I always hear about 1/4... but what would a modded Type-S do from 0-60??


Say with I/H/E?? I know it wont be that much better than stock since we have NO LOW END.

Maybe 6sec??

 

it's depends on what you mean my modded? there are different levels, a stock Cls is about 6.4-6.6. Add the juice and I'm sure can get 5.5 atleast

 

I'm thinking high 5.7-5.9 range if launched right.

 

There is a graphic forumla you can use to estimate 0-60mph time if you have a 1/4 mile time slip with the times at each diferent interval on it.

CRAZY, post your timeslip.... oh wait YOU DIDN"T go to track!!!



But seriously, I will try to find the formula to calc the 0-60 time....

 

I used gtech a few times, the accuracy of those kind of machines are questionable...but my best 0-60 times was 5.7 and 5.9 (with all mods in my signature)

 

Anyone else have some 0-60 times? My worst 0-60 was 6.6seconds with a horrible launch....

 

ok guys.. i found the equation to attempt to estimate 0-60 from a 1/4 mile run... give me your times for 60 ft, 330ft, 660ft, 1000ft, 1320ft and will try to calc it.

DOM

 

<br>Here's the relationship between 0-60 and 1/4
mile times. This was <b>*NOT* </b>a calculated table. We are dealing with
the real world, here. I went through many magazines and pulled out the
0-60 and 1/4 mile times from road tests. I plotted the times on graph paper,
and the result is a "real life" graph of 0-60 vs 1/4 mile. You can see
that a car with a 0-60 time of 8.0 seconds is predicted to run close to
16 seconds flat. A 12.25 second car, like mine, is predicted to have a
0-60 of 4.0 seconds, although my computer program predicts 3.842. But the
computer knows that I have good slicks (I told it). The "real world curve"
doesn't know about my slicks. Darned close prediction, anyway! <b>: </b>)
<p><img SRC="http://home.earthlink.net/~tmahon281/comp0-60.gif" height=422 width=299>
<br><b>Note that each light line is worth .33 seconds
as you go from left to right, but each light line is only worh .25 seconds
when you go up or down!</b>

Refrence: http://home.earthlink.net/~tmahon281/tech.html

So for my best run @ 14.61s, 0-60 would be @ 6s flat.

 

Anything under 6 sec. is pretty respectable:P

 

Nashua:


AS a note, the data seems to be "in the ballpark"... However, cars with poor aerodynamics, like SUVs/trucks will tend to show higher 1/4 mile times relative to the 0..60 times if they have a good size engine and/or good power-to-weight. (The aerodynamic forces are having a large impact at the end of the 1/4 mile run).


Example: X5 0..60 = 6.9 & 1/4 mile = 15.4

Graph prediction would be around 7.3 seconds based on its 1/4 mile. (0.4 lower than test). The large frontal area hurts the performance at the higher velocities.

Then there is the issue of power-to-weight vs. aero resistance as it impacts cars with small engines... (They can have good power-to-weight, but don't have a lot of power to pull at higher speeds. They have the power to overcome the inertia, but they don't have the power to overcome the aero. drag losses at higher speeds)

2000 Honda Civic SI 0..60 7.9 1/4 mile = 15.9
1999 Honda Civic SI 0..60 7.1 1/4 mile = 15.7

Graph predicts 2000 SI as 7.6 (0.3 lower than test)
Graph predicts 1999 SI as 7.5 (0.4 higher than test)



And finally, don't use this with older cars (pre-70 muscle cars), the tires sucked, and couldn't get off the line...

OLD
1965 Shelby Cobra 427 S/C 0..60 4.6 1/4 mile = 12.7

NEW
2002 BMW M3 0..60 4.7 1/4 mile = 13.2

Prediction for 13.2 is 4.7 sec, fo r 12.7 is 4.2


Finally, the higher the 1/4 mile terminal velocities get, the more the car's CD will alter the relationship between the 0..60 and 1/4 mile times. If you look at the graph, there are very few data points in the sub 13-second range, and some consideration should be given to: 1) the vehicles shape and CD 2) the power-to-weight vs. the total weight of the car 3) high HP cars with low chassis weight, but "funny" design (designed for style, not C/D).


So, it's a useful tool, but I hope people don't start listing their 0..60s and 1/4-mile times based on this graph...

BTW, there was an advertisement in the latest Summit Racing catalog for the GTECH Competition-Pro. This unit will compensate for pitch and yaw, and should be very accurate. (I still don't see the updated info on the Tesla/GTech pro site).


Here is the link for various figures (there are more sites out there for 70 muscle cars too…): http://www.car-stats.com/