Jump to content Jump to content

DiRTy Gossip


MastaVonBlasta
 Share

Go to solution Solved by PJTierney,
Message added by PJTierney,

Did you know that the long-time members of this thread have had a DiRTy Gossip Discord server for a while?

You do now 😉 

 

 

Recommended Posts

BrySkye said:

Apparently a redundant line of thought anyway though as the people that went to Codies before the game was even announced have made it clear lately that they were told the exact reason why Toyota are not in the game and it's a reason that means they never, ever, will be.
Would have been sweet to have a Celica with turbo restrictor bypass simulation, and if you actually used it you would have been banned from racenet for cheating.  :p
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4-speed gearbox!              

Wait?, what?
Yup, the 307 initially had a 4-speed gearbox. It infuriated Grönholm on more than one occasion because it was also unreliable.
Two of my favorite WRC quotes, both from 2004 and both from Gronholm:

"Three gear, three gear! Whole stage! You can tell Corrado now that three is enough!"

G: I  have one gear...
Interviewer: Which one?
G: THREE!

Of course not to mention his other completely unrelated quotes from the same guy:

(after crashing in Australia)
"MAYYYYBE I was going too fast, but I don't think so."

Cyprus 2004:
"It came some stone, ehh, into Timo's seat, up into asshole of Timo"

Mexico 2004:
"No power steering! And I have two long stages to go, I'm fed up with this car"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BrySkye said:
RookieOne said:
Or the Celica ST165 and/or the ST185 (the ST165 would be fun, since it actually had a manually lockable center diff, which would probably translate in-game as being unlocked on tarmac stage and locked on snow and gravel stages or as having only 2 settings : locked and unlocked)
The 205 was in Sega Rally though.
That's all that really needs to be said. :)
That and Codies already have a compatible source file for the 205.

Apparently a redundant line of thought anyway though as the people that went to Codies before the game was even announced have made it clear lately that they were told the exact reason why Toyota are not in the game and it's a reason that means they never, ever, will be.
True enough, but the 205 have a tainted legacy because of the cheating incident.

the 185 and the 165 does not, they actually look way cooler than the 205 and actually dominated for a while (especially the 185) in the hands of Sainz, Auriol and Kankunnen.

For the line of thought, it might be because the expectations of DR were very low after the mixed success of games that CM made during the last few years.

With the success of the Early Access and the fact that the game is going to console, Toyota, Renault and others (especially Mitsubishi, which is lacking with the exception of the R4/Gr.N car) might reconsider their choice (although for Renault, it does look like the reconsidering is ongoing right now)

Now back on topic : 

Concerning the 307, I dare to say poor Timo, but to be frank, if a steel pin manage to get through the car floor (under which it was supposed to be protected by a skidplate), it does mean that the fucking car is bloody dangerous and a real menace to its occupants.

But if renault come ingame, 2 cars I want : 

Alpine A110 (for obvious reasons)
Alpine A310 (yes, the V6 versions that participated in the 1977 French Rally Championship)

For the A310, the reason is simple : it would be cool to have another V6 car in the 70s class as a rival to the lancia (if it's even possible)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

RookieOne said:
True enough, but the 205 have a tainted legacy because of the cheating incident.

the 185 and the 165 does not, they actually look way cooler than the 205 and actually dominated for a while (especially the 185) in the hands of Sainz, Auriol and Kankunnen.
To big rally fans, sure, but not so much to gamers. There's a reason why the 205 is the most popular one in games, even though it was the subject of the cheating that got Toyota banned.
It's the icon in spite of that.
You're perfectly entitled to your opinion about the 165 and 185 looking cooler, but I'd never agree. I think they look pretty generic in comparison. 
Sega Rally was my first experience of rally almost exactly 20 years ago. In fact, it was exactly 20 years and 4 days since I got my Sega Saturn and very soon after tried the Sega Rally playable demo and owned the full game by February.
It was the inspiration for so many games, including Colin McRae Rally, making it the de facto Celica by default to many people.
The most popular and recognisable cars aren't always the most successful.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would always go for the 185 if given the choice, to me it's the better looking, most successful, most iconic, but I'm also aware that I'm a rally fan and I know in the wider world @BrySkye is correct that the 205 is more widely recognised. Crucially though, I think stick any of the three models in game and we'd all be happy, but that doesn't seem likely for some strange reason.

He's spot on that success doesn't necessarily equal fame and vice-versa - one only has to look at the popularity in these boards of the S1 E2 Audi to see that, a car with few rallies and even fewer successes under its belt.

------

By the way, Renault were being discussed above; it would be great news if the R5 and A110 were to come, but does anyone else feel strange about their prospective classes?

If I'm not mistaken, the 5 model is the early '80s edition, such as the 1981 winner, so having it in the late '80s class against the M3 and Sierra would seem massively out if place to me. Group B RWD, even if not officially in 'Maxi' spec would seem more appropriate.

Likewise I'm struggling to comprehend how the Alpine is considered a '60s car, when the model (assuming it's based on the Dirt 3 one) is roughly a '73 one and it would be the ideal opponent to the Stratos. In a '60s class, it would blow the other two away, whereas it should be fairly competitive, if a bit slower, in the '70s category.

Other Renault food for thought, Project CARS recently launched a Renault themed DLC; I wonder if the marketing bods at Renault prefer this approach, for their cars to be a 'star' of their own DLC launch than integrated into a base game. I know this is contradicted a bit by SLRE, but just musing aloud....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BrySkye said:
RookieOne said:
True enough, but the 205 have a tainted legacy because of the cheating incident.

the 185 and the 165 does not, they actually look way cooler than the 205 and actually dominated for a while (especially the 185) in the hands of Sainz, Auriol and Kankunnen.
To big rally fans, sure, but not so much to gamers. There's a reason why the 205 is the most popular one in games, even though it was the subject of the cheating that got Toyota banned.
It's the icon in spite of that.
You're perfectly entitled to your opinion about the 165 and 185 looking cooler, but I'd never agree. I think they look pretty generic in comparison. 
Sega Rally was my first experience of rally almost exactly 20 years ago. In fact, it was exactly 20 years and 4 days since I got my Sega Saturn and very soon after tried the Sega Rally playable demo and owned the full game by February.
It was the inspiration for so many games, including Colin McRae Rally, making it the de facto Celica by default to many people.
The most popular and recognisable cars aren't always the most successful.
Perhaps for old timers who now know better

But for the new ones ? I think they will recognize more the ST185

In Gran Turismo, the 185 is well known for being the only rally car with in Safari Trim.
In Forza Motorsport, it's the same thing, only car from a rallying heritage that can be modded to safari trim, is the ST185
In forza Horizon, the recommended car for Rallying from toyota is the ST185

I think that in the last few years, the ST185 has became more recognizable than we think
Link to comment
Share on other sites

RookieOne said:
Perhaps for old timers who now know better

But for the new ones ? I think they will recognize more the ST185

In Gran Turismo, the 185 is well known for being the only rally car with in Safari Trim.
In Forza Motorsport, it's the same thing, only car from a rallying heritage that can be modded to safari trim, is the ST185
In forza Horizon, the recommended car for Rallying from toyota is the ST185

I think that in the last few years, the ST185 has became more recognizable than we think
Let me throw that right back at you. The 185 in Gran Turismo is still a 'standard' model, even in GT6.
It's still basically the PS2 model from GT4.
The 205 was one of the first cars to be given the premium treatment in GT5, with the full interior and all the graphical bells and whistles.
There is absolutely no doubt which car Polyphony Digital put the love into.





It's the 205 in DiRT and DiRT 3. The one in Sega Rally Revo and it's arcade reworks Sega Rally 3 and Sega Rally Arcade Online.

You're right it's the only one in Forza that can be modded into safari trim and recommended for rally trim in Horizon, but you know why?
Because the 185 wasn't included in the release version of Forza Horizon. It was part of the Rally Expansion pack.
The 205 was absent from Horizon (though has always been present in the main series) but is back in Horizon 2.

SLRE is the first time the 185 has been given proper prominence since CMR2005, so let's not pretend the 185 is suddenly the more favoured car in games.

Hate to tell you this, but the Celica ZZT231 is more recognised in gaming than the 185. That's the second most prominent Celica in the likes of GT, Forza, NFS, etc after the 205.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always favoured the ST185 over the ST205.
There's just something about it that always draws my attention to it somehow.
The only ST205 that I liked was this one because of the livery:


I made a model version of the one in the previous post once. Unfortunately the cleaning lady dropped it while moving stuff around. Man was I pissed! It was my first perfectly made model and you know what she said? "It's just a toy, just buy a new one." I was like WHAAAAT!?!? YOU B****!!! At least we've got a new cleaning lady who doesn't drop stuff. I would hate to see another one break into pieces after all the hard work. Also my most precious models are behind lock and key like my ST165 Snijers Edition. That thing cost me over €150 (decals, paint and all included).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

phil94ma said:

A little bit off-topic, but Assetto  Corsa will have the Sport quattro S1 E2 in 2016.... I hope Dirt Rally also  :)
As a mod, I assume?
Nop,.... http://www.assettocorsa.net/2015-and-beyond/

"Thanks to the success of the Audi R8 Ultra 2014, and as a response to the requests of our fans, we are going to replicate the brand new R8 Ultra 2016. The new amazing Audi car will not come alone, since we are also working on the Audi R18 E-Tron, TT VLN 2014, TT CUP 2015, A1 S1, Sport quattro S1 E2 and TT 2015 models."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

phil94ma said:
"Thanks to the success of the Audi R8 Ultra 2014, and as a response to the requests of our fans, we are going to replicate the brand new R8 Ultra 2016. The new amazing Audi car will not come alone, since we are also working on the Audi R18 E-Tron, TT VLN 2014, TT CUP 2015, A1 S1, Sport quattro S1 E2 and TT 2015 models."
That's easy then. They are making a fictional car, so they don't need a license :p Remember, it's Quattro S1 and Quattro E2, not Quattro S1 E2 ;) I learnt my mistake, now I'm keeping the proper naming.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

phil94ma said:
"Thanks to the success of the Audi R8 Ultra 2014, and as a response to the requests of our fans, we are going to replicate the brand new R8 Ultra 2016. The new amazing Audi car will not come alone, since we are also working on the Audi R18 E-Tron, TT VLN 2014, TT CUP 2015, A1 S1, Sport quattro S1 E2 and TT 2015 models."
That's easy then. They are making a fictional car, so they don't need a license :p Remember, it's Quattro S1 and Quattro E2, not Quattro S1 E2 ;) I learnt my mistake, now I'm keeping the proper naming.
The official name is Audi Quattro S1 E2.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_Quattro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jepsertti said:
phil94ma said:
"Thanks to the success of the Audi R8 Ultra 2014, and as a response to the requests of our fans, we are going to replicate the brand new R8 Ultra 2016. The new amazing Audi car will not come alone, since we are also working on the Audi R18 E-Tron, TT VLN 2014, TT CUP 2015, A1 S1, Sport quattro S1 E2 and TT 2015 models."
That's easy then. They are making a fictional car, so they don't need a license :p Remember, it's Quattro S1 and Quattro E2, not Quattro S1 E2 ;) I learnt my mistake, now I'm keeping the proper naming.
The official name is Audi Quattro S1 E2.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_Quattro
It's not. :p Amazingly enough, Wiki is wrong.
http://www.ableitet.no/twentyS1/s1vse2.htm
Rather more detailed, sourced account including where the misconception came from.

As for the car being in AC, not so weird given the E2 was put into Forza 4, a game which also lacked any real form of off-road racing.
Yet was absent from Forza Horizon where it was more relevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BrySkye said:
Jepsertti said:
phil94ma said:
"Thanks to the success of the Audi R8 Ultra 2014, and as a response to the requests of our fans, we are going to replicate the brand new R8 Ultra 2016. The new amazing Audi car will not come alone, since we are also working on the Audi R18 E-Tron, TT VLN 2014, TT CUP 2015, A1 S1, Sport quattro S1 E2 and TT 2015 models."
That's easy then. They are making a fictional car, so they don't need a license :p Remember, it's Quattro S1 and Quattro E2, not Quattro S1 E2 ;) I learnt my mistake, now I'm keeping the proper naming.
The official name is Audi Quattro S1 E2.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_Quattro
It's not. :p Amazingly enough, Wiki is wrong.
http://www.ableitet.no/twentyS1/s1vse2.htm
Rather more detailed, sourced account including where the misconception came from.

As for the car being in AC, not so weird given the E2 was put into Forza 4, a game which also lacked any real form of off-road racing.
Yet was absent from Forza Horizon where it was more relevant.

Thanks for that :) Learned something new today.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Audi refer to the E2 as the S1 though...

Audi Motorsport said:
1986 Winner of Pikes Peak hillclimb race (Audi Sport quattro S1)

The above linked article is as clear as mud.  
Though, if its true that the 'E2' couldn't 'mix and match' with the earlier car, then B264 (1984 homologation) actually refers to earlier cars (1st Evolution - non S1) and suggests that the S1/E2 are actually the same, with S1 being Audi's reference and the E2 being FIA's reference to the same 1985 homologated vehicle.

So the only thing missing from Wiki's S1 E2 is a ' / '

The car we have in-game is an Audi Sport Quattro

:P
Link to comment
Share on other sites

KevM said:
Audi refer to the E2 as the S1 though...

Audi Motorsport said:
1986 Winner of Pikes Peak hillclimb race (Audi Sport quattro S1)

The above linked article is as clear as mud.  
Though, if its true that the 'E2' couldn't 'mix and match' with the earlier car, then B264 (1984 homologation) actually refers to earlier cars (1st Evolution - non S1) and suggests that the S1/E2 are actually the same, with S1 being Audi's reference and the E2 being FIA's reference to the same 1985 homologated vehicle.

So the only thing missing from Wiki's S1 E2 is a ' / '

The car we have in-game is an Audi Sport Quattro

:P
Think the mud is in your eyes as much as the article. :P ...Well, guess it depends on how used you are to having to interpret anything the FIA puts out.
Had FISA not insisted on how the evolutions would be designated after the S1 had competed, the car we know as the E2 would probably have been designated the S2 by Audi. They were forced to call it the E2, but call it the E2 they did.
He consistently refers to the second evolution as the “E2”. This is in line with the way Audi Sport referred to them in their press releases and the way that that they were referred to internally at FISA. I know that because in those years I sat on the FISA Homologation Commission representing the manufacturers.
But hey, feel free to disagree and do things your own way, we're more than used to that by now. :)

The real point though is that the commonly seen designation "S1 E2" does not officially exist and that specific designation is one Audi have never used.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats a third party quote from someone from FISA, the people who invented 'E', for someone else's car.  Of course he'd refer to it as E2, they named it as that.  I quoted Audi directly, who refer to it as S1 when paying tribute to its success!  So they do things their way too it seems (crazy guys)  :)

What you are stating doesn't actually disagree with anything I have interpreted, but take it as 'disagreement' if it comforts you in some way

https://audimediacenter-a.akamaihd.net/system/production/press_releases/3846/file_en/d9a8ab75e33d2688cb60edfd2e12df81235f8d0b/150101_Motorsport_Erfolge_GB.pdf?1432745082&disposition=attachment
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you missed it again.

"This is in line with the way Audi Sport referred to them in their press releases."

So, just for the sake of clarity, Audi have apparently used both.
Don't pretend Audi have never used the E2 designation, nor try to change the direction away from the actual thing being addressed was the "S1 E2" designation, rather than just "S1" or just "E2".
If anything it would be the S1 E1, because it would have been the first evolution of the S1.
But the S1 itself was an evolution, which is why that designation doesn't hold water.
You know, even more crazy, Audi are also capable of making mistakes as well. That's one of the problems with this particular example, there is a lot of conflicting info even in official sources, which is why you have to delve into it so deeply. The 22b comparison is perfectly apt. It's all in the fine technicalities.

It's nice that you'd like to act as if I'm the one who's upset though. :) No skin off my back if you want to disagree with someone like John Davenport.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are 'inventing' disagreement here... (But keep quoting a third party statement written about something Audi did - lol)

I will summarise my findings, the big mad Quattro is referred to as S1 by some, E2 by others, sometimes either or, but never both, or a German puppy dies...   Ultimately exactly the same car.

(where I would disagree though, nothing above to suggest a contrary but I may be wrong, the none existing 'Evo 1' was just the Sport Quattro Rallye, the one we have in game?). 


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't want to get involved in this, but I would like to add something.  

Im not entirely sure about what the official Prodrive documents are out there for the Subaru, I am sure they are out there, it's why the whole 22b mistake is settled quickly.  Are their official Audi Factory documents for Quattro rally program, designating the S1/E2?  

I think the confusion is all of these are quotes from interviews and such.  If someone would refer to their Subaru continually as a "2007 Subaru WRX STI" to be technically correct, you would sound a bit weird, instead for convenience they may just shorten it to "my Subie" if your in certain company.  

I think the S1 or E2 debate falls under the same circumstances, where did the interview take place, for what purpose (promotional?) or right after the driver jumped out of the car?  Lots of different places can change why and when it was called a certain name.  

I hope this helps 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its daft to argue the Audi though.  It was known as both the S1 (by Audi)  and E2 (by the governing body who told Audi to refer to it as E2 also, so they did).  Why there's an issue calling it both, baffles me.  Its the same car

VW produced the Polo R, they enter it into the World Rally Championship (TM), so its known in the championship as the Polo 'WRC'.  No issue with calling it the Polo R WRC though, no one gets hurt...  :)

(I refer to the Impreza as a P2000, cos it is - :D )
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Happy New Year you rally lunatics.

 Just to clarify this one: Audi S1 E2  is of course a Group B car with a 3.0 liter engine that produces around 540 bhp with a widely aerodynamic bodykit. The Audi S1 E1 or the EVO 1, the one homologated in 1984, that has a 2.1 liter engine produces 350 bhp. They are both S1s with EVO distinction like P205 T16. 

The S1 naming was probably to designate the E2 only to make it more prominent because of the very substantial modifications done to it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

KevM said:
Its daft to argue the Audi though.  It was known as both the S1 (by Audi)  and E2 (by the governing body who told Audi to refer to it as E2 also, so they did).  Why there's an issue calling it both, baffles me.  Its the same car
Why you want to insist that the problem is in calling both cars S1 is what baffles me, because that was never even brought up until you threw in your hat.
Why it could be an issue though is that the S1 is also a different car. That's the crux which makes doing so a bit wonky. The Audi Sport Quattro that appeared in 1984 is also the S1. The homologation states that plain as day.
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/03/14/1984-audi-sport-quattro-s1-stig-blomqvist-wrc-rally-video/
If you want to call two different cars the exact same name, that's your prerogative. 
E2 is just more specific to differentiate between the original 84 S1 and the 1985 evolution car.

This only started when it was said that "S1 E2" was the official designation for the mad Quattro which was more wing than car.
But it never was. Audi have never used it themselves, though just about everyone else has. The problem is S1 E2 makes damn good sense on the face of things. 
Unfortunately, being straightforward doesn't make it technically correct. It's a designation that has never been used in any official capacity, and when you know how the evolution regulations worked it becomes pretty understandable why it isn't S1 E2.
That you couldn't evolve an evolution, and the S1 was indeed already an evolution.
Yet it's become common because calling two different cars S1 is both confusing and just a bit silly.
S2 would also have been fine, and that was probably the original intent, just like the earlier A1 and A2.
S1 84 and S1 85 have also become common alternatives to try and differentiate between them.
That's how messed up the naming of the car has become.

Saying as the 85 car was officially entered into the WRC as the Audi Sport Quattro E2, that is simply the most appropriate designation to differentiate it from the 84 car which was entered as the Audi Sport Quattro S1.

It's only as confusing as anyone chooses to make it.
Gotta hand it to you Kev, you do a hell of a job of turning what was one little correction of a mere 3 lines into all this pointlessness.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sqdstr said:
*grabs some more popcorn*

yeah keep it coming guys :smile: 
Nope. completely done because there's nothing more to add.
I see the exact problem, where Kev's decided to interpret it simply as the S1 being Audi's internal designation and E2 as the WRC one, hence "S1/E2".
That they are just two names for one single car.

Problem with that is the fact the original Audi Sport Quattro S1 competed in 1984 and was a very different car from the one that appeared in 85.
If you ignore the existence of the original S1, then it suddenly makes sense why you would think it's obvious and straight forward to think like that.

Even the Wiki article refers to the original S1.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_Quattro#Sport_Quattro

The only reason this started was it then goes on to describe the E2 as the S1 E2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_Quattro#Sport_Quattro_S1_E2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The title was changed to DiRTy Gossip
  • The topic was pinned
  • The topic was locked
  • The topic was unlocked
  • This topic was featured and unpinned
  • The topic was unpinned
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...