What I don’t get is T10 has the 787B but no other Group C or IMSA GTP cars. The only reason the 787B won Le Mans is it had better fuel economy. At the other races it got destroyed. Also when they brought it to the US to run IMSA it was laughed off the track. I think if its in the game, add the cars that were better at the time.
1 Like
It won Le Mans not because of fuel economy but because the two C11s (including Schumacher’s) that were in 1st and 2nd place had mechanical problems and were forced to pit for repairs. it was followed across the line by 3 XJR12s, the remaining C11 and two 787s. It never was raced in IMSA, that was the RX-792P which was plagued with problems as a result of low budget development and lack of time (they didn’t even enter the first race of the season).
This was on Wikipedia page for the 787B
Mazda was not the favourite to win, but the three Mazdas started on 19th (#55), 23rd (#18) and 30th (#56), despite being the 12th, 17th and 24th fastest qualifiers respectively. The new 3.5 litre cars were given the first grid positions, moving everyone else back by seven places. On the day before the race, team manager Ohashi decided to drop his usual conservative strategy and instructed the drivers of the #55 car to drive as if it were a short sprint race.
The decision was made based on the reliability of the cars demonstrated in the Paul Ricard tests, -as well as the car’s exceptional fuel economy-, which meant that the carefully learned driving techniques intended to preserve the fuel allowance were no longer a critical part of the team’s strategy.
The rest of the year the 787B was a mid to back of the pack car. So like I said if we have the 787B give us the cars that were better at the time.
Also there is one big difference between Group C and IMSA GTP. IMSA didnt impose fuel restrictions on thier cars as in Group C.
The main difference between the two categories was the former had no emphasis on fuel consumption which was highlighted by Derek Bell quoting “race fans do not come to races to watch an economy run.”
I think you may be misunderstanding what this is saying about fuel usage. The exceptional fuel economy refered to is in relation to the category 1 one cars (3.5 liter naturally aspirated) of which the Peugot 905 was the only significant competitor). Only one C1 car classified at the end of the race - the team Fedco Cosworth DFZ powered Spice SE89C. Mercedes and Jaguar both built C1 cars but they failed to qualify so Merc used the grandfathered 5 liter C11 and Jag the 7 liter XJR12. Note that Mazda dropped their fuel conservation strategy (meant to make them competitive with the expected fuel consumption of the C1 cars based on the poor qualifying times the C1 cars posted). Also note that the fuel restrictions referred as not applying to IMSA are the total quantity of fuel available for use during the race (which itself implies that the R26B 4 rotor was capable of gulping it down in great quantity). If you continue reading further in the article you will see why the 787B won - C11 mechanical problems. you can also find an article in Wikipedia for Mazda’s involvement in IMSA using the R26B 4 rotor RX-792P, not the 787B.
I understand that the 787B wasn’t in IMSA. I looked at the engine model not the car(same engine). And I did see that the C11 had mechanical problems But I also stated that the rest of the year, 1991 World Sportcar Championship Season, that the 787B was a mid to back of the pack car. Season standings went Slik Cut Jaguar, Peugeot Talbot Sport, Team Sauber Mercedes,Euro Racing, then MazdaSpeed. Also the highest palcing Mazda driver was in 15th. It seems to me that the 787B is not the world beater that Turn 10 thinks it is.
And if/when T10 add the C11 back into the game, queue more threads chirping on about how overpowered the LMP car is compared to an Indy car.
To me this is a simple concept. If car x is slower than car y (generally speaking) then car x should have a lower pi in stock form and therefore have more upgrades available to get to top of class.
The 787B IS that dominant that its stock pi should be quite high compared to other P class cars allowing those other P class cars to catch up via upgrades.
With the Indy Lights I assume that it has no significant upgrades maybe due to licensing agreements. Even then I think its stock PI may need to be a little lower given its at least 6 seconds a lap slower than the 787B.
Not going to argue the point on the 787B - but Eduardo has a point in that the PI system is supposed to level the playing field so to speak - a car, A with a PI of XYZ should be just as fast as another car, B, also with a PI of XYZ. The problem seems to come in where the PI is assessed on a generic track and not on the tracks in question - what you need for Le Mans Old Mulsanne is way different to the Catalunya School Circuit. The issue is that a car can be very quick in a straight line but corner slower (like the Indy DW12), and be in a class with the Lotus F1, which is quick everywhere (ignoring that the PI may be as much as 100 points different for the cars in the is example).
Differences, as pointed out, in performance can just be the way the gearing is set up, too. There is no way at all any single car can be an absolutely perfect tune for all tracks in one sitting, one saved tune. If a car is not tuned specifically for each track, the performance is not optimized.
As to PI readings, I believe it was back in FM3 (maybe FM2) where Turn 10 explained how the readings are shown to the three digits, but don’t take into account the next three - I think the examples were on Ferrari. In other words, you may have a two cars, both showing “R3 800” where one is actually “799.001” and another is “799.999”. Those number not displayed to us can make a world of difference.
I f you can tune out six seconds with gearing you are a God! All cars have their strengths and weaknesses. The PI should help level that playing field. I.e. if a car is great at handling you shouldn’t be able to dump HP and drag tires to make up for it’s speed. It should be a trade off. Depending on the track you may want to give up some handling for power or vice versa. A lotus or great handling car should have the advantage out of the box at short tight tracks, where Vette’s Viper’s have an out of the box advantage at longer high speed tracks, you then should be through the PI able to build a car up to improve upon it’s weakness at a given track to have a large group of cars that are able to compete. Six seconds isn’t competing.
1 Like
I dont think the variables are that small to make a difference. One pi point dose not add upto 3 secs off the top 100 at alps festival with a very solid lap. Watch the replay its 692 on the lb and justifys a higher spot. If you could add 50 pi to the ferrari i still wouldnt get into the top 100 now. The dicrepency between them is massive considering they both lmp with the same pi. I can understand the f1 and indy differences. One is the pinnacle of circuit racing and one is designed to go fast in a circle at speed. Shouldnt be compared and the indy should have lower pi. To reflect this.
im not that good and in the lower classes on a long track 6 seconds is absolutly achievable thru gearing alone. you talk about adding power and thats exactly what good gearing simulates. the pro tranny also reduces you shift time so you are under power more of the time. the pro tranny is always my 1st upgrade for exactly that reason, it costs very few pi and knocks off alot of time from the laps. its actually acceleration you want more than top speed. you can adjust the gears so you can floor it out of the corners and not have to shift before the next corner on alot of tracks. those saved shifts add up.
get a d class car stock and run a few laps around old lemans. check the lap times. put in a pro tranny and adjust the final drive so you are redlineing top gear at the end of the straight. now fine tune the gears so you are at the bottom of the powerband coming out of the corners. if you haven’t gained more than 6 seconds its because you are intentionally sandbagging the tranny tune. and you did it for about 10 pi points. now go back to your stock tune and spend 20 pi points on more hp. then run aa few laps in it. yes it picked up a couple of seconds but the tranny tune is still beating it. go back to stock and reduce 20 pi points of weight. stock and 20 points of tires. the tranny gives you more than twice the advantage of any other upgrade except maybe aero and that because you cant spend 20 points on areo and the tranny will still be faster.
you want more power for better acceleration, you can get that via gearing.
Yawn. 90% of the cars are not using race tranny and are a hell of a lot faster. In Snowowl’s example we are talking about cars that already have race trans. You’re not going to get six seconds. Run a stock 250 tr at Old Le Mans it does top 100 or there about stock. A race tran isn’t going to shave six seconds. Apples to apples.
2 Likes
I think we’ve lost sight of what is actually the problem here, and that is that the indy lights car simply doesn’t go to the top of its class since there are no engine upgrades available to it. Hence it is only competitive by only being able to avoid crashes really well due to how nimble it is, lol.
That is part of the problem but that might only get it to compete with the Ferrari and Peugeot.
I suspect they may have been forced to limit the upgrades under the terms of the license. Makes no sense to me otherwise. Anyway run that go kart at Longbeach short - that is where it shines.
This is the exact issue at hand, and because it doesn’t receive any engine upgrades to help it the car almost becomes useless. It is a great handling car and with a touch more power it won’t keep up with the 787b on the straights but it won’t be held to a 30 mph loss. If it can’t max out and won’t compete in its given class then what is it used for in this game if you can’t race it competitively? I think it’s also such a big issue because the car dose drive so well and we have nowhere to race it not even in the career. I say it needs it’s own lobby, but that’s just my opinion.
In c class the sport or pro trannys are slower in most cases.