How do car makers measure 0-60 times. Do they redline an engine or change up at say 3000 rpm?
Is it done carrying a full tank of fuel?
Is it done for real on a test track in perfect weather conditions or in a sterile lab along with the fictitious mpg figures?
|
|
I read its done by a professional driver who can get the very best figures possible......bit like me trying to match Tiger Woods score with my golf clubs.
|
|
|
I read somewhere a long time ago that a magazine couldn't get a particular claimed time out of a particular car (3.9sec and Corvette spring to mind but I could be wrong) so they got the manufacturer's test driver in to demonstrate the correct technique.
He promptly drove it up to the rev limiter in 1st gear and wrenched the gear lever with great force straight into 2nd without lifting the throttle. Hey presto, 3.9sec 0-60 as claimed.
The technique. therefore, seems to be to drive with absolutely zero mechanical sympathy. The magazines do, I gather, quite frequently break cars whilst "figuring" them.
Edited by Dave_TD {P} on 05/10/2009 at 22:45
|
The fastest 0-60 times quoted by manufacturers can indeed be achieved by the cars in question...but only once.
|
So, in the real world, the average driver will be able to accelerate quicker in a 2.0 litre automatic, than in the manual equivalent.
Of course he may PREFER to drive a manual, and good drivers may perform differently, but we are talking about the average Joe, here.
|
Damn it I won't risk breaking into Manchester airport with a rusty hammer then to try and claim my 12.9 seconds to 60!
As for the automatic I guess it depends on how good the torque convertor was but I have known for a few people claim automatics are faster because of human error with a manual.
|
I had wondered if Ray Charles had tested the 0 to 60 mph on my car.
There is no way 0 to 60mph takes 11 seconds, its quicker than that...
|
Have you actually tried? If I belt it which I have done once or twice mainly due to bad planning by me it takes me around 5 seconds to get to 30, if I wanted to do 40 add another 3 seconds etc. I reckon with me driving it will me 15 seconds to get to 60 if I was being heavy but not wrecking my car.
E.g sometimes cars feel a lot quicker than they actually are, in the city my car feels a lot quicker than a 0-60 in 12.9 seconds car on NSLs it certainly feels the slow 13 seconds to 60!
|
no had the chance yet, but if i held the revs just in turbo boost (1400 rpm) then dumped the clutch I am sure id rocket off the line.
Change from 1st to 2nd (about 20mph - very short gearing in 1st) then boot it again up past 60mph (near red line).
I would get to 60mph below 11 seconds.
|
|
You'll probably find your (same as everyone else's) optimistic speedo is only doing about 56mph at an indicated 60. To hit 60 real mph may require an extra gearchange.
|
|
0-60 - Is that an estimate of the IQ of a professional footballer?
|
0-60 - Is that an estimate of the IQ of a professional footballer?
Do we really need another footballer-bashing thread? Sorry, I'm fed up with it.
|
|
|
|
I tested my speedo with GPS and its quitelinear and only out by 5mph.
So an indicated 60mph is 55mph.
|
So if you are timing acceleration you need to go by 0-66 on your speedo roughly.
Assuming no extra gearchange, this will add around 1 second to the 0-60 (indicated) time.
|
Assuming no extra gearchange this will add around 1 second to the 0-60 (indicated) time.
This is the big problem with using 0-60 as a measure of performance. Most cars need a second gearchange somewhere between 50 and 65 mph, and this can make two cars with near identical performance post vastly different times if their gearchanges fall either side of the magic 60 mph mark. It's also part of the reason diesels fare poorly on 0-60 times relative to their actual performance - few will do 60 mph in 2nd gear. Our Golf is figured at 9.3 seconds, but I reckon if it would pull 60 in 2nd, you could, as you say, lop a second off that time, which would give a much better indicator of its actual performance.
In all cases, a standing distance is a much better indicator, say the traditional quarter mile, or 0-400m. This levels the field as far as gearchanges go, and shows performance over a reasonable time and distance. It also reduces the impact of traction issues off the line, or an otherwise poor launch by the driver.
And I agree, the methods used by road testers would never be used by anyone with an ounce of mechanical sympathy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rattle: the standard tools for B&E for those from the Greater Manchester area are, I believe, a sponge and a rusty spanner. Precedent set in 1986, I believe.
tt
|
Does it matter outside sporting circles?
A friend of mine years ago put a 1098cc engine into an old split screen Morris Minor (bulkhead had to be slightly modified with a lump hammer to take the extra length). O-60 time was phenomenal but that was still its top speed until he realised he had to change the diff as well.
Get a speedway bike if you really want the quickest time. 0-60 in 2 to 3 seconds.
|
>>He promptly drove it up to the rev limiter in 1st gear and wrenched the gear lever with great force straight into 2nd without lifting the throttle. Hey presto, 3.9sec 0-60 as claimed.
I've often done this, but only on cars with a limiter (valve bounce will do). It's far less dramatic in a diesel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
