0-60 times.

[300bhp/ton]

RobM77 said:

0-60 is criticised a lot, but I still think it is a pretty good measure of how fast a car is, although becoming marginal nowadays as cars get faster. Sure, you're probably never going to floor it away from rest in your own car, but you know that a 6 second car is slower than a 5 second car, and that's good enough for most people I reckon. The only complication is transmission... 4WD doesn't really have much of an advantage over RWD off the line in the dry (look on You Tube at the 996 vs 360, or the Mclaren F1 vs the Veyron), but FWD is severely handicapped compared with RWd or 4WD, and it's not fair comparing the 0-60 of a RWd car with a FWD car. A 6 second FWD car would have a 6 second RWD car in a straight line in the "real world" once the traction's put down, because the FWd car did the 0-30 really slowly, and then took off quicker than the RWD car to make up the defecit.

Nevertheless, here's my seat of the pants stats:

For a mundane wobbly FWD shopping car like a Focus, Yaris, Civic etc:

Slow: above 15 seconds (Panda)
Fair:9-15 (Yaris)
Poky:7 - 9 (Mondeo ST220, Alfa's quicker models etc)
Pokier:5 - 6 (Focus RS etc)
Fast - n/a
Supercar: n/a


For a proper performance car with a lower CofG, rear drive, balanced chassis, wider tyres etc things change somewhat:

Slow: above 6 seconds (RX8)
Fair: 5-6 (135i)
Poky:4 - 5 (E46 M3)
Fast: 3.5 - 4 (Caterham R400)
Supercar: below 3.5 (Noble M400, Caterham R500 etc)

The change is because when a car takes something in its stride it doesn't feel exciting. This is why cars like the 106 GTi and Clio Cup win group tests against meatier stuff. the truth is that something balanced like a 3 series doesn't feel fast until you get well over 300bhp (250bhp/tonne), whereas a 205 GTi always felt fast with 120bhp (150bhp/tonne).

The exponential scale is because 0-60 is an exponential relationship with power to weight ratio.

grip and traction play a part too and how the engine makes it's power. Some drag cars with proper setup suspension and sticky tyres can drop below 3 secs 0-60mph, despite modest power to weight levels.

[RobM77]

300bhp/ton said:

RobM77 said:

0-60 is criticised a lot, but I still think it is a pretty good measure of how fast a car is, although becoming marginal nowadays as cars get faster. Sure, you're probably never going to floor it away from rest in your own car, but you know that a 6 second car is slower than a 5 second car, and that's good enough for most people I reckon. The only complication is transmission... 4WD doesn't really have much of an advantage over RWD off the line in the dry (look on You Tube at the 996 vs 360, or the Mclaren F1 vs the Veyron), but FWD is severely handicapped compared with RWd or 4WD, and it's not fair comparing the 0-60 of a RWd car with a FWD car. A 6 second FWD car would have a 6 second RWD car in a straight line in the "real world" once the traction's put down, because the FWd car did the 0-30 really slowly, and then took off quicker than the RWD car to make up the defecit.

Nevertheless, here's my seat of the pants stats:

For a mundane wobbly FWD shopping car like a Focus, Yaris, Civic etc:

Slow: above 15 seconds (Panda)
Fair:9-15 (Yaris)
Poky:7 - 9 (Mondeo ST220, Alfa's quicker models etc)
Pokier:5 - 6 (Focus RS etc)
Fast - n/a
Supercar: n/a


For a proper performance car with a lower CofG, rear drive, balanced chassis, wider tyres etc things change somewhat:

Slow: above 6 seconds (RX8)
Fair: 5-6 (135i)
Poky:4 - 5 (E46 M3)
Fast: 3.5 - 4 (Caterham R400)
Supercar: below 3.5 (Noble M400, Caterham R500 etc)

The change is because when a car takes something in its stride it doesn't feel exciting. This is why cars like the 106 GTi and Clio Cup win group tests against meatier stuff. the truth is that something balanced like a 3 series doesn't feel fast until you get well over 300bhp (250bhp/tonne), whereas a 205 GTi always felt fast with 120bhp (150bhp/tonne).

The exponential scale is because 0-60 is an exponential relationship with power to weight ratio.

grip and traction play a part too and how the engine makes it's power. Some drag cars with proper setup suspension and sticky tyres can drop below 3 secs 0-60mph, despite modest power to weight levels.

I was assuming that those elements were roughly equal and in the realm of your average road car, where the difference between a 3 sec car and a 4 sec car feels much bigger than that between a 7 sec car and an 8 sec car. It's still a curved graph; that was my point - the difference you feel is the bigger difference in power to weight (ok, torque to weigh because a=F/m) between the two cars.

What you say is of course very true though. The most crackers example is that a Formula Renault will do 0-100mph in 4.9 seconds, despite having less than 400bhp per tonne That's quicker up to 100mph than a Yamaha R1, Mclaren F1 or Veyron (all of which are around 6 something), despite having similar on paper stats to a Caterham R400. That's a mid engine, slicks and a sequential straight cut dog ring gearbox for you

[Megabyte]

I have to say none of the answers I am seeing really get the point.

I used to live in the States and owned a 5.3ltr muscle car... hate to break the news ... it was crap. A 1600cc Lotus Elan or MX5- would not have the 0-60 but when the roads actually challenge the chassis and indeed the driver ...the Elan or MX5 would piss all over it.

The there are tricked out cars that have a good acceleration and do go around bends... but without the feedback and dynamic joy of a proper sports car...but now we are in Caterham territory... very much not some sad sods modified Range Rover or Corsa