0-50 should be 3.1 sec. 0-60 should be ~3.9 sec. 0-100 should be 8.2 sec. 0-120 seems correct.
MRA from ~67 to ~90, wich make sense, becasue is close to the corrected MRA of the coupé version, and they have the same engine and a 300lb weight difference.
0-60 seems ok. 0-100 from ?? to 13.0 sec. (post stock times for this one also, please). MRA from 92,8 to 60,5!
That's all for Epic Evoras, wich we all knew that they had an exagerated MRA and sooner than later, they'll get nerfed. One last apologise to all who had one of this three maxed out, kicking Legendary butts over there.
So... While I was watching the forum burn with all the rage about the finals and the owners challenge, I investigated the car in question and, in the hope of bring some water to the fire, I'll show the results of my research.
>0-60 mph from 2.9 sec to 3.0 sec (if Hutch was representing the "high wing"), or 3.2 sec (if Hutch was representing the "low wing"). >0-100 mph from ?? to 6.1 sec (for the "high wing"), or 6.6 sec (for the "low wing").* >MRA from 93.67 (wich was already quite good for a Legendary) to 96.77 (for the "high wing"), or 94.12 (for the "low wing"). A small improvement nontheless. >1/4 mile from ?? @ ?? to 11.0 sec @ 131.8 mph (for the "low wing"), or 10.8 sec @ 133.1 mph (for the "high wing").* >Top speed from 210 mph to 212 mph.
*Please, I ask owners to submit times of a stock example for comparison.
"low wing" is the standard ZR1 with regular wing, and "high wing" is the ZR1 with ZTK Package, that adds some goodies and a giant wing in the back. Here the comparison:
Additional notes: handling should also be revised to be closer to the S [92] Ford GT (2017), as seen in the lap times set on Willow Spring for comparison. This according to which version Hutch is refering to (normal or ZTK Package). But it should have at least 1 more point on handling score. Also, is interesting to see that with the 3.2 sec to 60 mph and 6.1 sec to 100 mph, you get an astonishing 110.3 MRA! Wich is unrealistic but is fun, becuase of how much some miliseconds can make all the difference.
Considering the picture Hutch chose, the fact that it's performance is closer to the high-wing (and also because the low-wing variant isn't as prevalent/well known), think we can safely say Hutch chose the high-wing variant.
Not sure if this is accepted, but I made this last march and I'm very certain the source images are most likely gone by now as I changed phones a few times so all the data I have for the car is this one single image that I just happened to have stored online. I also don't think judging the car's trim based on its image in game is reliable as it's only supposed to represent the gen and not the trim; but the image-wise it is the high wing.
Ok, now for the big ones. This too are also ridiculously faster than their real life counterparts.
So, the difference between the Evora 430 and 430 Sport is purely cosmetic. The Sport doesn't have the giant wing, and has a little skinier tires thant the 430 "alone". After that, they have identical powertrain, so their 0-60 should be the same, and that also goes for their MRA. Multiple sources declare 0-60 times near to the 430's acceleration in game, being the difference between the manual and the automatic of just 0.1 sec. And here goes the bomb, all sources also say a 0-100 "just under 8 sec", that could be refering to manufacturer claims. Leaving that for later, lets also discuss that the 430 model is more powerful than the 410 model for obvious reasons (the number in their names refer to the power of the car), so in no way the 410 could be equally faster to 60 as the 430. Resuming:
Evora 430 Sport: > 0-60 from 3.9 sec to 3.6 sec (if Hutch chose the automatic). > 0-100 from ?? sec to ~7.9 sec (Please submit stock times). > MRA from 103.27 to 83.72 (wich is realisticaly nearer to the Evora 400's real MRA above).
Evora 430: > 0-60 from 3.7 sec to 3.6 sec (if Hutch chose the automatic). > 0-100 from ?? sec to ~7.9 sec (Please submit stock times). > MRA from 105.74 to equal or less than 83.72, given that it has a giant wing that creates drag (hence the lower top speed).
Evora 410: > MRA reduced to match Evora hierarchy (lower than 83).
Additional notes: EVO themselves said that Lotus claimed, at their test track, the Evora 430 made a lap time as good as the 3-Eleven. So handling should be closer to this one (wich is also in the game).
I found it ok, (I have both) as at first, they are limited by the traction, then when they have full traction, it is all MRA and torque.
586 vs 695
The Diesel weighs more and has a lot less HP. Torque is nice, but irrelevant when it comes to drag racing.
There is just no way that the diesel would win vs the v8 in real life. It is not how diesel engines work. Diesel torque makes cars quick off the line but the mid to high-end acceleration is atrocious compared to petrol engines.
Comments
Found a test for the newer model with more power and torque
https://www.auto-swiat.pl/testy/testy-nowych-samochodow/nowe-bmw-x5-m50d-poczworna-fala-mocy-or-test/jcr88ky
Should be slower than the newer one, 0-60 seems correct but not for its 0-100mph
-Should be a little faster.
Car and Driver Test Results: https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15104852/2015-mini-john-cooper-works-hardtop-test-review/
0-100 mph: 13.9 -> 13.7 sec
0-130 mph: 27.26 sec -> 25.5 sec (had to do a run and record it since there's no 0-130 in game)
1/4 mile: 14.46 sec -> 14.3 sec
0-150 mph: 28.13 s -> 25.3 s
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15107072/2014-porsche-911-targa-4s-test-review/
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/test/test-lamborghini-gallardo-lp-560-4-spyder/technische-daten/
0-50 should be 3.1 sec.
0-60 should be ~3.9 sec.
0-100 should be 8.2 sec.
0-120 seems correct.
https://www.motortrend.com/cars/cadillac/sts/2006/blownaway-full-size-luxury-sedan-comparison/
https://www.automobilemag.com/news/cadillac-stsv-3/
https://www.motorweek.org/reviews/road_tests/2006_cadillac_sts-v
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a18203054/cadillac-sts-v-first-drive-review/
It should be faster, but I’m not too sure about its top speed, Motor Trend achieved 171mph during their road trip
In game test
It should be slower
In game test
jacky: (devilish laughter)
but wow, mra dropping from 84 to 73, that is pretty sad
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/test/lotus-evora-400-im-supertest/technische-daten/
0-60 is ok.
0-100 from ?? to 9.9 sec. (please, post in-game times from the stock one).
MRA from 101,74 to 70,69!
Bang, bang! It's dead. Sorry to all the owners who already maxed it out. It'll still be a king until next update though (probably 2021).
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/test/lotus-evora-s-im-test-komfort-renner-mit-350-ps/technische-daten/
0-60 is ok.
0-100 from ?? to 10.6 sec. (please, post stock times for this one too).
MRA from 96,84 to 68,25!
Again, sorry to all owners who maxed it out.
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/test/lotus-evora-im-test-der-elise-bruder-mit-260-ps-und-v6-motor/technische-daten/
0-60 seems ok.
0-100 from ?? to 13.0 sec. (post stock times for this one also, please).
MRA from 92,8 to 60,5!
That's all for Epic Evoras, wich we all knew that they had an exagerated MRA and sooner than later, they'll get nerfed. One last apologise to all who had one of this three maxed out, kicking Legendary butts over there.
>0-60 mph from 2.9 sec to 3.0 sec (if Hutch was representing the "high wing"), or 3.2 sec (if Hutch was representing the "low wing").
>0-100 mph from ?? to 6.1 sec (for the "high wing"), or 6.6 sec (for the "low wing").*
>MRA from 93.67 (wich was already quite good for a Legendary) to 96.77 (for the "high wing"), or 94.12 (for the "low wing"). A small improvement nontheless.
>1/4 mile from ?? @ ?? to 11.0 sec @ 131.8 mph (for the "low wing"), or 10.8 sec @ 133.1 mph (for the "high wing").*
>Top speed from 210 mph to 212 mph.
*Please, I ask owners to submit times of a stock example for comparison.
"low wing" is the standard ZR1 with regular wing, and "high wing" is the ZR1 with ZTK Package, that adds some goodies and a giant wing in the back. Here the comparison:
Sources:
>https://www.motortrend.com/cars/chevrolet/corvette/2019/2019-chevrolet-corvette-zr1-first-test-review/
>https://www.motortrend.com/news/watch-the-2019-chevrolet-corvette-zr1-hit-212-mph/
>https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a20903305/2019-chevrolet-corvette-zr1-instrumented-test-review/
Additional notes: handling should also be revised to be closer to the S [92] Ford GT (2017), as seen in the lap times set on Willow Spring for comparison. This according to which version Hutch is refering to (normal or ZTK Package). But it should have at least 1 more point on handling score.
Also, is interesting to see that with the 3.2 sec to 60 mph and 6.1 sec to 100 mph, you get an astonishing 110.3 MRA! Wich is unrealistic but is fun, becuase of how much some miliseconds can make all the difference.
I also don't think judging the car's trim based on its image in game is reliable as it's only supposed to represent the gen and not the trim; but the image-wise it is the high wing.
So, the difference between the Evora 430 and 430 Sport is purely cosmetic. The Sport doesn't have the giant wing, and has a little skinier tires thant the 430 "alone". After that, they have identical powertrain, so their 0-60 should be the same, and that also goes for their MRA. Multiple sources declare 0-60 times near to the 430's acceleration in game, being the difference between the manual and the automatic of just 0.1 sec. And here goes the bomb, all sources also say a 0-100 "just under 8 sec", that could be refering to manufacturer claims. Leaving that for later, lets also discuss that the 430 model is more powerful than the 410 model for obvious reasons (the number in their names refer to the power of the car), so in no way the 410 could be equally faster to 60 as the 430.
Resuming:
Evora 430 Sport:
> 0-60 from 3.9 sec to 3.6 sec (if Hutch chose the automatic).
> 0-100 from ?? sec to ~7.9 sec (Please submit stock times).
> MRA from 103.27 to 83.72 (wich is realisticaly nearer to the Evora 400's real MRA above).
Evora 430:
> 0-60 from 3.7 sec to 3.6 sec (if Hutch chose the automatic).
> 0-100 from ?? sec to ~7.9 sec (Please submit stock times).
> MRA from 105.74 to equal or less than 83.72, given that it has a giant wing that creates drag (hence the lower top speed).
Evora 410:
> MRA reduced to match Evora hierarchy (lower than 83).
Additional notes: EVO themselves said that Lotus claimed, at their test track, the Evora 430 made a lap time as good as the 3-Eleven. So handling should be closer to this one (wich is also in the game).
Sources:
> Evora 430 and 430 sport
https://www.evo.co.uk/news/19717/new-lotus-evora-gt430-sport-joins-the-gt430-line-up
https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/first-drives/a14011879/lotus-evora-gt430-review/
https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-reviews/lotus/lotus-evora-gt430-and-evora-gt430-sport-2017-review/
https://www.motoringresearch.com/car-reviews/lotus-evora-gt430-review/
> Evora 410
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/lotus/evora/102282/new-2018-lotus-evora-gt410-sport-launched-with-85900-price-tag
Are all three Bentaygas up for a change?
586 vs 695