Super GT Thread ArchiveTouring Cars

[Snaeper]

Can we all just agree that the likelihood of the NSX (Super GT Racecar) being MR is the same as it being FR? Since it really hasn't been confirmed either way, just talked about?

 

[freshseth83]

The nsx has been announced as MR in concept form. The GT500 car is based off the concept. I don't get the confusion or reluctance to believe what numerous motorsport outlets reported.

 

[Tornado]

We've gotten that you don't get what we are trying to say by this point.

 

[Wardez]

It is an assumption, you're crazy if you don't think it is one. You act like just because it's in a journal it's final fact - not the case.

Allow me to re-write the press release in order to show you what proof we need.

Takanobu Ito, the President, Chief Executive Officer and Representative Director of Honda Motor Co., Ltd., addressed on the stage of presentation, "This will be the last season for HSV-010 GT. Next year, we are going to field the "NSX Concept" in the GT500 class ahead of production model. I would like to express appreciation to the promoter GTA for their understanding in this shift." At last, President Ito revealed the debut of new NSX. Technical regulation of GT500 will go through a drastic change in 2014, but it was informed that the car will be a compliant racing car in MR configuration and is currently under development.

 

[Snaeper]

Wrong. They said the NSX will have a mid engine with hybrid power at all 4 wheels. They did announce the NSX to be MR. And with the SGT rules stipulating 2.0 liter 4 cylinder turbo's, the hybrid powertrain can't be used in GT500. Honda has said they will use the NSX based off the concept. The concept is not an FR layout. No one needs to tell me anything. Honda has said themselves.

It's actually not wrong, you just cannot comprehend anything anyone tells you, thus you come to conclusions like calling me wrong, when I'm not.

Given that you clearly can't understand anything we say to you, how can we possibly trust anything you say when it's based on a rubbish-ly translated Japanese Article. Especially when that article doesn't confirm the NSX to be MR. And that's your only source.

Because I don't know if you watched or read the Honda NSX Super GT intention release, but they don't say anything about it being MR. Merely that they're going to be running it in 2014.

Are you sure you know that? Because you seem to think they'll use some alternate layout from what the NSX is going to be on the road. They are basing it off the NSX concept which is mid engine. But you all know that.

You're responding to me in a different context than which I was speaking. You stated that the NSX would be used in 2014. We all know it's going to be used in 2014. That's how the conversation got started. You seem to think the car will be MR based on them having permission to run MR. That's not a confirmation.

Wrong again. The article from December said GTA accepts Honda's request to use the NSX in 2014. Honda said this month they will go ahead and use it in 2014. No "if's" there bud.

Again, not wrong. You just don't understand what anyone is saying to you.

Of course it won't change their minds. You watched the Honda motorsport activity press conference, correct? They said they will use the NSX in 2014, correct?

There's that attitude again (then again, this argument has gone on so long that I'm now displaying it, too. Sorry). Why you think that by assuming I haven't watched those some how makes my opinion less relevant is silly.

The article I linked to about the BOP for Mid Engined NSX from the GTA was dated from last year, December I think. That's 3 months from GTA releasing this information to the public. You really think Honda would change their mind about using the NSX now? That makes no sense. Why even announce the NSX for 2014 if they have doubts of using it?

Because, and get ready for me to blow your mind on this one, they could run the NSX as an FR in Super GT. Just like the Nissan GT-R and Audi A5 are run as FR.

You spoke of reading comprehension before, then used an example in your last post. So when I use one, I'm mis-quoting you? You're being hypocritical and it's pathetic. What I said was hypothetical in itself. 👎

I could go back and explain it for you, if that would make it feel better. Continuing to show a lack of comprehension and then calling me hypocritical and pathetic... is pathetic. If what you said was hypothetical, then you need to be more concise. Because I read it as you inferring that the GTA would change their minds. As my hypothetical situation never played that out in the scenarios I gave, you were thus misquoting me. Because you inferred that the GTA would change their minds.

No, you're wrong. As is everyone else who thinks the NSX won't be an MR GT500.

Congratulations, you've won the argument!

They will not change the layout of the engine just because that's what everyone else is running. You don't even specify which link you're denying.

I don't have to, because none of them do.

There's at least 2 links saying the acceptances of Honda using the NSX because it's MR and there is also a link describing the change to the chassis in 2014 from what DTM currently run because of the NSX being MR. So you're denying which source? Or both?

To make it easy, I'm denying any source you've given. Because every source you give, I read, and come to the conclusion that the MR NSX Super GT car is only a possibility. Not a fact, as you continue to imply.

That makes absolutely no sense. Honda asks the GTA for permission to use the NSX as their 2014 car because it's a mid engined car, GTA grants them permission. But somehow you seem to believe they won't make it MR? So what's the point in their bargaining with GTA and seemingly ITR to use the MR layout/NSX?

It doesn't cost anything to get permission to run an MR car. And since Honda clearly has the funds to build one-off development race car prototypes, they were simply looking for permission so they could justify the expense further. Honda could build an FR and MR Super GT car and test them against each other under the regulations that would be posed on each, and then pick which car was the fastest.

Really? CTSCC has run Porsches, those are mid/rear engine, Rolex has the cars I listed, DP being ALL mid engine. On top of that they are joining with ALMS with... Mid engine GTE's and Mid engine LMP2s and Rear engine Porsche GTCs. I don't think you can say they won't be kind to MR cars.

You really don't understand how Grand-Am and the future American DTM series works. It's hilarious.

But to continue on this little bit of off-topic we have here, let me post you this.

Oh look, a mid-engined car based on a front-engined car that was made to be mid-engined because that's what the regulations stipulated. An FR NSX Super GT race car isn't out of the realm of possibility just because the road car is MR. And yes, I know these are two completely different series. But regulations are regulations, and it seems that if Corvette can't be allowed to run an FR DP in the Rolex series, then when Grand-Am starts their American DTM series, we might as well expect all the cars to be FR.

The nsx has been announced as MR in concept form. The GT500 car is based off the concept. I don't get the confusion or reluctance to believe what numerous motorsport outlets reported.

I understand that you're upset that we are not so willing to readily believe a poorly translated Japanese website, but that doesn't mean you should criticize us. Especially when we all feel we're in the right.

 

[aarror]

Holy crap, stop it already. I came into this thread to try and find news about this years cars, but if there ever was any news it's been buried in 6 pages of pointless arguments. At least one side needs to take the high road and let it slide, because its pretty clear if you don't this argument will continue all the way until 2014.

Now, has there been an entry list for GT300 yet? Are there any crazy Japanese cars left or are they all switching to GT3 cars?

 

[RACECAR]

Holy crap, stop it already. I came into this thread to try and find news about this years cars, but if there ever was any news it's been buried in 6 pages of pointless arguments. At least one side needs to take the high road and let it slide, because its pretty clear if you don't this argument will continue all the way until 2014.

Now, has there been an entry list for GT300 yet? Are there any crazy Japanese cars left or are they all switching to GT3 cars?

As far as I'm aware, The CR-Zs would be one. I would only guess the BRZ and the Prius may return, but the Garaiya unfortunately IS retired.

 

[thewheelman83]

Subaru has confirmed its 2013 participation, they will be switching tire manufacturer, from Yokohama's to Michelin's. Here's the video for their press release, skip to 1:36 for Subaru's Super GT plan...


For more info, here's the link for their press release, http://supergt.net/pages/pg:news_detail/devicec/ln:en/id:12764

 

[Snaeper]

Holy crap, stop it already. I came into this thread to try and find news about this years cars, but if there ever was any news it's been buried in 6 pages of pointless arguments. At least one side needs to take the high road and let it slide, because its pretty clear if you don't this argument will continue all the way until 2014.

Now, has there been an entry list for GT300 yet? Are there any crazy Japanese cars left or are they all switching to GT3 cars?

And as long as it stays on topic and relatively civil, it should be allowed to.

I appreciate and commend your calls for peace, good sir, but you are a perfect example of why this lengthy discussion got started in the first place. Any new members who come in asking for information on Super GT are at risk of possibly being mis-informed should they inquire about the New NSX Super GT Car.

Many of us believe the car has the potential of being MR, but FR is just as likely. While one member is completely convinced the car will be MR and is not open to the possibility of it being FR, despite our attempts to have him consider our view.

I have attempted to take the high road and surrender the argument, but alas, it's a challenging discussion which I addictive-ly love to hate and participate in.

 

[freshseth83]

We've gotten that you don't get what we are trying to say by this point.

I don't care what you have to say. I don't go by what guys on a forum think. I gave links, with actual quotes from the people in charge of Super GT, and Honda themselves. So what you and the others have to say to me is irrelevant. 👍

It is an assumption, you're crazy if you don't think it is one. You act like just because it's in a journal it's final fact - not the case.

Allow me to re-write the press release in order to show you what proof we need.

That's the proof you need? So my previous link where Maasaki Bandoh (representative of GTA) has said "BOP to MR NSX" isn't what you are speaking of?

It's actually not wrong, you just cannot comprehend anything anyone tells you, thus you come to conclusions like calling me wrong, when I'm not.

Like I said, what you think or what you say are meaningless. Until you can prove that Honda will run the NSX as an FR you haven't done anything to show my links are wrong.

Given that you clearly can't understand anything we say to you, how can we possibly trust anything you say when it's based on a rubbish-ly translated Japanese Article. Especially when that article doesn't confirm the NSX to be MR. And that's your only source.

See above. It's not what I say. It's what "GTA", "Honda", "Racecar Engineering" and "Sportscar Racing" say. Argue with them, call them untrustworthy. Your words are pointless to me. All I can suggest is you find a better translation site, invest in better translation software, find a Japanese member of these forums or go by what I linked you. I even linked to a Japanese member of another motorsport forum who is kind enough to translate these stories, you still deny it.

Because I don't know if you watched or read the Honda NSX Super GT intention release, but they don't say anything about it being MR. Merely that they're going to be running it in 2014.

So when they released the concept of the NSX and said it was a mid engined car, that's not saying it's MR? I guess when Honda said they will run the NSX in GT500 based on the concept that means they will change the engine layout? If that's what you're hinting at you're the one making assumptions (which you accuse me of).

You're responding to me in a different context than which I was speaking. You stated that the NSX would be used in 2014. We all know it's going to be used in 2014. That's how the conversation got started. You seem to think the car will be MR based on them having permission to run MR. That's not a confirmation.

I'm responding to you in a different context? Ok, bud. Let me know when you know something other than NSX in GT500 in 2014.

Again, not wrong. You just don't understand what anyone is saying to you.

Repeating I don't understand doesn't make it true. I don't care what you or anyone else is saying. I don't go off guys in a forum. I go off information by reliable motorsport resources.

There's that attitude again (then again, this argument has gone on so long that I'm now displaying it, too. Sorry). Why you think that by assuming I haven't watched those some how makes my opinion less relevant is silly.

You opinion is irrelevant because it's not factual. I'm not speaking my opinion. I'm speaking what is available for you and everyone else here to read. You calling me out is pointless, as is your opinions. The websites I've linked to say specifically about the NSX being MR. Why do you continue to deny the facts?

Because, and get ready for me to blow your mind on this one, they could run the NSX as an FR in Super GT. Just like the Nissan GT-R and Audi A5 are run as FR.

Another assumption. You can't link to any article that says they will run an FR NSX.

I could go back and explain it for you, if that would make it feel better. Continuing to show a lack of comprehension and then calling me hypocritical and pathetic... is pathetic. If what you said was hypothetical, then you need to be more concise. Because I read it as you inferring that the GTA would change their minds. As my hypothetical situation never played that out in the scenarios I gave, you were thus misquoting me. Because you inferred that the GTA would change their minds.

You should probably just stop. Reading 'comprehension' was your words trying to poke fun at me for not 'understanding' you. You made up some silly hypothetical situation I made up some silly hypothetical situation. Never did I say I was following or elaborating on your hypothesis, that's another assumption on your part. I didn't misquote you, I gave my own. How's that for 'reading comprehension'?

Congratulations, you've won the argument!

I'm not arguing with you. You're not showing me any facts, I showed you facts in the links. When you can do that you will be right. Until then all you have is what you think Honda will do, not what they will actually do.

I don't have to, because none of them do.

Au contraire, they all say the NSX is going to run as an MR. You need to translate the articles that are in Japanese and you will see.

To make it easy, I'm denying any source you've given. Because every source you give, I read, and come to the conclusion that the MR NSX Super GT car is only a possibility. Not a fact, as you continue to imply.

Wrong, again. I won't repeat myself as you'll still deny the factual evidence in the articles. There isn't any 'implying' by me. Your conclusion is false.

It doesn't cost anything to get permission to run an MR car. And since Honda clearly has the funds to build one-off development race car prototypes, they were simply looking for permission so they could justify the expense further. Honda could build an FR and MR Super GT car and test them against each other under the regulations that would be posed on each, and then pick which car was the fastest.

So they'll waste money building two concepts when they've already been told back from at least December that GTA will accept their MR NSX?

You really don't understand how Grand-Am and the future American DTM series works. It's hilarious.

I'll just have to laugh at that one. As of now, there is no American DTM series.

But to continue on this little bit of off-topic we have here, let me post you this.

Oh look, a mid-engined car based on a front-engined car that was made to be mid-engined because that's what the regulations stipulated. An FR NSX Super GT race car isn't out of the realm of possibility just because the road car is MR. And yes, I know these are two completely different series. But regulations are regulations, and it seems that if Corvette can't be allowed to run an FR DP in the Rolex series, then when Grand-Am starts their American DTM series, we might as well expect all the cars to be FR.

Like I said above, as of now there is no American DTM series. Talk about that when it comes back up. "#TheFuture" that they speak of about Rolex is still in connection with the ACO which runs LeMans. Not ITR which runs DTM, not GTA which runs Super GT. Unless you have some proof, there's no reason to even talk about DP's in an American DTM type series.

I understand that you're upset that we are not so willing to readily believe a poorly translated Japanese website, but that doesn't mean you should criticize us. Especially when we all feel we're in the right.

You clearly don't understand. Why would I be upset that guys on GTPlanet don't understand Japanese or want to believe links from sites that they themselves have linked to in the past? I'm really just laughing inside at how naive and uninformed you're acting. I said it before, don't believe me, don't do any reading of the translations, don't follow the links; I don't care. You choose to listen to what they say or not. These aren't my words.

 

[Tornado]

I don't care what you have to say. I don't go by what guys on a forum think. I gave links, with actual quotes from the people in charge of Super GT, and Honda themselves. So what you and the others have to say to me is irrelevant.

Yeah, we got that part too. It certainly is interesting just how actively involved you are in not caring, though.

 

[Wardez]

That's the proof you need? So my previous link where Maasaki Bandoh (representative of GTA) has said "BOP to MR NSX" isn't what you are speaking of?

If you build a house and you insure it for flooding, that does not guarantee a flood will come!

 

[thewheelman83]

If you build a house and you insure it for flooding, that does not guarantee a flood will come!

An excellent metaphor, Wardez. As I said in my previous post, Honda could go either way...

 

[freshseth83]

Yeah, we got that part too. It certainly is interesting just how actively involved you are in not caring, though.

And you reply why? What do you have to add? You're not discussing Super GT, you're continuing with your agenda in replying to me saying simple two line replies which have no bearing to the topic of this thread. 👎

If you build a house and you insure it for flooding, that does not guarantee a flood will come!

GTA doesn't tell autosport Japan that the NSX will be MR and receive BOP for Honda to make it FR and not base it off the concept which was released. Nice analogy with no relative meaning.

Here's last year's driver champion Mola's new livery

If you pay close attention to the diffuser area, you will notice the 'shark teeth' as Nissan calls them. This helps reduce drag while retaining large amounts of downforce.

 

[Wardez]

Teaser shot by Autosport, on the cover:

So, it certainly has the stance of MR, but this could just be some artist interpretation. Won't know till the book's opened up.

 

[Tornado]

And you reply why? What do you have to add? You're not discussing Super GT, you're continuing with your agenda in replying to me saying simple two line replies which have no bearing to the topic of this thread. 👎

No, seriously. If you don't care what people say against what you are stating to be fact (and you've made it clear that you don't want to listen to anyone else on the subject considering how much you've twisted words, misrepresented posts and ignored responses that don't suit you), then why do you keep going out of your way to write entire essay posts repeating the exact same set of assumptions and interpretations of news that you've been saying since the start if you don't have any interest in reading what the responses say?

GTA doesn't tell autosport Japan that the NSX will be MR and receive BOP for Honda to make it FR

GTA didn't tell Autosport that the NSX would be MR and receive BOP as a result. Just because you keep saying that that is the exact 100% true meaning of the translation you keep using as proof doesn't mean that is in fact anything more than your interpretation of the translation. GTA told Autosport that it would receive BOP for being MR. That's the only thing that that news means for certain; which means whether it actually will hinges entirely on if Honda is going to go through with making it MR now that they know it will take the penalty. You said yourself they they made the decision to make it MR before they knew what penalties they might receive for it, but you still don't grasp the idea that because they now know what those penalties are they might not make it MR in response?

and not base it off the concept which was released.

"If I keep repeating it, it will make it true. If I keep repeating it, it will make it true. If I keep repeating it, it will make it true. If I keep repeating it, it will make it true."

Nice analogy with no relative meaning.

"I failed to grasp the meaning" ≠ "analogy has no meaning"

 

[RX-7_FD3S]

Ahh my shot of arguing, it's so fun reading this thread. Guess it can continue like that for at least 6 month fun times~

 

[nostuner03]

Lol came in here for supergt convo. Left with half information and half argumentive points being made about said info.

 

[freshseth83]

No, seriously. If you don't care what people say against what you are stating to be fact (and you've made it clear that you don't want to listen to anyone else on the subject considering how much you've twisted words, misrepresented posts and ignored responses that don't suit you), then why do you keep going out of your way to write entire essay posts repeating the exact same set of assumptions and interpretations of news that you've been saying since the start if you don't have any interest in reading what the responses say?

No, seriously if you have nothing better to do than argue with what I post why are you here in a SuperGT thread? I don't listen to arguments saying things like "we have to wait and see", why? Because there's already confirmation on Honda and GTA's part that the NSX will be MR. I find it funny how you can say I misrepresent posts, because I don't follow your line of thought I'm misrepresenting it? So If I have sources that say one thing and you go off and post something like "we have to wait" and give silly false reasonings that have no real merit you come to that conclusion? Do you even know the definition of misrepresent? It's "to give a false or misleading representation of"... if the quote is in the post how is it misrepresenting, tornado? If I reply to someone with what I say, saying how it has no basis as it's unprobable and unfounded, that's misrepresenting? 👎 Whatever you say.

GTA didn't tell Autosport that the NSX would be MR and receive BOP as a result. Just because you keep saying that that is the exact 100% true meaning of the translation you keep using as proof doesn't mean that is in fact anything more than your interpretation of the translation. GTA told Autosport that it would receive BOP for being MR. That's the only thing that that news means for certain; which means whether it actually will hinges entirely on if Honda is going to go through with making it MR now that they know it will take the penalty. You said yourself they they made the decision to make it MR before they knew what penalties they might receive for it, but you still don't grasp the idea that because they now know what those penalties are they might not make it MR in response?

You're wrong, again. I said they announced the NSX will be used in 2014 after GTA told Honda would receive a "BOP towards the MR NSX". Those are direct words from Masaaki Bandoh, representative of GTA. I think you're getting confused as to what the words I said are. They told GTA their intention to run the NSX in 2014 before the story in autosport Japan which I linked to numerous times was dated at least from December last year, that's 12/2012. When was Honda's motorsport press conference? February 8, 2013/ 2/8/13. You don't need me to tell you the difference between times.

"If I keep repeating it, it will make it true. If I keep repeating it, it will make it true. If I keep repeating it, it will make it true. If I keep repeating it, it will make it true."

Whatever works for you. I read it once and knew it was true. Like Ambrose Bierce said;

"Doubt, indulged and cherished, is in danger of becoming denial; but if honest, and bent on thorough investigation, it may soon lead to full establishment of the truth."

"I failed to grasp the meaning" ≠ "analogy has no meaning"

It has no relevance. Were talking about a car, a race series, an engine layout. It's an analogy, nothing more. It pertains to our conversation in some way I'm sure as any analogy can, but it still has no relevance to your denial of official news confirming what you fail to accept.

BTW, Wardez that picture is dated from last year as well. It was an issue which talked about the tie-up between the two series and the new common parts/chassis to be used in 2014. And yes, the NSX in that picture is just a mock up image.

Here's a live shot of the MOLA GTR's new livery

And here's a video of a private test session at Suzuka


It seems only the Weider HSV (the one featured in GT5) is using the old single rear exhaust layout.

 

[Furinkazen]

Is this a SuperGT thread or a bat and ball argument thread? Sorry off topic but seriously guys? Take it to Pm's or something...

 

[Wardez]

Your sources aren't good enough for us to make a conclusion, but they're good enough for you, bottom line. I agree to disagree.

@Furi
This is still on topic. You guys coming in here and complaining about how things are supposedly getting clogged are the ones adding absolutely nothing to the conversation by mini-modding.

 

[Furinkazen]

Your sources aren't good enough for us, but they're good enough for you, bottom line. I agree to disagree.

@Furi
This is still on topic. You guys coming in here and complaining about how things are supposedly getting clogged are the ones adding absolutely nothing to the conversation by mini-modding.

Sorry my bad then..

 

[freshseth83]

Your sources aren't good enough for us to make a conclusion, but they're good enough for you, bottom line. I agree to disagree.

@Furi
This is still on topic. You guys coming in here and complaining about how things are supposedly getting clogged are the ones adding absolutely nothing to the conversation by mini-modding.

My source is the same source your picture is from

Autosport web, they interviewed the representative of GTA and he confirmed the MR layout of the NSX. I gave you and the rest of this thread a link to the other forum where the Japanese member translated it better than Google. Google, even though hard to understand at times, had the words pretty spot on.

Hey even if you can't translate the as-web article that well, Racecar Engineering says this back in October 2012 http://www.racecar-engineering.com/news/super-gt-and-dtm-to-share-regulations;

One complication is the desire of Honda to run a mid engined car in GT500 based on its new NSX model, this will almost certainly be a challenge with the DTM tub, however the GTA will allow Honda to run whatever engine position it likes which may require a different tub, however that car would only be permitted to take part in domestic races and not international races.

So that was back in October before the developments of late which I linked to in the sportscar-racing article. Running MR in SuperGT isn't a problem. Running in MR in DTM was the problem. But the sportscar-racing article explains that the chassis will be modified and made by the Japanese and the Germans. The chassis changes in SuperGT because of the MR layout of the NSX.

 

[Wardez]

Well then, we must all just be a group of deficients. I wonder why we lack the intellect to talk about things with such certainty.

 

[Tornado]

Yep. I'll be sure to come to you, and only you, seth, to translate all of Kaz's future interviews about GT6.


I mean, can you imagine how much grief would have been saved if we had your perfect translation skills back when there were 5 different interpretations of what exactly "Standard Cars do not correspond to interior views" meant? Since, you know, even from similar languages it is very easy for the meaning of words to be changed through direct translations, nevermind mangling sentences with Google Translate. I just hope the Rosetta Stone people don't go out of business.



And by the way, we had already seen that article. thewheelman posted it.

 

[freshseth83]

Yep. I'll be sure to come to you, and only you, seth, to translate all of Kaz's future interviews about GT6.

Your condescending posts are a waste of your time. I'm not Japanese, bud. If you actually read my posts you would see that the translation of these articles isn't from me or google or bablefish or rosetta stone but from a Japanese member of another forum. Guess that one must have skipped past you.

I mean, can you imagine how much grief would have been saved if we had your perfect translation skills back when there were 5 different interpretations of what exactly "Standard Cars do not correspond to interior views" meant? Since, you know, even from similar languages it is very easy for the meaning of words to be changed through direct translations, nevermind mangling sentences with Google Translate. I just hope the Rosetta Stone people don't go out of business.

Were talking about Super GT and the fact that the NSX is a mid-engined car. Not standard cars corresponding with interior views. This shows how you are getting caught up in petty word play and using examples that don't pertain to the topic at hand. GT5's standard car debacle does not equal 3 or 4 different sources confirming an MR NSX GT500. Your connection is lost, try another line.

And by the way, we had already seen that article. thewheelman posted it.

Wheelman posted a video on the 16th in a new thread that has since been merged with this one I posted my link on February the 8th

 

[Wardez]

Here's a live shot of the MOLA GTR's new livery

Those side-mirrors look atrocious D:

 

[Tornado]

Your condescending posts are a waste of your time. I'm not Japanese, bud. If you actually read my posts you would see that the translation of these articles isn't from me or google or bablefish or rosetta stone but from a Japanese member of another forum. Guess that one must have skipped past you.

No, I noticed that you provided a translation of some actual validity. Then I noticed that you turned right around and continued to defend the Google Translate mess that you posted before that:

Google, even though hard to understand at times, had the words pretty spot on.

As if it meant anything whatsoever when you told us to basically find the information and then translate the information ourselves. Which I was responding to.

Were talking about Super GT and the fact that the NSX is a mid-engined car. Not standard cars corresponding with interior views. This shows how you are getting caught up in petty word play and using examples that don't pertain to the topic at hand. GT5's standard car debacle does not equal 3 or 4 different sources confirming an MR NSX GT500. Your connection is lost, try another line.

*whoosh*

Your inability to grasp even the most basic of comparisons for why we aren't jumping at the idea that it is definitely MR, even after they are spelled out to you (at which point you just blow them off as... how did you put it? "Silly false reasonings"), kind of says a lot for why you resort so quickly to treating everyone who disagrees like invalids.

Wheelman posted a video on the 16th in a new thread that has since been merged with this one I posted my link on February the 8th

Wheelman posted that exact article on the 19th. So... yeah, we did see it.

 

[Furinkazen]

It seems only the Weider HSV (the one featured in GT5) is using the old single rear exhaust layout.

0:33 the Weider also sporting front left accident damage?

 

[freshseth83]

No, I noticed that you provided a translation of some actual validity. Then I noticed that you turned right around and continued to defend the Google Translate mess that you posted before that:

Because the google translate said almost the exact same thing. 💡 But you were complaining about the validity of such a tool. So how is it that google translate comes to a translation almost verbatim with what a Japanese member has said but you and others have an issue with it? Right...

As if it meant anything whatsoever when you told us to basically find the information and then translate the information ourselves. Which I was responding to.

Which goes in hand with what I just said. You seem to think my google translate is iffy, so I give you the same article translated by "Japanese Samurai" from ten-tenths.com and it comes to be almost the same words. So I'm making an example of how you can use your own way of translating these articles and still come to reach the same conclusion as what a person who's native language is Japanese. Basically the google translate doesn't skew the information and what I've said is what 'someone in the know' also said. 👍

*whoosh*

You work for Nike or something? Looks kinda familiar

Your inability to grasp even the most basic of comparisons for why we aren't jumping at the idea that it is definitely MR, even after they are spelled out to you (at which point you just blow them off as... how did you put it? "Silly false reasonings"), kind of says a lot for why you resort so quickly to treating everyone who disagrees like invalids.

Aww Did I hurt your feelings by calling out your crap reasoning? Honda says it's MR, Masaaki Bandoh says it's MR, sportscar-racing.net says it's MR, racecar-engineering says it's MR! Then, Tornado says "you're inability to grasp even the most basic of comparisons for why we aren't jumping at the idea..." I'm not here for comparisons, buddy. I'm here to give information on SuperGT and it's future, not to take into consideration what Tornado thinks about my inabilities.

Wheelman posted that exact article on the 19th. So... yeah, we did see it.

That's nice. Glad you saw it. That means it was posted at least twice officially that Honda says they're using the NSX based off the concept next year. So in October we have the GTA saying Honda wants to use the NSX and it will receive BOP. Then about 4 months later we have Honda confirming they will use the NSX. 💡 For someone that talks about comparisons and how they relate, you sure can't put the two together. GTA- MR NSX, BOP. HONDA- NSX 2014, based off Concept, Concept is Mid engine.

That's just one source, one connection. If you understand the translations and you think the translation from "Japanese Samurai" is reliable- there should be no question.