SatinCL

This may be Car Talk. This may be O/T. Whatever the case I wanna create some other type of discussion....

Anyhow, I was looking at my signature showing my before and after 0-60 times. Before mods, I was at 7.15 WITHOUT brake torquing or any other drag tricks. After mods, I was at 6.85. BTW, these numbers are rounded to the higher end of multiple runs.

So, my question is: How do these guys get times up to 0.5 seconds LESS than we do? Before you answer, I know how what they do: Brake Torquing, optimized asphalt, etc. But, a half second is HUGE! Any opinions?

------------------
Ken
'01 Satin Silver CL-P
Performance: Headers, K&N Drop-In, Comptech Springs/Sways, 17" Borbet T's & Eagle RS-A's.
Other: Flaps, X-Pel Clear Bra, Cannon Mats, Polarg Accent Bulbs, & Burlwood Shift Knob.

Stock GTech: 7.15
Current G-Tech: 6.85
(Rounded, of course)

alex2364

You have a CL-P. The car mags are testing CL-S. That's 35 HP difference, stock vs. stock.

Alex

astro

car mags get good 0-60 times by totally trashing the cars tehy test as well as using professional drivers who have prolly launced the 1/4 many more times than you ever will...



------------------
Astroboy out...
2001 Acura CL Type S: Comptech: Headers, filter, sways, springs, koni shocks, goodridge braided brake lines, full kicker system
1996 Porsche 911 Twin Turbo: H&R Springs and sways, Bilstein shocks

Tom_RENAMED

.5 seconds in not a huge difference at all if you consider the following:

(1) You're using a G-Tech. They use a 5th wheel. They're gonna be more accurate.

(2) On any given day(s) the same car can vary more than .5 seconds due to conditions. Temperature, humidity, wind direction/speed etc, all play a big role in determining acceleration results.

(3) The performance numbers will vary from car to car. Two identicle cars may have performance numbers that vary by more than 10%, mostly due to manufacturing tolerances.

(4) Magazine test drivers are usually pros at getting the most out of any given car. You may or may not be able to drive as well as they can, but I'm sure there's a possibility of a better driver getting a better time. Even though are cars are relatively easy (especially with our automatic tranny) to drive, a good driver can simply put up better numbers.

------------------
'01 Type-S Navi
99 M3

Astroboy calls me an "elitist prick", yet I don't have to explain that I have a 4x4 to "tow the boat and jet skis". Go figure.

Jump on down off your high horse, Astroboy.

Otis

Isn't it kind of ironic that the posts in this thread talk about how the car mags have favorable 0-60 and 1/4 mile times due to their copious experience in those skills?

Seems like most of the posters on here (and on every other car board I have ever visited) talk about how car magazines are way to conservative and that anyone in the real world can outshift or outperform the magazines and that times quoted there are artificially high.

Case in point, some time ago there was a lot of discussion surrounding the article in R&T comparing the 330 with the CL-S. Seems like a lot of people came down hard on the editors of R&T for posting times they felt were unrealistic.

If you ask me, I have always felt car magazines post numbers that are either too slow for the cars they are testing. Especially when it's your car.

Tom_RENAMED

I agree with what you're saying when you're talking manual trans cars. Most major car mags do not powershift a manual trans car. Anyone with decent driving skills can beat their numbers by powershifting at the dragstrip.

With an automatic trans car that doesn't have huge wheelspin problems (like our CL), it becomes more difficult to obtain better times than the mags.



------------------
'01 Type-S Navi
99 M3

Astroboy calls me an "elitist prick", yet I don't have to explain that I have a 4x4 to "tow the boat and jet skis". Go figure.

Jump on down off your high horse, Astroboy.

EricL

Perhaps if the magazines(rags) were more specific about all conditions in their tests, we would all be better informed.

The weight, temp, altitude, # of people, added test equipment weight, and amount of gas make quite a difference!

I notice an altitude and temp on some individual car tests.

That BMW330CI vs CL-S test didn't include that much info. about test conditions... They did rationalize putting on those nice wheels and tires on the 330


------------------
2001 Satin Silver Cl-S w/ Navi.
Mud Guards.
Wheel locks
Toyo 235/45ZR17-97W*
T1S Proxies on Stock 17" CLS wheels
Gtech 1/8th tank 40F ~=6.1