Ariel atom's

ThatPorscheGuyThatPorscheGuy Posts: 371 ✭✭✭
How in the world can these cars have such poor handling stats? They outperform some of the highest class cars existing to date and are called track cars for a good reason.
Lap time links:
https://fastestlaps.com/tracks/rudskogen-pre-2012
https://fastestlaps.com/tracks/top-gear-track
https://fastestlaps.com/tracks/anglesey-international-gp
https://fastestlaps.com/models/ariel-atom-3

Their mra seems to be relatively correct (though underestimated slightly in game), so the only thing that could make up for the immense performance on tracks is handling.

+5 handling doesn't seem like farfetched when looking at this data so just to put that in perspective:
Ariel atom 500 v8: 91>95/96 (this probably has mra so maybe 94 would be enough)
Ariel atom 4: 90>94/95
Ariel atom 3.5: 88>92/93
Ariel atom 2 sr: 86>91/92
Ariel atom 3: 87>91
Ariel atom 3 sr: 87>92
Ariel atom 1: 84>87/88 



Comments

  • ThatPorscheGuyThatPorscheGuy Posts: 371 ✭✭✭
    Some additional info on the atom 2 sr: 
    https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/ariel/atom/first-drives/ariel-atom-supercharged 
    https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15143817/the-outsiders-2007-ariel-atom-2/
    Twice appraised for incredible handling, and "beating every car by 2 seconds" in laps according to caranddriver.

  • TGPDTGPD Posts: 6,067 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Uh no. The Atoms are fast because they are furiously light and aggressive off the line and in hard acceleration, like the Caterhams. They have no aero at all and their aerodynamic efficiency is that of scaffolding.
  • ThatPorscheGuyThatPorscheGuy Posts: 371 ✭✭✭
    TGPD said:
    Uh no. The Atoms are fast because they are furiously light and aggressive off the line and in hard acceleration, like the Caterhams. They have no aero at all and their aerodynamic efficiency is that of scaffolding.
    Seems like you haven't noticed that the acceleration is **** poor, besides the weight doesn't help for one bit in any of the circuits. You could argue that the mra should be improved but I don't think you have as much of a case for that compared to handling.
  • TGPDTGPD Posts: 6,067 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Seriously? The Atoms I see on Youtube and in other (much, MUUUUCH more realistic games) accelerate off the line like a rocket, yet their lightweightness seriously inhibits their stability at speed and their lack of downforce.
    Sure, it may handle well at low speeds, where the aero is not important for cornering, but overall it handles quite poorly.
    Imo if they have as much handling as the Caterhams it is enough. No need for more. They weigh as much as the Caterhams and don't have super sophisticated suspension (the KTM X-Bow do, but for some reason the handling on that isn't great either, thanks Hutch).
  • ThatPorscheGuyThatPorscheGuy Posts: 371 ✭✭✭
    TGPD said:
    Seriously? The Atoms I see on Youtube and in other (much, MUUUUCH more realistic games) accelerate off the line like a rocket, yet their lightweightness seriously inhibits their stability at speed and their lack of downforce.
    Sure, it may handle well at low speeds, where the aero is not important for cornering, but overall it handles quite poorly.
    Imo if they have as much handling as the Caterhams it is enough. No need for more. They weigh as much as the Caterhams and don't have super sophisticated suspension (the KTM X-Bow do, but for some reason the handling on that isn't great either, thanks Hutch).
    Well in game they accelerate like a boat on wheels, and their handling is far worse than the caterhams. some legendaries even going 4 handling below the epic r500.
  • TGPDTGPD Posts: 6,067 ✭✭✭✭✭
    My point is that if they have as much handling than their equivalent Caterhams then that's enough.
  • ThatPorscheGuyThatPorscheGuy Posts: 371 ✭✭✭
    TGPD said:
    My point is that if they have as much handling than their equivalent Caterhams then that's enough.
    Completely agree, 90/91 handling would do the trick
  • Nobody4funNobody4fun Posts: 11


    Just look at the two cars for comparison. Why is the Ariel RQ27 and has 4 handling points less than the Caterham. 

    Clearly wrong, the Ariel should clearly be better than the Caterham. The Atom 2 is even 6 kg lighter!
  • evilprofesseurevilprofesseur Posts: 1,841 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Because so many people have superlights you'd never be able to catch up to them if it went legendary where it belongs
  • ThatPorscheGuyThatPorscheGuy Posts: 371 ✭✭✭
    Because so many people have superlights you'd never be able to catch up to them if it went legendary where it belongs
    Why not take the Ariel's down 1 rq? Either that or their handling needs some improvement for sure.
  • ThatPorscheGuyThatPorscheGuy Posts: 371 ✭✭✭

    Some in game comparisons made. Only uncertainty would be hillclimb since I'm not 100% certain the ariels could catch up using mra, so 18-10 if r500 wins that.
  • ThatPorscheGuyThatPorscheGuy Posts: 371 ✭✭✭

    Some in game comparisons made. Only uncertainty would be hillclimb since I'm not 100% certain the ariels could catch up using mra, so 18-10 if r500 wins that.
    I seriously think the rq calculator needs some work, this isn't the first time cars have been overvalued in the last few updates and if nothing is done about it these cars will become nearly obsolete.
     
Sign In or Register to comment.