- 1,673
- UK
The WTC 600 in Tokyo done without exploits is genuinely one of the hardest races in single player in gt7 - share your setups, tips, and cars
- Thread starter The_It_Jojo
- 2,591 comments
- 401,552 views
- 2,179
- United Kingdom
- breeminator
- breeminator
It drops the PP but it makes the shifts slower. It depends on how much gear shifting is needed, but for Sardegna I found the race gearbox was faster, as the faster shifts more than made up for the PP difference. I haven't specifically compared the two for Tokyo, but I generally default to the race gearbox. If you do use the manual gearbox, it can be quicker to stay in a longer gear as much as possible to reduce the number of shifts needed.
- 2,115
- Germany
It really depends on how you setup the gear ratios and how much power you can increase by switching from racing transmission to customizable transmission.
If you can setup your gear ratios in a way to not require much shifting while also matching a good power band, you are not losing too much compared to racing transmission.
- 722
- United Kingdom
Not tried it elsewhere but on Tokyo it provides the stability amd agility I'm looking for along the narrow bends in the second and third sectors of the course without the back stepping out which the default F40 does.
Even on lap 1 at Turn 1 after touching 200MPH, only really reckless driving will get the back to spin out - I don't use TC
Last edited:
- 2,179
- United Kingdom
- breeminator
- breeminator
My first time under 26 minutes for this race:
That was a 1 stop, you need to shift around half bar with fuel mix 1 to last 6 laps. I've switched from controller to wheel, so don't know how it will drive with a controller, but the understeer wasn't THAT bad with a wheel. I used TC1. I expect an alien could get under 25:30.
That was a 1 stop, you need to shift around half bar with fuel mix 1 to last 6 laps. I've switched from controller to wheel, so don't know how it will drive with a controller, but the understeer wasn't THAT bad with a wheel. I used TC1. I expect an alien could get under 25:30.
Last edited:
- 1,673
- UK
- 1,165
- Sweden, Gothenburg
- Highlanderlast
Does this still work after June 23rd 1.17 update? I am not near 600pp and copied settings exactly like in the image?
- 3,035
- Kingston, Jamaica
- pj-gm
- PJwasHere876
I also dreaded doing this in the F40, especially without ever driving it prior, but it seems the ballast I had to add was what made it easier than expected. I had a feeling that was the case when the car actually handled 'worse' as the fuel went down.
I also thought I would cut it close on strategy, but a one stop on Sport Hards allowed me to win fairly comfortably, even with two 5 second penalties (first time rustiness). Fantastic car, love it to death. Felt a lot better than my previous banter car for this event, the stock Diablo with a GTR wing.
I also thought I would cut it close on strategy, but a one stop on Sport Hards allowed me to win fairly comfortably, even with two 5 second penalties (first time rustiness). Fantastic car, love it to death. Felt a lot better than my previous banter car for this event, the stock Diablo with a GTR wing.
- 1,165
- Sweden, Gothenburg
- Highlanderlast
- 722
- United Kingdom
Tried it at Spa WTC600 and secured a comfortable win. Again stability was noticeable.
I think there is room for improvement on more technical courses; so I'd add the Adjustable Suspension to try and tune out some of the understeer.
At 600PP it's not a problem, I won all events with the F40 build I posted, but in search of the best handling possible, I may increase the ballast to add the Adjustable Suspension or possibly introduce the power restrictor.
Not necessary as the car will win the events with good stability which is its default problem (IMO) but I wanna hone it for the twistier tracks too.
- 29
- China
Just went with Aston Martin VGT last night but with a setup slightly different. 145kg ballast, 70 ECU with 100 restrictor. Came up 1sec faster each lap from the earlier 100kg ballast setup. So it's capable of around 2.06-2.07 time a lap and still no need of pitstop with full race finished just around 26min dead. Quite a nice one to run, think I would stick with it for some time.
- 1,027
- Portugal
Another car to add to the list of greats for this race:
Ferrari Tributo. It can do 330km/h on the straight.
Ferrari Tributo. It can do 330km/h on the straight.
- 171
- Italy
So, after some days, I've decided to do this review, though I have an small announcement to make at the end of it.
Lancer EVO V: this is literally Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V
So, this car has the same behaviour of the EVO IV and the EVO VI, both top speed wise and handling wise, so I won't spend any more words, you know how they behave overall. Only thing I'm going to add, I put the central torque vectoring here too with a 30:70 to mitigate understeer without having oversteer problems.
Economy wise, it's the same as the others, with 8/9 laps of fuel and no problems with tyres, so, yeah, nothing to add also here, it's quite literally the same once you bring all of them to 600pp. I swear it's uncanny.
Lap times wise, as you may have guessed, yeah, it's another copy and paste of the other two, with 2:11s being my best ones, and an overall of 2:27. How I'm capable of being so consistent with every EVO is beyond me.
Final thoughts: yeah, uh... I don't really have anything to add, really, every EVO is the same one (Except the EVO X but I haven't tried it yet).
Porsche 911 930 Turbo: the widowmaker is, indeed, a good nickname for this car
Yeah... this car is a nightmare to drive. Like, I genuinely think it has an infatuation towards Barry R. because it wants to kiss him very badly, but let's go in order.
Top speed wise, you have 280 km/h with a 4 gear manual. Yeah, there is nothing to add here, it's just bad, despite the 450 horsepower; meanwhile, handling wise, as you can see from that pic, this car likes to spin at the most random moments which made me want to just erase it from existence, but I digress. It's just bad and has no grip whatsoever. At least brakes are good but you will suffer from lift off oversteer. Or braking oversteer. Or both.
Economy wise, what did you expect? Turbo means only 7 laps of fuel and no grip means no rear tyres when you pit, this isn't just the widowmaker, it's the tyres destroyer and gets drunk by how much fuel it drinks. So, don't use this if you are looking for economy.
Lap times wise, it's the worst with 2:13.4 as my best time, I just couldn't push it at all. Oh and it's the slowest one overall with 27:53 as my total time.
Final thoughts: an absolute waste of money, don't.
A70 Supra: that 1JZ still rocks
To top the day, something that made it better, and this car really made my day:
First of all, 321 km/h of top speed is one of the absolute best ones I've ever achieved, plus an amazing acceleration means this 1JZ is really, really doing its job even if it's a '88 engine.
If you are looking for handling, well, keep its happy tail under control, and you'll have a car that turns amazingly well. However, besides the happy tail, you also have not so good brakes, so, yeah, you'll need to break early, but if you do, you'll be good.
Economy wise, it has good fuel mileage with a full tank lasting for 8 laps, and surprisingly also not rough on tyre wear with a noticeable but manageable performance drop with worn mediums on, so I think that if you were to drop the aftermarket turbo for better brakes and sports hards, you could go for a no stopper with an easier handling. Overall, very nice.
Lap times wise, below 27 minutes overall with a 2:09.0 as my best one (I could have gone faster, but the 5 seconds wall penalty hates me), which makes this car really fast overall and potentially even faster, and has nothing to envy to the A80 with its 2JZ. Very solid and fast pick overall.
Final thoughts: it's good. Like really good. Money absolutely well spent on this one, especially since it's very fun to drive.
So, thank you for reading what I think it's going to be my last review, I've had my fun doing these, but a bit of staleness, a bit of kind of lack of interest by other people in this thread, and also a bit of seeing people running suspension exploits in a thread named "with no exploits this race can be challenging", well, I don't really see much of a point in continuing it. If you have requests, I will still try them, but overall, I don't think I will continue with them. As always, thank you again for reading my reviews, and have a good day, peace✌
Lancer EVO V: this is literally Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V
So, this car has the same behaviour of the EVO IV and the EVO VI, both top speed wise and handling wise, so I won't spend any more words, you know how they behave overall. Only thing I'm going to add, I put the central torque vectoring here too with a 30:70 to mitigate understeer without having oversteer problems.
Economy wise, it's the same as the others, with 8/9 laps of fuel and no problems with tyres, so, yeah, nothing to add also here, it's quite literally the same once you bring all of them to 600pp. I swear it's uncanny.
Lap times wise, as you may have guessed, yeah, it's another copy and paste of the other two, with 2:11s being my best ones, and an overall of 2:27. How I'm capable of being so consistent with every EVO is beyond me.
Final thoughts: yeah, uh... I don't really have anything to add, really, every EVO is the same one (Except the EVO X but I haven't tried it yet).
Porsche 911 930 Turbo: the widowmaker is, indeed, a good nickname for this car
Yeah... this car is a nightmare to drive. Like, I genuinely think it has an infatuation towards Barry R. because it wants to kiss him very badly, but let's go in order.
Top speed wise, you have 280 km/h with a 4 gear manual. Yeah, there is nothing to add here, it's just bad, despite the 450 horsepower; meanwhile, handling wise, as you can see from that pic, this car likes to spin at the most random moments which made me want to just erase it from existence, but I digress. It's just bad and has no grip whatsoever. At least brakes are good but you will suffer from lift off oversteer. Or braking oversteer. Or both.
Economy wise, what did you expect? Turbo means only 7 laps of fuel and no grip means no rear tyres when you pit, this isn't just the widowmaker, it's the tyres destroyer and gets drunk by how much fuel it drinks. So, don't use this if you are looking for economy.
Lap times wise, it's the worst with 2:13.4 as my best time, I just couldn't push it at all. Oh and it's the slowest one overall with 27:53 as my total time.
Final thoughts: an absolute waste of money, don't.
A70 Supra: that 1JZ still rocks
To top the day, something that made it better, and this car really made my day:
First of all, 321 km/h of top speed is one of the absolute best ones I've ever achieved, plus an amazing acceleration means this 1JZ is really, really doing its job even if it's a '88 engine.
If you are looking for handling, well, keep its happy tail under control, and you'll have a car that turns amazingly well. However, besides the happy tail, you also have not so good brakes, so, yeah, you'll need to break early, but if you do, you'll be good.
Economy wise, it has good fuel mileage with a full tank lasting for 8 laps, and surprisingly also not rough on tyre wear with a noticeable but manageable performance drop with worn mediums on, so I think that if you were to drop the aftermarket turbo for better brakes and sports hards, you could go for a no stopper with an easier handling. Overall, very nice.
Lap times wise, below 27 minutes overall with a 2:09.0 as my best one (I could have gone faster, but the 5 seconds wall penalty hates me), which makes this car really fast overall and potentially even faster, and has nothing to envy to the A80 with its 2JZ. Very solid and fast pick overall.
Final thoughts: it's good. Like really good. Money absolutely well spent on this one, especially since it's very fun to drive.
So, thank you for reading what I think it's going to be my last review, I've had my fun doing these, but a bit of staleness, a bit of kind of lack of interest by other people in this thread, and also a bit of seeing people running suspension exploits in a thread named "with no exploits this race can be challenging", well, I don't really see much of a point in continuing it. If you have requests, I will still try them, but overall, I don't think I will continue with them. As always, thank you again for reading my reviews, and have a good day, peace✌
- 1,110
- Portland, OR
- Live25
That's a pity, I've just started reading these. Thank you for your time and effort.
- 1,673
- UK
Ive thoroughly enjoyed your reviews on the different cars.ive given some of your review cars a bash for myself.Some of them i wouldnt have thought of useing but reading your reviews opened up a little bit of choice for me.Gets a 10 out of 10 for you sir.👍So, after some days, I've decided to do this review, though I have an small announcement to make at the end of it.
Lancer EVO V: this is literally Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V
So, this car has the same behaviour of the EVO IV and the EVO VI, both top speed wise and handling wise, so I won't spend any more words, you know how they behave overall. Only thing I'm going to add, I put the central torque vectoring here too with a 30:70 to mitigate understeer without having oversteer problems.
Economy wise, it's the same as the others, with 8/9 laps of fuel and no problems with tyres, so, yeah, nothing to add also here, it's quite literally the same once you bring all of them to 600pp. I swear it's uncanny.
Lap times wise, as you may have guessed, yeah, it's another copy and paste of the other two, with 2:11s being my best ones, and an overall of 2:27. How I'm capable of being so consistent with every EVO is beyond me.
Final thoughts: yeah, uh... I don't really have anything to add, really, every EVO is the same one (Except the EVO X but I haven't tried it yet).
Porsche 911 930 Turbo: the widowmaker is, indeed, a good nickname for this car
Yeah... this car is a nightmare to drive. Like, I genuinely think it has an infatuation towards Barry R. because it wants to kiss him very badly, but let's go in order.
Top speed wise, you have 280 km/h with a 4 gear manual. Yeah, there is nothing to add here, it's just bad, despite the 450 horsepower; meanwhile, handling wise, as you can see from that pic, this car likes to spin at the most random moments which made me want to just erase it from existence, but I digress. It's just bad and has no grip whatsoever. At least brakes are good but you will suffer from lift off oversteer. Or braking oversteer. Or both.
Economy wise, what did you expect? Turbo means only 7 laps of fuel and no grip means no rear tyres when you pit, this isn't just the widowmaker, it's the tyres destroyer and gets drunk by how much fuel it drinks. So, don't use this if you are looking for economy.
Lap times wise, it's the worst with 2:13.4 as my best time, I just couldn't push it at all. Oh and it's the slowest one overall with 27:53 as my total time.
Final thoughts: an absolute waste of money, don't.
A70 Supra: that 1JZ still rocks
To top the day, something that made it better, and this car really made my day:
First of all, 321 km/h of top speed is one of the absolute best ones I've ever achieved, plus an amazing acceleration means this 1JZ is really, really doing its job even if it's a '88 engine.
If you are looking for handling, well, keep its happy tail under control, and you'll have a car that turns amazingly well. However, besides the happy tail, you also have not so good brakes, so, yeah, you'll need to break early, but if you do, you'll be good.
Economy wise, it has good fuel mileage with a full tank lasting for 8 laps, and surprisingly also not rough on tyre wear with a noticeable but manageable performance drop with worn mediums on, so I think that if you were to drop the aftermarket turbo for better brakes and sports hards, you could go for a no stopper with an easier handling. Overall, very nice.
Lap times wise, below 27 minutes overall with a 2:09.0 as my best one (I could have gone faster, but the 5 seconds wall penalty hates me), which makes this car really fast overall and potentially even faster, and has nothing to envy to the A80 with its 2JZ. Very solid and fast pick overall.
Final thoughts: it's good. Like really good. Money absolutely well spent on this one, especially since it's very fun to drive.
So, thank you for reading what I think it's going to be my last review, I've had my fun doing these, but a bit of staleness, a bit of kind of lack of interest by other people in this thread, and also a bit of seeing people running suspension exploits in a thread named "with no exploits this race can be challenging", well, I don't really see much of a point in continuing it. If you have requests, I will still try them, but overall, I don't think I will continue with them. As always, thank you again for reading my reviews, and have a good day, peace✌
- 722
- United Kingdom
Shame. I enjoyed these.
Your tests and reviews encouraged me to hit Tokyo and experiment with different cars/tunes. It's genuinely the most interesting event in GT7 outside of the Missions because it does offer a moderate challenge, a rewarding payout, and for the most part gives many road cars a stage to be competitive on without just maxing out tuning or using race-spec cars.
Your tests and reviews encouraged me to hit Tokyo and experiment with different cars/tunes. It's genuinely the most interesting event in GT7 outside of the Missions because it does offer a moderate challenge, a rewarding payout, and for the most part gives many road cars a stage to be competitive on without just maxing out tuning or using race-spec cars.
Last edited:
- 2,179
- United Kingdom
- breeminator
- breeminator
They're a bit different to the gearing exploits, though, in that the PP jumps are much smaller, and there's loads of parameters that can cause those jumps. The fact that raising the front end and lowering the rear is PP efficient isn't an exploit, all tuning in games involves trying to find the most PP efficient changes. For example, in FH4 you almost never wanted to widen the front tyres, instead you used the ARBs to tune out understeer, because widening the front tyres increased PP, whereas adjusting the ARBs didn't. That's simply the challenge of tuning in these games, working out how to maximise performance for a given PP. So it's legitimate to change parameters and see how they affect the PP, seeking PP efficiency. There's so much weirdness in the game's PP calculations at the moment that it's basically impossible to avoid causing weird changes in the PP when adjusting lots of the parameters. We've had cars for this race for a long time now with very basic tunes that can easily win it against the hardest AI.
- 2,115
- Germany
If you wouldnt do it on a real car, dont do it on a virtual car.
Most exploits can be avoided this way.
- 245
- Singapore
- engrmariano
audi mr2
- 2,179
- United Kingdom
- breeminator
- breeminator
There's no real racing that has a PP system like games have. There's no point setting cars up in games like you would in real life because the physics in the game are their attempt at simulation, and the car won't respond to settings in the same way that a real car would. The whole point of how to tune/setup in games is extracting the best performance relative to PP. If real racing had the same system, that is exactly what people would be doing on a real car as well. The way it works at the moment, with PP sometimes jumping 0.1 for 1 click, sometimes jumping 2-3 for 1 click, sometimes jumping 10-15 for 1 click, you'd have to try every single value for every parameter, just to make sure you're not saving some PP by being on the "wrong" side of one of those clicks (the right side if you're trying to maximise performance for PP).
The gearing was different because it was a clear bug where if it thought a car couldn't reach a particular speed, it had zero cornering ability at that speed and it clearly completely messed up the PP calculation. With the current variable jumps in PP with all sorts of settings, there's certainly bizarreness in how it responds to certain settings, but if you try to avoid it, you'll just be doing the opposite of what you should be doing, you'll basically be maximising PP inefficiency rather than efficiency by always choosing the side of PP jumps that give the most PP rather than the least. It won't be any more realistic as a setup, the setup won't differ significantly from the setup where every parameter is changed one click in the other direction, but it will perform a lot worse in the game.
- 1,027
- Portugal
Thank you for your tests. I found many good cars to farm this race because of you.So, after some days, I've decided to do this review, though I have an small announcement to make at the end of it.
Lancer EVO V: this is literally Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V
So, this car has the same behaviour of the EVO IV and the EVO VI, both top speed wise and handling wise, so I won't spend any more words, you know how they behave overall. Only thing I'm going to add, I put the central torque vectoring here too with a 30:70 to mitigate understeer without having oversteer problems.
Economy wise, it's the same as the others, with 8/9 laps of fuel and no problems with tyres, so, yeah, nothing to add also here, it's quite literally the same once you bring all of them to 600pp. I swear it's uncanny.
Lap times wise, as you may have guessed, yeah, it's another copy and paste of the other two, with 2:11s being my best ones, and an overall of 2:27. How I'm capable of being so consistent with every EVO is beyond me.
Final thoughts: yeah, uh... I don't really have anything to add, really, every EVO is the same one (Except the EVO X but I haven't tried it yet).
Porsche 911 930 Turbo: the widowmaker is, indeed, a good nickname for this car
Yeah... this car is a nightmare to drive. Like, I genuinely think it has an infatuation towards Barry R. because it wants to kiss him very badly, but let's go in order.
Top speed wise, you have 280 km/h with a 4 gear manual. Yeah, there is nothing to add here, it's just bad, despite the 450 horsepower; meanwhile, handling wise, as you can see from that pic, this car likes to spin at the most random moments which made me want to just erase it from existence, but I digress. It's just bad and has no grip whatsoever. At least brakes are good but you will suffer from lift off oversteer. Or braking oversteer. Or both.
Economy wise, what did you expect? Turbo means only 7 laps of fuel and no grip means no rear tyres when you pit, this isn't just the widowmaker, it's the tyres destroyer and gets drunk by how much fuel it drinks. So, don't use this if you are looking for economy.
Lap times wise, it's the worst with 2:13.4 as my best time, I just couldn't push it at all. Oh and it's the slowest one overall with 27:53 as my total time.
Final thoughts: an absolute waste of money, don't.
A70 Supra: that 1JZ still rocks
To top the day, something that made it better, and this car really made my day:
First of all, 321 km/h of top speed is one of the absolute best ones I've ever achieved, plus an amazing acceleration means this 1JZ is really, really doing its job even if it's a '88 engine.
If you are looking for handling, well, keep its happy tail under control, and you'll have a car that turns amazingly well. However, besides the happy tail, you also have not so good brakes, so, yeah, you'll need to break early, but if you do, you'll be good.
Economy wise, it has good fuel mileage with a full tank lasting for 8 laps, and surprisingly also not rough on tyre wear with a noticeable but manageable performance drop with worn mediums on, so I think that if you were to drop the aftermarket turbo for better brakes and sports hards, you could go for a no stopper with an easier handling. Overall, very nice.
Lap times wise, below 27 minutes overall with a 2:09.0 as my best one (I could have gone faster, but the 5 seconds wall penalty hates me), which makes this car really fast overall and potentially even faster, and has nothing to envy to the A80 with its 2JZ. Very solid and fast pick overall.
Final thoughts: it's good. Like really good. Money absolutely well spent on this one, especially since it's very fun to drive.
So, thank you for reading what I think it's going to be my last review, I've had my fun doing these, but a bit of staleness, a bit of kind of lack of interest by other people in this thread, and also a bit of seeing people running suspension exploits in a thread named "with no exploits this race can be challenging", well, I don't really see much of a point in continuing it. If you have requests, I will still try them, but overall, I don't think I will continue with them. As always, thank you again for reading my reviews, and have a good day, peace✌
- 2,446
- United Kingdom
- Hasnain282
Tried a few different settings for the DP-100 and the best for me was:
ECU: 72
Ballast: 92
Ballast Pos: -50
Power Restrictor: 98
ECU: 72
Ballast: 92
Ballast Pos: -50
Power Restrictor: 98
Last edited:
- 36
- United States
extremely easy race with nissan gt-r and honda nsx from praiano tunes
- 1,971
- Ludwigsburg
- RocketJoe1-61
What times did you achieve ?
- 2,446
- United Kingdom
- Hasnain282
Best lap times were in the 2:04s and I think race time was 25:32. Still a minute or so off the Alpine but I actually quite like driving the Aston on this one
- 1,971
- Ludwigsburg
- RocketJoe1-61
No idea why, but man, your settings are simply fabulous.
This is a seriously quick Aston.Ran that 2.04 lap in my first attempt on lap 7 ( first time ever sub 2.06 ) and a 25.42 finish. I was speechless.
One great aspect is tire wear doesn't have such a great effect on lap times since the car is relatively light ( my impression at least ).
Who cares for the Alpine ?
Yep, dito.
- 476
- Tampa, Florida
- Saargasm86
Great work! LOLZ at the American Stereotype because it's true (although we've seemed to export our fast food ways to the rest of the world. See Saudi Arabia and growing obesity due to the explosion of fast food chains, but super-digressing lol)Anyway, time for three reviews this time, and they are going to be very interesting:
Lancia Stratos: a surprise, to be sure, but a welcomed one
Requested by @Meythia, this car was genuinely a nice surprise, and also not one I was expecting to begin with.
This car is legit fast - 294 km/h of top speed is impressive, especially considering it's the least powerful car I've tried thus far; however, because of its low weight, this car can do a pull so strong to drag race the GT-R and beat it, which is impressive to say the least - pleasantly surprised by this performance. Then we go to the handling, and here we see the first weak point of the car: since it's a short wheelbase MR car, it likes to slide. A lot. You are going to have to countersteer and correct your line quite a lot with the current sets of physics, and it takes a lot of time to get used to it - though once you become used to it, you are going to have fun. It's still not fast though. Last note, you need to break early - those are 1971 brakes, after all, so it should come to no surprise.
Economy wise, there is an extremely strong point and a weak one, and I'll start from the latter: tyre wear. This Lancia really eats its rear tyres like an American eats Big Macs (sorry Americans, but stereotypes about you are funny), so you will have to pit for tyres rather than fuel for this one, if you are on mediums.
However, fuel consumption is this car's strong point: you can run the whole race at FM1 and not have to refuel at all, that's how little fuel this car uses.
That means that if you go on hards and save them a bit, you can run a no stopper with ridiculous easiness and just smooth sail to victory.
Lap times wise, I have to do a premise: I didn't really do lots of justice to this car, I could have gone faster maybe even by half a second. Premise aside, the best I was able to achieve was a 2:12.5, which is eh. As I said in the premise, I could have gone faster with more practice, but this car is hard to nail down, especially for its tricky behaviour. Still, I could have been faster.
Final thoughts: surprised about how fast this car is, I wasn't expecting it. Still, it's slidy af and if you are not careful enough, you are going to have a bad time driving this car.
Lancer Evo VI T.M. edition: fast but understeery
Well, this explains a lot, especially in regards to how the 22B outperforms the 2014 WRX in the hands of the ai.
So, first of all, this car is fast in acceleration with a top speed of almost 300 km/h, which means as soon as you are hitting a straight, you are going to be fast very soon. Only problem is, this car naturally understeers, even more so as soon as you get on the power - this will just make the car understeer more. At least the brakes are good.
Economy wise, this car's good - very small tyre consumption, and fuel lasts easily for 8 laps without problems, so you can just push for the whole duration of the race without many problems across your head.
Lap times wise, it's also good here - 2:11.3 is genuinely surprising for this car, and it's not something slow either. Overall, it's in the mid-high range of lap times.
Final thoughts: granted, it's not the fastest car around, but it's not bad either. Just, keep the understeer under control and you'll be good.
Honda S2000: speed and handling
Well, well, well, ain't this a nice car to drive? Top speed of 300 km/h with a very good acceleration is not bad but nothing egregious either, but still, it's very nice on the straight. The best part comes with the handling though, which is by far the best I've ever found: you can just steer and have the car turn without problems at (almost) any speed. Seriously, the handling is so good it's almost illegal. You also have good, if not slightly average, brakes to top it off.
Economy wise, car's good on tyres, you won't have any problem regarding them, and regarding fuel it easily lasts for 8 laps, though you may need to fuel save a slight bit in the first stint. Overall though, this car is good.
Lap times wise, we have another entry to the 2:09 club with a lap time of 2:09.9, though admittedly that's mostly because of its very good handling. On another track it would be even faster and more competitive, as long as massive straights are not involved.
Final thoughts: I genuinely had a fun time driving this car, overall recommended for pretty much everything for how good it is.
As literally every single time I wrote those reviews, thank you very much for reading them, and if you have any request, feel free to ask here or shoot me a DM, I'm always open to try new entries. Stay safe out there, and I'll see you all tomorrow.
Too lazy to check page 1 again, but are you updating it with your tests and linking to the post (Like Praiano's)?
Also, I randomly tried the Alpine VGT (Original one that's like 650PP from dealership) this morning. Certainly not that fast with a lousy 275ish kpm on the straight (like 170 MPH max unless slip stream) - but holy crap does it stick to the road. It's the only car for me that I've used TC0 (im TC1 kinda guy) because unless you smash throttle, you aint spinning the tires. Easy no pitting car (because a pit would probably lose the race). Fastest lap for me was 2:12.9 and race was 27:02.
Practice! Try different cars that @The_It_Jojo has reviewed and find one that fits your driving style more. The key to enjoying this race is learning the driving line as going off it will reward you with your beloved 5-second penalties. And since you're more than likely to be using sport tires, you have to practice throttle control and your turning points. It's the most rewarding race because of the relative challenge, the ability to use road cars and being the best paying/hr.
That's if you want somewhat of a challenge - if not, the Alpine A'220 has got to be coming to the LDS soon and with the exploit tune settings utilizing RS tires and this car destroys the performance of all but the 2J exploit (which is farrrrr harder to drive IMHO).
There is also the Aston VGT tune which is glued to the road and can no-stop the whole race on FM1 (you have to use manual transmission otherwise you'll get stuck on i think gear 5 when there is a silly 8-gears - simply shift when bar starts to light up as the turbo kicks in instantly).
Thanks for all the reviews! I came pretty late to this thread, but appreciate having a solid list of cars to test out! If your main reason for stopping is the lack of perceived interest, just know that probably 95% of the people who walked away appreciating your effort didn't click the like button (I'm typically a super-duper lurker type lol).So, after some days, I've decided to do this review, though I have an small announcement to make at the end of it.
Lancer EVO V: this is literally Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V
So, this car has the same behaviour of the EVO IV and the EVO VI, both top speed wise and handling wise, so I won't spend any more words, you know how they behave overall. Only thing I'm going to add, I put the central torque vectoring here too with a 30:70 to mitigate understeer without having oversteer problems.
Economy wise, it's the same as the others, with 8/9 laps of fuel and no problems with tyres, so, yeah, nothing to add also here, it's quite literally the same once you bring all of them to 600pp. I swear it's uncanny.
Lap times wise, as you may have guessed, yeah, it's another copy and paste of the other two, with 2:11s being my best ones, and an overall of 2:27. How I'm capable of being so consistent with every EVO is beyond me.
Final thoughts: yeah, uh... I don't really have anything to add, really, every EVO is the same one (Except the EVO X but I haven't tried it yet).
Porsche 911 930 Turbo: the widowmaker is, indeed, a good nickname for this car
Yeah... this car is a nightmare to drive. Like, I genuinely think it has an infatuation towards Barry R. because it wants to kiss him very badly, but let's go in order.
Top speed wise, you have 280 km/h with a 4 gear manual. Yeah, there is nothing to add here, it's just bad, despite the 450 horsepower; meanwhile, handling wise, as you can see from that pic, this car likes to spin at the most random moments which made me want to just erase it from existence, but I digress. It's just bad and has no grip whatsoever. At least brakes are good but you will suffer from lift off oversteer. Or braking oversteer. Or both.
Economy wise, what did you expect? Turbo means only 7 laps of fuel and no grip means no rear tyres when you pit, this isn't just the widowmaker, it's the tyres destroyer and gets drunk by how much fuel it drinks. So, don't use this if you are looking for economy.
Lap times wise, it's the worst with 2:13.4 as my best time, I just couldn't push it at all. Oh and it's the slowest one overall with 27:53 as my total time.
Final thoughts: an absolute waste of money, don't.
A70 Supra: that 1JZ still rocks
To top the day, something that made it better, and this car really made my day:
First of all, 321 km/h of top speed is one of the absolute best ones I've ever achieved, plus an amazing acceleration means this 1JZ is really, really doing its job even if it's a '88 engine.
If you are looking for handling, well, keep its happy tail under control, and you'll have a car that turns amazingly well. However, besides the happy tail, you also have not so good brakes, so, yeah, you'll need to break early, but if you do, you'll be good.
Economy wise, it has good fuel mileage with a full tank lasting for 8 laps, and surprisingly also not rough on tyre wear with a noticeable but manageable performance drop with worn mediums on, so I think that if you were to drop the aftermarket turbo for better brakes and sports hards, you could go for a no stopper with an easier handling. Overall, very nice.
Lap times wise, below 27 minutes overall with a 2:09.0 as my best one (I could have gone faster, but the 5 seconds wall penalty hates me), which makes this car really fast overall and potentially even faster, and has nothing to envy to the A80 with its 2JZ. Very solid and fast pick overall.
Final thoughts: it's good. Like really good. Money absolutely well spent on this one, especially since it's very fun to drive.
So, thank you for reading what I think it's going to be my last review, I've had my fun doing these, but a bit of staleness, a bit of kind of lack of interest by other people in this thread, and also a bit of seeing people running suspension exploits in a thread named "with no exploits this race can be challenging", well, I don't really see much of a point in continuing it. If you have requests, I will still try them, but overall, I don't think I will continue with them. As always, thank you again for reading my reviews, and have a good day, peace✌
Another curiosity I'm having now after catching up on the thread - I'm curious if you went back to some of the first reviewed cars that maybe "had more potential" and re-tested them now that your familiarity with the race and track is much, much higher. First few times I used the Alpine I was blown away when I was getting 2:04's-2:06's on my laps and getting under 27-mins. After some familiarization of the track I was able to get laps down to a best of 1:57.2 and generally 2:58's most races and a race time of 25:12ish.
Similar threads
