Scoobynet Drag Strip Leaderboard!
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,314
Likes: 19
From: Wakefield
Found this too
When manufactures test something like an Evo V RS at 4.2 seconds to 0-60mph, it will have been done at pretty conservative revs, now when someone like MickyWRX or myself launch there WRX with over 50bhp more than an Evo V and a more efficient drivetrain at over 6,000rpm then you can see how 2.9-3.5 seconds is in reach. (but very hard on the car)
The early Nissan GTR's had a power to weight ratio very similar to MickyWRX's car, especially when allowing for higher tranny losses on the GTR and that's reflected in the 1/4 mile times of both cars, the Nissan going on to 12.2 and Micky's 12.4 respectively.
I believe to achieve a 3.2 second 0-60mph the 2007 GTR had launch control set at around 4500rpm, Micky on the other hand side-stepped the clutch at around 7,000rpm, so for him to claim a similar 0-60 wouldn't shock me one iota.
This is assuming a somewhat linear rate of acceleration, with a FAST 1-2 shift. It's in line with what I have measured with a G-tech accelerometer.
2.3 second 60' time = 35.5 mph @60' = 7.0 second 0-60 time
2.2 second 60' time = 37.1 mph @60' = 6.5 second 0-60 time
2.1 second 60' time = 38.9 mph @60' = 5.9 second 0-60 time
2.0 second 60' time = 40.9 mph @60' = 5.2 second 0-60 time
1.9 second 60' time = 43.0 mph @60' = 4.6 second 0-60 time
1.8 second 60' time = 45.5 mph @60' = 4.0 second 0-60 time
1.7 second 60' time = 48.1 mph @60' = 3.4 second 0-60 time
1.6 second 60' time = 51.1 mph @60' = 2.9 second 0-60 time
1.5 second 60' time = 54.5 mph @60' = 2.2 second 0-60 time
1.4 second 60' time = 58.4 mph @60' = 1.5 second 0-60 time
1.36 second 60' time = 60.0 mph @60' = 1.36 second 0-60 time
1.3 second 60' time = 62.9 mph @60' = 1.2 second 0-60 time
1.2 second 60' time = 68.1 mph @60' = 1.1 second 0-60 time
1.1 second 60' time = 74.3 mph @60' = 0.9 second 0-60 time
1.0 second 60' time = 81.8 mph @60' = 0.7 second 0-60 time
Here's the math:
0-60 is a function of traction, engine power, rear end gearing, shifting ability.
You can kind of back out a 0-60 from a 60 ft time. For example, if you assume a constant acceleration over the 60 ft time (which is not always a good assumption), then you can assume that your time to distance function is given by the double integral of a constant acceleration:
0.5 * acceleration*(60ft time)^2 = 60 ft
Solving this gives acceleration in ft / sec^2 of
a = 120 ft / (60ft time)^2
Since 1 MPH is about 1.47 ft/sec, assuming the constant acceleration, noting velocity is acceleration times time, and solving for the math,
Velocity at end of 60 ft is approximately 81.82 / 60ft-time (units ignored for simplicity).
In other words, take your 60 ft time, divide it into 81.82, and that will give you an approximate MPH at the end of the 60 ft.
2.3 second 60' time = 35.5 mph @60' = 7.0 second 0-60 time
2.2 second 60' time = 37.1 mph @60' = 6.5 second 0-60 time
2.1 second 60' time = 38.9 mph @60' = 5.9 second 0-60 time
2.0 second 60' time = 40.9 mph @60' = 5.2 second 0-60 time
1.9 second 60' time = 43.0 mph @60' = 4.6 second 0-60 time
1.8 second 60' time = 45.5 mph @60' = 4.0 second 0-60 time
1.7 second 60' time = 48.1 mph @60' = 3.4 second 0-60 time
1.6 second 60' time = 51.1 mph @60' = 2.9 second 0-60 time
1.5 second 60' time = 54.5 mph @60' = 2.2 second 0-60 time
1.4 second 60' time = 58.4 mph @60' = 1.5 second 0-60 time
1.36 second 60' time = 60.0 mph @60' = 1.36 second 0-60 time
1.3 second 60' time = 62.9 mph @60' = 1.2 second 0-60 time
1.2 second 60' time = 68.1 mph @60' = 1.1 second 0-60 time
1.1 second 60' time = 74.3 mph @60' = 0.9 second 0-60 time
1.0 second 60' time = 81.8 mph @60' = 0.7 second 0-60 time
Here's the math:
0-60 is a function of traction, engine power, rear end gearing, shifting ability.
You can kind of back out a 0-60 from a 60 ft time. For example, if you assume a constant acceleration over the 60 ft time (which is not always a good assumption), then you can assume that your time to distance function is given by the double integral of a constant acceleration:
0.5 * acceleration*(60ft time)^2 = 60 ft
Solving this gives acceleration in ft / sec^2 of
a = 120 ft / (60ft time)^2
Since 1 MPH is about 1.47 ft/sec, assuming the constant acceleration, noting velocity is acceleration times time, and solving for the math,
Velocity at end of 60 ft is approximately 81.82 / 60ft-time (units ignored for simplicity).
In other words, take your 60 ft time, divide it into 81.82, and that will give you an approximate MPH at the end of the 60 ft.
The early Nissan GTR's had a power to weight ratio very similar to MickyWRX's car, especially when allowing for higher tranny losses on the GTR and that's reflected in the 1/4 mile times of both cars, the Nissan going on to 12.2 and Micky's 12.4 respectively.
I believe to achieve a 3.2 second 0-60mph the 2007 GTR had launch control set at around 4500rpm, Micky on the other hand side-stepped the clutch at around 7,000rpm, so for him to claim a similar 0-60 wouldn't shock me one iota.
Last edited by RS_Matt; Mar 14, 2016 at 10:21 PM.
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,314
Likes: 19
From: Wakefield
It's probably just me but I've never seen the thrill of cornering hard :/
I think the fact I tried sliding my WRX around a roundabout and left it zig-zagging for 80yards put me off!
I think the fact I tried sliding my WRX around a roundabout and left it zig-zagging for 80yards put me off!
That's where you're going wrong Matt, you dont want to slide it anywhere...it's all about maximising the grip, getting perfect entry speed so you can plant your foot mid corner and come out as fast as possible, no harm in giving it a flick and getting the **** out but it's not the quickest way around imo
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,314
Likes: 19
From: Wakefield
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,778
Likes: 4
From: Newcastle. 330bhp-289lb/ft @ 1bar boost - 12.4s @ 105mph
Tyre size, well profile plays a big part in the speed, IIRC as it effects the gearing or something.
Also the weight of the car/driver is worth noting. Dunno what my car weighs, but, I'm usually under 70kgs.
Guilty as charged at dumping the clutch near the limiter. Go hard or go home.
Also the weight of the car/driver is worth noting. Dunno what my car weighs, but, I'm usually under 70kgs.
Guilty as charged at dumping the clutch near the limiter. Go hard or go home.
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,778
Likes: 4
From: Newcastle. 330bhp-289lb/ft @ 1bar boost - 12.4s @ 105mph
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,314
Likes: 19
From: Wakefield
Tyre size, well profile plays a big part in the speed, IIRC as it effects the gearing or something.
Also the weight of the car/driver is worth noting. Dunno what my car weighs, but, I'm usually under 70kgs.
Guilty as charged at dumping the clutch near the limiter. Go hard or go home.
Also the weight of the car/driver is worth noting. Dunno what my car weighs, but, I'm usually under 70kgs.
Guilty as charged at dumping the clutch near the limiter. Go hard or go home.
Last edited by RS_Matt; Mar 15, 2016 at 08:44 PM.
The problem with revving to 8krpm on a JDM on the standard turbo is that it's running out of flow at 6.5krpm so could be quicker grabbing another gear as you'll end up with a higher terminal
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,778
Likes: 4
From: Newcastle. 330bhp-289lb/ft @ 1bar boost - 12.4s @ 105mph
I've been eyeing up Spec C's and I know for sure I'll need tall tyres to help lengthen the gears ratios. Even though it'll rev out to 8,000 and allow the car to hit 3rd beyond 60mph it'll still have incredible rev pick up which will want to make the car spin on launch. It's probably an insignificant gesture though as I don't know the exact physics.
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,314
Likes: 19
From: Wakefield
I can't see it being an issue with just how fast the car's revs will sail from 6.5 to 8. Especially when tuned to 380? It's not a diesel!
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,314
Likes: 19
From: Wakefield
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,314
Likes: 19
From: Wakefield
I wonder about power band a bit and then think surely it'll accelerate quicker from 6000-8000 in 2nd than it would from 4000-6000 in 3rd? (or would the huge revs cause too much heat build up?) ...and wouldn't it be better holding it to 8,000rpm in 1st to avoid a huge wedge of wheelspin inducing torque whilst changing to 2nd at 6,000rpm? I can imagine changing at 6,000rpm in a Spec C puts you at around 40mph in 3rd gear!
Last edited by RS_Matt; Mar 16, 2016 at 12:20 AM.
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,314
Likes: 19
From: Wakefield
I remember my 2nd ever run, it was against a White Blob STI, he stayed at the staging lights for an age setting his revs, I launched like a granny but got a good lead, then he passed me like an absolute rocket at the half way mark.
My wife actually filmed it but p*ssed off I told her to delete it before I picked up the slip. I really wish I'd viewed it again before telling her to do so.
It was EMB's old car (shell)
My wife actually filmed it but p*ssed off I told her to delete it before I picked up the slip. I really wish I'd viewed it again before telling her to do so.
It was EMB's old car (shell)
Thread Starter
Scooby Regular
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,314
Likes: 19
From: Wakefield
It was quick, and stunning to look at. ...but looking at the SN leaderboard there are cars around the mid 11's hovering around 120mph.
It'd be nice to know, if anyone speaks to shawey.
Dont start moving the goal posts now, it was a wrx shell with a wide arch kit and a custom bay, I remember when Neil built it from a burnt out mess...was a black bug or blob to start with I forget now as it was years ago
