What is the cheapest way to get from 0-62 in sub 4 seconds?

[Y282]

Pothole said:

I recently saw a decent looking ZX9R for sale for £850...bet you could haggle it down to £750 and it would do sub 4 second 0-60s all day long (and sub 11 second quarter miles too)

Yeah same era of bike. Any big, just pre r1 era sportbike will do it for pence.

[Mars]

Sam_68 said:

I very much doubt he would get anywhere close to a 4-second 0-60 time with a Cerbera (or many of the other cars listed on this thread, so you're probably right, it's academic ...as I said in my first response to this thread.

My AC22, calibrated during a series of runs at Santa Pod with my Caterham, reckoned my Cerbera was hitting 60 in 3.6 when I did some "testing". That was exactly the same time I could achieve with my 244bhp Caterham. I admit, I did have to increase the "yaw" figure to account for the Cerbera's arse "dipping" more but I only increased it by one digit. The extra length of the Cerb over the Caterham ought to mean that the angle wasn't far off.

My Cerb had 407bhp. There's rather a lot out there now with significantly more.

[Uhura fighter]

A VW Bug.

[robsco]

Sam_68 said:

Yes, I know, I've owned one - it's called 'being scared stless'. You don't need to risk your drivetrain with a standing-start, though; you just need to try to keep up with a well-driven hot hatch on a typical english back road.

Sorry, hadn't checked your profile. Exactly right though.

[D1bram]

Y282 said:

Yeah same era of bike. Any big, just pre r1 era sportbike will do it for pence.

IIRC the RGV250 even had a sub 4second official time (3.9seconds I think).

I had one a few years back, I don't know about sub 4 seconds but it was very quick.

Bikes are always going to be a very cheap way of going very fast in a straight line.

[Dave_]

Another vote for a pulsar GTIR , some basic mods and ZERO mechanical sympathy will see you touching 4 seconds.

Clutches , gearboxes and transfer boxes wont last long though and thats before you start worrying about rust.

[B.J.W]

robsco said:

Sam_68 said:

Yes, I know, I've owned one - it's called 'being scared stless'. You don't need to risk your drivetrain with a standing-start, though; you just need to try to keep up with a well-driven hot hatch on a typical english back road.

Sorry, hadn't checked your profile. Exactly right though.

Yup - nothing scares you quite as much as a V8 TVR, except, perhaps, for a speed six Tuscan

[Y282]

D1bram said:

Y282 said:

Yeah same era of bike. Any big, just pre r1 era sportbike will do it for pence.

IIRC the RGV250 even had a sub 4second official time (3.9seconds I think).

I had one a few years back, I don't know about sub 4 seconds but it was very quick.

Bikes are always going to be a very cheap way of going very fast in a straight line.

Some of us aint bad round corners either.


Aaah the 250. That smell. That character. That constant rebuild concern.

[Sam_68]

B.J.W said:

robsco said:

Sam_68 said:

Yes, I know, I've owned one - it's called 'being scared stless'. You don't need to risk your drivetrain with a standing-start, though; you just need to try to keep up with a well-driven hot hatch on a typical english back road.

Sorry, hadn't checked your profile. Exactly right though.

Yup - nothing scares you quite as much as a V8 TVR, except, perhaps, for a speed six Tuscan

Interestingly, my Westfield (which is considerably quicker than my Griffith in terms of straight-line acceleration - I have the published and properly timed road test results to prove it) is not the slightest bit scary in comparison and subjectively doesn't feel as though it's accelerating as quickly, because it doesn't make all the fuss and noise and (being so light) you don't get the same thump in the back each time you change gear.

Like I said.... TVR's: all mouth and trousers.

But my personal experience of the Speed Six engined cars (Tuscan and T350 in my case) was that they, too, felt a lot more 'linear' and predictable in their power delivery, hence more trustworthy than the 500 when you were trying to press on a bit.

But if we were discussing 'what's the cheapest way to scare yourself stless', the V8 Dutton would definitely win every time.

Edited by Sam_68 on Sunday 9th October 13:40

[Mars]

I couldn't get the power down in the Caterham unless there were two of us in it. It was simply too light over the rear wheels (even though I'm a fat knacker).

The Cerb launched consistently every time.

[pilchardthecat]

A z4m or e46 m3 with an ess s/c attached to it.

[robsco]

Sam_68 said:

But my personal experience of the Speed Six engined cars (Tuscan and T350 in my case) was that they, too, felt a lot more 'linear' and predictable in their power delivery, hence more trustworthy than the 500 when you were trying to press on a bit.

Edited by Sam_68 on Sunday 9th October 13:40

Interesting. I've only passengered in a Speed Six engined car (MK1 Tuscan 4.0) and it felt frankly animalistic compared to the AJP and Rover V8s. Perhaps the sensation is multiplied when you're not in the driver's seat, but that thing scared me witless.

[EDLT]

Steffan said:

grimfandango said:

I imagine nothing gets much cheaper than a tuned V8 dutton or similar




Probabley not much more than £1000 for one!

I do not disagree with you a Dutton V8 is the most likely cheap very quick car.

The downside is the lethal handling had 2 tried everything, all new suspension, all new drive train, five types of wheel I never got safely round a corner at speed.

And simply undriveable safely at any speed in the wet.

It would be a pretty difficult car to enjoy on an ordinary road I tried for years.

I think either a big bike engined kit car properly sorted with appropriate suspension settings would be a better option. I personally prefer a red top powered or Duratec powered kit car. The last 1.8 Ford powered car I tried was turning out over 225 brake pulling under 1000 Kilos and definitely sub 4 secs to 60.

It was also a very tractable car and really a genuine long distance road car which no lightweight V8 is ever going to be. IMO.

Why are they so bad, if it uses the same mix of Cortina/Sierra bits as every other kit then it should handle the same way shouldn't it?

[Sam_68]

EDLT said:

Why are they so bad, if it uses the same mix of Cortina/Sierra bits as every other kit then it should handle the same way shouldn't it?

FWIIW it doesn't use the same Cortina/Sierra bits as every other kit; the 'traditional' Dutton uses Triumph Herald front suspension (not that there's anything wrong with that - quite the reverse) and most of the higher-powered ones use Cortina/Capri axle (whereas most live axle 'Sevens' use the much lighter Escort or Morris Marina axles).

The headline problems are:

• The heavy axle has a high unsprung weight relative to the weight of the car.
• The axle is poorly located (early versions were on leaf springs, FFS)
• The chassis is pretty basic and lacks torsional stiffness.

To be fair, with a 1600 Crossflow, it's adequate and was cheap, capable fun in its day. Throw the sort of torque at it that a River V8 can produce however - particularly one that would be capable of producing the sort of acceleration we're talking about on this thread - and the chassis and rear axle tie themselves in knots. The chassis acts as a big undamped spring, exacerbated by the fact that the high unsprung weight leads to very variable tyre loads (hence grip/traction) at the back when it has to deal with anything other than a perfect road surface, and it loses the plot completely.

Several people have developed Duttons for competition use that have overcome the worst of these problems, but it requires a thorough re-engineering of the whole car. There are much better options now anyway; these days anyone looking to use a high-torque engine like the Rover V8 in a 'Seven' would use de Dion or IRS, and even with live axle cars, the successful ones have much better chassis, with better located axles.

[Pothole]

Y282 said:

Pothole said:

I recently saw a decent looking ZX9R for sale for £850...bet you could haggle it down to £750 and it would do sub 4 second 0-60s all day long (and sub 11 second quarter miles too)

Yeah same era of bike. Any big, just pre r1 era sportbike will do it for pence.

you could have a handful for £5k:

ZZR1100
Fox Eye Blade
ZX9R
RF900
FZR1000

[DanDC5]

p4cks said:

CAT C VX220 Turbo (£5,500) and precat pipe and remap (£500).

This was my thought.

[jon-]

Pothole said:

Y282 said:

Pothole said:

I recently saw a decent looking ZX9R for sale for £850...bet you could haggle it down to £750 and it would do sub 4 second 0-60s all day long (and sub 11 second quarter miles too)

Yeah same era of bike. Any big, just pre r1 era sportbike will do it for pence.

you could have a handful for £5k:

ZZR1100
Fox Eye Blade
ZX9R
RF900
FZR1000

Some of the thumpy 600's will do it too. My 675 was timed by Triumph at 3.6, and I'm pretty sure a cheap SV650 will do it under 4 thanks to the high torque (twin) and short gearing.

[Meoricin]

Surely a cheap MR2 Turbo, strip out any excess weight (there's plenty to strip), and turn the boost up, could be done for 2-3k?

[jon-]

Meoricin said:

Surely a cheap MR2 Turbo, strip out any excess weight (there's plenty to strip), and turn the boost up, could be done for 2-3k?

I agree, mine was pretty close at standard boost.

me earlier said:

Mr2 Turbo, stripped out, wind up the boost and side step the clutch should get close (mine was just above 4 seconds at 290bhp). Should be doable for under 4k.

[VR6 Turbo]

Zwoelf said:

Like this one?



Bang on the money

Was this recently at the ring?