Car 0-60 stats site

Freefaller · 28 Jan 2006 at 12:25

Me not in the car:

Power at Flywheel (BHP) : 140
Weight without Driver (KG) : 1047
Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 135.86
0 - 60 (Secs) : 7.70
0 - 100 (Secs) : 22.67
60 - 100 (Secs) : 14.97
Quarter Mile (Secs) : 16.16
Terminal Speed (MPH) : 84.43
Drag Strip Quarter Mile (Secs) : 16.06
Drag Strip Terminal Speed (MPH) : 85.41

me in the car:

Power at Flywheel (BHP) : 140
Weight without Driver (KG) : 1138
Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 125.00
0 - 60 (Secs) : 8.31
0 - 100 (Secs) : 25.17
60 - 100 (Secs) : 16.86
Quarter Mile (Secs) : 16.77
Terminal Speed (MPH) : 81.63
Drag Strip Quarter Mile (Secs) : 16.67
Drag Strip Terminal Speed (MPH) : 82.57

me on the bike (I had to scale it up because it didn't accept lower weight than 350kg)

Power at Flywheel (BHP) : 460
Weight without Driver (KG) : 935
Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 499.88
0 - 60 (Secs) : 3.25
0 - 100 (Secs) : 7.15
60 - 100 (Secs) : 3.90
Quarter Mile (Secs) : 11.39
Terminal Speed (MPH) : 126.17
Drag Strip Quarter Mile (Secs) : 11.29
Drag Strip Terminal Speed (MPH) : 127.63

That's pretty awesome, and maybe a little generous to be fair. I doubt I could do a 3.25s dash to 60. Sub 4s for sure... but not that low.

Funnily enough my midrange acceleration in the car stats, and 0-100 time would be quicker if I had chosen FWD? As well as my terminal speed, but my 1/4 mile is slower if I choose FWD. Not quite sure I understand why...

Stonedofmoo · 28 Jan 2006 at 13:09

460bhp... on a bike?!

What bike is that and how comes it weighs 935kg

ScoobyDoo69 · 28 Jan 2006 at 13:13

he had to scale it up!

Freefaller · 28 Jan 2006 at 13:14

Stonedofmoo said:
460bhp... on a bike?!

What bike is that and how comes it weighs 935kg

I said I had to ratio it up - as it didn't allow a weight of 187.

So I kept the ratio to be 500 bhp/tonne which is what it is on my bike very approximately with 92 bhp @ 187kg.

(92 * 5) / (187 * 5) = 497.

Though I've just checked my bike is actually closer to 100bhp either way it's still in the right ball park figure.

Power at Flywheel (BHP) : 500
Weight without Driver (KG) : 935
Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 543.34
0 - 60 (Secs) : 3.20
0 - 100 (Secs) : 6.87
60 - 100 (Secs) : 3.67
Quarter Mile (Secs) : 11.30
Terminal Speed (MPH) : 128.25
Drag Strip Quarter Mile (Secs) : 11.20
Drag Strip Terminal Speed (MPH) : 129.73

That's just insane! :eek:

I wonder what a 'busa would be like...

ScoobyDoo69 · 28 Jan 2006 at 13:16

Power at Flywheel (BHP) : 130
Weight without Driver (KG) : 1245
Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 106.09
0 - 60 (Secs) : 9.19
0 - 100 (Secs) : 32.06
60 - 100 (Secs) : 22.87
Quarter Mile (Secs) : 18.06
Terminal Speed (MPH) : 75.06
Drag Strip Quarter Mile (Secs) : 17.66
Drag Strip Terminal Speed (MPH) : 77.11

wow my car's slow haha

[TW]Fox · 28 Jan 2006 at 14:10

I didn't know the Impreza Sport was 130bhp...

[TW]Fox · 28 Jan 2006 at 14:14

Cryfreeman said:
where does it say that?

seems pretty accurate from the stats I have been trying v real life cars

It doesn't need to say, its obvious. How can you calculate an accurateish 0-60 time without knowing gear ratios?

A Civic VTi with an Integra box does 0-60 quicker than a standard one but both are same power and weight, for example.

That thing would give them both identical times...

ScoobyDoo69 · 28 Jan 2006 at 14:18

[TW]Fox said:
I didn't know the Impreza Sport was 130bhp...

they're not, they're 123 standard, but I'm going on my rolling road power output..

[TW]Fox · 28 Jan 2006 at 14:26

Why not do the caculation again with the proper 123bhp

ScoobyDoo69 · 28 Jan 2006 at 14:28

because it's not the power my car has

FincH · 28 Jan 2006 at 14:42

DanF said:
tehe, hohoho.

I'm serisouly thinking of selling the rusty old 5 gtt and buying a cheap Fiat Cinquecento sporting arbath, putting a 85bhp 1242 16v Fire engine in with a wee tune. That's about 95bhp and 720kg, looks good for an 8sec 0-60.

Or why not keep the R5 and put the GTT lump in?

Or if it's a 1.4 convert it to a 1.4T

Hmms I suppose my car is probably down on power over standard but I added a bit becuase of the de-cat and panel filter:

Power at Flywheel (BHP) : 140
Weight without Driver (KG) : 980
Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 145.15
0 - 60 (Secs) : 7.40
0 - 100 (Secs) : 20.59
60 - 100 (Secs) : 13.19
Quarter Mile (Secs) : 15.86
Terminal Speed (MPH) : 87.76
Drag Strip Quarter Mile (Secs) : 15.66
Drag Strip Terminal Speed (MPH) : 89.28

Sounds about right. Never done a proper 0-60 but it would be around that.

Enfield · 28 Jan 2006 at 14:55

FincH said:
Or why not keep the R5 and put the GTT lump in?

He said he's got an R5 GTT.

Have you got any pictures of it DanF?

FincH · 28 Jan 2006 at 15:01

Enfield said:
He said he's got an R5 GTT.

Have you got any pictures of it DanF?

So he did...

Liverpool-Lad · 28 Jan 2006 at 15:45

[TW]Fox said:
Why not do the caculation again with the proper 123bhp

I dont think the 1/4 mile counter has space for minutes...

shrek2 · 28 Jan 2006 at 15:52

I have just read that a top fuel dragster can accelerate fo 0-100 in 0.8 seconds. thats insane.

Stonedofmoo · 28 Jan 2006 at 16:04

Even more insane when you see it in front of you. I saw them once at Santa Pod and there is just an awesome explosion of noise.

Really quite something

Cryfreeman · 28 Jan 2006 at 16:04

[TW]Fox said:
It doesn't need to say, its obvious. How can you calculate an accurateish 0-60 time without knowing gear ratios?

A Civic VTi with an Integra box does 0-60 quicker than a standard one but both are same power and weight, for example.

That thing would give them both identical times...

having a guess here but doubt theres a massive differance between the 2 boxes in a VTI.

like you say its 'accurateish'

most people probally look at that web page for 1/4 referance I would have thought which that web site gives a pretty accurate time/referance.

edit: if I put my cars stats in for example and inc driver weight the 0-60 they give is 0.03 from book figure. 0-100 is 0.15 off

[TW]Fox · 28 Jan 2006 at 16:48

Doesn't take into account areodynamics either - you telling me a 140 bhp 1500kg Transit can do 0-100 in the same time as a 1500kg 140bhp saloon?

That site is

bingham67 · 28 Jan 2006 at 17:18

nicRob said:
http://www.jsread.com/tvr/quartermile.html is one 1/4 mile comparison thing

Dont work properly i chose Subaru WRX vs Lamborghini Murcielago and Subaru was just still on the line and the Lambo moved.

Cryfreeman · 28 Jan 2006 at 17:26

[TW]Fox said:
Doesn't take into account areodynamics either - you telling me a 140 bhp 1500kg Transit can do 0-100 in the same time as a 1500kg 140bhp saloon?

That site is

nice extreme example shown

if you goign down in a tranny I doubt very much your to bothered about trap speed

doubt its going to make much differance to most saloons down the 1/4, seeing as a quick ish car traps at 100mph.

obviously comes into play the higher you trap.

put a few cars in there now and the times do come out pretty close