General Discussion

Update 7.0 Car Discussion

179111213

Comments

  • O__VERO__VER Member Posts: 459 ✭✭✭✭
    ShadowFTL said:



    Looks like a good hill climber for 70s or not?
    I kept mine just in case but damn it's an ugly card. Makes me throw up in my mouth a little every time I scroll past it.
  • baestbaest Member Posts: 153 ✭✭✭
    O__VER said:
    ShadowFTL said:



    Looks like a good hill climber for 70s or not?
    I kept mine just in case but damn it's an ugly card. Makes me throw up in my mouth a little every time I scroll past it.
    It just looks like some bloke sitting in a barn find haha!
  • TGPDTGPD Member Posts: 4,333 ✭✭✭✭✭
    baest said:
    O__VER said:
    ShadowFTL said:



    Looks like a good hill climber for 70s or not?
    I kept mine just in case but damn it's an ugly card. Makes me throw up in my mouth a little every time I scroll past it.
    It just looks like some bloke sitting in a barn find haha!
    ugh the front grille... rusted away
  • StealthFTStealthFT Member Posts: 88 ✭✭
    @StealthFT; 311? 3.0 1.3 1.3? Leave it at that if you want and I'll PM you when I have the Xstreme at your same level. That should give you an idea of what tune would be best for the 454 SS, in comparison.

    Looks like the Xstreme's optimal tune should be a safe bet @ 303, but maybe both are. I'm just wondering if that 454 SS @330 would be a great asphalt Hill climber.
    Before I read your reply, I had already fuse upgraded it for 323 (i.e., right now it's at 3.0/2.0/3.0). Let me know if you want to compare times, I can take it to 3.3/2.3/3.3 as well if you want to compare fully upgraded.
  • AJTheCaveManAJTheCaveMan Member, Wrenchmen Posts: 1,172 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ugly? Damn. I love that k5 Blazer.

    @StealthFT; No worries mate. I'll max mine 303 also and ill pm you with some times when its done.
  • milewski1015milewski1015 Member Posts: 1,384 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Anybody have any experience with either of these?


  • Ivo_KamburovIvo_Kamburov Member Posts: 421 ✭✭✭
    Anybody have any experience with either of these?


    Yes, I unpacked the Chrysler 300 :D sorry
  • hillclimberhillclimber Member Posts: 1,240 ✭✭✭✭✭
    HeissRod said:
    UncleGary said:
    Jay said:
    Did I get lucky? 
    Got the same car yesterday, going to fuse it up to 3.0/3.0/3.0 just for the hell of it... It's completely useless as it is though. Worse than even the QX50.
    Why would you waste a third fuse to 3.0?
    in hope Leoni would finish it 889
  • Blue2moroBlue2moro Member Posts: 130 ✭✭✭
    Silverado SS at 969

  • TheTruePwnzorTheTruePwnzor Member Posts: 114 ✭✭✭
    Unfortunately, all of the D class USA "Drag" cars I have pulled thus far have been underwhelming. Stock vs stock, they have all been significantly slower than the RQ12, '70 Monte Carlo (and 396 'Vette, ofcourse). Haven't found any MRA gems yet.. Thanks to @Nacho101 for listing those times btw.

    Also, and maybe I am missing something here, but why is this '03 Monte Carlo SS listed as RWD? They added the '91 Lumina Z34 as RWD too. Neither of those gens released any RWD models, IIRC.I've driven that particular Jeff Gordon "moar stickers" edition. It came optioned with an N/A 3800 (series 1), attached to that terrible slushbox automatic driving the front wheels. 

    A little off topic, but I dig this new pic of the '03 Jag XJR. I don't remember the old pic, but I want to keep it now just because it looks so slick!
    There was never a rwd vehicle built in the GM W-platform. The architecture could have never supported it because it was fwd/transverse mounted. I mean I guess it was possible to do but why? Also, but why pretty much sums up american badge-engineering in the period.

    Fun fact: if you drop a neutral bomb in a rented Lumina and completely bork the tranny and engine mounts and then tell the rental company insurance agent you thought it was a manual transmission the insurance will cover it as "user error". Ahh, Florida, the land of....well, it kind of defies definition.
  • AJTheCaveManAJTheCaveMan Member, Wrenchmen Posts: 1,172 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @TheTruePwnzor; Thanks for confirming. I didn't grow up in the US, so I wasn't 100% sure. Come to think of it, the Dodge stealth is listed as RWD too. Wasn't that only FWD with the N/A engine?

    And you did the world a favour by destroying a Z34 Lumina. What an abysmal car that was. If it was a G-body you destroyed, I'd be very upset!
  • TopDrives40778TopDrives40778 Member Posts: 41 ✭✭✭
    I was going to a series of posts and testing of 5 unlikely and maybe 5 likely new drag cars (whether good or bad results).  First up is the unlikely (because I like the strange and oddball cars) - I just finished fusing the Chevrolet 454 SS, then next up is the Chrysler Newport.  All will be tuned 996 and I will try to test the most appropriate tracks (obviously no 0-170 MPH for the 454 SS :D ).  Any opinions whether to keep it in this thread or make a new one?
  • AJTheCaveManAJTheCaveMan Member, Wrenchmen Posts: 1,172 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 13
    @TopDrives40778; Great idea. I'm definitely curious on the 454ss. As far as a new thread, It probably wouldn't be a bad idea to have a thread for testing the new drag cars. I haven't pulled the Newport yet, but I'd like to test the 3 E class' I've highlighted in my pic too (Lumina looks like a 303 car though).I don't wanna invest the time upgrading all my new cars in each class, so I might atleast test my drag cars stock. I have some proven drag car's still stock for a control too.
  • TheTruePwnzorTheTruePwnzor Member Posts: 114 ✭✭✭
    edited October 13
    @AJTheCaveMan I haven't pulled a stealth yet so I didn't notice, but yes, it was available in any flavor but rwd. The stealth was just a re-badged 3000gt. That pic looks like a stealth rt, so it would have been fwd. Rt turbos were awd and actually pretty fun if they were put on a diet.

    *edit* looked again and it's definitely and es or rt model not a turbo because it lacks the rear brake cooling ducts.

    *edit 2* it's an rt. It has an rt badge below stealth, lol. I always do things the hard way.
  • TheTruePwnzorTheTruePwnzor Member Posts: 114 ✭✭✭
    @O__VER they look much better once you take the top off. In fact I've rarely ever seen one with the factory hardtop because they were so difficult to get on and off without like 3 people. Also good luck finding one that isn't lifted. 



    Also, they just chose the most godawful pic possible. Here's the same exact model:



    It's no Pininfarina design but it was not as bad as the pic makes it look. I actually was unable to even find a pic of one with the top off that was rocking all oe.
  • O__VERO__VER Member Posts: 459 ✭✭✭✭
    @O__VER they look much better once you take the top off. In fact I've rarely ever seen one with the factory hardtop because they were so difficult to get on and off without like 3 people. Also good luck finding one that isn't lifted. 



    Also, they just chose the most godawful pic possible. Here's the same exact model:



    It's no Pininfarina design but it was not as bad as the pic makes it look. I actually was unable to even find a pic of one with the top off that was rocking all oe.
    You're right, that does look a lot better. There's a lot of questionable photos in the latest update actually. Like I am 100% sure there are higher resolution, colour images of the '70 Dodge Challenger in existence.
  • TheTruePwnzorTheTruePwnzor Member Posts: 114 ✭✭✭
    With the Challenger T/A it's too bad they used the factory bhp rating. They rated the engine from the factory the same as the 4-barrel engine even though it's well known that the 6-barrel carbs bumped the mill up to around 350 bhp. Not so much an error, just too bad considering how badly it sucks in-game.
  • NinjaDesignzNinjaDesignz Member Posts: 937 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @TopDrives40778; Great idea. I'm definitely curious on the 454ss. As far as a new thread, It probably wouldn't be a bad idea to have a thread for testing the new drag cars. I haven't pulled the Newport yet, but I'd like to test the 3 E class' I've highlighted in my pic too (Lumina looks like a 303 car though).I don't wanna invest the time upgrading all my new cars in each class, so I might atleast test my drag cars stock. I have some proven drag car's still stock for a control too.
    Can you test the Impala SS stock on the drag races please?
  • ThomasNürburgringThomasNürburgring Member Posts: 383 ✭✭✭
    edited October 15
    HeissRod said:
    @Hutch_Tim - the stats on this thing are completely wrong.  These are specs for the base V6 model.

    0-60 is 4.4, not 6.8.
    Power is 475, not 290.
    Torque is 470, not 273.
    Handling should be on par, if not better, than the as-yet-unawarded A25 Cayenne Turbo S.
    Drive type is 4WD, not RWD.
    Top speed is 155, not 125.
    Weight should be 2435, not 2123.

    Hoard these now, folks.  These changes should move it to mid-Epic when fixed.

    https://www.dodge.com/durango/srt.html


    I wanted to say that the Durango SRT has the wrong stats, but it’s already discussed (see above).

    The Viper ACR isn’t though. As can be seen below, the 0-60 time is 4.0 seconds on the card.



    This is not correct. The actual 0-60 time is as low as 3.3 seconds. Here are two overviews of real-life tests with Viper ACRs.





    Hutch, please alter the 0-60 time (preferably to 3.3 seconds).
  • GrossbucketsGrossbuckets Member Posts: 309 ✭✭✭
    There isn’t one new “American Dream” Muscle car (or other type) with any MRA!  What the heck is going on here?  “Let’s add a large amount of worthless clutter to the mix”!? 
  • Hutch_TimHutch_Tim Administrator, Hutch Staff Posts: 327 admin
    There isn’t one new “American Dream” Muscle car (or other type) with any MRA!  What the heck is going on here?  “Let’s add a large amount of worthless clutter to the mix”!? 
    Okay, I had to check... by one measure of MRA, American Dream has:
    - 50% of the Top 10 Uncommons (out of 172)
    - 50% of the Top 10 Super-Rares (out of 174)
    - The Epics: I probably shouldn't reveal exactly, but let's just say a couple of them are definitely worth a test...
  • ThomasNürburgringThomasNürburgring Member Posts: 383 ✭✭✭
    Hutch_Tim said:
    There isn’t one new “American Dream” Muscle car (or other type) with any MRA!  What the heck is going on here?  “Let’s add a large amount of worthless clutter to the mix”!? 
    Okay, I had to check... by one measure of MRA, American Dream has:
    - 50% of the Top 10 Uncommons (out of 172)
    - 50% of the Top 10 Super-Rares (out of 174)
    - The Epics: I probably shouldn't reveal exactly, but let's just say a couple of them are definitely worth a test...
    No comment on the Viper ACR and Durango SRT?
  • GrossbucketsGrossbuckets Member Posts: 309 ✭✭✭
    Hutch_Tim said:
    There isn’t one new “American Dream” Muscle car (or other type) with any MRA!  What the heck is going on here?  “Let’s add a large amount of worthless clutter to the mix”!? 
    Okay, I had to check... by one measure of MRA, American Dream has:
    - 50% of the Top 10 Uncommons (out of 172)
    - 50% of the Top 10 Super-Rares (out of 174)
    - The Epics: I probably shouldn't reveal exactly, but let's just say a couple of them are definitely worth a test...
    I thought there was no “measurement for MRA” and we can all see that they are lacking what “Muscle” means.
  • GrossbucketsGrossbuckets Member Posts: 309 ✭✭✭
    Hutch_Tim said:
    There isn’t one new “American Dream” Muscle car (or other type) with any MRA!  What the heck is going on here?  “Let’s add a large amount of worthless clutter to the mix”!? 
    Okay, I had to check... by one measure of MRA, American Dream has:
    - 50% of the Top 10 Uncommons (out of 172)
    - 50% of the Top 10 Super-Rares (out of 174)
    - The Epics: I probably shouldn't reveal exactly, but let's just say a couple of them are definitely worth a test...
    Also...can we get a guide to the the new “physics”?  Now that all previous tunes are compromised (imagine the effort, money, and cars to upgrade all the high end cars, only to find out that tune is no longer valuable)...refund?  One example: my 033 Audi S8 Plus just lost to a 303 S7 “better mid-range” (never would’ve happened b4 and the rumors about post update 033/699 vs 303/969 are true).  Wonder how many cars have been, basically, downgraded.  


  • GrossbucketsGrossbuckets Member Posts: 309 ✭✭✭
    Just look at the pure stats between the two cars and know that the S8 has better MRA, as proven many many times and then see the nonsensical outcome.
  • GrossbucketsGrossbuckets Member Posts: 309 ✭✭✭
    Apologies....I am just bummed about the update (hopes where high) and now the tunes are flipped.  It’s just hard to keep up..I feel like Sisyphus!  Never ending hamster wheel of pain.  Thank you for all u do!
  • Hutch_TimHutch_Tim Administrator, Hutch Staff Posts: 327 admin
    No comment on the Viper ACR and Durango SRT?
    Oh, I noted those. We need a better system for tracking these corrections so people can know what we've noted and what stage something is at. After failing to come up with a perfect solution I've just thought of a maybe-adequate one... I'll talk to the rest of the team tomorrow just to check I'm not crazy and if it makes sense I'll kick it off.

    I thought there was no “measurement for MRA” 
    True! There is no *single* measurement for MRA - the car that is fastest to 90mph won't necessarily also be fastest to 120mph - so I took one of the possible measures of MRA and used that.

    Also...can we get a guide to the the new “physics”?  Now that all previous tunes are compromised (imagine the effort, money, and cars to upgrade all the high end cars, only to find out that tune is no longer valuable)...refund?  One example: my 033 Audi S8 Plus just lost to a 303 S7 “better mid-range” (never would’ve happened b4 and the rumors about post update 033/699 vs 303/969 are true).  Wonder how many cars have been, basically, downgraded.  
    Sure, I'll try to keep this brief!
    - I don't believe all previous tunes are compromised. If you do think a huge amount of money has gone down the drain you could try contact support to fix it, but I can't guarantee anything.
    - As I've noted before, the 'Race Info' tips are a good guide for beginners as to what's important, but in extremely close races that raise eyebrows of experienced players, they just aren't very accurate at calling out the main factor behind a loss. To be blunt, and in case it's not obvious already, when it says "mid-range acceleration"... it's sometimes wrong about that. I think in particular it doesn't call out lower weight as often as it should.
    - My understanding is that our latest correction to AI handling has revealed that in some cases where 699 used to beat 969 in a slalom, that was actually because the 969 car was using the extra engine power inefficiently - the same kind of reason that a 969 could sometimes lose to a 669. We've now reduced these inefficient driving situations, but at the cost of some tunes now performing differently.
    - Our slalom isn't as twisty as the name suggests. Especially from a standing start, 0-60 ends up being hugely important. Looking at the telemetry of how cars perform on it, it's not surprising to me that 969 wins so often. The newer forest slalom behaves more like you might expect, with cars forced down to low speeds and results heavily dependent on weight and handling.

  • Huskic69Huskic69 Member Posts: 1,482 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Danny said:
    O__VER said:
    Hutch_Tim said:
    - My understanding is that our latest correction to AI handling has revealed that in some cases where 699 used to beat 969 in a slalom, that was actually because the 969 car was using the extra engine power inefficiently - the same kind of reason that a 969 could sometimes lose to a 669. We've now reduced these inefficient driving situations, but at the cost of some tunes now performing differently.
    - Our slalom isn't as twisty as the name suggests. Especially from a standing start, 0-60 ends up being hugely important. Looking at the telemetry of how cars perform on it, it's not surprising to me that 969 wins so often. The newer forest slalom behaves more like you might expect, with cars forced down to low speeds and results heavily dependent on weight and handling.

    It sounds to me like you don't believe it is a problem or an error that 699 cars now most commonly lose in slalom and other twisty tracks. Given that I have upgraded close to 30 cars to 699 because they used to win on twisty tracks, what does Hutch plan to do about the fact that they now lose? What about literally everyone else? I don't think your support could handle the amount of requests they'll get to change tunes because Hutch changed the physics in the game.
    They want you to spend more money to obtain a duplicate then upgrade that to the ‘correct’ tune, until next big update of course and the game physics change again. Soon we’ll need 3 of every car with each tuned differently for different updates
    lmao im doing that since february 
Sign In or Register to comment.