0-60

[gt4tosupra]

whats the 0-60 on an NA manual please? i keep reading anything from 6 to 6.9 secs!! i'm thinking of buying one and parting with my st205 gt4, which is 0-60 in 6 secs!

[chris2o2]

Mate seriously the search button is your friend .

This has been done millions of billions of times .

 

The n/a is slower than your GT4 and heavier (probarly)

[tbourner]

Does it matter?

[ilicos]

6 seconds

[jamesmark]

The 0-chav time depends very much on how well the car has been looked after.

 

Serious answer I would say about a week.

[Snooze]

Is 0-60 time actually a useful metric for anything at all?

 

It's not even really related to actual distance covered - my Supra was doing about 5s 0-60 - almost identical to a friend's BMW M-Coupe, but the M-Coupe covered a damn sight more ground in that time. We would both be hitting 60 in 5s, but he would be comfortably ahead of me.

[tbourner]

Is 0-60 time actually a useful metric for anything at all?

 

Especially in cars like the Supra, where it's acceleration from moving is astonishing, and hearing the 0-60 time makes the car sound a lot slower than it is!

[j80leo]

0-60 Times are all over rated as most sports cars are more or less the same speed to 60, The best way to find out how quick a car is after 60 does it run out of puff or keep going;)

[mikeyb10supra]

FFF please move this out of technical

[tbourner]

FFF

 

Force Feed Forward?

[Animal]

Find 'em, follow 'em, f**k 'em?

[Max Headroom]

A much much better indicator is the 50 to 70 times, giving an indication of overtaking times rather than the 0 to 60 which is more of your drag strip times.

[Alex]

FFF please move this out of technical

 

FFF indeed!

 

Moved.

 

Buy the NA you're looking at and find out. It won't drive like the GT4 so forget comparing.

[mikeyb10supra]

FFF indeed!

 

Moved.

 

Buy the NA you're looking at and find out. It won't drive like the GT4 so forget comparing.

 

[gt4tosupra]

i think 0-60 is very relevant, more so than a cars bhp due to the difference in a cars weight. 0-60 is key to how fast a car will shift. my gt4 is 260bhp but wastes power in driving all 4 wheels. i'm thinking that if an NA with standard 220bhp is only driving th rear wheels then i'm hoping that 0-60 could or should be similar to my gt4, 6.0. i used to have a celica gt, 0-60 was only 7.5, hell of a lot slower!

[gt4tosupra]

Is 0-60 time actually a useful metric for anything at all?

 

It's not even really related to actual distance covered - my Supra was doing about 5s 0-60 - almost identical to a friend's BMW M-Coupe, but the M-Coupe covered a damn sight more ground in that time. We would both be hitting 60 in 5s, but he would be comfortably ahead of me.

 

 

if he had covered more ground than you then his 0-60 is quicker, because if it were the same you would be head to head

[carl0s]

Depends a lot on gearbox too I think. My auto TT is horrible from a standstill, you just can't get a great launch even if you power brake. Foot to the floor at 25mph is mental though, and foot hard down from 25mph to beyond 100mph is just constant torque, and that's a typical ~380bhp-ish BPU J-Spec TT.

[tbourner]

You need to look at the whole package, you can't just compare BHP figures because torque is just as important in acceleration - then you have the curves, they're just as important as the peaks.

Similarly you can't just say a car is faster cos it has a lower 0-60, for one thing the test to measure 0-60 isn't real world, and is very unrepeatable in the real world, so within 0.5 seconds you can't really judge any difference in it just on measurement uncertainty!!! Then you get the 40-60 and 50-70 and 50-100 and all the other numbers you can think of, all will be different and all will affect the 'race' with the other car!

[Scott]

You need to look at the whole package, you can't just compare BHP figures because torque is just as important in acceleration - then you have the curves, they're just as important as the peaks.

Similarly you can't just say a car is faster cos it has a lower 0-60, for one thing the test to measure 0-60 isn't real world, and is very unrepeatable in the real world, so within 0.5 seconds you can't really judge any difference in it just on measurement uncertainty!!! Then you get the 40-60 and 50-70 and 50-100 and all the other numbers you can think of, all will be different and all will affect the 'race' with the other car!

 

 

General simple rule i use is torque = acceleration, BHP = top speed. Obviously its not as simple as that lol.

 

Torque vs bhp is a big can of worms on any car forum though lol.

[tbourner]

General simple rule i use is torque = acceleration, BHP = top speed. Obviously its not as simple as that lol.

 

Me too!

Also, torque moves the weight, so more weight you need more torque to accelerate it, I've always thought BHP/ton was a bit odd.

[Animal]

My N/A has a proven 0-70 of 10 seconds. Not that it matters unless you want to take part in McDonald's car park bullshit sessions. The last few posts say it all really.

[Scott]

Me too!

Also, torque moves the weight, so more weight you need more torque to accelerate it, I've always thought BHP/ton was a bit odd.

 

BHP = Pub talk.

 

I read somewhere that the heavier the internals, the more BHP is required to accelerate them (the internals). The more torque you have the more force you have them accelerating with. By the time all this force hits the tyres its the torque that determins how fast the car accelerates.

 

Basically the BHP determins how fast your engine internals can accelerate and the torque determins how fast your wheels can accelerate.

 

This is the reason diesels are not as quick to accelerate from standstill... the lack of bhp holds the car back because the engine internals won't accelerate fast enough. In neutral a decent diesel will go from 1k rpm to 5.5k rpm just as fast as it will in 1st. This means that its the BHP holding the car back, the torque is high enough to accelerate in 1st as fast as the engine can build up speed. Once you get into 2nd, 3rd 4th etc thats when they come into their own, as the torque is so high.

 

 

Or something like that, lol.

[tbourner]

Sounds fair.

 

Either way, 0-60 means arse.

[Snooze]

if he had covered more ground than you then his 0-60 is quicker, because if it were the same you would be head to head

 

LOL - no. Sorry. Would be true if all cars had linear acceleration. But they don't.

 

Imagine an extreme scenario:

 

Car 1 pulls away, increasing speed by 10mph/s. After 6 seconds, he is travelling at 60mph, at an average speed of 30mph. (this is the - altered for simplicity - N/A M-Coupe)

 

 

Car 2 has no power at low speed, so in the first 5s, he is still only doing 10mph. At that point his power kicks in and delivers immense power, accelerating him from 10mph to 60mph in one second flat. (this is the - exagerated again - twin turbo Supra!) Over the 6s second period, the car only averaged 10mph.

 

So 6 seconds later, both cars are now doing 60mph (they have the same 0-60 time), but the first car travelled about 80m and the second car only 27m.

 

C'mon - this is basic physics!

[lexsum]

LOL - no. Sorry. Would be true if all cars had linear acceleration. But they don't.

 

Imagine an extreme scenario:

 

Car 1 pulls away, increasing speed by 10mph/s. After 6 seconds, he is travelling at 60mph, at an average speed of 30mph. (this is the - altered for simplicity - N/A M-Coupe)

 

 

Car 2 has no power at low speed, so in the first 5s, he is still only doing 10mph. At that point his power kicks in and delivers immense power, accelerating him from 10mph to 60mph in one second flat. (this is the - exagerated again - twin turbo Supra!) Over the 6s second period, the car only averaged 10mph.

 

So 6 seconds later, both cars are now doing 60mph (they have the same 0-60 time), but the first car travelled about 80m and the second car only 27m.

 

C'mon - this is basic physics!

 

 

 

the distance covered is the area under the line on a speed time graph. (takes me back to being 14 that does!)