Your 0-60 times

[Monkeylegend]

I will get the man servant to do a timed run in the Veyron then get back to you OP.

[Cock Womble 7]

Eddh said:

My Dad's car is faster than your Dad's car.

Quite probably. Mine has just got an Agila.

[paulmoonraker]

swerni said:

paulmoonraker said:

Impreza STi @ 336bhp... Probably 4.2 seconds or there abouts...

Probably don't cut it.

Based on what?

Me guessing. Prodrive claim 4.2 for the 2005 STi and that's based on a 305bhp upgrade.

[Aphex]

6.6 in my old mk2 golf, never did time the 20vt mk1

[B.J.W]

Sub 4 seconds to 60 (apparently) - which is wishful thinking

0-60 means nothing

0-100 is where it's at

8 seconds to 100 for the Tuscan (apparently) - which is wishful thinking.

I wouldn't consider a car to be properly quick unless it hits the 3 digit mark in 10 seconds or less. Just waiting for my Ultima associates to turn up and pour scorn on the 'properly quick' assessment

[CraigVmax]

4.2 secs for a car with less than 400bhp and weight about what 1.2 tonnes is pretty quick, i'd expect it to be closer to 5 personally, but i could be wrong!

[Sub5s]

<------ That! (and even less on two wheels)

[maser_spyder]

Depends.

One of mine does 0-60 in about a quoted 20.5 seconds, but is the most fun of the lot.

The others, about 5.4, 4.7 and 4.2 (SLK, Maser, Gallardo). The latter two I've never tried, not wanting to spend £4k on a new clutch to find out.

40-140 is where it's all at.....

[Fastdruid]

2.4s

Well someone managed that when it was new anyway. Probably 3 without killing the clutch and/or looping it.

[CH51LKY]

Think the noble is quoted at 3.8.

Bike is similar i suspect.

[Streetrod]

maser_spyder said:

Depends.


The others, about 5.4, 4.7 and 4.2 (SLK, Maser, Gallardo). The latter two I've never tried, not wanting to spend £4k on a new clutch to find out.

Your statement throws up another question that has always bothered me. Why do some certain supercars seem to not have the ability to do more than two full bore standing starts without needing a trip to their dealers for a new clutch? It’s a supercar for goodness sake give the thing a decent clutch that can stand some abuse

[paulmoonraker]

CraigVmax said:

4.2 secs for a car with less than 400bhp and weight about what 1.2 tonnes is pretty quick, i'd expect it to be closer to 5 personally, but i could be wrong!

The Evo 9 FQ360 manages 3.9 and the FQ400 3.4 seconds. It kills clutches however. These are manufacturers figures also.

[Jim the Sunderer]

I imagine the Disco is somewhere around... 18 seconds.

[ninjacost]

i'm guessing most of these times would in reality be difficult to replicate unless you were prepared to show no mechanical sympathy whatsoever in gear times are far more real world for overtaking etc , never been a lover of nailing my car from standing start always thinking about my transmission etc ! sad i know but i'll leave the 0-60s to the boy racers

[RV8]

Proper cars 0-60, 0-100... yes, on a flat road, in the dry! God knows what my 0-60 time is but I know I'll rob the victory off road versus any so called quick car, in any weather, I'll even tow that quick car across the finishing line and my defender is certainly not the quickest one around either.

[maser_spyder]

Streetrod said:

maser_spyder said:

Depends.


The others, about 5.4, 4.7 and 4.2 (SLK, Maser, Gallardo). The latter two I've never tried, not wanting to spend £4k on a new clutch to find out.

Your statement throws up another question that has always bothered me. Why do some certain supercars seem to not have the ability to do more than two full bore standing starts without needing a trip to their dealers for a new clutch? It’s a supercar for goodness sake give the thing a decent clutch that can stand some abuse

Yup, agreed, bothers me too.

That said, I've managed less than 40% clutch wear in six years / 24000 miles in the Maser, but that's mostly careful starts and wellying it once moving. And actually, it's 'only' about £1200-£1500 for a Maser clutch. More like £4k for the Lambo though. Ouch.

[Glosphil]

CraigVmax said:

I think a lot of people would be surprised how much slower their car is than quoted or they think it is.

A few years ago one of the motoring programmes had 3 owners of a car that had a quoted 0-50 of around 8.5 sec (some model of Astra?) try to match the manufacturer's figure. None of them bettered 11.5!

[sparks_E39]

I reckon my Steptronic 528 is about 7.5-8 seconds. Certainly less than BMW's claimed time. Never tested it though.

[Fastdruid]

Streetrod said:

maser_spyder said:

Depends.
The others, about 5.4, 4.7 and 4.2 (SLK, Maser, Gallardo). The latter two I've never tried, not wanting to spend £4k on a new clutch to find out.

Your statement throws up another question that has always bothered me. Why do some certain supercars seem to not have the ability to do more than two full bore standing starts without needing a trip to their dealers for a new clutch? It’s a supercar for goodness sake give the thing a decent clutch that can stand some abuse

Difference between a full bore start and a full bore quick 0-60 second start. One involves full throttle, the other involves full throttle and a lot of clutch slip.

My technique is to get the thing moving and then get the clutch out as quick as possible then full throttle. That works with my bike as it has lots of torque low down and results in quickish times but not record (and clutch) breaking. Anything that's gutless low down (smaller bikes, some cars) you need to slip the clutch otherwise it takes a relative age to get into the power.

[maser_spyder]

Fastdruid said:

Streetrod said:

maser_spyder said:

Depends.
The others, about 5.4, 4.7 and 4.2 (SLK, Maser, Gallardo). The latter two I've never tried, not wanting to spend £4k on a new clutch to find out.

Your statement throws up another question that has always bothered me. Why do some certain supercars seem to not have the ability to do more than two full bore standing starts without needing a trip to their dealers for a new clutch? It’s a supercar for goodness sake give the thing a decent clutch that can stand some abuse

Difference between a full bore start and a full bore quick 0-60 second start. One involves full throttle, the other involves full throttle and a lot of clutch slip.

My technique is to get the thing moving and then get the clutch out as quick as possible then full throttle. That works with my bike as it has lots of torque low down and results in quickish times but not record (and clutch) breaking. Anything that's gutless low down (smaller bikes, some cars) you need to slip the clutch otherwise it takes a relative age to get into the power.

Pretty much precisely how I drive my cars. Get the clutch fully out, and only then give it some right foot. It definitely works, I've had record mileage from the Maser clutch driving like this.