Holy **** guys. I don't know how this one went unnoticed for so long but.
The El Camino is the wrong year!!
Here's a 1969, pay attention to that front. And here's a 1970. Now the card itself back at launch, the stats remain the exact same bar the RQ which is 14 (soon to be 15). The front is the same as that 1969. The stats are correct for an SS 454, so all that needs done is an image change. (I admit, I will miss the front facing image and the older look, but at least we'll likely be able to see the rear a bit now.
Edit: I mean no offense with the whole "I'm amazed this went unnoticed" I'm amazed we never caught it since it was kind of a small thing.
Edit 2: Shoutouts to my pal Tri who caught this one.
The Beretta GTZ stats are off. It does 0-60 in 7.5 seconds, not 11.1. Handling should also be higher. I believe the performance stats were taken from a base car and not the GTZ.
The Berlinetta is slow, but it's not THAT slow. 0-60 should be around 10.0 seconds. Here is a comparison from 1983. Click the 'Test results' box on the right of the screen for the magazine's performance results.
The IROC-Z didn’t appear until 1985. The year and specs associated with this card would suggest the 1984 Camaro Z/28. The image and name need to be corrected.
Some oldies that might have fallen through the cracks:
*2015 Cadillac CTS-V*: The picture is correct for a 2015 CTS-V,
but all of the stats are for the next generation 2016 CTS-V. The 2015
CTS-V made 556 hp while the new 2016 CTS-V made 640 hp. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_CTS-V
Year should be 2016 and photo should be this:
2016 Subaru Outback This is the previous generation in the photo. Should be the picture below the card.
Porsche 924 This is the turbo pictured. Should be a non-turbo like the image below the card (no hood intake, no upper grille)
Can't really post the picture but this one is such a hilarious screw up.
The Neon SRT 4 isn't even named properly... I'm just laughing so much about this one.
It's named properly. For the 2004 model year, when power was increased and a LSD was finally added, Dodge dropped 'Neon' from the car's name. The specs though are off.
For the 2004 model year (as pictured and listed on the card)
HP = 230
Torque = 250
0-60 - 5.2 seconds
Top Speed - 153 mph
Handling - should be much higher than 73. Probably about 80 or so
The Berlinetta is slow, but it's not THAT slow. 0-60 should be around 10.0 seconds. Here is a comparison from 1983. Click the 'Test results' box on the right of the screen for the magazine's performance results.
Both cars has the same height and width yet only one of them is medium height. furthermore, as stock the Camaro SS stats should be better than the Camaro Convertible version.
0-60 should be slightly faster, but the mid-range acceleration is horrible on this car... I just recorded a 0-150 time of 39+ seconds on the second part of the Challenge with my 699 Viper RT/10... http://fastestlaps.com/models/dodge-viper-rt-10-1996
Apologies if this has already been raised (did a search but couldn’t find anything) but this model, year and picture don’t tie up. 1. The WRX model didn’t exist as a UK model in the first generation Impreza. It was called the Impreza Turbo. I know because I bought a brand new one from a UK dealership in 1999! 2. This isn’t the 1993 version, it’s the later 1990s face-lifted version (hence the V-plate which was from Aug 1999 to February 2000). 3. There were various Special Editions of the first gen Impreza, some with WRX designation. This picture isn’t one then. 4. The official Subaru 0-60 time for the stock UK version when I bought mine was 6.3 seconds (remember like it was yesterday!). Parkers list it as 6.1, and top speed of 144.
Both cars are built on the same platform and meant to be identical in performance 0-60 should be the same , handling as well as they weigh the same Same with these two
Comments
The El Camino is the wrong year!!
Here's a 1969, pay attention to that front.
And here's a 1970.
Now the card itself back at launch, the stats remain the exact same bar the RQ which is 14 (soon to be 15). The front is the same as that 1969. The stats are correct for an SS 454, so all that needs done is an image change. (I admit, I will miss the front facing image and the older look, but at least we'll likely be able to see the rear a bit now.
Edit: I mean no offense with the whole "I'm amazed this went unnoticed" I'm amazed we never caught it since it was kind of a small thing.
Edit 2: Shoutouts to my pal Tri who caught this one.
This one has the best stats out of all non-reward-only corvettes, but is only RQ25.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_CTS-V
https://www.caranddriver.com/archives/1985-chevy-camaro-berlinetta-vs-1985-ford-mustang-svo-comparison-test-chevrolet-camaro-berlinetta-page-2
Both cars has the same height and width yet only one of them is medium height.
furthermore, as stock the Camaro SS stats should be better than the Camaro Convertible version.
0-60 should be slightly faster, but the mid-range acceleration is horrible on this car...
I just recorded a 0-150 time of 39+ seconds on the second part of the Challenge with my 699 Viper RT/10...
http://fastestlaps.com/models/dodge-viper-rt-10-1996
In game times:
0-100 = 9.50 sec. For reference a stock 2004 M5 in game runs 9.53
1/4mi. = 12.4 @ 112 mph
Test bowl 165mph @ 45.20
1 mi. = 32.10 @ 153mph
Compare with info from this link http://fastestlaps.com/models/chevrolet-camaro-zl1-2012
0-100 = 8.7sec
0-150 = 22.9sec
1/4mi = 11.9 @ 116mph
This link backs up that data
https://www.motortrend.com/news/stock-2012-chevrolet-camaro-zl1-runs-11s-in-the-quarter-mile-201921/
Where they say it's 1/4mi is 11.93-11.96
They themselves managed similar times with higher trap speeds... The lateral acceleration and figure 8 results are a clear indication that handling should gain a few points as well. The Ford GT was adjusted, and this should be as well
https://www.motortrend.com/cars/chevrolet/camaro/2012/2012-chevrolet-camaro-zl1-vs-2013-shelby-gt500/
In real life the Porsche Carrera GT has no traction control.
Apologies if this has already been raised (did a search but couldn’t find anything) but this model, year and picture don’t tie up.
1. The WRX model didn’t exist as a UK model in the first generation Impreza. It was called the Impreza Turbo. I know because I bought a brand new one from a UK dealership in 1999!
2. This isn’t the 1993 version, it’s the later 1990s face-lifted version (hence the V-plate which was from Aug 1999 to February 2000).
3. There were various Special Editions of the first gen Impreza, some with WRX designation. This picture isn’t one then.
4. The official Subaru 0-60 time for the stock UK version when I bought mine was 6.3 seconds (remember like it was yesterday!). Parkers list it as 6.1, and top speed of 144.
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/chrysler-crossfire-srt-6-road-test
Both cars are built on the same platform and meant to be identical in performance
0-60 should be the same , handling as well as they weigh the same
Same with these two
- Acura NSX 1995/Honda NSX 1990: 135mm
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/acura-nsx-1991.html#aeng_acura-nsx-1991-30-v6http://www.automobile-catalog.com/auta_details1.php
- Audi R8 V10 Spyder 2013 : 114mm
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/audi-r8-v10-spyder-2010.html#aeng_audi-r8-spyder-2010-52-v10-fsi- BMW Z4 2016 : 124mm
https://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=209726- Caddilac XLR : 168mm!
https://www.xlr-net.com/specs/2005/2005specs.htmlhttps://www.autoevolution.com/cars/cadillac-xlr-2003.html#aeng_cadillac-xlr-2003-46
- Caddilac XLR-V:168mm!
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/cadillac-xlr-v-2005.html#aeng_cadillac-xlr-v-series-2006-44- Fiat 124 Spider 2017 : 124mm
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/fiat-124-spider-2016.html#aeng_fiat-124-spider-2016-14-6mt-140-hphttp://autotk.com/dimensions/fiat/124-spider/2017/
- Abarth 124 Spider 2017 : 119mm
http://autotk.com/dimensions/fiat/124-spider/2017/https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/fiat-124-abarth-spider-2017.html#aeng_fiat-124-abarth-spider-2017-14-6at-170-hp
- Fiat 124 Sport Spider 1966: 150mm!!
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/fiat-124-sport-spider-1966.html#aeng_fiat-124-sport-spider-1966-14https://drive-my.com/en/social/item/127-fiat-124.html
- Fiat Barchetta 1995 : 130mm
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/fiat-barchetta-1995.html#aeng_fiat-barchetta-1995-18-16v- Fiat Dino Coupe/Spider 1996 : 120mm
https://www.uniquecarsandparts.com.au/car_info_fiat_dino- Fiat Coupe Turbo 1993 : 130mm
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/fiat-coupe-1994.html#aeng_fiat-coupe-1994-18- Honda Integra Type R 1995/ Acura Integra GSR : 150mm
http://www.hondanews.com/channels/acura-automobiles/archive/1994/releases/1995-acura-integra-specifications- Honda CRX 1.6o 1983/ CRX Si: 160mm
https://vteclimey.wordpress.com/2011/03/08/honda-crx-1st-generation-1983-1987/- Honda CR-Z 2016: 150mm
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/honda-cr-z-2010.html#aeng_honda-cr-z-2010-15-i-vtec-imahttps://www.autodealer.co.za/cars/Honda/CR-Z-Hybrid-2016/Prices-Specs
- Honda Prelude 1987: 140mm
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/honda-prelude-1987.html#aeng_honda-prelude-1987-20-109-hp- Honda CRX VTEC 1988: 150mm
http://www.cr-x.org/crxorg/crxspecs/- Honda Prelude Type S 1996: 145mm
https://www.car.info/en-se/honda/prelude/prelude-4th-generation-281976/specshttps://www.autoevolution.com/cars/honda-prelude-1996.html#aeng_honda-prelude-1996-20i
- Honda Integra Type R 2002: 130mm
https://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=84238http://www.integradc5.com/dc5-honda-integra-type-r-specs/
- Jaguar F-Type R/ Convertible/ SVR 2016: 120mm
https://www.caranddriver.com/jaguar/f-type/specs/2015/jaguar-f-type-coupe/365503https://www.caranddriver.com/jaguar/f-type-r/specs/2017/jaguar-f-type-r/383584
https://www.autoblog.com/buy/2017-Jaguar-F_TYPE-SVR__2dr_All_wheel_Drive_Coupe/specs/
- Lancia Beta Montecarlo 1975 : 130mm
https://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=105743- Lancia Statos 1973: 130mm
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/lancia-stratos-1973.html#aeng_lancia-stratos-1973-24- Mazda MX-5 2018 : 119mm
https://www.caradvice.com.au/compare-specs/ri515a-mazda-mx-5/https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/mazda-mx-5-miata-rf-2016.html#aeng_mazda-mx-5-miata-rf-2016-15-skyactiv-g-6mt-131-hp
- Mazda MX-5 RF 2018 : 134mm
https://www.mazdausa.com/siteassets/pdf/features--specs/2018/mx5-rf/2018_mazda_mx5_features_specs.pdf- Lotus Elise 1.6 2015: 140mm
https://www.caradvice.com.au/compare-specs/noo15a-lotus-elise/https://www.car.info/en-se/lotus/elise/elise-16-vvt-i-m6-2015-360469/specs
- Lotus Elan SE 1989 : 130mm
https://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=33286- Lotus Elan 1962 : 152mm
https://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=62909- Nissan GT-R (R32) : 161mm
http://www.skylinegtr.com/SPECS.html- Nissan GT-R (R33) : 173mm!!!
http://www.skylinegtr.com/SPECS.html- Nissan Skyline GT-R (R34): 145mm
http://www.gtr.org.uk/R34_spec.pdf- Nissan Juke R 2011 : 201mm
https://www.currynissan.com/vehicles.cfm/make/nissan/model/juke/year/2017/level/USC70NIS122E0/Medium
- Audi RS6 Avant 13 : 114mm
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/acura-integra-coupe-1994.html#aeng_acura-integra-1994-18-gs-rhttps://www.cartrade.com/audi-cars/rs6-avant/faqs/what-is-the-ground-clearance-of-the-audi-rs6-avant
- Audi RS7 Sportback: 109mm
https://autoportal.com/newcars/audi/rs7/feature/ground-clearance.htmlhttps://www.autox.com/new-cars/audi/rs7-sportback/ground-clearance/
- Audi RS5 Cabrio 2012: 104mm
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/audi-s5-cabriolet-2012.html#aeng_audi-s5-coupe-2011-30-tfsi-quattro-333-hphttps://www.caradvice.com.au/561307/2017-audi-rs5-review/price-specifications/
- Audi TTS Coupe 2015 : 114mm
https://www.caradvice.com.au/compare-specs/rw717a-audi-rs5/m9z12a-audi-tt/- Audi Quattro 1980 : 115mm
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/auta_details1.php- Audi RS6 Avant 2004: 109mm
https://www.caradvice.com.au/compare-specs/d7j05a-audi-rs6/- Audi RS4 Avant 2000: 100mm
https://www.caradvice.com.au/compare-specs/d7j05a-audi-rs6/apg00k-audi-rs4/- Audi RS2 Avant 1992: 100mm
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/audi-80-avant-rs2-1994.html#aeng_audi-80-avant-rs2-1994-22-turbo- Mercedes S 65 Coupe : 114mm
https://www.mbca.org/node/7291082- BMW M5 E60 2005 : 112mm
https://www.caradvice.com.au/compare-specs/eph05f-bmw-m5/- BMW M6 2016 : 107mm
https://autoportal.com/newcars/bmw/m6-gran-coupe/feature/ground-clearance.html- Ford Focus RS 2009 : 99mm!!
https://www.autoevolution.com/cars/ford-focus-rs-2008.html#aeng_ford-focus-rs-2008-25-turboimpossible to find other sources for the RS or the RS500
..... I got bored, but fix these things for gods sake
Please dont just eyeball ride heights, AND use NUMERIC VALUES instead of just Low Medium High