0-60 time for TL with auto transmission?
07-17-2005, 02:00 PM
#41
Does anyone read this
Originally Posted by ndx2
you must've been just dumbfounded by the drag factor comment.You're absolutely right - the stickier tires and stiffer suspension (which reduces squatting, and "lifting" of front tires) provide better (actually, MUCH better) straight-line performance over the stock set up (you know, the mushy suspension & horrible, horrible EL42's).
This also means, the TL can produce better numbers than that of the MT/C&D's times with even sticker tires & even stiffer suspension.
Sure, the TL's not a sports car. But it'll hang with a lot of them w/o much effort - i.e. mustang gt, crossfire, rx-8, etc.
The TL hang with Mustang w/o much effort????? ndx2 the Mustang does 0 to 60 in 5.1 and the 1/4 mile in 13.8 with a skidpad of 89g. The TL comes now where close to those numbers even with better suspension and sticker tires.
The TL will hang with the RX 8/crossfire in a straight line but it will be a close race. It will take everything the TL has to beat them and w/o much effort is out of the question. The TL has no chance with the RX 8 in the turns though.
07-17-2005, 03:43 PM
#42
6MT & LSD
Join Date: Apr 2005
Age: 39
Posts: 1,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't seen the numbers for the new mustangs, but as far as older GT's are concerned, I'm positive I can match their numbers with my TL... provided that I do a bit of tires/suspension upgrades.
Previous gen mustang GT's 1/4 mile numbers are actually around low to mid 14's. The verts, especially, were significantly slower (0-60 time of 6.3~). My brother's TL-S, which now runs low 14's, high 13's, can easily take on a stock GT... and I've recently found out that my car's almost as quick as his. Gotta love the 6MT
The TL has no chance against a lot of sports cars in terms of cornering, when it's riding on the stock suspension... but that's just the way the car was engineered. So, with similar suspension set up, I think the TL will do just fine - the TL does have plenty of power to come out of corners fast.
Haha, by "w/o much effort" I meant the TL will perform just as well, if not better, when these cars were driven similarly. i.e. any decent car can do a "ricer fly-by" while pushing the car's limits, while the other car's just cruising...
But donte, I know what you mean, and I agree with you. I have never thought of the TL as a sports car, nor treated/driven it like one. It is, as you said, a family sedan.
Previous gen mustang GT's 1/4 mile numbers are actually around low to mid 14's. The verts, especially, were significantly slower (0-60 time of 6.3~). My brother's TL-S, which now runs low 14's, high 13's, can easily take on a stock GT... and I've recently found out that my car's almost as quick as his. Gotta love the 6MT
The TL has no chance against a lot of sports cars in terms of cornering, when it's riding on the stock suspension... but that's just the way the car was engineered. So, with similar suspension set up, I think the TL will do just fine - the TL does have plenty of power to come out of corners fast.
Haha, by "w/o much effort" I meant the TL will perform just as well, if not better, when these cars were driven similarly. i.e. any decent car can do a "ricer fly-by" while pushing the car's limits, while the other car's just cruising...
But donte, I know what you mean, and I agree with you. I have never thought of the TL as a sports car, nor treated/driven it like one. It is, as you said, a family sedan.
07-17-2005, 04:27 PM
#43
Does anyone read this
Oh ya the TL well hang with the older Mustangs. I thought you ment the new one. My bad then. 
The TL does have some power for coming out of the corners. I just wish the power was going to the wheels in the back and not the fornt
The TL does have some power for coming out of the corners. I just wish the power was going to the wheels in the back and not the fornt
Originally Posted by ndx2
I haven't seen the numbers for the new mustangs, but as far as older GT's are concerned, I'm positive I can match their numbers with my TL... provided that I do a bit of tires/suspension upgrades.
Previous gen mustang GT's 1/4 mile numbers are actually around low to mid 14's. The verts, especially, were significantly slower (0-60 time of 6.3~). My brother's TL-S, which now runs low 14's, high 13's, can easily take on a stock GT... and I've recently found out that my car's almost as quick as his. Gotta love the 6MT
The TL has no chance against a lot of sports cars in terms of cornering, when it's riding on the stock suspension... but that's just the way the car was engineered. So, with similar suspension set up, I think the TL will do just fine - the TL does have plenty of power to come out of corners fast.
Haha, by "w/o much effort" I meant the TL will perform just as well, if not better, when these cars were driven similarly. i.e. any decent car can do a "ricer fly-by" while pushing the car's limits, while the other car's just cruising...
But donte, I know what you mean, and I agree with you. I have never thought of the TL as a sports car, nor treated/driven it like one. It is, as you said, a family sedan.
Previous gen mustang GT's 1/4 mile numbers are actually around low to mid 14's. The verts, especially, were significantly slower (0-60 time of 6.3~). My brother's TL-S, which now runs low 14's, high 13's, can easily take on a stock GT... and I've recently found out that my car's almost as quick as his. Gotta love the 6MT
The TL has no chance against a lot of sports cars in terms of cornering, when it's riding on the stock suspension... but that's just the way the car was engineered. So, with similar suspension set up, I think the TL will do just fine - the TL does have plenty of power to come out of corners fast.
Haha, by "w/o much effort" I meant the TL will perform just as well, if not better, when these cars were driven similarly. i.e. any decent car can do a "ricer fly-by" while pushing the car's limits, while the other car's just cruising...
But donte, I know what you mean, and I agree with you. I have never thought of the TL as a sports car, nor treated/driven it like one. It is, as you said, a family sedan.
07-17-2005, 04:49 PM
#44
Does anyone read this
Originally Posted by fast-tl
Who said A-spec improves 0-60? What're you smokin'?
I just found the article on the A-spec test. They tested a stock 6mt TL against an A-spec 6mt TL on the same day. I will scan in the article and post it. But here are some quick numbers for you. Oh and the article was in Motor Trend and not Road & Track like I said in one of my posts.
Stock TL
0 to 60 = 6.0 seconds.
¼ mile = 14.44
A-spec TL
0 to 60 = 5.7 seconds.
¼ mile = 14.25
07-17-2005, 05:14 PM
#46
Does anyone read this
Ya but you can't compare the two time because they weren’t the same conditions. All the conditions play a big part in times. It wasn’t on the same track, same driver and same weather conditions. Come crazymjb you are a smart kid you read this forum a lot. You should know this buy now
This test is back to back. Same track, same driver, same conditions. This is a much better test.
This test is back to back. Same track, same driver, same conditions. This is a much better test.
07-17-2005, 05:25 PM
#47
Does anyone read this
05-26-2011, 04:43 PM
#48
Instructor
Maybe in a straight line we will beat them but a sports car is supposed to go around corners too. Most of those cars will out corner the TL. Look up the 300-ft dia skidpad numbers on those cars. Shit the TL skidpad is an 81g and the Tiberon beat it with an 84g. Yes beat by a Hyundai. The Mazda RX 8 is at 91g. Get my point.
Classified as a Luxury-Sport car.
05-26-2011, 04:52 PM
#49
Instructor
My brother has been a Ford mechanic for 8 years and he has told me that traction control in general doesn't have anything to do with the brakes rather it shuts down some of the cylinders so that you dont get too much power at the wheels.
This might be a Ford thing or this might be older style traction controls, but just thought I would throw out there that I was always under the impression that traction control had nothing to do with the brakes, because if you were accelerating hard through a corner and VSA applied your front brakes, that would cause undesirable effects that the driver wouldnt expect. Whereas if your power is partially disabled, it would be more controllable.
I further believe in this because if you intentionally spin your tires with VSA turned on, you will notice that the feeling seems like your power is being reduced instead of the feeling of your brakes fighting the power of the engine.
Sorry to rant off-topic but thought it was worthwhile
This might be a Ford thing or this might be older style traction controls, but just thought I would throw out there that I was always under the impression that traction control had nothing to do with the brakes, because if you were accelerating hard through a corner and VSA applied your front brakes, that would cause undesirable effects that the driver wouldnt expect. Whereas if your power is partially disabled, it would be more controllable.
I further believe in this because if you intentionally spin your tires with VSA turned on, you will notice that the feeling seems like your power is being reduced instead of the feeling of your brakes fighting the power of the engine.
Sorry to rant off-topic but thought it was worthwhile
Last edited by johnfilice; 05-26-2011 at 04:57 PM.
05-26-2011, 06:55 PM
#50
Moderator
iTrader: (7)
My brother has been a Ford mechanic for 8 years and he has told me that traction control in general doesn't have anything to do with the brakes rather it shuts down some of the cylinders so that you dont get too much power at the wheels.
This might be a Ford thing or this might be older style traction controls, but just thought I would throw out there that I was always under the impression that traction control had nothing to do with the brakes, because if you were accelerating hard through a corner and VSA applied your front brakes, that would cause undesirable effects that the driver wouldnt expect. Whereas if your power is partially disabled, it would be more controllable.
I further believe in this because if you intentionally spin your tires with VSA turned on, you will notice that the feeling seems like your power is being reduced instead of the feeling of your brakes fighting the power of the engine.
Sorry to rant off-topic but thought it was worthwhile
This might be a Ford thing or this might be older style traction controls, but just thought I would throw out there that I was always under the impression that traction control had nothing to do with the brakes, because if you were accelerating hard through a corner and VSA applied your front brakes, that would cause undesirable effects that the driver wouldnt expect. Whereas if your power is partially disabled, it would be more controllable.
I further believe in this because if you intentionally spin your tires with VSA turned on, you will notice that the feeling seems like your power is being reduced instead of the feeling of your brakes fighting the power of the engine.
Sorry to rant off-topic but thought it was worthwhile
05-26-2011, 08:42 PM
#52
Instructor
My brother has been a Ford mechanic for 8 years and he has told me that traction control in general doesn't have anything to do with the brakes rather it shuts down some of the cylinders so that you dont get too much power at the wheels.
This might be a Ford thing or this might be older style traction controls, but just thought I would throw out there that I was always under the impression that traction control had nothing to do with the brakes, because if you were accelerating hard through a corner and VSA applied your front brakes, that would cause undesirable effects that the driver wouldnt expect. Whereas if your power is partially disabled, it would be more controllable.
I further believe in this because if you intentionally spin your tires with VSA turned on, you will notice that the feeling seems like your power is being reduced instead of the feeling of your brakes fighting the power of the engine.
Sorry to rant off-topic but thought it was worthwhile
This might be a Ford thing or this might be older style traction controls, but just thought I would throw out there that I was always under the impression that traction control had nothing to do with the brakes, because if you were accelerating hard through a corner and VSA applied your front brakes, that would cause undesirable effects that the driver wouldnt expect. Whereas if your power is partially disabled, it would be more controllable.
I further believe in this because if you intentionally spin your tires with VSA turned on, you will notice that the feeling seems like your power is being reduced instead of the feeling of your brakes fighting the power of the engine.
Sorry to rant off-topic but thought it was worthwhile
The following users liked this post:
shatnurface (06-11-2011)
05-26-2011, 10:47 PM
#53
05-27-2011, 08:16 AM
#54
US Navy Seabees
show me where the TL scored .91 G on the skidpad. I call BS
.
05-27-2011, 09:59 AM
#56
Instructor
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...cura_tl_page_5
"The TL's 0.91 skidpad performance and 62.5-mph lane-change speed were tops."
Why let the thread die?
"The TL's 0.91 skidpad performance and 62.5-mph lane-change speed were tops."
Why let the thread die?
05-27-2011, 10:00 AM
#57
Instructor
I didn't really intend to address him directly, just wanted to put it out there that I had read conflicting information.
05-27-2011, 01:55 PM
#58
Instructor
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: H-town, Tex-ass
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was poking around some magazine sites & saw this time for an auto TL... 6.3
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...test_data.html
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...test_data.html
05-27-2011, 03:06 PM
#59
Cruisin'
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder why people are so concerned about 0 to 60 times on such a slow car. No matter if its 5at or 6mt this car is slow. Also I would say 80% of people on this forum would probably go faster in 5at than a 6mt. They wouldn’t be able to launch the car or get through the gear properly in order to get a good time.
I don’t know how many times I have seen threads on here by 6mt owners asking how to shift this car properly.
Just enjoy this car for what it is….A family four door sedan and not a sports car which a lot of you think it is. If you bought this car because you think its fast then you are one sad individual.
I don’t know how many times I have seen threads on here by 6mt owners asking how to shift this car properly.
Just enjoy this car for what it is….A family four door sedan and not a sports car which a lot of you think it is. If you bought this car because you think its fast then you are one sad individual.
05-27-2011, 03:22 PM
#60
Instructor
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: H-town, Tex-ass
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just passing along some info - I for one, bought it for what it is. A auto, psuedo-lux, comfortable sedan with good power that doesn't completely heel over on the doorhandles at the mention of a corner... Mine's bone-stock BTW.
05-27-2011, 04:59 PM
#61
Cruisin'
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perfectly logical, but the post I quoted from was over 5 years old and it's still true today. Although it was a little over-the-top, it gets some of those who are also over-the-top about their TL to be a little more level-headed about their vehicles. Is the TL a great car? Absolutely, but don't talk about it like it's some F1 racehorse.
05-27-2011, 07:23 PM
#63
Cruisin'
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car and Driver's take on the '04 TL: Manual: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...a_tl-road_test
0-60: 5.7 sec
1/4: 14.4 @ 99mph
Last edited by answersto?s; 05-27-2011 at 07:26 PM.
05-27-2011, 08:39 PM
#64
All I know is the car has enough power to put a smile on my face when I drive. 0-60 is good and all, but its not reality. I like the TL's 60-80 performance. Drop it into 3rd and floor it and the comfy 'family' car really takes off. Sure its no corvette or s4, but for the price and what you get. I'm VERY happy.
The following users liked this post:
ntmera (06-12-2011)
05-27-2011, 08:43 PM
#65
Moderator
iTrader: (7)
^ if you want to do a 60-08 run, i hope you're not starting in 3rd. 60mph is well within range of 2nd gear and its good because its high rpm for 2nd gear so you take off even faster.
05-27-2011, 08:46 PM
#66
05-27-2011, 09:48 PM
#67
Pretty good.
Car and Driver's take on the '04 TL: Manual: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...a_tl-road_test
0-60: 5.7 sec
1/4: 14.4 @ 99mph
Car and Driver's take on the '04 TL: Manual: http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...a_tl-road_test
0-60: 5.7 sec
1/4: 14.4 @ 99mph
05-29-2011, 01:53 AM
#69
Banned
Exactly... This is why I tell those that want a Type-S manual but cant find one the can afford that a 06 6speed will make them just as happy.
05-29-2011, 08:17 AM
#70
Interesting. I've owned both and my Type S sure feels faster.
Most car magazines had the 04 TL in the 5.9 range and the 08 type s as 5.5 or so...
Either is fast enough for me.
Most car magazines had the 04 TL in the 5.9 range and the 08 type s as 5.5 or so...
Either is fast enough for me.
03-03-2017, 12:27 AM
#71
1st Gear
Join Date: Mar 2017
Age: 33
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I read 91. I've owned mine for 8 years and it will reply run 6 seconds. That's on cool Georgia weather. I take it all through the mountains frequently. I'm addicted. I can admit of rather have many cars. But also surprised what cars can't hang with me. I have too many examples. This car is very surprising being a luxury sport sedan. Not sports car like yal keep saying. I've since put BFG Gforce comp 2 tires on it. 255/40/17 helps a lot. I like the feel of get out of it this way. Michelin as3+ are garbage BTW... an AEM cold air intake was a solid addition as well as brembo brakes. I seriously drive the shit out of this car and it takes it like a champ. Only posting this because I'm sick of the haters. This car holds all my people and their luggage. I can get 30 mpg with ease and dust most cars at the light or on the turns. Once again I know there are faster more pleasurable cars out there. But I've made no mistake buying this car and owning it for 8 years. Hope some people keep these things around I'm years to come
.
.
03-06-2017, 08:39 AM
#73
Suzuka Master
well we should give him credit because at least he did used the search bar.
The following users liked this post:
Scottwax (03-07-2017)
03-07-2017, 04:34 PM
#74
Mr. Detail
0-60 in 6.0-6.3 isn't slow, most muscle cars weren't any quicker. In relationship to sedans in the mid 70s to late 90s, most of which were in the 8-12 second range 0-60, 6 seconds is blazingly quick.
03-07-2017, 05:01 PM
#75
Suzuka Master
well let me get this straight 90s legendary car like Supra Mark IV TT, 300ZX TT 3000 GT VR4 is a low to mid 5 sec 0-60 MPH and then early in 2000 there luxury sedans goes into the 5 sec range.
03-09-2017, 03:08 PM
#77
Chapter Leader (Southern Region)
you guys have been measure your average sized dicks for 12 years now..
5.5 seconds if you're a boss... 6.5 seconds if you're not...
That's quick enough.. move along..
5.5 seconds if you're a boss... 6.5 seconds if you're not...
That's quick enough.. move along..
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mada51589
3G TL Problems & Fixes
79
05-03-2022 08:54 PM
orkoTL
4G TL Problems & Fixes
107
09-28-2017 09:12 AM
BlkTxAcuraTypeS
Member Cars for Sale
3
10-18-2015 08:05 PM
asahrts
Member Cars for Sale
0
09-04-2015 05:55 PM
