Maybe change it to the new Chevy eCOPO Camaro with 780 horsepower and 780 pound-feet of torque - 9.837-second 1/4 mile with a trap speed of 134.07 miles per hour.
Can we fix the 718 Cayman and Boxster screw up? Convertibles are never quicker than their hard-top counterparts so I think perhaps Hutch swapped the stats by accident here.
This sentence from Road & Track is pretty damn clear:
"Porsche says 0-60 mph times for the Cayman and Cayman S are 4.5 and 4.0 seconds, respectively, which are 0.4 seconds quicker than the Boxster and Boxster S"
While those are clearly manufacturer claims, it is made clear that the hard-top Cayman should have the better acceleration and handling stats, where it is the opposite in Top Drives.
In my opinion, the 718 Boxster should have the 718 Cayman's in-game stats (171 / 4.9 / 84) and the 718 Cayman should be 0.4 seconds quicker and one handling point better (171 / 4.5 / 85).
@Hutch_Tim Is this thread still alive? Specifically, should we continue to post corrections for post PL 8.0 changes or do you want to create a new thread for a fresh start?
Remember back before this thread started, I said I was looking for a good way to handle corrections? And then in the absence of finding one, I though a thread like this might be good enough? Well, it definitely isn't. Forum posts don't make for good databases, and it's very inefficient to edit! So now I think I'll try switching to a locked Google Doc that people can review instead.
Meanwhile: - Hold back on 8.0 car corrections until 8.0 is out, as we're dealing with those elsewhere - Do please continue to post corrections in this thread - when I get the Google Doc up and running I'll just edit the first post accordingly.
How about you just show us all the cars being added and people would point out the mistakes in advance and you just release everything as it should be?
In game the C-Class Mustang convertible has a stock 5.8 sec 0-60, which I think is not correct. That little circled thing is the GT badge so it has a 4.6 V8 and even the in game stats show it by the horsepower and the torque, they are the exact same as the regular B-Class GT, that means if this site is correct ------>https://www.motortrend.com/cars/ford/mustang/2005/2005-ford-mustang-gt-convertible/ It should have a 5.2 stock 0-60. Correct me if I'm wrong but I feel something isn't right. And sorry if someone already posted about this car.
It matters yes, but its much more difficult to upgrade Legendary car. Eighter rs6 should be legendary, either r8 should be epic. Anyway this is one of my biggest mistakes in my early play which I regret much.
Comments
https://hooniverse.com/the-electric-chevy-ecopo-camaro-runs-in-the-nines/
Can we fix the 718 Cayman and Boxster screw up? Convertibles are never quicker than their hard-top counterparts so I think perhaps Hutch swapped the stats by accident here.
This sentence from Road & Track is pretty damn clear:
"Porsche says 0-60 mph times for the Cayman and Cayman S are 4.5 and 4.0 seconds, respectively, which are 0.4 seconds quicker than the Boxster and Boxster S"
https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/future-cars/news/a28941/2017-porsche-718-cayman-debut/
While those are clearly manufacturer claims, it is made clear that the hard-top Cayman should have the better acceleration and handling stats, where it is the opposite in Top Drives.
In my opinion, the 718 Boxster should have the 718 Cayman's in-game stats (171 / 4.9 / 84) and the 718 Cayman should be 0.4 seconds quicker and one handling point better (171 / 4.5 / 85).
Meanwhile:
- Hold back on 8.0 car corrections until 8.0 is out, as we're dealing with those elsewhere
- Do please continue to post corrections in this thread - when I get the Google Doc up and running I'll just edit the first post accordingly.
Plus it shows tested mid range times as well
In game the C-Class Mustang convertible has a stock 5.8 sec 0-60, which I think is not correct. That little circled thing is the GT badge so it has a 4.6 V8 and even the in game stats show it by the horsepower and the torque, they are the exact same as the regular B-Class GT, that means if this site is correct ------>https://www.motortrend.com/cars/ford/mustang/2005/2005-ford-mustang-gt-convertible/
It should have a 5.2 stock 0-60. Correct me if I'm wrong but I feel something isn't right. And sorry if someone already posted about this car.
We need to talk. I dunno if it's been mentioned before but it's seriously not right.
Seriously.
At the very least the picture is wrong.
BUT. 1964. No one wants a 1964 gt40. It was (whisper it) a bit pants. The iconic 1-2-3 at le mans was in a mk II with a 7 litre engine.
This is a fantasy game, why put in a slightly **** version of an iconic car. If you want a 1964 surely it has to be on slicks?
The image of a gulf liveried number 40 gt40 is this specific car: https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-shows/monterey-weekend/news/a9158/world-record-breaking-11-million-paid-for-gt40-gulfmirage-2012-monterey-auctions-38081/
Conveniently rather a lot is known about it. It's a beast. Chassis p1074. When this photo was taken it had a 440bhp ford 289 engine in it.
TL;DR
The GT40 is either significantly underpowered, has the wrong photo, or is (forgive me) just a bad GT40 to choose. It also need slicks.