rec.autos.simulators

Scott so you have driven bascially a 1 million dollar GT1 Sports Racer.
Which make the CLK GTR or the 911 GT1 or even the Panoz GT-R1.  I am
figuring you have actaully driven a SCCA GT1 class car something allong the
lines of a tubeframe Camaro or Mustang and if its a great chassis its
either a Pratt and Miller or a Riley and Scott.  Either way  that type of
car is still far removed from a true GT1 Sports Racer like the one
mentioned above.  GT2 classes cars are much simlar to what SCCA runs as a
GT1 car infact you can see 911RSRs and 911 Turbos that run GT2 and GT3
regularly at some SCCA national events when the owners want a bit of easy
track time.

My experince is only in Solo ll, but the car is bascially a SCCA GT4
classed car and well it reacts very similarly in handling to the GT3 cars.
I do feel the cars have just a touch too much grip, but not by much.  It is
very noticeable in the GT1 class sports racers due to being able to go thru
the esses at Road America flat in top gear.  Even with a touch of too much
grip the car feels and reacts just like my Solo ll car does.  Overcook and
entry and the car does not turn in well, turning the wheel more just makes
it worse.
Well mayber you should before you start saying this is not a sim or this is
a sim.  Also I think the GT1 car you drove was probly closer to a GT2 or
GT3 car that would run in PSCR events.

Might be a good idea to have someone make a comment that has a frame of
reference.

Opinions are like chevelles, everyones got one and they all stink.

Dave

Bollocks.  Ever drove a vintage sports car David?  The suspension model back
in those year was truly pathetic.  I remember pushing an old MGC Mark II to
the edge, slipping into the corners at the Gilles Villeneuve F1 circuit one
night, or at Mont-Tremblant F1 circuit on a shiny day.  It was the best pure
racing moment I have ever done.  And the car is far underpowered compared to
Formula 1's.  Think about this... FORMULA ONE.  Not a typical Toyota Sedan
eh?

If you ever have the chance to get to Silverstone some day, go take a day
test with the Lotus Elise Experience.  You will slip all over the corners,
re-act some technique in GPL, and powerslide alot in the corners.

I am still amazed how those people actually had the hearth to hop in a
***pit and race any racecar before 1970.  They were over-powered, had
incredibly bad tyres, and suspension geometry that made the cars
undriveable.

GPL is realistic for that type of racing cars.  It is also realistic as it's
the best ***y game engine ever done, and far ahead of any competitor at
the moment and nearby future.  If you ever drove a vintage FFord or even one
from today, you would know.

Also, ever drove a rally car also?

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

(Qualifier - No... Im not comparing SCGT to LeMans.  LeMans makes SCGT look
like the complete tactile racing sumulations to end all race simulations
<G>)

Using your argument,  I will say the GT-1 I raced did not handle like the
GT2 or GT3 in SCGT.
You are correct in that I did not drive a $1 million dollar piece of
equipment.  The GT-1 I raced was of the SCCA specs and the car I drove did
race in a few Trans-Am events before being purchased for GT-1 usage.

Scott
PA-Scott
PowerSims.com

--
Scott B. Husted
"PA-Scott"
COO
MMMGI
ICQ# 4395450

http://www.MMMGI.com
http://www.Acrotech.net
http://www.Powersims.com
http://www.InternetMotorsports.net

SUV's are also a pet peeve of mine, but I wouldn't group them together
with good American iron.  A live axle is crude, but can be controlled
rather nicely.  I've had many RWD cars with live axles, including a very
fun little Corolla GT-S.  They get a bit sloppy on really rough pavement,
but they're not so bad.  The MacPherson strut is hardly leading edge
technology, and yet you'll also find this one on a lot of sporty cars.
Get's the job done, just like a live axle with a few horizontal struts.

And no enthusiast would ever call a car "overpowered".  There is no such
thing as overpowered. :)

Stephen

<OFF-TOPIC>

And why do you suppose lots of folks are driving Camaros, Firebirds,
Mustangs, and other "american overpowered, bad suspension geometry piece of
junk" cars?  The answer is simple:  bang-for-the-buck.  The Camaro Z28 at
305 HP offers the most horsepower per dollar for ANY car you can buy -
$69.72.  Check out the top ten list at
http://carpoint.msn.com/Browse/win_2886.asp

Personally, I'd love to own a Porsche or BMW M3, but my budget doesn't allow
it, so I settled for a Mustang GT and couldn't be happier with the car.
It's fun to drive.  Unless you've driven a RWD street car with 200-300
horsepower and 300+ lb/ft of torque, you are missing a feeling that can't be
described.  There's a review at Motor Trend that does come close however ...
http://www.motortrend.com/dec99/mustanggt/mustanggt_f.html

One point about the "bad suspension geometry piece of junk," I remember
reading an article once about the Mustang GT where it said that the whole
car was very primitive and the approach was like "breaking eggs with a
hammer."  But the bottom line is that hammers do break eggs.  Primitive
geometry or not, a $20,000 Mustang got through Motor Trend's 600 ft. slalom
course averaging 66.8 mph, while a $70,000 BMW M5 was "only" able to muster
65.6 mph through the same course.  It doesn't seem possible, but those are
the objective numbers.

</OFF-TOPIC>

<remove 7of9 for e-mail replies>

--
Bill Jones    e-mail addresses:


(860) 701-1201   WWW:   http://pages.cthome.net/billj

so that Mustang and Camaro have actaully the same basic design of front end
that a BMW and even a Porsche uses.  Actually most SUVs still use a double
A arm front end since its easier to package all the 4WD components in that
design.

Dave

David K.,
(whose '93 Protege does the 600 ft. slalom averaging, sigh, wheeze, about 40
mph . . .)

Nope.  ;-)

What are you trying to say?  <tongue in cheek now>

Bill J., (whose bad geometry piece of junk '95 Mustang GT might only do 30
mph on a bumpy 600 ft.
slalom . . .)

There is a difference in theory and in practice.
Simulation is the act of replicating, or emulating  , approximating actual
or operational conditions
to imitate

Game , has no such connotation, just a game

"SIM" racing offers me the ability to drive vehicles that  I would not be
able to, I would love to drive for real , but it is very cost prohibitive
for me , where I can build a machine  and "plug in software" for different
types of driving and if the program is intended to be a "sim" , then I can
get immersed in the sim, and get close without going out on the road and
racing

my point is that there are drivers , who want the challenge of driving these
sims, and take it serious
and there are others who just want to "play"

there is room for both , but they are not the same