Skip to content

Hutch...what did you do to my 718 Boxster?

2»

Comments

  • TomTurboTomTurbo Posts: 1,013 ✭✭✭✭✭
    ATSR_997 said:
    TomTurbo said:
    ATSR_997 said:
    Here’s another incorrect result after the upgrade. My fully maxed 718 with better stats on every single category except a 4kg weight difference lost. 

    The dreaded mid-range acceleration strikes again!








    Still the same result as before the update - fastest B Porsche drag racers: 911 RS -> Martini -> green Cayman -> yellow Cayman -> 718 Boxster/Cayman
    So I guess that means they didn’t fix it properly. Based on the stats, there is no way that the green Cayman could win that race.  
    The fix was about upgraded cars losing to the lesser upgraded same car and not about any cars with better hidden performance.
  • mikesmikes Posts: 4,369 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The turbocharged four-cylinder Boxster 718 has always been a dog in this game speed wise compared to its six-cylinder brothers and sisters. 
  • HuacanachaHuacanacha Posts: 2,139 ✭✭✭✭✭
    ATSR_997 said:
    TomTurbo said:
    ATSR_997 said:
    Here’s another incorrect result after the upgrade. My fully maxed 718 with better stats on every single category except a 4kg weight difference lost. 

    The dreaded mid-range acceleration strikes again!
    Still the same result as before the update - fastest B Porsche drag racers: 911 RS -> Martini -> green Cayman -> yellow Cayman -> 718 Boxster/Cayman
    So I guess that means they didn’t fix it properly. Based on the stats, there is no way that the green Cayman could win that race.  
    There’s your problem right there: basing performance expectation on 4 basic stats. They can’t and won’t and shouldn’t tell the whole story. For drags extrapolating from just two data points, 0-60 and top speed, tells you almost nothing about the acceleration that matters. Even for the shorter 1/4 mile you see some cars with similar 0-60 time cross the line at 140MPH and 100MPH. The FQ-400 is a good example of this with around 3s 0-60 and fairly high top speed but very sluggish after 80MPH so it makes an awful drag car. Cars are made for very different purposes, with various gearing setups, torque curves, aero etc, so there should be “quick” cars that are terrible at drags.

    Whether or not a particular case (Porsche vs Porsche in this case) reflects reality is another question... I don’t know either way. I just know you can’t tell much at all about a cars performance with the small amount of discrete data points we see in Top Drives. 
  • TGPDTGPD Posts: 6,067 ✭✭✭✭✭
    they decreased the mid-range acceleration even more
  • BugattiBugatti Posts: 3,553 ✭✭✭✭✭
    TGPD said:
    they decreased the mid-range acceleration even more
    Yeah, but they also increased the acceleration to the uninstall.  :D:D:p
  • daGmandaGman Posts: 934 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Bugatti said:
    TGPD said:
    they decreased the mid-range acceleration even more
    Yeah, but they also increased the acceleration to the uninstall.  :D:D:p
    Glad to see you back on the forums man!!!
  • BugattiBugatti Posts: 3,553 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2018
    daGman said:
    Bugatti said:
    TGPD said:
    they decreased the mid-range acceleration even more
    Yeah, but they also increased the acceleration to the uninstall.  :D:D:p
    Glad to see you back on the forums man!!!
    Thanks!
    Yeah, but hopefully not so negative on my part going forward lol I've had a rough week. 
  • ATSR_997ATSR_997 Posts: 587 ✭✭✭✭✭
    ATSR_997 said:
    TomTurbo said:
    ATSR_997 said:
    Here’s another incorrect result after the upgrade. My fully maxed 718 with better stats on every single category except a 4kg weight difference lost. 

    The dreaded mid-range acceleration strikes again!
    Still the same result as before the update - fastest B Porsche drag racers: 911 RS -> Martini -> green Cayman -> yellow Cayman -> 718 Boxster/Cayman
    So I guess that means they didn’t fix it properly. Based on the stats, there is no way that the green Cayman could win that race.  
    There’s your problem right there: basing performance expectation on 4 basic stats. They can’t and won’t and shouldn’t tell the whole story. For drags extrapolating from just two data points, 0-60 and top speed, tells you almost nothing about the acceleration that matters. Even for the shorter 1/4 mile you see some cars with similar 0-60 time cross the line at 140MPH and 100MPH. The FQ-400 is a good example of this with around 3s 0-60 and fairly high top speed but very sluggish after 80MPH so it makes an awful drag car. Cars are made for very different purposes, with various gearing setups, torque curves, aero etc, so there should be “quick” cars that are terrible at drags.

    Whether or not a particular case (Porsche vs Porsche in this case) reflects reality is another question... I don’t know either way. I just know you can’t tell much at all about a cars performance with the small amount of discrete data points we see in Top Drives. 
    I’m basing my point in differences in horsepower, torque, 0-60, top speed and weight. The 718 beats the green Cayman on every one of those categories except weight, with only a 4kg disadvantage which is completely negligible for this example. If the game doesn’t follow what would happen in real life based on those stats, then why even have them.
  • lemmings99olemmings99o Posts: 1,720 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hutch_Tim said:
    Yep, please focus on comparisons of car vs car in the new update, that's what matters most. That Caterham result is my biggest worry, we'll have to check that out. 
    If you're looking at direct car comparisons how about this one done today after the patch

  • TGPDTGPD Posts: 6,067 ✭✭✭✭✭
    weight upgrade is glitched
  • stvhanstvhan Posts: 221 ✭✭✭
    mid-range acceleration is nightmare
  • G_anlucaG_anluca Posts: 253 ✭✭✭
    any comment? stats are for the 718, and 100kg itself doesn't seem justifiable. Do some research. What the stats don't tell is the engine size and type: 2 liter 4 cilinders turbo vs a 3.6 flat six that has a totally different way of unleash his torque. It is that?



  • TD42792TD42792 Posts: 2,265 ✭✭✭✭✭
    TomTurbo said:
    ATSR_997 said:
    Here’s another incorrect result after the upgrade. My fully maxed 718 with better stats on every single category except a 4kg weight difference lost. 

    The dreaded mid-range acceleration strikes again!








    Still the same result as before the update - fastest B Porsche drag racers: 911 RS -> Martini -> green Cayman -> yellow Cayman -> 718 Boxster/Cayman
    Yep. Green cayman has always been OP, especially in straight line.
    I actually created a thread on this.
    This should be fixed too, no way a 2009 cayman beats newer generations (unless someone can prove porsche has been nerfing the cayman post 2009!?)
  • mikasamikasa Posts: 92 ✭✭✭

    TD42792 said:
    TomTurbo said:
    Still the same result as before the update - fastest B Porsche drag racers: 911 RS -> Martini -> green Cayman -> yellow Cayman -> 718 Boxster/Cayman
    Yep. Green cayman has always been OP, especially in straight line.
    I actually created a thread on this.
    This should be fixed too, no way a 2009 cayman beats newer generations (unless someone can prove porsche has been nerfing the cayman post 2009!?)

    New 718 models have 2.0 L four cylinder turbo engines, which are strong in low range, while 2009 Cayman has 2.9 L six cylinder naturally aspirated engine, which presumably have a bit stronger mid/high range power curve. (I haven't seen the real life power curves however.)

  • TD42792TD42792 Posts: 2,265 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2018
    mikasa said:

    TD42792 said:
    TomTurbo said:
    Still the same result as before the update - fastest B Porsche drag racers: 911 RS -> Martini -> green Cayman -> yellow Cayman -> 718 Boxster/Cayman
    Yep. Green cayman has always been OP, especially in straight line.
    I actually created a thread on this.
    This should be fixed too, no way a 2009 cayman beats newer generations (unless someone can prove porsche has been nerfing the cayman post 2009!?)

    New 718 models have 2.0 L four cylinder turbo engines, which are strong in low range, while 2009 Cayman has 2.9 L six cylinder naturally aspirated engine, which presumably have a bit stronger mid/high range power curve. (I haven't seen the real life power curves however.)

    Absolutely, larger displacement could give better performance at higher speeds. But it would really surprise me in this case that the 09 cayman is faster than the 17 cayman IRL, especially given aero and engine technological improvements over almost 10 years.
  • grandvachegrandvache Posts: 2,124 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Over a one mile drag in gear acceleration, gearing and revs are going to be factors, not just 0-60 times and top speeds.

    It's not beyond the realms of probability that a larger 6cl NA engine will over a longer distance beat a smaller turbocharged 4cl that has better BHP and 0-60.

    If we could see dyno readings you'd be able to make some more solid conclusions, but this result doesn't strike me as absolutely being a post update error.
  • Sherby90Sherby90 Posts: 333 ✭✭✭
    Guys. stop speculating with bigger displacement and other nonsense. 
    Here is an apples-to-apples comparison/review between 718 Cayman S and  2014 Cayman S, both PDK. just scroll down a bit and on the right you can see a table with performance figures
    https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-porsche-718-cayman-s-pdk-test-review
    https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-porsche-cayman-s-pdk-automatic-test-review

    As you can see @quarter mile there is a very significant lead for 718, (0.6 of a second and 5 mph more). There can also be found the power curve, which shows no chance for the 2014 Cayman to make up for the lost ground. No magic better mid range in sight.

    I think, sadly, the problem with better mid range is a fundamental one in the way the game is designed. My guess is that mid range acc is a value from a spreadsheet, instead of being computed from power, weight, drag coefficient,  etc. And because of this 'balancing' is a never ending process, always tweaking with value.

    And all of this comes on top of the 'fix' we got this week.
  • G_anlucaG_anluca Posts: 253 ✭✭✭
    edited January 2018
    sherby90 said:
    Guys. stop speculating with bigger displacement and other nonsense. 
    Here is an apples-to-apples comparison/review between 718 Cayman S and  2014 Cayman S, both PDK. just scroll down a bit and on the right you can see a table with performance figures
    https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-porsche-718-cayman-s-pdk-test-review
    https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-porsche-cayman-s-pdk-automatic-test-review

    As you can see @quarter mile there is a very significant lead for 718, (0.6 of a second and 5 mph more). There can also be found the power curve, which shows no chance for the 2014 Cayman to make up for the lost ground. No magic better mid range in sight.

    I think, sadly, the problem with better mid range is a fundamental one in the way the game is designed. My guess is that mid range acc is a value from a spreadsheet, instead of being computed from power, weight, drag coefficient,  etc. And because of this 'balancing' is a never ending process, always tweaking with value.

    And all of this comes on top of the 'fix' we got this week.
    but this is a 718 cayman s (2.5 trubo) not the 718 cayman (2.0 turbo)
  • TD42792TD42792 Posts: 2,265 ✭✭✭✭✭
    sherby90 said:
    Guys. stop speculating with bigger displacement and other nonsense. 
    Here is an apples-to-apples comparison/review between 718 Cayman S and  2014 Cayman S, both PDK. just scroll down a bit and on the right you can see a table with performance figures
    https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-porsche-718-cayman-s-pdk-test-review
    https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-porsche-cayman-s-pdk-automatic-test-review

    As you can see @quarter mile there is a very significant lead for 718, (0.6 of a second and 5 mph more). There can also be found the power curve, which shows no chance for the 2014 Cayman to make up for the lost ground. No magic better mid range in sight.

    I think, sadly, the problem with better mid range is a fundamental one in the way the game is designed. My guess is that mid range acc is a value from a spreadsheet, instead of being computed from power, weight, drag coefficient,  etc. And because of this 'balancing' is a never ending process, always tweaking with value.

    And all of this comes on top of the 'fix' we got this week.
    Exactly
  • Sherby90Sherby90 Posts: 333 ✭✭✭
    I know it's the S, but for the base version is the same kind of story, and a bigger difference:
    https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-porsche-718-cayman-manual-test-review
    Most important paragraph of that:
    "At the track, our Guards Red 718 Cayman test car needed just 4.3 seconds to rocket to 60 mph, 10.5 to hit 100 mph, and 12.8 to cover the quarter-mile at 109 mph. These figures barely trail the numbers put up by our lighter and more powerful 2014 Cayman S long-term test car, while roundly beating the last flat-six base Cayman we tested, which needed 5.3 seconds to reach 60 mph, 12.9 to hit the century mark, and 13.9 seconds to travel 1320 feet."

    Meaning 1.1 seconds @quarter mile. What more to say?
  • G_anlucaG_anluca Posts: 253 ✭✭✭
    anyway...

    718 boxter 2017
    C/D
    TEST RESULTS:

    Zero to 60 mph: 4.4 sec
    Zero to 100 mph: 10.6 sec
    Zero to 130 mph: 18.9 sec
    Zero to 140 mph: 24.1 sec
    Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.9 sec
    Top gear, 30-50 mph: 9.6 sec
    Top gear, 50-70 mph: 6.0 sec
    Standing ¼-mile: 13.0 sec @ 109 mph
    Top speed (mfr's claim): 170 mph
    Braking, 70-0 mph: 145 ft
    Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 1.01 g

    Cayman 2007

    C/D TEST RESULTS:
    Zero to 60 mph: 5.5 sec
    Zero to 100 mph: 14.1 sec
    Zero to 130 mph: 26.6 sec
    Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.4 sec
    Standing ¼-mile: 14.1 sec @ 100 mph
    Top speed (drag limited): 158 mph
    Braking, 70-0 mph: 152 ft
    Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.96 g
  • HeissRodHeissRod Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2018
    Exactly.  That 9mph difference in trap speed, at the end of the quarter shows which car is accelerating faster than the other.  It's obviously not running out of steam.
  • mikasamikasa Posts: 92 ✭✭✭
    edited January 2018

    double post

    Post edited by mikasa on
  • mikasamikasa Posts: 92 ✭✭✭

    I collected drag times from Top Drives for stock tuning 718 Boxster and for stock tuning Caymans. (Cayman year 2005 model is same that year 2007 model)

    Here is the the times from the game, and also the engine models info, which I collected from wikipedia:

    Cayman 2005 (2,7 L engine, 241 bhp, 201 lb-ft)   *242 bhp in Top Drives

    1/4 mile drag: 14,33 - 1/2 mile drag:  22:36 - 1 mile drag: 36:03

    Cayman 2009 (2,9 L engine, 261 bhp, 221 lb-ft)

    1/4 mile drag: 13,76 - 1/2 mile drag:  21:03 - 1 mile drag: 33:36

    Cayman 2012 (2,7 L engine, 271 bhp, 214 lb-ft)

    1/4 mile drag: 13,70 - 1/2 mile drag:  20:90 - 1 mile drag: 33:20

    718 Cayman 2016 (2,0 L engine, 296 bhp, 280 lb-ft)   *288 lb-ft in Top Drives

    1/4 mile drag: 13,33 - 1/2 mile drag:  20:86 - 1 mile drag: 33:70

    718 Boxster 2017 (2,0 L engine, 296 bhp, 280 lb-ft)

    1/4 mile drag: 13,23 - 1/2 mile drag:  20:80 - 1 mile drag: 33:83

  • HuacanachaHuacanacha Posts: 2,139 ✭✭✭✭✭
    ATSR_997 said:
    I’m basing my point in differences in horsepower, torque, 0-60, top speed and weight. The 718 beats the green Cayman on every one of those categories except weight, with only a 4kg disadvantage which is completely negligible for this example. If the game doesn’t follow what would happen in real life based on those stats, then why even have them.
    Fair enough. That will give you a little more to go on but still doesn’t tell you what the performance profile is without gearing, torque and horsepower curves (not just max), aero, and a number of other factors. I take the point that the green Cayman probably should not be beating the 718... the performance tests linked pretty much show that the car performance as configured in-game doesn’t match reality (even without an exact match for the green Cayman). But my point stands that there is much more that goes into the acceleration performance profile than the 5 relevant data points you can see in-game. It’s very possible to see the drag performance difference you see in the game in real life with cars with those same stats. The stats just don’t give you enough info to give you a good understanding of performance over the full range.
  • TGPDTGPD Posts: 6,067 ✭✭✭✭✭
    daGman said:
    Bugatti said:
    TGPD said:
    they decreased the mid-range acceleration even more
    Yeah, but they also increased the acceleration to the uninstall.  :D:D:p
    Glad to see you back on the forums man!!!
    he was always there, like
  • TD42792TD42792 Posts: 2,265 ✭✭✭✭✭
    mikasa said:

    TD42792 said:
    TomTurbo said:
    Still the same result as before the update - fastest B Porsche drag racers: 911 RS -> Martini -> green Cayman -> yellow Cayman -> 718 Boxster/Cayman
    Yep. Green cayman has always been OP, especially in straight line.
    I actually created a thread on this.
    This should be fixed too, no way a 2009 cayman beats newer generations (unless someone can prove porsche has been nerfing the cayman post 2009!?)

    New 718 models have 2.0 L four cylinder turbo engines, which are strong in low range, while 2009 Cayman has 2.9 L six cylinder naturally aspirated engine, which presumably have a bit stronger mid/high range power curve. (I haven't seen the real life power curves however.)

    Absolutely, larger displacement could give better performance at higher speeds. But it would really surprise me that in this particular case the 09 cayman is faster than the 2017 IRL, especially with aero and engine technological improvements over almost 10 years.
Sign In or Register to comment.