Fairlady Z300ZX Z31 '83 (S2 tires, used, oil changed) / FR / 225HP / 1380kg / 6.133kg/HP / 51 A-spec points by GTsail290

Nissan Club "Z": Race 2 - Tokyo R246
Car: Nissan 300ZX 2seater Z32 '89 (S2 tires, used, no oil change) / FR / 249HP / 1510kg / 6.064kg/HP / 39 A-spec points by GTsail290

Nissan Club "Z": Race 3 - El Capitan
Car: Nissan Fairlady Z300ZX Z31 '83 (S2 tires, used, no oil change) / FR / 203HP / 1380kg / 6.798kg/HP / 82 A-spec points by GTsail290

Nissan Club "Z": Race 4 - Laguna Seca
Car: Nissan Fairlady Z300ZX Z31 '83 (S2 tires, used, oil changed) / FR / 225HP / 1380kg / 6.133kg/HP / 51 A-spec points by GTsail290

Nissan Club "Z": Race 5 - Grand Valley Speedway
Car: Nissan Fairlady Z300ZX Z31 '83 (S2 tires, used, no oil change) / FR / 203HP / 1380kg / 6.798kg/HP / 82 A-spec points by GTsail290

Race 4 at El Capitan is ridiculously easy. The AI is just bad. The others took some work. I've tried some of the other Nissan's but have not yet had success with them.

GTsail290

 

[alhajoth]

One quick question for Smallhorses (Or anyone else if you have an opinion on the matter.. )

If I buy an NA2-upgrade for the Callaway C12 and enter it in the Supercar Festival, and then remove the upgrade before the race, would that still be eligible for entry in this thread?

I'm trying to find winnable high-point races for all the cars in the game, and the Supercar Festival seems the best bet for the Callaway as long as it's stock.

I'm not sure what my own opinion on the matter is. One of the most appealing things about this thread has always been that you can take cars straight from the dealership and go race, without having to worry about purchasing upgrades or tuning and the like.
But then again you'd only be cheating the entry-regulations, and hardly to your own advantage. And the car would still be stock during the actual race..



A new high for this race:
American Races: Old Muscle Car Competition race 1 - New York
Car: Shelby Mustang G.T. 350R '65 / FR / 306HP / 1268kg / 4.1kg/HP / 119 A-spec

 

[AMG.]

If I buy an NA2-upgrade for the Callaway C12 and enter it in the Supercar Festival, and then remove the upgrade before the race, would that still be eligible for entry in this thread?

snip
Rules: No tuning (stock car -> i.e. you can't buy any new parts, but
/snip

You've got an interesting point there. Race without the parts would seem to make it eligible but the words "cant buy" would suggest => not valid.
You must buy S1 to do snow, you are allowed RSH for Seca (glitch) so this might be considered another exception?
Hmmmm, what weighs more ... entering the actual race in stock or the not buying part of the rules.
For me it would be race stock.

AMG.

 

[Open Addict]

If I buy an NA2-upgrade for the Callaway C12 and enter it in the Supercar Festival, and then remove the upgrade before the race, would that still be eligible for entry in this thread?

This is an interesting question, and I am a little suprised it has taken 4 years to be asked.

My understanding of the rules would be, you must race stock. it does not say anthing about qualifying except that you must mention if you did qualify
If this means you buy some parts to make a car eligable for a series, and then remove the parts before the race starts.
This should be fine.

I think I have seen somewhere in here, where people would use a modified car to qualify but then convert back to stock to race. scratch that.

I don't see a problem as long as it is documented what mods you did to become eligable and then remove them to race.
I now see the problem of how could it be proven that you did actually take the parts off
Maybe, this type of entry would need to be verified before it could make the list.
(not saying that we would not believe you alhajoth, but just making sure.👍)

OA


This is certainly a ripper of a question for us to ponder further.

 

[GTsail]

One quick question for Smallhorses (Or anyone else if you have an opinion on the matter.. )

If I buy an NA2-upgrade for the Callaway C12 and enter it in the Supercar Festival, and then remove the upgrade before the race, would that still be eligible for entry in this thread?

I'm trying to find winnable high-point races for all the cars in the game, and the Supercar Festival seems the best bet for the Callaway as long as it's stock.

I'm not sure what my own opinion on the matter is. One of the most appealing things about this thread has always been that you can take cars straight from the dealership and go race, without having to worry about purchasing upgrades or tuning and the like.
But then again you'd only be cheating the entry-regulations, and hardly to your own advantage. And the car would still be stock during the actual race..

[/B]

Such a great question Alhajoth!

I am still thinking about it. I could go either way. It would only apply to a couple of races (maybe Liga B?), so its not like this would create some huge exception.

As for qualifying with upgrades and then taking them off for the race, I think it would be best if this wasn't allowed. I feel that qualifying is just another part of the same race and the same stock rules should apply. Also, I think it would encourage excessive amounts of blocking during the race which would detract from our efforts to have clean races. I think that its ok if the AI car hits your back bumper when you are on the racing line, but if you are driving all over the track to stay in front then your car just isn't good enough to win in stock tune.

Respectfully,
GTsail290

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Such a great question Alhajoth!

I am still thinking about it. I could go either way. It would only apply to a couple of races (maybe Liga B?), so its not like this would create some huge exception.

As for qualifying with upgrades and then taking them off for the race, I think it would be best if this wasn't allowed. I feel that qualifying is just another part of the same race and the same stock rules should apply. Also, I think it would encourage excessive amounts of blocking during the race which would detract from our efforts to have clean races. I think that its ok if the AI car hits your back bumper when you are on the racing line, but if you are driving all over the track to stay in front then your car just isn't good enough to win in stock tune.

Respectfully,
GTsail290

I have to agree. This is probably why the choice of wording "you can't buy any new parts", was used in the rules to start with.




Endurance Races: Suzuka 1000 km

Car: Subaru IMPREZA Super Touring Car '01 / 4wd / 421HP no oil change / 1030kg / 2.447kg/HP / 200 A-Spec points by SuperCobraJet


NTSC/USA Lineup:

Opel Astra Touring Car '00
Toyota au CERUMO Supra (JGTC) '01
Mazda RX-8 Concept LM Race Car '01
Nissan XANAVI HIROTO GT-R (JGTC) '01
2000 Ford Falcon XR8


172 laps complete at a time of 6:05'32.520
Fastest lap (also unassisted) : 2'01.513
MOV: 1 lap (2nd. RX-8)
Started on S1's, switched to S2's after first pitstop (lap 10). 2-3 secs faster per lap. Have to reduce downforce for 200pts.

Turned out to be a pretty challenging race with the RX-8. After running 60 laps or so I encountered a problem that ended up wiping out what little advantage I had managed to accumulate. Just past T2 where the left turn is on approach to the casio triangle, when transitioning left on this corner I discovered a somewhat strange phenomenon. If the right front tire contacted the rumble strip when the throttle and steering input were just so, the car would snap hook left instantly with out a chance of saving it. Needless to say, 360's would ensue causing a considerable loss of time. As a result my lead was down to 2 secs. at one point. After having this happen about 4 times between lap 60 and 80, I permanently adjusted my approach there to stay just under the rumble strip. Apparently the first 60 laps I had just managed to some how avoid this harmonic convergence.
Fortunately, the RX-8 began to encounter lap traffic about lap 90, slowing his progress. Evidently during his duel with one of them he also had some type of problem, to my pleasant surprise, losing about 18 secs on lap 95. The combination enabled me to pull away, eventually lapping him near the end of the race.

 

[RVDNuT374]

Extreme Hall: Real Circuits Tour- Fuji Speedway 2005 GT

Car: Pagani Zonda LM Race Car '01 (Oil Changed, R2 tires, downforce @ 38/50) / MR / ?HP (garage value 694HP) / 1150kg / ?kg/HP (1.7kg/HP using garage value) / 200 A-spec by RVDNuT374 against the first lineup after reset

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Endurance Races: Grand Valley 300km

Car: AMG Mercedes 2.5-16 190 E EvoII Touring Car '92 / FR / 382hp / 980kg / 2.565kg/HP / 200 A-Spec points by SuperCobraJet

NTSC/USA lineup:

Toyota au CERUMO Supra (JGTC) '01
Audi A4 Touring Car '04
2000 Ford Falcon XR8
Opel Astra Touring Car '00
Honda NSX-R Prototype LM Race Car '02

Start R1s switch to R2s first pitstop. Reduce downforce for 200 pts.


Endurance Races: Laguna Seca 200 miles

Car: Amuse S2000 R1 / FR / 272hp / 1120kg / 4.058kg/HP / 200 A-Spec points by SuperCobraJet

NTSC/USA lineup:

Pontiac GTO 5.7 Coupe '04
Dodge VIPER GTS '99
Chevrolet Corvette GRAND SPORT (C4) '96
Chevrolet Corvette Z06 (C5) '00
Callaway C12 '03

Ran R1 tires

 

[alhajoth]

SuperCobraJet, do you remember the MOV on those races?
Do you reckon the Merc could take on the RX-7, and could the Honda hold off the Saleen S7?

Also, can you tell me the exact downforce-settings you used?

 

[SuperCobraJet]

SuperCobraJet, do you remember the MOV on those races?
Do you reckon the Merc could take on the RX-7, and could the Honda hold off the Saleen S7?

Also, can you tell me the exact downforce-settings you used?

The MOV with the Merc at Grand Valley was 47secs. over the Opel Astra.
Total time for 60 laps was 1:57'59.568
Fastest lap was 1'52.306, I think that was assisted.

This is the setup I ran:

Downforce: 26/32
Brake control: 16/20
Limited Slip: 5/25/5
Driving Aids: 0/0/2
Tranny: auto 9, Final 3.840

Suspension:
14.2/11.5
63/63
7/5
9/7
4.4/0.0
-1/-2
7/7

Switching to R2s on lap 10, once they warmed up, I ran laps in the low to mid 1'53s and occasional mid to high 1'52s. The Merc is very understeery and has poor front tire wear. Most efforts to loosen the car up result in even worse front tire wear. The fronts are pretty much gone in 8 laps, but if you soft peddle it you can get 9, which I did on two segments to eliminate an extra pitstop, pitting on 10, 18, 27, 35, 43, and 51. I used this car to win this race once before for 200pts. against the RX-8, but I can't remember if it was "stock as per the stock car thread rules". Against the RX-7, I don't know, I guess you will have to try it and see. As you know it has the deadly combo of being fast and not pitting very often.

At Laguna Seca I forgot to write down the MOV, but I 'm pretty sure I had lapped the field or was close to it at the end. Time to complete was 2:21'55.738.
Sorry but I have to admit that I am very bad at remembering to take notes sometimes, and when I do I am equally bad at organizing or keeping up with them. Sometimes I can be running a race and look up and see I set a new fast lap and I don't know when I set it or whether it was unassisted or not.
I wish the lap time blinked, turned colors or something when you set a new low time.

Oh well anyway, with the Amuse I ran lap times of low to mid 1'32s and a fast lap of 1'31.478. Thats with the sports suspension set as it comes. Cornering and tire wear are good as is, so I didn't try but with some tweaking, you may be able to do better. With the R1s you can go 25 laps before pitting so you only have to make 3 pitstops. I didn't attempt it, but if you could push it to 30 laps you could get by with 2. I don't know if thats possible or if the Amuse is enough for the S7. One way to find out.

Hope that will help you out. Happy hunting.



Edit: alhajoth's question a few posts ago, reminds me of a question I have been meaning to ask concerning the "Stock Car Rules".

"No tuning (stock car -> i.e. you can't buy any new parts, but you can change all settings possible except ballast)".

On the last part of that concerning ballast, do yall take that to mean "no adding ballast" as well as "no front-rear balance adjustments"?

I have interpreted it to mean both, but I was just wondering if everyone else is using the same interpretation.

Both "ballast" and "front-rear balance" are under "Weight Balance" and are technically two different adjustments. This is what has prompted my question.

 

[Watchman]

Content removed.

 

[Smallhorses]

@ SCJ & Nenad: with regards to ballast, it means "no ballast is permitted" for a stock car entry - a car run with ballast is not eligible for the list.

If for example you win the Nissan R89C, it comes with multiple adjustable parts, such as brake balance controller, transmission, suspension, downforce and LSD. These parts since they come as standard on the car may be adjusted to give a suitable setup for your driving style, and in the case of reducing downforce may actually add to the number of A-spec points.

 

[Austin343]

Right, but SCJ isn't asking whether or not ballast is permitted. He's talking about adjusting the front/rear balance of the ballast (between -50 and 50), which many believe actually does make a difference even when the amount of ballast is 0. I have no answer to that, but Smallhorses might.

 

[GTsail]

.....Edit: alhajoth's question a few posts ago, reminds me of a question I have been meaning to ask concerning the "Stock Car Rules".

"No tuning (stock car -> i.e. you can't buy any new parts, but you can change all settings possible except ballast)".

On the last part of that concerning ballast, do yall take that to mean "no adding ballast" as well as "no front-rear balance adjustments"?

I have interpreted it to mean both, but I was just wondering if everyone else is using the same interpretation.

Both "ballast" and "front-rear balance" are under "Weight Balance" and are technically two different adjustments. This is what has prompted my question.

I had always assummed that moving the weight balance slider would make a difference even if you had no ballast, however, last night I performed an admittedly brief study of this, and found that if you have no ballast, moving the slider makes no difference!

I took my Alpine A310 1600VE (a car sensitive to ballast) to Tsukuba in the practice mode and had B-spec Bob run some laps:

Weight slider .. 1st lap ... 2nd lap .. Ballast
------------ .. ------- ... -------- .. -------
+50 to rear ... 1.10.146 ... 1.10.178 ... 0 kg
-50 to front ... 1.10.146 ... 1.10.178 ... 0 kg
@ 0, even ... 1.10.146 ... 1.10.178 .... 0 kg

I then took my white Formula GT to Tsukuba as well and let Bob loose:

Weight slider .. 1st lap .. 2nd lap .. 3rd lap .. Ballast
----------- .. ------- .. -------- .. ------- .. ------
+50 to rear ... 45.688 ... 45.933 ... 45.926 ... 0 kg
-50 to front ... 45.688 ... 45.933 ... 45.926 ... 0 kg
@ 0, even ... 45.688 ... 45.933 ... 45.926 ..., 0 kg

From the above you can see that my B-spec Bob runs very consistent laps and that the weight slider makes absolutely no difference in lap times if you have no ballast on board!

I then put 100kg of ballast on board, and ran some laps with it moved to the front and then moved to the rear, and Bob's laps times changed by about half a second, so Bob is affected by the ballast.

I haven't tested any other cars, but I imagine that the results would be the same.

Updated:
I have gone back to Tsukuba and tested two more cars:

Hyundai Tiburon GT:

Weight slider .. 1st lap ... 2nd lap .. 3rd lap ... Ballast
------------ .. ------- ... -------- .. ------- ..-------
+50 to rear ... 1.12.589 ... 1.12.586 ... 1.12.610 ... 0 kg
-50 to front ... 1.12.589 ... 1.12.586 ... 1.12.610 ... 0 kg
@ 0, even ... 1.12.589 ... 1.12.586 .... 1.12.610 ... 0 kg

Chaparral 2J:

Weight slider .. 1st lap .. 2nd lap .. 3rd lap .. Ballast
----------- .. ------- .. -------- .. ------- .. ------
+50 to rear ... 51.097 ... 51.376 ... 51.266 ... 0 kg
-50 to front ... 51.105 ... 51.368 ... 51.308 ... 0 kg
@ 0, even ... 51.170 ... 51.439 ... 51.251 ..., 0 kg

I then added 100kg of ballast to the Chaparral 2J and ran again:

Weight slider .. 1st lap .. 2nd lap .. 3rd lap .. Ballast
----------- .. ------- .. -------- .. ------- .. ------
+50 to rear ... 51.433 ... 51.772 ... 51.674 ... 100 kg
-50 to front ... 52.417 ... 52.722 ... 52.647 ... 100 kg
@ 0, even ... 51.992 ... 52.192 ... 52.074 ..., 100 kg

I would say that the Chaparral 2J is a very strangley behaving car! Quite inconsistent lap times. But it does seem to me that overall, ballast movement is affecting the lap times even if it is zero, and that the 2J does not like too much ballast to the front. The reason could be either bad handling or reduced rear traction (ie. more wheel spin).

I will investigate further.

GTsail290

 

[Dotini]

GTsail290, that was a very commendable test. But was it definitive? The Tsukuba circuit is flat, and may not reveal a car's handling going over crests such as are found at Nurburgring, El Capitan and those crazy stair-step hills at Seattle Circuit.

Once I took a Chaparral 2J up those Seattle hills. The front lifted, and and it went darn near 100% vertical on me! All I could see was the sky. That was a terrible feeling, never to be desired, even in a game. The car felt like it should have gone over the fence and into the side of a building or into the crowd. So I shifted balance fully to the front and, lo and behold, the front end stayed down, even with Bob driving. Could I respectfully ask you to repeat this particular test?

Thanks, and all the best,
Dotini

 

[Watchman]

@ SCJ & Nenad: with regards to ballast, it means "no ballast is permitted" for a stock car entry - a car run with ballast is not eligible for the list.

It was for nothing then. Will remove the content in the post.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

In my experience, moving the FRB even if no ballast weight is added definitely affects the car handling in A-spec.

Technically the way the rule is worded, this is allowable, again as long as no ballast is added.

I guess the only question is, whether or not the car is still considered "stock".
While it would be in every-other respect, in the real world it could be difficult to achieve this type modification.

 

[RaidoGT]

In my experience, moving the FRB even if no ballast weight is added definitely affects the car handling in A-spec.
(...)
I guess the only question is, whether or not the car is still considered "stock".

Must say I doubt that moving 0 kilos around would affect the handling at all; if it does, then that's another big bug in the code.

Then again, question easily answered: if it affects the handling, then it can no longer be called stock. After all, it would then handle *different* (better) than a car completely stock.

(Personally, after driving GT4 for a while I've found becoming no longer really interested in stock as-is, since you'd have to use those 'fantasy' S2 tires for street cars.. which I prefer to drive atm.)

 

[Open Addict]

...Then again, question easily answered: if it affects the handling, then it can no longer be called stock. After all, it would then handle *different* (better) than a car completely stock...

Contradiction of the rules though, because changing the suspension settings makes the car handle *different* (better) than a car that has not had these setting changed.

My understanding of the rules would be that anything to do with ballast is not allowed to be changed. Just my opinion.

 

[GTsail]

GTsail290, that was a very commendable test. But was it definitive? The Tsukuba circuit is flat, and may not reveal a car's handling going over crests such as are found at Nurburgring, El Capitan and those crazy stair-step hills at Seattle Circuit.

Once I took a Chaparral 2J up those Seattle hills. The front lifted, and and it went darn near 100% vertical on me! All I could see was the sky. That was a terrible feeling, never to be desired, even in a game. The car felt like it should have gone over the fence and into the side of a building or into the crowd. So I shifted balance fully to the front and, lo and behold, the front end stayed down, even with Bob driving. Could I respectfully ask you to repeat this particular test?

Thanks, and all the best,
Dotini

As suggested by Dotini - I have repeated my test with two more cars. The infamous Hyundai Tiburon and the Chaparral 2J.

I found that the Tiburon's times were again completley un-affected by ballast movement if the ballast weight was zero.

However, the Chaparral 2J was another story! Its lap times at Tsukuba were affected by the placement of ballast even if the ballast is zero! I think that Dotini has found an anomaly. There may be others! I am going to add the results to my first post.

I won't have time to test this further for a couple of days, but I will get back to it. A further test that I would like to do is run an entire pit stop sequence for each car and see if the ballast affects the frequency of pits stops and different tire wear patterns. This will take a while. But my B-spec Bob is up to the task! My B-spec Bob already has more miles than most of your's.
Respectfully,
GTsail290

 

[Car-less]

I doubt your B-spec Bob has as many miles under his belt as my B spec-Beast.

Might I suggest that you repeat the Chaparral test exactly as before, exit, then repeat the test exactly again. I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised to find that Bob's time will vary between identical tests and that the reason for the difference seen is more to do with his abilities to control this anomoly of a car. For almost any other car, I suspect that you will see absolutely no effect in laptime depending on ballast placement without any applied weight.

 

[Dotini]

My Bob, at 8555, is distinctly anemic compared to GTsail290 and Car-less. So I took a notorious wheel spinning FF, the Suzuki Concept, to Las Vegas Drag Strip to test acceleration. Sure enough, ballast balance made no difference without weight applied.

 

[Smallhorses]

I wouldn't worry too much about weight balance settings.
As far as I've been concerned they've been part of the ballast settings and therefore never been touched for any of my submissions here, and I dare say the same goes for everyone else that's submitted races, except those that've tried to submit entries with added weight by mistake.

This said, if the rules are changed now, for the benefit of 1 or 2 cars that may see an effect, it kind of nullifies all the previous submissions and the list has to begin again. Which seems pointless...

It is an interesting point that has been raised and discussed, but in the interests of preserving over 4 years of work, let's not start messing with the rules again now. 👍 Ballast weight and weight balance settings should remain at defaults of 0 / 0 for purposes of submission here.

 

[GTsail]

I'm in agreement with Smallhorses. Lets not change the rules.

I have always interpreted the rule - "you can change all settings possible except ballast" - to mean that you could neither add ballast nor move it around.

I think we may find that its an almost mute point because I think we will find that ballast movement when the ballast is zero, has no effect except for a couple of cars that are strange anyway like the 2J.

Car-less -
My B-spec Bob has just short of 444,444 miles. I know its not the 666,666 that you posted, but it is getting up there. Bob just likes to drive, just not on the Test Track in a Renault Megane!

GTsail290

 

[GeeTeeR]

Try out the Falken GTR for the Tsukuba Wet (hard).4wd makes it much easier to win with than any JGTC car.The Audi TT touring car might work well too

 

[SuperCobraJet]

However, the Chaparral 2J was another story! Its lap times at Tsukuba were affected by the placement of ballast even if the ballast is zero! I think that Dotini has found an anomaly. There may be others! I am going to add the results to my first post.

As I pointed out before, I found this is to be the rule not the exception.

Front/Rear Balance is shifting the weight of the car fore and aft even if there is no ballast.

As discussed, I have not used it so far in any of my stock car races and will just continue under that same course.

It appears technically acceptable in rule wording, but questionable in practice.

At any rate, I didn't mean to cause a major problem.

Happy Motoring

 

[RVDNuT374]

Endurance Hall: Infineon World Sport Car Race

Car: BMW McLaren F1 GTR Race Car '97 (R1 and R2 tires, no oil) / MR / ?HP (612HP on garage screen) / 950kg / ?kg/HP (1.6kg/HP using garage value) / 200 A-spec by RVDNuT374 against the 4th lineup after reset, includes the Nissan R92CP

 

[PF]

Endurance Races: Grand Valley 300km

Car: AMG Mercedes 2.5-16 190 E EvoII Touring Car '92 / FR / 382hp / 980kg / 2.565kg/HP / 200 A-Spec points by SuperCobraJet

That looks like an awesome amount of fun SCJ: my favourite track, one of my beloved cars and it's a 200 pointer. You've inspired me.

 

[Dotini]

Extreme Hall: Polyphony Digital Cup Race 10 - Nurburgring

Car: Chevrolet SSR '03 (no oil change, S1/S2 tires) / FR / 290HP / 2248kg / 7.75kg/HP / 92 A-spec points by Dotini

This was against the 2nd lineup after reset: Audi S3, Peugeot 206, Honda S2000, Mazda RX-7 GT-Ltd, Toyota Supra SZ-R.

Since this is my first submission to the Stock car race challenge, I want to note that I scrupulously avoided opponent car contact, carefully kept at least two wheels on the pavement at all times, eschewed any wallriding, and closely studied the replay. This race is easy to verify, since it's against only the 2nd grid after reset. Total time was 17:27.445 with an MOV of 2 seconds. Started from the back, passed cleanly, no blocking required.


Beginner Hall: FR Challenge Race 1 - Seattle

Car: Nissan Skyline GTS-t Type M '89 (used, no oil) / FR / 192HP / 1260kg / 6.6kg/HP / 200 A-spec points by Dotini

This was against the 6th grid after a Sarthe I Preview: BMW Z4 '03, Sileighty '98, BMW 330i '05, Mazda RX-7 Infini III (FC,J) '91, Honda S2000 '04. All Stock car challenge driving rules adhered to. Total time 4:05.048, 3 second MOV, no blocking required.