Mid-range acceleration times

[nobrakes]

Whatever happened to mid-range acceleration figures?

Sure, 0-60 is a good datum, but I recall 50-70 or 60-90 (?) times sometimes threw up some surprising comparisons.

Often a bit more of a real world every day comparison, too.

[Heathwood]

I agree, 30-70mph is the one that sticks in my head and IMO is a good real life barometer. Used to be timed and published in car mags but I’ve not seen it for years.

[s m]

Heathwood said:

I agree, 30-70mph is the one that sticks in my head and IMO is a good real life barometer. Used to be timed and published in car mags but I’ve not seen it for years.

I see it used every week in road tests in car mags - Autocar road tests for one. Also What Car use it in their performance tests. UK ones generally as the European mags use kmh rather than mph

Edited by s m on Tuesday 9th August 20:10

[Don Roque]

These are the numbers that really matter as they tell you so much more about what a car is like to drive than simply how quickly it can get off the line. It's a shame that it isn't better recognised as a more useful figure than 0-60 times. It was particularly useful for establishing just how potent a FWD car was. I remember high output Saab and T5 Volvo's doing well with these metrics back in the day; being cars that would hop and torque steer badly off the line or just going into a TCS induced crawl, but once rolling they could really shift.

[nobrakes]

Ah, yes, it was the 30-70 times that were a good yard stick (though these days dangerous do-gooders almost accelerate to not let you over take anyone in that range, but that’s well discussed on other threads).

[Glenn63]

Everyone measures 100-200kph now in the tuning world as it’s a good measure of acceleration without traction being the limiting factor.

[otolith]

They’re all proxies for power to weight, corrupted by traction, aerodynamics, or gearing. 0-100mph is a reasonable overall measure.

[david-j8694]

Glenn63 said:

Everyone measures 100-200kph now in the tuning world as it’s a good measure of acceleration without traction being the limiting factor.

Agreed.

Whilst 200kph is a little heady for UK roads, it gives you a proper idea of how hard a car will pull at high speeds. It's where powerful, but traction limited cars would reel in the AWD+DCT cars or EVs that blast off the line. 0-60mph always flatters these cars.

Also agree 30-70mph is a useful guide for overtaking performance.

[Buff Mchugelarge]

david-j8694 said:

Glenn63 said:

Everyone measures 100-200kph now in the tuning world as it’s a good measure of acceleration without traction being the limiting factor.

Agreed.

Whilst 200kph is a little heady for UK roads, it gives you a proper idea of how hard a car will pull at high speeds. It's where powerful, but traction limited cars would reel in the AWD+DCT cars or EVs that blast off the line.

Also agree 30-70mph is a useful guide for overtaking performance.

Also agree with this though some high performance cars are only just getting into their stride at 100-150 Kph. I've been lucky enough to do a fair few miles in an R8 V10+ and would be interesting to see how it fairs against other car at these 'normal' speeds

[untakenname]

Don Roque said:

These are the numbers that really matter as they tell you so much more about what a car is like to drive than simply how quickly it can get off the line. It's a shame that it isn't better recognised as a more useful figure than 0-60 times. It was particularly useful for establishing just how potent a FWD car was. I remember high output Saab and T5 Volvo's doing well with these metrics back in the day; being cars that would hop and torque steer badly off the line or just going into a TCS induced crawl, but once rolling they could really shift.

I remember being blown away by the 40mph+ punch of a Saab 95 Aero, at the time not much could touch it on the motorway.

[mat205125]

Heathwood said:

I agree, 30-70mph is the one that sticks in my head and IMO is a good real life barometer. Used to be timed and published in car mags but I’ve not seen it for years.

Absolutely

0-60 only tells us whether something is AWD these days

30-70 is what we want to know for what the TED is going to be when we pull out to overtake ..... the fact we launched off of the line, with all wheels driving is irrelevant.

[carinaman]

The late LJKS wrote that a quick car was one that accelerated from 60 to 90 in a time comparable to the 0-60 time.

[s m]

mat205125 said:

Heathwood said:

I agree, 30-70mph is the one that sticks in my head and IMO is a good real life barometer. Used to be timed and published in car mags but I’ve not seen it for years.

Absolutely

0-60 only tells us whether something is AWD these days

30-70 is what we want to know for what the TED is going to be when we pull out to overtake ..... the fact we launched off of the line, with all wheels driving is irrelevant.

Just reading the full test of the latest 911 Turbo and it manages the 30-70 sprint in 2.0 seconds

[ingenieur]

Surely 0-60 is better as it gives you more information? Like how well developed the chassis is for limiting traction issues.

It's basically relative as well isn't it.

If you're saying that since no front-wheel-drive car can ever really get below 5.0 seconds 0-60 that it really is faster than a Porsche which can.... erm... not really.

[Scrump]

30mph to 60mph would be useful as that is the change in speed limit as I leave my village. If the local councillors have their way it will soon be 20mph to 60mph

[ingenieur]

Scrump said:

30mph to 60mph would be useful as that is the change in speed limit as I leave my village. If the local councillors have their way it will soon be 20mph to 60mph

Wrong... if they drop it to 20mph they will sure as sh1p be looking to knock a wedge off the 60-limit as well.

[otolith]

Unless the cars you are looking at are very different in drivetrain configuration, weight, or aerodynamics, the speed increments will probably all come out in the same order anyway. The only ones likely to vary much are the "X-Y in what might be the wrong gear" numbers.

[Zetec-S]

ingenieur said:

Scrump said:

30mph to 60mph would be useful as that is the change in speed limit as I leave my village. If the local councillors have their way it will soon be 20mph to 60mph

Wrong... if they drop it to 20mph they will sure as sh1p be looking to knock a wedge off the 60-limit as well.

Yep, in a few years time the 20-40 figure will be all that matters

[QBee]

Clarkson did a piece in Top Gear about Saab drivers having a smug smile.
So he borrowed a 9-5 aero (turbo) and set about finding out why.

Us Saab owners just sat there, watching the telly, smug smile firmly in place. We knew the answer.
And he found it was the 30-70 overtaking performance that was the reason.

No they are not a Porsche 911 turbo, but they do overtake a lot quicker than they look like they might.

[RazerSauber]

I've never understood why 0-60 times have gone out the window in place of 0-62 times. I know 62mph is 100km/h but what bearing is that on us? It sounds to me like they started doing 0-60mph and 0-100mph since cars are getting frighteningly quick now then somehow it got all confused and we end up with 0-62 times. Is it just lazy manufacturer performance figures so they don't have to measure 0-60 and this bears more relevance across the continents?