New definition of quick. 0 -100 mph time

[Devil2575]

p1esk said:

Devil2575 said:

PoleDriver said:

Devil2575 said:

This.

0-100 in <6 seconds in a road car isn't quick, it's bordering on insanity and IMHO completely irrelevant on the public highway.

It seems that you are in the wrong area.
Go out of the door, turn left, go to the end of the corridor then either left for Mumsnet or right for BRAKE.

It would appear that you are a plonker

Oh I don't think so. To me it looked like a way of disagreeing with you without being offensive.

Did it? To me it seemed like a stock PH style response of saying Mumsnet and Brake to anyone who dares to suggest that a car doesnt need to accelerate like a dragster to be considered fast

[J4CKO]

Devil2575 said:

p1esk said:

Devil2575 said:

PoleDriver said:

Devil2575 said:

This.

0-100 in <6 seconds in a road car isn't quick, it's bordering on insanity and IMHO completely irrelevant on the public highway.

It seems that you are in the wrong area.
Go out of the door, turn left, go to the end of the corridor then either left for Mumsnet or right for BRAKE.

It would appear that you are a plonker

Oh I don't think so. To me it looked like a way of disagreeing with you without being offensive.

Did it? To me it seemed like a stock PH style response of saying Mumsnet and Brake to anyone who dares to suggest that a car doesnt need to accelerate like a dragster to be considered fast

Mumsnet mentions need their own Godwins law.

[br d]

joe1145 said:

Mclaren 650s 0-100 5.7 secs

[V8 Fettler]

robinessex said:

I've decided that the old 0-60 sprint is obsolete, that a 0-100 is the new standard. And I'm assigning a time of <6 secs as the pass level. The Ultima does it in 5.3 secs. Anything road going faster!

427 on modern tyres wouldn't be far behind a modern "supercar" 0 - 100. There was certainly at least one 917 registered for road use, Can-Am spec was probably twice Ultima horsepower.

[Devil2575]

J4CKO said:

Mumsnet mentions need their own Godwins law.

Godwin's law is a good analogy!

[br d]

swerni said:

I'm going to swim against the tride and agree with you, it is utterly pointless having a car that can accelerate at the kind of speed.

Edited by swerni on Friday 10th July 18:56

Each to there own Swerni. It's not about charging all over the place at light speed but rather flooring it in very specific situations, it is huge fun. While ultimately irrelevant to just getting from A to B there are certainly times when it is far from pointless.
I wouldn't mind betting that you own cars that will accelerate at a rate that would have been thought pointless 20 years ago, I'm sure that wouldn't stop you enjoying them!

[br d]

swerni said:

br d said:

swerni said:

I'm going to swim against the tride and agree with you, it is utterly pointless having a car that can accelerate at the kind of speed.

Edited by swerni on Friday 10th July 18:56

Each to there own Swerni. It's not about charging all over the place at light speed but rather flooring it in very specific situations, it is huge fun. While ultimately irrelevant to just getting from A to B there are certainly times when it is far from pointless.
I wouldn't mind betting that you own cars that will accelerate at a rate that would have been thought pointless 20 years ago, I'm sure that wouldn't stop you enjoying them!

The slow one does it in 14 seconds (4x4) and is very usable
The others does in circa 7.5 which is utterly pointless.
Doesn't mean I don't love it, but it's still pointless

Okay, that's good enough for me

[rallycross]

Anything that can do under 12.5 secs zero to 100 mph feels seriously quick (for a road car).

[Jasandjules]

Terminator X said:

My benchmark for a seriously quick car was / is anything around 10s for 0-100mph. That really is fast so anything quicker is a tad mental

TX.

Edited by Terminator X on Friday 10th July 09:56

Me too, I think my 5.0 TVR isn't quite that fast either, and to me it is feckin' fast, as in too fast to use full power a lot of time...

To suggest 6 is fast, well, 0-60 is 6 is not too bad to my mind!!

[ZX10R NIN]

When I was running a tuned Cossie anything that could run under 12's on the Quarter Mile was considered fast not sure what would be considered a fast quarter mile time now.

[Incognegro]

Some great points and posts on here. My 2pence... why not go the whole hog and state the time standard to be set at 0-100 and back to 0 that way we get the safety element in too. It's all well and good ragging to get the car up to speed but what if through acceleration (on track or road) something or someone gets in the way you need to be able to stop just as well so total balance needed! TVR Cerbera I believe set a time of 8.9secs (4.5 Red Rose)

[ZX10R NIN]

Jimmm said:

Just found this list online of supposedly sub 6 seconds to 100mph cars...

SSC Ultimate Aero TT - [2008] 0 to 100 mph time - 4.6 seconds
Porsche 9FF GT9R - [2009] 0 to 100 mph time - 4.9 seconds
Caparo T1 3.5l V8 - [2007] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.0 seconds
TVR Cerbera Speed 12 - [2000] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.0 seconds
Koenigsegg Agera 5L V8 - [2011] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.1 seconds
Koenigsegg CCX R Special Edition 4.8 V8 S - [2008] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.1 seconds
Koenigsegg CCR 4.7 V8 Supercharged - [2005] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.2 seconds
Koenigsegg CCX 4.7 V8 Supercharged - [2006] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.2 seconds
Koenigsegg CCX 4.7 V8 Supercharged - [2006] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.2 seconds
Hennessey Venom GT - [2010] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.3 seconds
Ultima GTR 720 - [2000] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.3 seconds
Ariel Atom V8 500 - [2008] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.4 seconds
Caparo T1 2.4 V8 - [2006] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.5 seconds
Porsche 9FF GT9 - [2008] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.5 seconds
Bugatti Veyron 8.0 litre W16 - [2005] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.7 seconds
Ascari A10 5.0 V8 - [2006] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.8 seconds
Lamborghini Aventador LP700-4 - [2011] 0 to 100 mph time - 5.9 seconds

Interesting but I think the 1/4 mile & 1/2 mile time is a better indication

Fiesta ST 14.7 Secs
Sierra Cosworth 14.4 Secs
BMW 130i 14.2 Secs
2015 Megane Trophy 14.4 Secs
2015 Focus ST 14.2 Secs
2015 Golf R 13.6 Secs
Nissan Pulsar GTI R 13.5 Secs
F80 M3 11.8 Secs
C63 6.2 11.4 Secs
991 Turbo S 10.6 secs
Dodge Challenger Hellcat 11.0 Secs
991 GT3 RS 11.4 Secs
997 GT2 RS 11.00
E92 335i 13.4 secs

Edited by ZX10R NIN on Sunday 30th August 22:54

[Welshbeef]

A 10 second car to the ton is fast.

I can only imagine those handful of people with faster cars to think it's not / actually if wager only those with cars which don't have a cat in jells chance of even beating 20 seconds to 100mph would consider 6 seconds now to be the time of a fast car.


Motorbikes went through this phase many years ago where acceleration ended up being separated by tenths or less of a second. Instead the focus is now on Bhp/tonne and absolute power.

[Mr Tidy]

I think it just tells us how far we have come!

I'm old, but remember the Ferrari Daytona being the fastest car Autocar had tested for many years - IIRC 0-60 in 5.4 secs and 1/4 mile in 13.7 secs with 100ish terminal speed.

I have a Z4C that an American magazine tested (not sure if Road & Track or Car & Driver) and recorded 5.5secs to 60 and 14secs to 100mph.

Anyway it seems plenty quick to me, and if anyone needs more there is always the M version! Must do 0 - 100 in under 10 seconds!

Shame most people are leasing a Cashcow/S-Max diseasel POS! Then try to drive it like it is a Touring Car.......

[Nedzilla]

Incognegro said:

Some great points and posts on here. My 2pence... why not go the whole hog and state the time standard to be set at 0-100 and back to 0 that way we get the safety element in too. It's all well and good ragging to get the car up to speed but what if through acceleration (on track or road) something or someone gets in the way you need to be able to stop just as well so total balance needed! TVR Cerbera I believe set a time of 8.9secs (4.5 Red Rose)

Forgive me if I'm misreading this,that is the 0-100 time you are referring to as there's no way that's a 0-100-0 time for a cerebra......any cerbera.

[caelite]

I believe 20-70 or 30-70 would be a far better standard. Not only because it is what people actually use, but because it also cuts out some car manufacturers (*cough* Citreon) harming the real world performance of there cars to make them look better on a 0-60 sheet. A common trick for this is the extra long 2nd gear given to some hot hatches meaning they can clip 60 before upping into 3rd, This of course makes them a d*ck to drive in reality (Saxo VTS?).

However that will make some of the rather quick hot DERVs out there seem relavent and PHers tend to hate that. A good example being some of the old 1.9TDI hot hatches (04+ Skoda Fabia VRS / SEAT Ibiza FR or Cupra) would beat an entry level Elise from 30-70, although at the same time having relatively slow 0-60s due to very short 1st and 2nd gears (8.5seconds for the fabia and ibiza FR, Mid 7s for the Cupra). This is before people spend £300 for a man with a laptop to extract 40% extra power from the motors, although obviously drivetrain issues come attatched to this.

Although I am really suprised that European manufacturers havnt tried to formally push this standard since it would give there sportyer dervs an even bigger edge on paper than there petrol engined (mostly) Japanese equivalent. However EU manufacturers, especially VAG dont even really seem interested in offering accurate numbers for there performance, with many of there cars beating the manufacturers claims (All the Skodas stripping a second off there manufacturers 0-60 times so that they would look worse than the VW / Audi equivalent, All the BMWs/Mercs that seem to ignore there 155mph limiters and go into the mid 160s)

[otolith]

The diesels only look particularly good when you force the cars to use a gear that favours them. Quite a useful figure if you don't know how to use a gearbox, I suppose.

[Mr Tidy]

caelite said:

I believe 20-70 or 30-70 would be a far better standard. Not only because it is what people actually use, but because it also cuts out some car manufacturers (*cough* Citreon) harming the real world performance of there cars to make them look better on a 0-60 sheet. A common trick for this is the extra long 2nd gear given to some hot hatches meaning they can clip 60 before upping into 3rd, This of course makes them a d*ck to drive in reality (Saxo VTS?).

However that will make some of the rather quick hot DERVs out there seem relavent and PHers tend to hate that. A good example being some of the old 1.9TDI hot hatches (04+ Skoda Fabia VRS / SEAT Ibiza FR or Cupra) would beat an entry level Elise from 30-70, although at the same time having relatively slow 0-60s due to very short 1st and 2nd gears (8.5seconds for the fabia and ibiza FR, Mid 7s for the Cupra). This is before people spend £300 for a man with a laptop to extract 40% extra power from the motors, although obviously drivetrain issues come attatched to this.

Although I am really suprised that European manufacturers havnt tried to formally push this standard since it would give there sportyer dervs an even bigger edge on paper than there petrol engined (mostly) Japanese equivalent. However EU manufacturers, especially VAG dont even really seem interested in offering accurate numbers for there performance, with many of there cars beating the manufacturers claims (All the Skodas stripping a second off there manufacturers 0-60 times so that they would look worse than the VW / Audi equivalent, All the BMWs/Mercs that seem to ignore there 155mph limiters and go into the mid 160s)

Those VAG tractors seem pretty pedestrian - my 123d reportedly did 0-100kph in 7.0, my 325ti does about the same but I know which I prefer....but then my Z4C does so much better, and allegedly will do "mid 160s!" despite the limiter!

[Welshbeef]

otolith said:

The diesels only look particularly good when you force the cars to use a gear that favours them. Quite a useful figure if you don't know how to use a gearbox, I suppose.

Well if the "challenge" is 50-70 in 4th gear then it's totally relevant. Depends on what feat is being measured.

Anyway only the D5 sneaks under 10 seconds to 100mph from the derv lot currently - actually sorry the M550d/remapped does it too.

[stephen300o]

No no no, 52 to 61 is how we should measure acceleration...