Respectable 0-60 times.

[obi_waynne]

What would you say is a restpectable* 0-60 mph time?

I think that anything over 10 seconds feels slow.
Under 8 seconds is pretty good
and under 5 seconds is just obscene!:amazed:

So IMHO I would say for a car to feel nippy and lively you need it to do the 0-60 run in 7-8 seconds.

(If 20-50 figures were published I'd use these as a benchmark but as they are not we are stuck with the silly 0-60 times for comparison.)

*I'll define respectable as the sort of car you would buy for as your daily run around.

 

[lutonmatt]

i would say no more then 8secs dont think i have owned a car in the last 4 years that is slower

 

[HDi fun]

Provided the 0-60 isn't achieved at the expense of in gear flexibility. Which is a common diesel thing. 0-60 no so clever but massive torque makes up for it with strong real world performance.

And before anyone starts the diesel bashing thing my car does the 0-62mph thing in 7.1. Which is extremely quick for even a remapped diesel.

The Vectra I had recently was a claimed 10.9 but felt more like 25.9.

As a benchmark below 9 is where things get interesting.

 

[HDi fun]

Years ago my mate had a 1.1 Escort Estate 1976/P, yes you saw it here first '76 NOT '96.

We gave this thing some therapy on the A412 southbound (and downhill) between IVer Heath and Slough.

0 to 60 took..............................48 seconds!!!!

 

[paulgolding]

my friend had a c32amg merc. Book said 0-60 was around 4.8 seconds. It felt like that too !! . . the porsche wasn't too happy either !! you could just make out his girlfriend mouthing "what is that ??" as we slowly took the lead

 

[HDi fun]

Some blokes use it as a dick extension.

 

[obi_waynne]

48 seconds! Thats almost a weekend. Did it go faster than 60! I can imagine it going through a speed trap and the constable saying to his sergent.

"I got the number serge........................................... The chassis number!"

 

[Massive]

i dont think my car is that bad just under 11 sec, not bad for 1.4 considering other car with the same size engine can take up to 13

 

[madman]

i had use of a standard 106 gti, apart from gti badge taken off wings an would get to 60 in no more than 7.5, so you can imagine the look on the escort rs boys faces wen they were looking at my boot from the lights!!!! good fun!!

 

[pgarner]

i dont think my car is that bad just under 11 sec, not bad for 1.4 considering other car with the same size engine can take up to 13

But remember rover made 2 versions of the 1.4 and 83 and 104bhp varients, your talking most 1.4s still give around 90bhp

 

[prevtec]

humans can accelerate from 0 to 40kph in 4 seconds [im on about super fit athletes here] if a car cant do better it should be turned into a childs dinky,because the child would make it go faster ha ha and its very true indeed

 

[HDi fun]

Re 1976 Escort. It would struggle on to an indicated 84mph but this took several minutes after reaching sixty.

Speed trap? You'd want a medal rather than an SP30

 

[obi_waynne]

It's interesting how our perceptions of what is reasonable and quick change over the years.

Take a modern family car back 30 years and it would have seemed like a stupidly high performing car in comparison to cars of the day. What about in 30 years time? I wonder what cars will be like then.

 

[old-git]

I won't know

 

[HDi fun]

It's interesting how our perceptions of what is reasonable and quick change over the years.

Take a modern family car back 30 years and it would have seemed like a stupidly high performing car in comparison to cars of the day. What about in 30 years time? I wonder what cars will be like then.

Yes. Let's face it, some of us thought that Montegos were nice to drive compared to the current competition at that time.

 

[TCJBOLDIE]

I won't know

Me as well

 

[obi_waynne]

Yes. Let's face it, some of us thought that Montegos were nice to drive compared to the current competition at that time.

The MG badge made all the difference! Do you remember the MG Metro Turbo and the MG Maestro? They were lovely cars but have sadly rotted away now.

 

[Teo]

What would you say is a restpectable* 0-60 mph time?

I think that anything over 10 seconds feels slow.
Under 8 seconds is pretty good
and under 5 seconds is just obscene!:amazed:

So IMHO I would say for a car to feel nippy and lively you need it to do the 0-60 run in 7-8 seconds.

(If 20-50 figures were published I'd use these as a benchmark but as they are not we are stuck with the silly 0-60 times for comparison.)

*I'll define respectable as the sort of car you would buy for as your daily run around.

Under 7 seconds for a daily driver is more than enough. My 4400lb 300 SRT stock was 4.5 seconds, supercharged it is now 7.3 seconds with well over 3 seconds of wheel spin until hook-up. Time to step up to 315-35-20 or drag radials to get it to giddy up and GO!

 

[HDi fun]

My Passat is around the 8 second mark. It's lively enough for me.

 

[st24]

I have never timed my car I think its around the 9 second mark which is ok by me.

 

[HDi fun]

9 would do me too. 0-60 is a bit of a vague benchmark really.

 

[TCJBOLDIE]

Under 7 seconds for a daily driver is more than enough. My 4400lb 300 SRT stock was 4.5 seconds, supercharged it is now 7.3 seconds with well over 3 seconds of wheel spin until hook-up. Time to step up to 315-35-20 or drag radials to get it to giddy up and GO!

spend mega $$$ to go slower

 

[HDi fun]

spend mega $$$ to go slower

I'm puzzled too

 

[Teo]

spend mega $$$ to go slower

All because I wanted a supercharger. This ride stock had trouble hooking up with 255-45-20 at 30 psi! Now with 680 at the crank, 255-45-20 are useless from 1st gear starts, even with the traction control fully engaged! It over powers it as soon as it hits 3000rpm! But that is the price you pay for more horsepower and torque!

 

[Teo]

Hello HDi,
I'm not.

 

[SLEEPER]

All because I wanted a supercharger. This ride stock had trouble hooking up with 255-45-20 at 30 psi! Now with 680 at the crank, 255-45-20 are useless from 1st gear starts, even with the traction control fully engaged! It over powers it as soon as it hits 3000rpm! But that is the price you pay for more horsepower and torque!

That's not quite accurate....

It's the price you pay when there is more horsepower and torque than the car can handle

It isn't the tyre size either - my ricer copes with well over 600bhp in all gears and that is with smaller 245 tyres .
Even with launch control there is virtually no wheelspin. (Technology does matter)

 

[Teo]

I'm puzzled too

That's not quite accurate....

It's the price you pay when there is more horsepower and torque than the car can handle

It isn't the tyre size either - my ricer copes with well over 600bhp in all gears and that is with smaller 245 tyres .
Even with launch control there is virtually no wheelspin. (Technology does matter)

What is your rwtrq??

 

[SLEEPER]

maybe the problem (or cure) isnt the power but the way the system transfers it to the road (or doesnt)

The stagea runs a 25 year Nissan old system called Attessa. ( one of those rubbish japanese technology things)

Although the car is set up to run rwd it has sensors that monitor each wheels speed . Immeadiately they vary ( wheelspin ) .
it transfers power to the other wheels . This is done electronically so it does this before the wheels actually spin because of course once they do it is difficult to stop.
The system is also adjustable and has lateral sensors as well so does this when the car gets under/over steer but thats a different story.

You are right about tyres though - I have toyo 888s which are about as grippy as you can get which obviously helps.

However to answer your question assumimg I ve understood it as rear wheel tourque ?

The car isnt mapped for outright power but driveability which also helps but torque is 560 with this map with 630bhp.

the car could be tuned for more and in a previous life was making 720 at the wheels on the track without lighting up the rears on a permanent basis.

 

[Aerial Andy944]

I have to agree with Sleeper here. My GTR never once stepped out of line, it just shot forward immediately and gripped round corners like the proverbial traintracks. My Porsche however I took beyond its limit and was so twitchy, always spinning its rear wheels even with a lsd which was a mechanical system as opposed to Nissans AttessaPro electronic system which was based on Porsches 959 sophisticated 4wd system.

 

[Teo]

maybe the problem (or cure) isnt the power but the way the system transfers it to the road (or doesnt)

The stagea runs a 25 year Nissan old system called Attessa. ( one of those rubbish japanese technology things)

Although the car is set up to run rwd it has sensors that monitor each wheels speed . Immeadiately they vary ( wheelspin ) .
it transfers power to the other wheels . This is done electronically so it does this before the wheels actually spin because of course once they do it is difficult to stop.
The system is also adjustable and has lateral sensors as well so does this when the car gets under/over steer but thats a different story.

You are right about tyres though - I have toyo 888s which are about as grippy as you can get which obviously helps.

However to answer your question assumimg I ve understood it as rear wheel tourque ?

The car isnt mapped for outright power but driveability which also helps but torque is 560 with this map with 630bhp.

the car could be tuned for more and in a previous life was making 720 at the wheels on the track without lighting up the rears on a permanent basis.

Hello Sleeper,
My trans is a NAG1 / W5A580 - Mercedes. Gear ratios 3.59, 2.19, 1.41, 1.00, and 5th is .83 to 1 with a 3.09 final rear ratio. The S/C is a Procharger P-1SC-1 currently set at 7.3psi of boost for 580rwhp x 530rwtrq. Current tires are Michelin Pilot Super Sport 255-45-20 with a 340 rating set at 34psi. The prior torque management was set for a power reduction when immediate WOT was called for and even then the traction control could not keep up when an immediate WOT was added. Now with the S/C added, the traction control is a mute point for this system especially when mash and go is tried on a unprepared road surface. To try and balance this rides output, going to the largest footprint and 100 rated tire, can/ may be the solution? Or just doing 2nd gear starts when I want to play hard. I guess the bottom line is: Tires may help some? But control of my right foot will help even more!

Thanks for your reply!!!

 

[davalav]

My Mini does it in roughly 6-7 seconds. Not bad at all.

 

[RobBentley]

I tend to prefer 0-100mph as a better benchmark of actual performance. You can achieve 0-60 in a relatively quick time compared to the real-world performance of a car with short gearing, dual clutch transmissions, launch control etc. My Passat R36 was very quick to 60mph being DSG with launch control and the first couple of gears being relatively short... only a couple of tenths shy of the C63 AMG I had, but in the real world (and to 100mph) the C63 demolished it.

 

[Teo]

I tend to prefer 0-100mph as a better benchmark of actual performance. You can achieve 0-60 in a relatively quick time compared to the real-world performance of a car with short gearing, dual clutch transmissions, launch control etc. My Passat R36 was very quick to 60mph being DSG with launch control and the first couple of gears being relatively short... only a couple of tenths shy of the C63 AMG I had, but in the real world (and to 100mph) the C63 demolished it.

Hello Rob you are absolutely correct, the 0 to 100 mph is the best bench mark! My mid to high end performance is GREAT! A rolling 30 mph in 2nd gear and up run seems to be it's sweet spot. I just need to control the 1st gear starts more or start in 2nd gear only to control all the current wheel spin!

 

[HDi fun]

Yeah, 0-60 is a well used benchmark but doesn't tell all the story. Six seconds is not that rare these days (cars are frequently geared to highlight a good 0-60 time) but if the same car can do 60-90 in six seconds then we're looking at some seriously usable performance.

 

[Teo]

Yeah, 0-60 is a well used benchmark but doesn't tell all the story. Six seconds is not that rare these days (cars are frequently geared to highlight a good 0-60 time) but if the same car can do 60-90 in six seconds then we're looking at some seriously usable performance.

Fully Agree!!

On the last dyno in aug. of 2014 my SRT will do 0 to 173 mph in a tad under 17 seconds at 6300rpm, as long as it is eased into.(no WOT initially) This P-1SC-1 is a linear supercharger (belt driven) and makes max boost at aprox. 4,000rpm up to fuel shut off at 6600rpm. After 2nd gear and 30 mph it kicks arsche!

Here is my ride. http://www.procharger.com/6.4_300.shtml

 

[HDi fun]

0-170 in 17 seconds is seriously quick.

 

[Teo]

0-170 in 17 seconds is seriously quick.

My wife doesn't want anymore and keeps telling me to be sastified!!!

BUT!!!! There is still much more that could be done by stepping up to a D-1SC to at least 15psi of boost(1400cfm intake) with cog drive. bore and stroke the motor to a 409CI, 9.8-1 cpr, forged 2618 or 4032 pistons, forged rods, bullet proof the NAG1, drive line, rear half shafts to 1400hp rating, tubbing the rear for 12" slicks, complete undercarriage ty-in, and more and more and more!!!

Then I might as well take this ride off the street and totally make a drag car out of it!

Final step is DIVORCE from the wife and then DEATH by her hand - IF??? I even attempt this!!!

 

[Teenager2413]

have to admit this is funny to read my astra well it truely epic 115 bhp if im lucky will get my to 60 in around 9-10 second i think never measured but if i did 0-100 yeah , id be left behind

 

[davalav]

I think I need a V8 in my life.

 

[Aerial Andy944]

I think I need a V8 in my life.

Yeah same. I've had V6, straight 6, turbo charged and twin turbo charged but never a V8. My 944 4 cylinders was taken from the 928s V8 so I've had half of a proper V8
Really tempted at a Jaguar XJRS V12 for sale at moment. Fast enough, comfortable and rare just like me .