Why the big difference in performance numbers?
#1
boostin'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 44
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why the big difference in performance numbers?
I recently saw that Motor Trend did a comparo w/ the RDX, and they recorderd 0-60 in 7.3 and 1/4 in 15.6---Road and Track recorded 0-60 in 6.3 and 1/4 in 14.8.
Those are vastly different numbers, so what gives? I know mags differ usually, but that is much more than usual!
Personally I like Road and Tracks numbers!
Those are vastly different numbers, so what gives? I know mags differ usually, but that is much more than usual!
Personally I like Road and Tracks numbers!
#2
Photographer
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Honolulu, HI
Age: 43
Posts: 640
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sorry to change the subjest but i just noticed your sig. you do know that the rear windows are not tinted right? they are just darkened. it doesnt offer your interior any UV protection.
#3
boostin'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 44
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DNPhotography
sorry to change the subjest but i just noticed your sig. you do know that the rear windows are not tinted right? they are just darkened. it doesnt offer your interior any UV protection.
so anyone got any ideas?
#4
Originally Posted by RDX REX
I know, I was just going for the darkened look on the front windows also...........................................the re, fixed it
so anyone got any ideas?
so anyone got any ideas?
the guys at motor trend probably used a different technique to obtain those 'best' numbers.
also keep in mind that variables such as temperature, road conditions, altitude, etc, can also effect performance numbers.
#6
Originally Posted by Jackygor
A bit off topic. I know in turbo cars if you put in gas with higher octane, you would yield better performance? Does this apply to the RDX?
#7
boostin'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 44
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DogPatch
keep in mind that R&T got those numbers break torquing the RDX at 3k rpm before letting loose, and assumingly with traction control off.
the guys at motor trend probably used a different technique to obtain those 'best' numbers.
also keep in mind that variables such as temperature, road conditions, altitude, etc, can also effect performance numbers.
the guys at motor trend probably used a different technique to obtain those 'best' numbers.
also keep in mind that variables such as temperature, road conditions, altitude, etc, can also effect performance numbers.
Does using the paddle shifters over just normal auto make a difference?
Trending Topics
#8
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by DogPatch
keep in mind that R&T got those numbers break torquing the RDX at 3k rpm before letting loose, and assumingly with traction control off.
Hmmm, R&T had info a few issues back about how they perform their testing and I'm pretty sure it specified that brake tq'ing was a no no.
Unlike MT and C&D R&T makes no corrections whatsoever for temp, pressure etc, they report exactly what they find. And typically their times are slower than the other two because of this.
Interesting they were so fast. But surface, temp, elevation and the car itself all play a role. Its possible they had a strong RDX and ideal testing conditions.
#9
0-60 in 6.3 eh ?
I dunno about that...I have an 04 mt TL that is supposedly 0-60 in about 6 secs and I dont think the RDX feels that quick. It definitely is fast for a truck though...
Love the truck.
I dunno about that...I have an 04 mt TL that is supposedly 0-60 in about 6 secs and I dont think the RDX feels that quick. It definitely is fast for a truck though...
Love the truck.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
JarrettLauderdale
2G CL Dynograph Gallery
5
09-21-2015 07:51 PM