Why are the RUF Porsches so aweful?

[Johnnypenso]

Is it normal that started to get a headache from reading @light driver posts?

His writing style is hard on the eyes and it is hard follow his train of thought. Luckily we don't have to endure it any longer

 

[TeamCZRRacing]

Is it normal that started to get a headache from reading @light driver posts?

What's worse is that he's got 216 posts to his credit, so I can't see how it's possible for him to not know that poor grammar and a complete lack of respect are not allowed here. I have a hunch it was @Famine who banned him. If so, good on him.

 

[MidFieldMaven]

If the 3400S is awful, well, you just suck.

Stock on Comfort Soft tires at Mid-Field:

 

[Voodoovaj]

There is a influx of people who've picked up the game at it's new price point and they are snapping to judgments expecting everything to be amazing without any work.

Personally, I find the Yellow Bird and BTR to be amazing cars in the 450 to 500 range. Really good at 525 and fast but tricky above that. Far from sucking, that's for sure.

 

[Sage Ages]

Well, the RUF Porsche still suk big time in the handling department on the Nurburgring and it's the track I play on mostly. No amount of tuning will make it competitive. What....RUF takes an awesome handling sports car and made it crappy? really......what a shame.....

Maybe the problem is your driving. 💡

 

[panjandrum]

I know Porsches in real life handle awesome but in the game they all suck. Why?

You are going to get a lot of different answers to this. But the low-down is this: There is something fundamentally and completely borked in GT5 & GT6 RR (and maybe MR?) physics. I performance drive 3 RR platform cars with chassis and suspensions nearly identical to those modeled in GT6, and the handling isn't even remotely similar in most cases. You can go back to GT4, which has it down very well, or move to something with more advanced physics like AC, in which the Yellowbird feels (except for the power of course) almost identical to a 911 of similar chassis. Somewhere along the line PD decided to make the physics in the GT series "more assessable" I think, and in so doing they massively screwed the pooch, at least for these wonderful classic beasts!

 

[Johnnypenso]

There is a influx of people who've picked up the game at it's new price point and they are snapping to judgments expecting everything to be amazing without any work.

Personally, I find the Yellow Bird and BTR to be amazing cars in the 450 to 500 range. Really good at 525 and fast but tricky above that. Far from sucking, that's for sure.

Fun to drive, but not competitive with the better cars in that PP range. They don't have the lateral grip to keep up.

 

[Polsixe]

Nothing wrong here at all!

 

[Voodoovaj]

Fun to drive, but not competitive with the better cars in that PP range. They don't have the lateral grip to keep up.

With top drivers in top cars, no. With average drivers yes. With average drivers in average cars, definitely ☺

 

[MidFieldMaven]

Awful. Just awful. 1:18 in a stock CTR2 at Mid-Field on Comfort tires. It doesn't get more awful. What an awful car.

 

[Aphelion]

Awful. Just awful. 1:18 in a stock CTR2 at Mid-Field on Comfort tires. It doesn't get more awful. What an awful car.

Just pitiful.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Awful. Just awful. 1:18 in a stock CTR2 at Mid-Field on Comfort tires. It doesn't get more awful. What an awful car.

And in spite of having 133 more HP, 38 more PP and 4wd, it's still only 0.2 ahead of the RGT. The Audi R8, with 20 less PP, is 0.4 faster. In fact, of all the cars in your 1:18 bracket, it has the highest PP, meaning it's the biggest underperformer. So yeah, it is awful, relative to it's competition at similar specs.

 

[Aphelion]

And in spite of having 133 more HP, 38 more PP and 4wd, it's still only 0.2 ahead of the RGT. The Audi R8, with 20 less PP, is 0.4 faster. In fact, of all the cars in your 1:18 bracket, it has the highest PP, meaning it's the biggest underperformer. So yeah, it is awful, relative to it's competition at similar specs.

Its also from the nineties.

 

[Tornado]

That shouldn't really matter for SuzukaStar's point.

 

[MidFieldMaven]

The time period in which it was built does, and should, matter when comparing relative lap times, especially if the gap is more than a decade.

Ferrari's F40 is less than a second faster than the CTR2.

And we all know the PP system is broken.

 

[Johnnypenso]

The time period in which it was built does, and should, matter when comparing relative lap times, especially if the gap is more than a decade.

Depends on what you mean by "should". Should this be competitive?

Or this?:

And the point remains, the car is not competitive in it's PP category and the reasoning of "it's old" falls apart with the two cars above, which are very competitive in their PP categories.

 

[MidFieldMaven]

I don't want to argue. The RUF's are as fast as some modern supercars, and therefore shouldn't be considered awful by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Tornado]

The time period in which it was built does, and should, matter when comparing relative lap times, especially if the gap is more than a decade.

Which it isn't between the CTR2 and RGT. And the former was a much more extensively modified car than the latter.


It's impressive that the RGT is so fast, because RR cars in GT6 are generally so wonky; but the CTR2 has been a dog since GT4.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I don't want to argue. The RUF's are as fast as some modern supercars, and therefore shouldn't be considered awful by any stretch of the imagination.

Your own testing says otherwise.

 

[DaBomm4]

The OP wasn't pleased when he took a RUF onto the tracks and we have had a great turnout of people trying to help make him rethink the RUF's, not all in a completely positive manner but still constructive information. Most of us also know that some cars get more attention from PD than others. Unless the OP or another person has more questions or concerns about the RUF's, I don't think we need much more discussion here.

 

[MidFieldMaven]

That the CTR2 is only a tenth quicker than the C7 Corvette speaks less about the RUF than it does about how much Corvettes have progressed over the years. In fact, the C7 is nearly 5 seconds quicker than the C4 '96.

 

[Johnnypenso]

That the CTR2 is only a tenth quicker than the C7 Corvette speaks less about the RUF than it does about how much Corvettes have progressed over the years. In fact, the C7 is nearly 5 seconds quicker than the C4 '96.

Adding 33% more HP and Torque has a tendency to do that.

You didn't explain how the Countach, Miura, Dino et. al fit into that equation of old cars slower/new cars faster.

 

[DaBomm4]

The OP wasn't pleased when he took a RUF onto the tracks and we have had a great turnout of people trying to help make him rethink the RUF's, not all in a completely positive manner but still constructive information. Most of us also know that some cars get more attention from PD than others. Unless the OP or another person has more questions or concerns about the RUF's, I don't think we need much more discussion here.

Adding 33% more HP and Torque has a tendency to do that.

You didn't explain how the Countach, Miura, Dino et. al fit into that equation of old cars slower/new cars faster.

Easy explanation, PD love.

 

[Aphelion]

Your own testing says otherwise.

Not necessarily. The test may only prove that the the car is more difficult to drive quickly, and not necessarily slower. It depends on how good @SuzukaStar is at driving.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

Fit CH on the Countach, Miura and Dino, that's the proper tire for the car if wanted more realistic performance of the cars ( acceleration, lateral grip, lap times ) , and with modern sticky rubber these vintage cars will driver much quicker with proper setup to suit ( similar to IRL ) and never use PP as a point of measurement, it's not accurate and there are many factors that do not taken into account in PP calculation like tire size ( width ) which increase grip the wider they are, stock gear ratio, chassis ( varies car to car ), aero ( with broken aero drag, makes things worse ), and suspension/LSD setup ( a messy one will make the PP useless )

I'm not going into the custom gearbox on the vintage cars, the flip will make these car faster and then there's glitch tuning , low LSD ( close to open diff ), camber, ride height exploits, messing the weight distribution ( closer to 50/50 on MR cars ) it all depends on how desperate a player to get a car as quick as possible.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Not necessarily. The test may only prove that the the car is more difficult to drive quickly, and not necessarily slower. It depends on how good @SuzukaStar is at driving.

Based on his laptimes I'd guess @SuzukaStar would be a WRS D2 Gold or D1 Bronze which would put him easily into the top 1% of all GT players. I have no doubts about his skill level.

Fit CH on the Countach, Miura and Dino, that's the proper tire for the car if wanted more realistic performance of the cars ( acceleration, lateral grip, lap times ) , and with modern sticky rubber these vintage cars will driver much quicker with proper setup to suit ( similar to IRL ) and never use PP as a point of measurement, it's not accurate and there are many factors that do not taken into account in PP calculation like tire size ( width ) which increase grip the wider they are, stock gear ratio, chassis ( varies car to car ), aero ( with broken aero grad, makes things worse ), and suspension/LSD setup ( a messy one will make the PP useless )

I'm not going into the custom gearbox on the vintage cars, the flip will make these car faster and then there's glitch tuning , low LSD ( close to open diff ), camber, ride height exploits, messing the weight distribution ( closer to 50/50 ion MR cars ) it all depends on how desperate a player to get a car as quick as possible.

Sorry but your equation falls apart with tire widths. If tire width affects performance, how does the Miura, Countach and Dino do so well then, seeing as how they have relatively skinny tires compared to modern cars? They should be far worse than they are then if tire widths affect performance, on similar compound tires.

The fact is, for no discernable reason, some vintage cars are just as fast or faster than cars of the last decade or so and others are not even in the same ballpark, the YB and BTR being two good examples of that.

 

[Aphelion]

Based on his laptimes I'd guess @SuzukaStar would be a WRS D2 Gold or D1 Bronze which would put him easily into the top 1% of all GT players. I have no doubts about his skill level.

Well there you go...

 

[MidFieldMaven]

Ok I take it back. The RUF's, besides the 3400S maybe, punch below their weight somewhat. I guess I just like them for what they are: cars for masochists

Can I just leave this here on my way out the door?

 

[Aphelion]

Ok I take it back. The RUF's, besides the 3400S maybe, punch below their weight somewhat. I guess I just like them for what they are: cars for masochists

Well, weren't these cars mostly speed record attempts? I mean, the veyron is not exactly a fast around midfield for its weight either!

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I don't think we need much more discussion here.

It's too bad that's not your decision to make.