Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
I still remember when I got beaten by a Renault 5... I was in a Cougar. Absolutely got killed at Autumn Ring Mini, beaten slightly at Motegi full, yet killed at the drag strip.
Tuner Garages
- Thread starter Kent
- 2,497 comments
- 226,410 views
- 3,008
- You're crazy if you think
- I can afford either of these.
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
Both my cars are purposely limited to 155mph or so.
- 3,008
- You're crazy if you think
- I can afford either of these.
Yeah, they aren't meant to tear up a track with long straights, just the more technical ones. I get it
nd 4 holden spd
(Banned)
- 6,142
- GTP_nd4holdenspd
- No, another PSN: nd4holdenspd
I was getting just under 1'50 at GVS wasn't I? I think my lap time is in the Corvette entry post.
- 919
Or, the reason the Alpine is killing you is because I never added my last settings update 
. Let me guess - irksome understeer in 2nd followed by power-over approaching redline. It's still a lightweight RR though, no matter which way you dice it. It was my attempt at the "win by improvement over default" strategy. That, and the fact that it can DESTROY the Nurburgring 
. Let me guess - irksome understeer in 2nd followed by power-over approaching redline. It's still a lightweight RR though, no matter which way you dice it. It was my attempt at the "win by improvement over default" strategy. That, and the fact that it can DESTROY the Nurburgring
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
Yep, you nailed it.
Except I was finding understeer much more often than power-over.
Except I was finding understeer much more often than power-over.
- 919
Yeah gearing, suspension and stabilizer changes should have been in place and weren't. Thank god for the postponed deadline...
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
I'm going through the same on my car.
- 919
You'd better, because now I'm delving back into mine, and yours feels like steering through molasses what with all that initial torque It IS probably good for under 2 minutes at GVS. I don't know about 1:55 to 1:57, but it's quick for its power.
It IS probably good for under 2 minutes at GVS. I don't know about 1:55 to 1:57, but it's quick for its power.
nd 4 holden spd
(Banned)
- 6,142
- GTP_nd4holdenspd
- No, another PSN: nd4holdenspd
*Sits back comfortably in Corvette and watches two guys desperately trying to improve their cars without luck so far*
- 919
You do realize that the Alpine isn't a Club Racer, yes? (And that on Sports tires it probably holds the road better than the Corvette on racing tires )
)
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
And that the R-Maxi can and will destroy CLS's Alpine by virtue of R2 tires?
The S-Maxi is the one that's being worked on.
The S-Maxi is the one that's being worked on.
- 369
VINTAGE CUP ENTRY - 1964-72 DIVISION Drive and Review
All the test driving was done a Grand Vallay Speedway. If the gearing was upgrade I tested with and without the gearing added. This is so I could see where the improvement came from. Plus some of the cars max out the default gearing before the end of the staights so this help fix the problem if it cames up. So tuner's this is what I found out about your cars.
mafia_boy = '70 TOYOTA CELICA (TA22) 1600GT GT-TWO
Final Score: 73/100
Default setting lap time = 2'07.000 (note:default gearing OK)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'06.751
Tme improvement = .249 ( all chassis )
Braking was a little better, but the brake control upgrade would have helped.
The suspension had a little more stability and less tire scrub in the turn.
The transmission gearing was Ok. The final drive was over geared some and
should be high ratio to get all the power out of the engine. By moving the final gear you can pick up .250 of a second.
Overall this car feels all like a norm factory upgrade model other then the over gearing.
GT40 MKII = 1971 Plymouth Cude
Final Score: 85/100
Default setting lap time = 2'10.211 (note: default gearing max out before end of the straigh)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'05.113
Tme improvement = 5.098 ( chassis = .621 / gearing = 4.477 )
Braking was better with more control.
The cars suspension had better at the turn-ins. It also had less understeer are all points and speeds of the turns.
The transmission gearing was Ok. The diff changes did a good jod keeping wheel spin down. The final drive was under geared and missed the engines power band. It should have bin a low ratio to get into the power band. By moving the final gear you can pick up 1.943 second.
Overall I liked the improvements to this car other than the final gearing. It runs well for using no wing and S2 tires only.
Nissan Tuner = Nissan 240ZG '71
Final Score: 95/100
Default setting lap time = 2'03.501 (note: no gearing upgrade's use and gearing OK)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'01.833
Tme improvement = 1.668 ( all chassis )
Braking was much better with very good controllability.
The cars suspension had better at all points of the turn with better control. The car was more neutral and could be steered with both the steering wheel and the throttle. The diff setting made the drive wheels more lock-in.
Overall this a great tuning job and a fun car to drive.
Greycap = Lotus Europa special '70
Final Score: 89/100
Default setting lap time = 1'58.266 (note:default gearing OK)
Tuned setting lap time = 1'57.799
Tme improvement = .467 ( chassis = .220 / gearing = .247)
Braking was better with more control. but had a little to much brake pressure.
The cars suspension was better and is more controllable with all of the oversteer gone at all speeds.
The transmission gearing and final drive gearing was good. But second gear was over geared for the chassis set-up. It was Ok was the defaults as I could carry more speed through second gear turns because of the oversteer. But with out it you miss the engines power band becaue of the missing speed. By change it you can pick up .200 of a second.
Overall this is a much easyer car to drive fast now. but same of the oversteer should be put back in to it even better.
nd 4 holden spd = Isuzu Bellet 1600 GT-R '69
Final Score: 63/100
Default setting lap time = 2'08.205 (note:default gearing OK)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'07.243
Tme improvement = .962 ( chassis = .007 / gearing = .955)
Braking was a little better with a little more control.
The cars suspension was no better and feels on the soft side.
The transmission gearing was Ok. The final drive was over geared and my best time was made without using sixth gear. The diff set-up was OK. By firming up the chassis and changed the final gearing you can picked up .600 of a second.
Overall this was a miss for me with only same small improvement that drive a little bit differently for the defaults.
Leonidae = NisMo FAIRLADY S-Tune'68
Final Score: 77/100
Default setting lap time = 2'04.673 (note:default gearing OK)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'04.058
Tme improvement = .615 ( chassis = .089 / gearing = .526)
Braking was better with more control.
The cars suspension had better at the turn-ins and was better in mid speed turns. On the exit of the turn and on high speed turns it was a little off from the defaults setting.
The transmission gearing and final drive gearing was good. The change used the power band better.
Overall this was a nice car and was a better driver after tuning that still needs same tweaking.
CraftyLandShark = Toyota 2000GTO Shelby Special '67
Final Score: 80/100
Default setting lap time = 2'02.754 (note:default gearing OK just)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'00.849
Tme improvement = 1.905 ( chassis = .362 / gearing = 1.543)
Braking was better with more control. but had a little to much brake pressure.
The cars suspension had better just a little on the soft side. It was better at the turn-ins and was better in mid speed turns. On the exits and in high speed turns it was the same. firming the suspension up same would help both.
The transmission gearing and final drive gearing was good. The change used the power band better.
Overall this is a better car to drive after tunning that stilll needs a little work.
mustangGT90210's = Plymouth 'Cude '71
Final Score: 65/100
Default setting lap time = 2'08.992 (note: default gearing max out before end of the straigh)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'03.989
Tme improvement = 5.003 ( chassis = .199 / gearing = 4.804 )
Braking was a little better and you could use them to rotate the car same.
The suspension was set-up to low in the ride height. Also to soft for both the spring rate and the shock bound setting. This is causing the car to bottom out the suspenions stops. The car's stabilizer setting did lessen the understeer a little. By rasing and firming up the setting you can pick up .500 of a second.
The transmission gearing and final drive gearing was good. The change used the engine power band.
Overall this car as was just setting to soft and needs more chassis work.
All the test driving was done a Grand Vallay Speedway. If the gearing was upgrade I tested with and without the gearing added. This is so I could see where the improvement came from. Plus some of the cars max out the default gearing before the end of the staights so this help fix the problem if it cames up. So tuner's this is what I found out about your cars.
mafia_boy = '70 TOYOTA CELICA (TA22) 1600GT GT-TWO
Final Score: 73/100
Default setting lap time = 2'07.000 (note:default gearing OK)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'06.751
Tme improvement = .249 ( all chassis )
Braking was a little better, but the brake control upgrade would have helped.
The suspension had a little more stability and less tire scrub in the turn.
The transmission gearing was Ok. The final drive was over geared some and
should be high ratio to get all the power out of the engine. By moving the final gear you can pick up .250 of a second.
Overall this car feels all like a norm factory upgrade model other then the over gearing.
GT40 MKII = 1971 Plymouth Cude
Final Score: 85/100
Default setting lap time = 2'10.211 (note: default gearing max out before end of the straigh)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'05.113
Tme improvement = 5.098 ( chassis = .621 / gearing = 4.477 )
Braking was better with more control.
The cars suspension had better at the turn-ins. It also had less understeer are all points and speeds of the turns.
The transmission gearing was Ok. The diff changes did a good jod keeping wheel spin down. The final drive was under geared and missed the engines power band. It should have bin a low ratio to get into the power band. By moving the final gear you can pick up 1.943 second.
Overall I liked the improvements to this car other than the final gearing. It runs well for using no wing and S2 tires only.
Nissan Tuner = Nissan 240ZG '71
Final Score: 95/100
Default setting lap time = 2'03.501 (note: no gearing upgrade's use and gearing OK)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'01.833
Tme improvement = 1.668 ( all chassis )
Braking was much better with very good controllability.
The cars suspension had better at all points of the turn with better control. The car was more neutral and could be steered with both the steering wheel and the throttle. The diff setting made the drive wheels more lock-in.
Overall this a great tuning job and a fun car to drive.
Greycap = Lotus Europa special '70
Final Score: 89/100
Default setting lap time = 1'58.266 (note:default gearing OK)
Tuned setting lap time = 1'57.799
Tme improvement = .467 ( chassis = .220 / gearing = .247)
Braking was better with more control. but had a little to much brake pressure.
The cars suspension was better and is more controllable with all of the oversteer gone at all speeds.
The transmission gearing and final drive gearing was good. But second gear was over geared for the chassis set-up. It was Ok was the defaults as I could carry more speed through second gear turns because of the oversteer. But with out it you miss the engines power band becaue of the missing speed. By change it you can pick up .200 of a second.
Overall this is a much easyer car to drive fast now. but same of the oversteer should be put back in to it even better.
nd 4 holden spd = Isuzu Bellet 1600 GT-R '69
Final Score: 63/100
Default setting lap time = 2'08.205 (note:default gearing OK)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'07.243
Tme improvement = .962 ( chassis = .007 / gearing = .955)
Braking was a little better with a little more control.
The cars suspension was no better and feels on the soft side.
The transmission gearing was Ok. The final drive was over geared and my best time was made without using sixth gear. The diff set-up was OK. By firming up the chassis and changed the final gearing you can picked up .600 of a second.
Overall this was a miss for me with only same small improvement that drive a little bit differently for the defaults.
Leonidae = NisMo FAIRLADY S-Tune'68
Final Score: 77/100
Default setting lap time = 2'04.673 (note:default gearing OK)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'04.058
Tme improvement = .615 ( chassis = .089 / gearing = .526)
Braking was better with more control.
The cars suspension had better at the turn-ins and was better in mid speed turns. On the exit of the turn and on high speed turns it was a little off from the defaults setting.
The transmission gearing and final drive gearing was good. The change used the power band better.
Overall this was a nice car and was a better driver after tuning that still needs same tweaking.
CraftyLandShark = Toyota 2000GTO Shelby Special '67
Final Score: 80/100
Default setting lap time = 2'02.754 (note:default gearing OK just)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'00.849
Tme improvement = 1.905 ( chassis = .362 / gearing = 1.543)
Braking was better with more control. but had a little to much brake pressure.
The cars suspension had better just a little on the soft side. It was better at the turn-ins and was better in mid speed turns. On the exits and in high speed turns it was the same. firming the suspension up same would help both.
The transmission gearing and final drive gearing was good. The change used the power band better.
Overall this is a better car to drive after tunning that stilll needs a little work.
mustangGT90210's = Plymouth 'Cude '71
Final Score: 65/100
Default setting lap time = 2'08.992 (note: default gearing max out before end of the straigh)
Tuned setting lap time = 2'03.989
Tme improvement = 5.003 ( chassis = .199 / gearing = 4.804 )
Braking was a little better and you could use them to rotate the car same.
The suspension was set-up to low in the ride height. Also to soft for both the spring rate and the shock bound setting. This is causing the car to bottom out the suspenions stops. The car's stabilizer setting did lessen the understeer a little. By rasing and firming up the setting you can pick up .500 of a second.
The transmission gearing and final drive gearing was good. The change used the engine power band.
Overall this car as was just setting to soft and needs more chassis work.
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
stidriver, I thought you were of the crew that found most of MFT's cars to have too much brake pressure... I must be wrong there.
- 919
Thanks for judging! That division desperately needed some more feedback.
- 369
No it's a car to car thing for me. As I put more miles on the car I can start push for all that the set-up has. For me the brakes came into play faster.
nd 4 holden spd
(Banned)
- 6,142
- GTP_nd4holdenspd
- No, another PSN: nd4holdenspd
You do realize that the Alpine isn't a Club Racer, yes? (And that on Sports tires it probably holds the road better than the Corvette on racing tires
Sometimes you forget these things
I don't like this judging, to say that my suspension was no better is downright laughable, if it was softer it was to control sliding, and my goodness, 🤬 load.
This sounds more like what it was meant to be.
- 369
I was not tring to make your set-up come out as it did. I have tried other set-ups of your with good out comes. I could not beleive what was happening to your tuning. So I ran the car and setting two more times on different day just incase I was not have a off day. That car just may not be a good one for me.Sometimes you forget these things
I don't like this judging, to say that my suspension was no better is downright laughable, if it was softer it was to control sliding, and my goodness, 🤬 load.
This sounds more like what it was meant to be.
update= I will give the car a run at Infineon like the other reviewer did to see how it runs on that track.
nd 4 holden spd
(Banned)
- 6,142
- GTP_nd4holdenspd
- No, another PSN: nd4holdenspd
- 369
I have ran the Bellet a Infineon and your tuning of the car just is wrong for GVS. But it likes infineon alot as the other review found. With not time run the other the at that track for a even review it stands as it. But here's the review for the Isuzu at Infineon.
default setting lap time = 1'45.137 tuner's seeting lap time = 1'44.320
Braking was better with more control.
The cars had better at the turn-ins and could be rotated with ease. It was neutral for most turns with a slight understeer on rest. It was a little floaty in the high speed turns and could use same more ride height.
The transmission gearing was still Ok and the final drive was still over geared.
I change the final to 5.320 and ran a 1'44.226 and my lap time where more consistent too. With the listed final if your off you lose alot of time as you end up off of the power band.
So you tuned a nice driver it just needed a different place to hang out at.
nd 4 holden spd
(Banned)
- 6,142
- GTP_nd4holdenspd
- No, another PSN: nd4holdenspd
Meh, tomorrow I will have to check that gearing, not that it can be changed now for the competition but it sounds like a problem needs fixing. Maybe the suspension doesn't suit your driving style at GVS (which must be a damn good one) because I tuned it at GVS and it suits me great and feels awesome.
Edit: Hey stidriver, our birthdays are only 3 days apart from each other
If you don't mind my asking what is your primary language?
- 369
English is my language. Also after the Infineon laps I made a stop GVS and it was as if I had change to a other car. O'will It's just not a GVS set-up for me.Meh, tomorrow I will have to check that gearing, not that it can be changed now for the competition but it sounds like a problem needs fixing. Maybe the suspension doesn't suit your driving style at GVS (which must be a damn good one) because I tuned it at GVS and it suits me great and feels awesome.
Edit: Hey stidriver, our birthdays are only 3 days apart from each other
- 3,008
- You're crazy if you think
- I can afford either of these.
65/100? I agree the suspension is a bit soft, but damn man, isn't that a little harsh?
*Points and laughs at N4HS* And you said that Isuzu was going to (and I agreed) kill my 'Cuda in feel. T'would appear StiDriver thinks differently.
Lol.
*Points and laughs at N4HS* And you said that Isuzu was going to (and I agreed) kill my 'Cuda in feel. T'would appear StiDriver thinks differently.
Lol.
- 3,008
- You're crazy if you think
- I can afford either of these.
Rotary Junkie
Premium
- 9,810
- Canton, MI
- RJs_RX-7
Currently impatiently buying rims to pass days to get Leo's Fairlady and N4HS's Bellett...
Testing one-two, testing one-two, grading in progress
nd 4 holden spd's 1969 Isuzu Bellett 1600 GT-R:
Stock Setting Impression:
Gearing is a bit on the close side, but that's the least of this car's problems. Body roll is outright nautical, it's an understeery pig off throttle and has a tendency to oversteer on-throttle, with the tail rolling more than the nose, exacerbating the problem by unloading the inside rear. However, the car is far from evil handling, it just needs a little work.
Tune Applied Impression:
Shaving great amounts of time per-corner at Twin Ring Motegi's full road course, the tune certainly works. Erm, that is... It works better than stock. However, it's cornering limits seem quite low, most likely due in part to the front toe-in limiting the amount of steering angle that can be applied mid-corner without the outside front protesting. Off-throttle understeer is still present, just not to the degree it was previously; review of the ride height and weight balance settings could possibly make this disappear. Gearing is far too long, as the car will never be able to pull and hold 6th on any track's straight short of Sarthe. Soo... While an improvement, it needs improvement. Its limits are just too low.
Time: 2:13.302
Score: 70/100, a C-.
MustangGT90210's 1971 Plymouth Barracuda
Stock Setting Impression:
Surprisingly not a bad handling car... The gearing hurts it, badly, but... It's faster around TRM than N4HS's Bellett despite being limited to 115mph on most straights and absolutely topping out at 125 or so (Big-block torque and what I suspect to be higher limits). This car is hurt by the open rear differential, which allows the inside rear to go up in smoke rather easily, making it nearly impossible to exit corners with much confidence. Application of the specified gearing, however, brought a few more problems with the default tune to the surface... Namely the brakes being weak for the weight of the car, and a tendency towards mild understeer. The car was actually notably SLOWER with the wider gearing, as acceleration up to 90-100mph was hindered. Seems that the ratios are a bit too spread out. Enough, how's it feel with downforce and the suspension tune?
Tune Applied Impression:
Without the downforce applied: Ouch. Sorry to say, but there's more understeer, the car is almost as nautical-feeling as the stock Bellett, and the brakes, while adjusted, made no difference as the front brake pressure was reduced and the front brakes can handle more braking force than the rears in this car.
With downforce: More understeer. Too much rear downforce means the rear has more traction than the front, with the car being nose-heavy to start with... It's painful, really. I found the sand more often than a good exit, and the laptime suffered due to the lowered exit speeds.
Time: 2:14.669 (Was 2:12.559 out of the box), 2:09.188 with different gearing.
Score: 55/100: Sorry man, but you have an E for the day.
CraftyLandShark's 1967 Toyota 2000GTO Shelby Special (Yes, I know you withdrew it... Testing anyways to see where it stands)
Stock Setting Impression:
It sounds good. It goes. There is very little at fault with this car, with the only problem areas being a bit of understeer on-throttle in 3rd and unwillingness to curb a powerslide in 2nd (both due to what seems to be an overly soft rear suspension), as well as some extremely mild understeer under braking. The times... Oh, my, the TIMES... The car is blazingly fast around here as it sits so long as you resist the temptation to drift it in second...
Tune Applied Impression:
Without downforce applied: Slightly quicker, but it doesn't feel as nice... That, and it could possibly use a bit less front brake pressure. And a rethinking of the front alignment. A bit of understeer on-throttle at times, but nothing horrid. Also seemed at times that the diff was a bit on the loose side.
With downforce: She's a grippy little sucker! However, the diff did allow the inside tire to light up on occasion, somewhat unpredictably, and the problems with the alignment became more obvious, with the outside front howling in protest all too soon. So, overall, the car is quicker, but it doesn't feel as nice.
Time: 2:07.655 fluke lap, 2:08.044 on re-run.
Score: 78/100, C+.
Leonidae's 1968 NisMo Fairlady S-Tune
Stock Setting Impression:
Very much like a Miata, this one. Not especially fast in a straight line, but cornering is enjoyable... However, enjoyable and good are not always one in the same; this car has a bit of body roll and a wee bit of understeer, but it's still fun. Don't ask how. Must be the cute looks. Not too much to say here... It's nice, but not in the "Holy crow, there's no way to improve on this" sense.
Tune Applied Impression:
Love the feeling. Steering is light and precise, and the car is just peachy. It's a cheeky little car made to be fun... Unfortunately, despite it's power to weight ratio, it's slow. Not going to dock points there, but the diff is a bit on the open side under accel and could possibly use less preload and the brakes could use to be a little more biased towards the rear. The improvement in times is non-existant for me, but the feel... It's nice.
Time: 2:11.471
Score: 75/100 (Just doesn't impact times enough...)
Greycap's 1971 Lotus Europa Special:
Stock Setting Impression:
Hmm... It's not bad at all, rather it's got just the right amount of lift-off oversteer and great cornering prowess... But it likes to pull powerslides in second at WOT, and controlling the throttle to prevent that causes understeer. Brakes seem a little on the weak side, and could use a slightly further rearward bias.
Tune Applied Impression:
Without downforce applied: Wow. Wow. Wow. It's a work of art. Cornering speeds are up... The gearing is great... It's... Bliss. Could possibly use a little more tweaking, but the only real annoyance is the high-speed touchiness of MR/RR cars that I've come to expect. Let's see what it does when the wing is put to use...
Downforce applied: The downforce doesn't drop times much at all... I think the car might be able to get away with a bit more front downforce and not be twitchy, but I could be wrong. Surprisingly, this isn't as quick as the default 2000GT, and it sometimes forces the outside tire to scream in agony. Not quite perfect, and there's a bit of high-speed oversteer, but I've come to expect that from a MR layout.
Time: 2:06.426
Score: 82/100, B-.
nissan tuner's 1971 Nissan 240ZG
Stock Setting Impression:
The high default traction control setting indicates that this car should be a bit on the tailhappy side with the aids off... So how is it?
It is... Err, kinda. If you keep the wheelspin away, the car's fine, but the instant you let it slide... The too-soft rear reveals itself. Moreover, the entire car feels overly soft and spongy. Despite the alarming nose dive and general feeling that the car would rather be cruising the boulevard, it sets reasonably quick laps.
Tune Applied Impression:
Dang. This car had potential... But it got screwed over. Understeer is the word of the day, with strong power-over tendencies in second. I think the diff is mostly to blame, as it could probably use to have less decel and initial, possibly a bit less accel as well. The cornering limits were dropped... The car was worsened in all aspects other than the dive/roll...
Time: a still-quick 2:09.538, but default was 2:08.183
Score: 55/100. Sorry, but you have an E for the day.
GT40 MKII's 1971 Plymouth Barracuda
Stock Setting Impression:
It's another 'Cuda, but this one has a little more power and a limited-slip. And, from a stock-setting point of view, it hurts it. There's a bit of push on and off throttle that's not present without the diff, and gearing is a problem still. But... With GT40's gearing, the car comes alive a bit, as you stop worrying about the ratios as much and can concentrate on driving... But the gears are still a bit short, as the car effectively is done accelerating at about 120mph... With a 3.27 final, it's cookin' with gas! 2:06.894 with a good bit of time to shave, and the suspension and diff are both far from perfect, with the diff being a bit on the tight side under decel and the suspension being overly soft and improperly damped.
Tune Applied Impression:
Keeping the 3.27 gears, the suspension and differential settings didn't fix much, nor did the brake settings. Understeer is still present, with more push under throttle and next to no difference off throttle, the damping still feels wrong... And the times suffered. Unfortunately, the car, while fast, merely disappoints.
Time: 2:07.764 (Stock + regear was a 2:06.894)
Score: 70/100, C-.
mafia_boy's 1970 Toyota Celica 1600GT GT-TWO
Stock Setting Impression:
It needs more. More power. As in 100-150hp more. The chassis is good enough to make the car seem to be constantly waiting on the power to get it to the next corner. Of course, there is a little bit of understeer to be found here or there and power-over is possible in second... I can't imagine this car with downforce... I can sense that it aches for more power already.
Tune Applied Impression:
Without downforce applied: The car still wants more. But cornering is now dead flat, dead neutral, and confidence-inspiring. Braking, despite the lack of a balance controller, is plenty strong for the speeds the car gets up to, and yet allows you to turn in under brakes comfortably... It's damn near perfect, only hampered by lack of power and the gears seemingly being a bit long. Oh, and the cornering speeds need to be a little higher to make up for the lack of power.
Downforce applied: The downforce hurt it. Too much rear downforce effectively reduces front-end grip, causing a bit of understeer. I'd try dropping a couple clicks off the rear downforce or removing the wing completely; it was THAT good without it.
Time: 2:13.567
Score: 78/100, C+.
So... WHO WON?
1st place: Greycap's Lotus Europa, 82/100.
2nd place: mafia_boy's Toyota Celica, 78/100 (would be a tie if CLS's car had not been withdrawn)
3rd place: Leonidae's Nissan Fairlady, 75/100
Good job to all.
~Kyle
Testing one-two, testing one-two, grading in progress
nd 4 holden spd's 1969 Isuzu Bellett 1600 GT-R:
Stock Setting Impression:
Gearing is a bit on the close side, but that's the least of this car's problems. Body roll is outright nautical, it's an understeery pig off throttle and has a tendency to oversteer on-throttle, with the tail rolling more than the nose, exacerbating the problem by unloading the inside rear. However, the car is far from evil handling, it just needs a little work.
Tune Applied Impression:
Shaving great amounts of time per-corner at Twin Ring Motegi's full road course, the tune certainly works. Erm, that is... It works better than stock. However, it's cornering limits seem quite low, most likely due in part to the front toe-in limiting the amount of steering angle that can be applied mid-corner without the outside front protesting. Off-throttle understeer is still present, just not to the degree it was previously; review of the ride height and weight balance settings could possibly make this disappear. Gearing is far too long, as the car will never be able to pull and hold 6th on any track's straight short of Sarthe. Soo... While an improvement, it needs improvement. Its limits are just too low.
Time: 2:13.302
Score: 70/100, a C-.
MustangGT90210's 1971 Plymouth Barracuda
Stock Setting Impression:
Surprisingly not a bad handling car... The gearing hurts it, badly, but... It's faster around TRM than N4HS's Bellett despite being limited to 115mph on most straights and absolutely topping out at 125 or so (Big-block torque and what I suspect to be higher limits). This car is hurt by the open rear differential, which allows the inside rear to go up in smoke rather easily, making it nearly impossible to exit corners with much confidence. Application of the specified gearing, however, brought a few more problems with the default tune to the surface... Namely the brakes being weak for the weight of the car, and a tendency towards mild understeer. The car was actually notably SLOWER with the wider gearing, as acceleration up to 90-100mph was hindered. Seems that the ratios are a bit too spread out. Enough, how's it feel with downforce and the suspension tune?
Tune Applied Impression:
Without the downforce applied: Ouch. Sorry to say, but there's more understeer, the car is almost as nautical-feeling as the stock Bellett, and the brakes, while adjusted, made no difference as the front brake pressure was reduced and the front brakes can handle more braking force than the rears in this car.
With downforce: More understeer. Too much rear downforce means the rear has more traction than the front, with the car being nose-heavy to start with... It's painful, really. I found the sand more often than a good exit, and the laptime suffered due to the lowered exit speeds.
Time: 2:14.669 (Was 2:12.559 out of the box), 2:09.188 with different gearing.
Score: 55/100: Sorry man, but you have an E for the day.
CraftyLandShark's 1967 Toyota 2000GTO Shelby Special (Yes, I know you withdrew it... Testing anyways to see where it stands)
Stock Setting Impression:
It sounds good. It goes. There is very little at fault with this car, with the only problem areas being a bit of understeer on-throttle in 3rd and unwillingness to curb a powerslide in 2nd (both due to what seems to be an overly soft rear suspension), as well as some extremely mild understeer under braking. The times... Oh, my, the TIMES... The car is blazingly fast around here as it sits so long as you resist the temptation to drift it in second...
Tune Applied Impression:
Without downforce applied: Slightly quicker, but it doesn't feel as nice... That, and it could possibly use a bit less front brake pressure. And a rethinking of the front alignment. A bit of understeer on-throttle at times, but nothing horrid. Also seemed at times that the diff was a bit on the loose side.
With downforce: She's a grippy little sucker! However, the diff did allow the inside tire to light up on occasion, somewhat unpredictably, and the problems with the alignment became more obvious, with the outside front howling in protest all too soon. So, overall, the car is quicker, but it doesn't feel as nice.
Time: 2:07.655 fluke lap, 2:08.044 on re-run.
Score: 78/100, C+.
Leonidae's 1968 NisMo Fairlady S-Tune
Stock Setting Impression:
Very much like a Miata, this one. Not especially fast in a straight line, but cornering is enjoyable... However, enjoyable and good are not always one in the same; this car has a bit of body roll and a wee bit of understeer, but it's still fun. Don't ask how. Must be the cute looks. Not too much to say here... It's nice, but not in the "Holy crow, there's no way to improve on this" sense.
Tune Applied Impression:
Love the feeling. Steering is light and precise, and the car is just peachy. It's a cheeky little car made to be fun... Unfortunately, despite it's power to weight ratio, it's slow. Not going to dock points there, but the diff is a bit on the open side under accel and could possibly use less preload and the brakes could use to be a little more biased towards the rear. The improvement in times is non-existant for me, but the feel... It's nice.
Time: 2:11.471
Score: 75/100 (Just doesn't impact times enough...)
Greycap's 1971 Lotus Europa Special:
Stock Setting Impression:
Hmm... It's not bad at all, rather it's got just the right amount of lift-off oversteer and great cornering prowess... But it likes to pull powerslides in second at WOT, and controlling the throttle to prevent that causes understeer. Brakes seem a little on the weak side, and could use a slightly further rearward bias.
Tune Applied Impression:
Without downforce applied: Wow. Wow. Wow. It's a work of art. Cornering speeds are up... The gearing is great... It's... Bliss. Could possibly use a little more tweaking, but the only real annoyance is the high-speed touchiness of MR/RR cars that I've come to expect. Let's see what it does when the wing is put to use...
Downforce applied: The downforce doesn't drop times much at all... I think the car might be able to get away with a bit more front downforce and not be twitchy, but I could be wrong. Surprisingly, this isn't as quick as the default 2000GT, and it sometimes forces the outside tire to scream in agony. Not quite perfect, and there's a bit of high-speed oversteer, but I've come to expect that from a MR layout.
Time: 2:06.426
Score: 82/100, B-.
nissan tuner's 1971 Nissan 240ZG
Stock Setting Impression:
The high default traction control setting indicates that this car should be a bit on the tailhappy side with the aids off... So how is it?
It is... Err, kinda. If you keep the wheelspin away, the car's fine, but the instant you let it slide... The too-soft rear reveals itself. Moreover, the entire car feels overly soft and spongy. Despite the alarming nose dive and general feeling that the car would rather be cruising the boulevard, it sets reasonably quick laps.
Tune Applied Impression:
Dang. This car had potential... But it got screwed over. Understeer is the word of the day, with strong power-over tendencies in second. I think the diff is mostly to blame, as it could probably use to have less decel and initial, possibly a bit less accel as well. The cornering limits were dropped... The car was worsened in all aspects other than the dive/roll...
Time: a still-quick 2:09.538, but default was 2:08.183
Score: 55/100. Sorry, but you have an E for the day.
GT40 MKII's 1971 Plymouth Barracuda
Stock Setting Impression:
It's another 'Cuda, but this one has a little more power and a limited-slip. And, from a stock-setting point of view, it hurts it. There's a bit of push on and off throttle that's not present without the diff, and gearing is a problem still. But... With GT40's gearing, the car comes alive a bit, as you stop worrying about the ratios as much and can concentrate on driving... But the gears are still a bit short, as the car effectively is done accelerating at about 120mph... With a 3.27 final, it's cookin' with gas! 2:06.894 with a good bit of time to shave, and the suspension and diff are both far from perfect, with the diff being a bit on the tight side under decel and the suspension being overly soft and improperly damped.
Tune Applied Impression:
Keeping the 3.27 gears, the suspension and differential settings didn't fix much, nor did the brake settings. Understeer is still present, with more push under throttle and next to no difference off throttle, the damping still feels wrong... And the times suffered. Unfortunately, the car, while fast, merely disappoints.
Time: 2:07.764 (Stock + regear was a 2:06.894)
Score: 70/100, C-.
mafia_boy's 1970 Toyota Celica 1600GT GT-TWO
Stock Setting Impression:
It needs more. More power. As in 100-150hp more. The chassis is good enough to make the car seem to be constantly waiting on the power to get it to the next corner. Of course, there is a little bit of understeer to be found here or there and power-over is possible in second... I can't imagine this car with downforce... I can sense that it aches for more power already.
Tune Applied Impression:
Without downforce applied: The car still wants more. But cornering is now dead flat, dead neutral, and confidence-inspiring. Braking, despite the lack of a balance controller, is plenty strong for the speeds the car gets up to, and yet allows you to turn in under brakes comfortably... It's damn near perfect, only hampered by lack of power and the gears seemingly being a bit long. Oh, and the cornering speeds need to be a little higher to make up for the lack of power.
Downforce applied: The downforce hurt it. Too much rear downforce effectively reduces front-end grip, causing a bit of understeer. I'd try dropping a couple clicks off the rear downforce or removing the wing completely; it was THAT good without it.
Time: 2:13.567
Score: 78/100, C+.
So... WHO WON?
1st place: Greycap's Lotus Europa, 82/100.
2nd place: mafia_boy's Toyota Celica, 78/100 (would be a tie if CLS's car had not been withdrawn)
3rd place: Leonidae's Nissan Fairlady, 75/100
Good job to all.
~Kyle
nd 4 holden spd
(Banned)
- 6,142
- GTP_nd4holdenspd
- No, another PSN: nd4holdenspd
RJ is one tough judge, no one above 80 in his scores yet
My Bellet, OK, for future drives (say it reaches AT) I have shortened the gears and it now just reaches the red line almost at the end of GVS straight. Here's the part I just can't understand, you all describe understeer, but I'm getting serious power over in this car- what's going on? Aren't you guys flawing it like you should in this car? I may have to work on it sliding less and getting less oversteer meaning more understeer- it seems I entered this division under prepared.
My Bellet, OK, for future drives (say it reaches AT) I have shortened the gears and it now just reaches the red line almost at the end of GVS straight. Here's the part I just can't understand, you all describe understeer, but I'm getting serious power over in this car- what's going on? Aren't you guys flawing it like you should in this car? I may have to work on it sliding less and getting less oversteer meaning more understeer- it seems I entered this division under prepared.
- 919
Yeah, the poor 2000GTO was the victim of a bad last-second update while, ironically, I was sick as well, and doped up on enough Nyquil to make pink elephants dance It's since gotten a good firming-up.
It's since gotten a good firming-up.
