Re: ugly and bad preformance, dosnt get worse gearing. and looks are a matter of opinion. i reckon it looks cool, nice for a manufacturer to try a different design. i thought the GT1 was black and white with a six-speed, entered into the BGTC... could be a different year i suppose.
Re: ugly and bad preformance, dosnt get worse I saw the max speed at 208MPh for the 1993 GT version.This seems too high , but 170.3mph must be very under rated.
Re: ugly and bad preformance, dosnt get worse Its the Gearing, its geared for fast acceleration (Short), it could be Geared to go alot faster.<!-- Signature -->
Re: ugly and bad preformance, dosnt get worse <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Bigblockbrawler426Hemistage8</i> <b>too slow for a such car!!!</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> Hello??? its a race car?? the gears can be changed to suit the track, so Top Speed is Gear Ratio dependant.<!-- Signature -->
Re: ugly and bad preformance, dosnt get worse this is a heavy car but 170 does seem quite low, everyone seems to agree that this car wpuld have to be geared low for it to have such a low top speed
Re: ugly and bad preformance, dosnt get worse these cars were meant to be raced at le mans? if they were, then the stats arent that bad...especially considering that the powerplant is suited to endurance runs...
Re: ugly and bad preformance, dosnt get worse It's down to downforce and gearing, children, downforce and gearing. In future, do your research before you sound off and look ignorant.
hmmm...170 mph is slow? oh those poor blokes who have to drive this thing. wait, what do you guys get paid to drive around circuts all over the world?
Hello??? anyone saying itsbad did you notice the top speed is 170mph geared for accelaration lets put this in context: -the top speed for motorways highways ect... is usually around 70mph/100kmph -the fastest (land) animal travels at 70 mph -most road cars reach 140mph max Plz stop calling it slow