nigelward

4wd losses and aerodynamics?

Surely between 60-1?? these are going to have more bearing on the performance figures than at lower speeds.

At which point the Scooby will loose out because of the shape of the front and the fact that it is a saloon, and the losses incurred through the drivetrain increase (there aren't any standard cars in the £15K-£20K price bracket that have traction issues above 60 (surely??)).

All the cars that have posted 'surprising' times have been hatchbacks.

All unscientific I may add .

nigelward

If everyone knows the gearing of their cars how about using the revcounter to measure the speed?

Veracocha

Good morning and merry Xmax guys!

I am willing to bet that if I raced my S3 from 60-100 with a Civic Type R there would not be more that 1 car lenth in it.

Judging by these figures I would get my *** handed to me on a plate by about 4 car lengths which is a lot.

If we put this into proportion the Civic will almost match a 340bhp M3 or 380bhp RS4. I think not.

I am off to unwrap some presents now!

LG John

Thats what I did. I defo measured exactly between 60-100 mph...this still doesn't account for inaccuracy of the timing gear (nokia in right hand), human error, if the road was perfectly flat, etc.

John's right....the 1/4 mile strip.....or dare I say it.....the road is where these battles will be fought and I'd be very suprised if a CTR matched my car between 60-100. Neverthless, the CTR has proven itself as quite the machine....shame its going to get popular like the scooby and then everyone will hate it

Merry Christmas

[Edited by Saxo Boy - 12/25/2002 4:59:59 PM]

john banks

Typical dash tachometers are not accurate either. An ECU output on a datalog is since the ECU uses a high frequency crystal controlled clock and the ECU is pretty good at counting engine revolutions accurately (kind of obvious).

Ditch the amateurish results, they make no sense and will only cause arguments. I will just get more people emailing me defending their claims As it is I might as well measure out the 1/4 mile strip by walking it the accuracy of the techniques being used

Veracocha

So them it needs to be tested car vs car rather than with 2 inaccurate times.

john banks

Car vs car may depend on who gets on the power first?

How about an increment with no gearchange mesaured with AP22? For expense can't beat it? Or plot the g-force curve.

skiddus_markus

As Saxoboy mentioned-a 1/4 mile test will help.Just compare times from 0-1/8 mile and 1/8-1/4 mile.The second distance is always covered a lot quicker than the first as you are up to speed and have got all the traction issues out of the way(unles you're in a twelfty squillion hp car).
My GTiR usually gets around low 8secs for the first 1/8 then high 4 secs for the 2nd 1/8.The 0-60 is low 4secs and the 0-100 is mid 11secs.It's no good saying the 60-100 is therefore 7ish secs as if you're doing a specific 60-100 test you're already in gear whereas a 0-100 you will have to chang up at around 60mph costing say 0.5 secs or so and the car losing a bit of boost and a bit more time.If I was already in gear and the boost built up,the 60-100 would be around 6secs.

LG John

**** I kind of hoped they would be since I use it to determine my speed through gatso's......still I've had no flashes so it can't be that bad

John I appreciate the times are amaturish but for most people its the best we can do. There hasn't been any arguing in this thread and the figures are a useful rough guide. Take dunks 7.6...whilst I don't believe a type r could do that, if you add a second for inaccuracies you get a far more realistic (but still very good) 8.6 Of course, he'd argue you could also take a second to account for inaccuracy

john banks

Those sort of errors make the whole exercise pointless.

LG John

John Banks = Scrooge

Veracocha

I wouldn't say pointless as it serves as maybe a very rough idea of what our cars are capable of. If you want accurate figures then I agree that this method is a waste of time and petrol.

I forgot to mention one car which would near the top of the pile in this class which is the 330i.

Funnily enough I have some codes on my S3 which allows you to change the climate control display into a digital km/hour display which is cool. The codes say the 'actual' speed of the car. It is easy to time it like this but I have not done that yet. I have tested it with my friends GPS and it is indeed very accurate.

I am sure that Audi along with many other manufacturers set the speedos to over-read deliberately.

The_Gza

Bring it on!

Veracocha

I feel sorry for the civic boys who think that a Clio Cup cannot keep up. They are in for a shock on the road.

Paul_M

They have to... unless they spend a fortune on perfectly accurate speedos. By law speedos cannot under-read, but can over-read up to 10% so manufacturers deliberately make them over-read so they have a margin of inaccuracy while maintaining their road legal status.

Jonto

I have been looking at a clio cup , how do they compare in gear to both scoobies and CTR ?

bluenose172

iTrader: (2)

With 171BHP/Tonne, pretty well!!

LG John

We seemed to have established that CTR's once rolling will keep up with the top of the range Impreza P1 (22b not included) and there are strong claims that the clio cup with stay with the CTR, hence, aslo a P1. So what are we saying here. Is a CTR and Clio cup (£11k) really going to stay with a P1 or teked up UK classic?? I just can't see it!! The closest I've owned to a cup is the VTS and whilst it would stay very reasonably close to a standard bugeye my car and a P1 would rip it a new a55hole! Clearly the cup and CTR are faster than a VTS and I defo noticed a useful difference between the CTR and VTS but I cannot believe that its the same difference as between my car/p1 and the VTS. No doubt the cup/CTR are a new breed of ultra fast hatches that distance themselves from the more traditional hot hatch, VTS/106 GTI/306 GTI/etc...but can they really stay with the car that was once regarded as a bit of a supercar slayer?

Seems a crail visit really is in order

bluenose172

iTrader: (2)

How about this then Kenny.

My bro looks like hes getting a Cup in March, I may follow suit, just depends! Take your scoob along to crail, line the cars up on the strip, roll to 20, then give the sign to 'gun' it. That would take the main advantage away from the scoob. It should be possible to get up to around the ton! I think you'd only pull a couple of cars in front. How about it, could be interesting!

deadduck

OK, I'll start by saying that due to timing errors this is probably all pointless, but...

Just tried it in my S2000, with a full tank, in the wet, over a few runs. Reckon on around high eight seconds, low nines. Includes the 3rd to 4th change which costs almost nowt with the S2K box.

In other words, in my opinion, the times quoted for a CTR are, erm, optimistic. ;-)

DD

MooseRacer

Just tried it in my ITR but forgot to press stop 'cos there was a copper on a bridge above me

john banks

No you cannot conclude that a CTR or Clio Cup is as quick as a P1. Get some >100 mph terminals and we'll start to even consider the possibility. Until then

Veracocha

I think Saxo Boy meant it tongue on cheek. Everyone knows that a CTR or Clio cup is not as fast as a P1 at any speed. A P1 has nearly 50% more power an god knows how much more torque but with about the same weight.

A time of 7.5 seconds from 60-100 for the CTR is either BS or measured inaccurately. I believe that much is established now.

MattOz

65 - 105, the stopwatch said 5.5 seconds, starting in 3rd and then moving into 4th. Looking at the published figures it looks like it should be closer to 5.8 seconds. Still pretty rapid though!

Should be bye bye CTR driver anyway! LOL

BMW M5 btw

Matt

[Edited by MattOz - 12/27/2002 12:25:41 PM]

john banks

That is why I love M5s. I have modded the hell out of my Scooby short of going internal and ended up with just under 6 seconds, and an M5 does it out of the box in total comfort and serenity in comparison

LG John

Quite agree John...you can't argue with 400bhp of V8 grunt That S2000 time sounds quite realistic I played with one of these once in the VTS. He was behind me and pulled out to overtake so I floored it. He still had enough power to get passed the flat VTS and then start to pull a useful lead...very quick car Moose you should have pulled over and asked to borrow the gun so you could get an exact time

LG John

Blue when I take the scooby to Crail I'll do a few launches to determine my best possible time but thereafter will be doing normal 'get her going then floor it' starts. I'd be happy to test a drag from a rolling start

Sexy Sue Sucks...

Saxo boy you sound really fast! what car do you have?

what is the VTS? Verile ******** Syndrome?

coz you sound like you have big ***** coz it seemed to keep up with everything!

go to your local GUM clinic and they will have some antibiotics for VTS and you will be back to normal.

Happy new year!

LG John

My ********* are working fine thank you Last I knew so was my old VTS.....




.....shame the scooby isn't

http://www.scoobynet.co.uk/bbs/threa...hreadid=162266

LG John

Nope they can't do 60-100 in 7.5-8 seconds Today I spent the afternoon with John sorting the car and on the way back I got a chance for some slip-road action with a CTR (both cars 2 up) The CTR certainly showed useful performance but I was having to back off a fair bit and hit the limiter in 2nd and 3rd because I was concentrating on not going into the back of it. In 4th we got to open it up a little more and as dunk said the ctr struggled at that speed and the scooby pasted it above 90mph. Cracking little car and once rolling would play all day with standard scoobs