60 - 100 times........real figures not based on grip etc
18 January 2002, 02:11 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wondered what peoples 60-100 times where, just to put into a clearer picture how much grip is worth, as i don't get wheel spin in 3rd gear.
Mine is
0-60 - 5.3 secs
0-100 - 9.5 secs
9.5 - 5.3 = 4.2 sec's which i think is quite good.
Has anyone else got there figures or any book figures to compare
[Edited by dingy - 1/18/2002 2:13:02 PM]
Mine is
0-60 - 5.3 secs
0-100 - 9.5 secs
9.5 - 5.3 = 4.2 sec's which i think is quite good.
Has anyone else got there figures or any book figures to compare
[Edited by dingy - 1/18/2002 2:13:02 PM]
18 January 2002, 02:18 PM
#5
A best of 3.52s according to the Stack with short gearing. Although this varies wildy depending between the best of 3.52s and a worst of 4.24s depending on how quick the gearchange can be done in (haven't tried it recently with the tall diff, but imagine it would be slower).
18 January 2002, 02:21 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reckon you need to get your Stack cjecked Mike - bearing in mind you said it recorded 4.5secs 0-60, that means your car gets to a ton in 8? Hmmm.
Not that I disbelieve you at all, but can anyone else smell it?
Hehe
Not that I disbelieve you at all, but can anyone else smell it?
Hehe
Trending Topics
18 January 2002, 02:26 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOL @ Ima, see youve got the jist of the bb already...
On a serious note, 60-100 or whatever is the only really fair way of showing how fast your car is (As ive said over and over, mentioned it yesterday on here, but all i got was anti-cossie abuse...
).
Is averaging the 0-60 + 0-100 times the best way of doing it?
Can we organise a day of this style of shennanigans? Scoobs, Cossies, Whoever wants to that is fast, really...
Id pay good money to finally get this argument sorted. Id pay upto £100odd if we had lots of us in lots of different models of mad cars attending.
Id happily organise it if someone told me how (ie where? timing equipment etc etc etc.
Steve
On a serious note, 60-100 or whatever is the only really fair way of showing how fast your car is (As ive said over and over, mentioned it yesterday on here, but all i got was anti-cossie abuse...
).Is averaging the 0-60 + 0-100 times the best way of doing it?
Can we organise a day of this style of shennanigans? Scoobs, Cossies, Whoever wants to that is fast, really...
Id pay good money to finally get this argument sorted. Id pay upto £100odd if we had lots of us in lots of different models of mad cars attending.
Id happily organise it if someone told me how (ie where? timing equipment etc etc etc
.Steve
18 January 2002, 02:28 PM
#10
Craig,
You muppet, 60-100 is not based on traction, this was done from a rolling start in second gear from 40mph onwards. You just tell the Stack what speed increment to record and it it starts the timer as soon as you hit that speed and stops it at the second figure.
So nail the throttle in second, at 40mph - timer then starts the minute the car hits 60 and stops again at 100. Doesn't take a genius to work out
Best regards
Mike R
You muppet, 60-100 is not based on traction, this was done from a rolling start in second gear from 40mph onwards. You just tell the Stack what speed increment to record and it it starts the timer as soon as you hit that speed and stops it at the second figure.
So nail the throttle in second, at 40mph - timer then starts the minute the car hits 60 and stops again at 100. Doesn't take a genius to work out
Best regards
Mike R
18 January 2002, 02:30 PM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,965
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to be a pedantic git, but you can't calculate a true 60-100 time by taking your 0-60 time from a 0-100 ---- cos in these circumstances the car is accelerating hard passing thru 60 mph, which will artificially shorten the time.
You should really be cruising at a steady 60 in 3rd then boot it ... have I just given you an excuse to do another road test ;-)
I reckon a true 60-100 roll on would be around 7-8 seconds.
You should really be cruising at a steady 60 in 3rd then boot it ... have I just given you an excuse to do another road test ;-)
I reckon a true 60-100 roll on would be around 7-8 seconds.
18 January 2002, 02:32 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seing as my speedo n rev counter seem to work randomly on my 3dr (i use shiftlights now), a Stack Dash may be a good option.
Mike- How much are they, including instalation (cant imagine a DIY job, esp speed calibration).
Cheers
Mike- How much are they, including instalation (cant imagine a DIY job, esp speed calibration).
Cheers
18 January 2002, 02:33 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
7-8 seconds your joking right, i will be hiting about 140 in that time 3rd and 4th are awesome...
So Mike, yours is measured differently, i am getting a stack soon so will be able to see what mine does, what model is the one in your car ???
So Mike, yours is measured differently, i am getting a stack soon so will be able to see what mine does, what model is the one in your car ???
18 January 2002, 02:34 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 3,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dingy, FWIW, my car does about 10.8 seconds to 100 MPH. 0-62 MPH was about 4.8 seconds. Power would be between 285 and 295 BHP.
In gear acceleration will tell you as much about your gearing as about your power though ...
In gear acceleration will tell you as much about your gearing as about your power though ...
18 January 2002, 02:44 PM
#16
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stack is dead easy to calibrate,
you just take the readings of a non-drivin axle,
and put in the tirecircumstence in the stack.
I've got one on my fiesta too.
I have a st500sr, think the same as mike has.
About £500, and that's not the dash, it's only a revcounter with
digital speedo and lots of amusing 0-60 0-whatever 1/4 mile etc options.
you just take the readings of a non-drivin axle,
and put in the tirecircumstence in the stack.
I've got one on my fiesta too.
I have a st500sr, think the same as mike has.
About £500, and that's not the dash, it's only a revcounter with
digital speedo and lots of amusing 0-60 0-whatever 1/4 mile etc options.
18 January 2002, 02:45 PM
#18
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 3,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dingy.
Brickboy is right. If you want to find out your 60-100 time then you have to be rolling at 60 and then accelerate. If you calculate it from a standing start when passing 60 you are not taking into account any lag that may be present, and you would obviously get little or no spin. I would have thought someone of your calibre would have realised this?
In your car, even at 60, seeing as it's such an amazingly powerful beast I would have thought there's still a chance of spinning if you floored it at 60?
Stef.
Brickboy is right. If you want to find out your 60-100 time then you have to be rolling at 60 and then accelerate. If you calculate it from a standing start when passing 60 you are not taking into account any lag that may be present, and you would obviously get little or no spin. I would have thought someone of your calibre would have realised this?
In your car, even at 60, seeing as it's such an amazingly powerful beast I would have thought there's still a chance of spinning if you floored it at 60?
Stef.
18 January 2002, 02:45 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dingy- you beat me to it! was gonna say that
Joris- Oh, cheers 4 the info. ill get one then! Thought it would cost more. Thats all i need, revs n speed, i can get an aftermarket water temp n fuel level, esp as i already have 7 autometer gauges (looks like a bloody aeroplane cockpit... ).
Stef- Good points, U reckon lag does affect it lots? hmmm, ill kick *** as i got ALS (antilag) and can pootle along in low revs at 60 running 20+psi boooooooost , wheelspin at that speed should be stopped by the wide *** rear rims im ordering (8.5" rims, 255tyres)
Wanna do loadsa 0-60 n 1/4mile this year but methinks i best buy a better diff first (wanna mad g.box but ill wait till my current one explodes... )
[Edited by Steve3drRS - 1/18/2002 2:54:31 PM]
[Edited by Steve3drRS - 1/18/2002 2:58:57 PM]
Joris- Oh, cheers 4 the info. ill get one then! Thought it would cost more. Thats all i need, revs n speed, i can get an aftermarket water temp n fuel level, esp as i already have 7 autometer gauges (looks like a bloody aeroplane cockpit...
).Stef- Good points, U reckon lag does affect it lots? hmmm, ill kick ***
as i got ALS (antilag) and can pootle along in low revs at 60 running 20+psi boooooooost , wheelspin at that speed should be stopped by the wide *** rear rims im ordering (8.5" rims, 255tyres) Wanna do loadsa 0-60 n 1/4mile this year but methinks i best buy a better diff first (wanna mad g.box but ill wait till my current one explodes...
)[Edited by Steve3drRS - 1/18/2002 2:54:31 PM]
[Edited by Steve3drRS - 1/18/2002 2:58:57 PM]
18 January 2002, 03:06 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stef,
Think it was Mike that said it was foot down already at 60mph...
Mike,
So the Stack is only as accurate as the info inputted? Always wondered why your car looks fast on paper, but in real life it's Lupo-like!
Think it was Mike that said it was foot down already at 60mph...
Mike,
So the Stack is only as accurate as the info inputted? Always wondered why your car looks fast on paper, but in real life it's Lupo-like!
18 January 2002, 03:10 PM
#22
I think you will find that when the magazine testers do the in-gear increments, they do it in the manner I did mine.... If not, I fail to see how a heavier (300kg) , slightly less powerful car (80bhp) can do it only 1.5s slower...
Trying to do it the way Stef suggests would by very difficult, as you would need to hold the car at 59mph (because the clock would start with any test gear the instant the car hit 60) and then floor it.
If not, I fail to see how a heavier (300kg) , slightly less powerful car (80bhp) can do it only 1.5s slower...Trying to do it the way Stef suggests would by very difficult, as you would need to hold the car at 59mph (because the clock would start with any test gear the instant the car hit 60) and then floor it.
18 January 2002, 03:14 PM
#23
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends on surface stef, Pod is wheel spinning the whole strip, brunters grips in 3rd.
I see your point, but speedo's generally are about as acurate as a nova's bhp claims.
so rolling in 3rd at 60 then floor it, i don't think it would be much difference to be honest, obviously slightly slower.
But if you have your 0-60 and 0-100 times it would be the same measurement for a comparision, as long as its measured on the same run from a standing start then you can compare these figures.
I will try what you are saying when i get the stack and see what the difference is.
MMMMM 10" slicks on the way
I see your point, but speedo's generally are about as acurate as a nova's bhp claims.
so rolling in 3rd at 60 then floor it, i don't think it would be much difference to be honest, obviously slightly slower.
But if you have your 0-60 and 0-100 times it would be the same measurement for a comparision, as long as its measured on the same run from a standing start then you can compare these figures.
I will try what you are saying when i get the stack and see what the difference is.
MMMMM 10" slicks on the way
18 January 2002, 03:21 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steve,
Simon De Banke has already explained to you that wider tyres are not going to help you with straightline traction, if anything narrower tyres will. Only other benefit would be lowering the pressure if I am to understand simon correctly.
And another thing. stop going on about bloody final drive! It makes no difference what final drive is, you need to mutiply that bu the ratio of the gear you are in. You might find that although you have a bloody tall final drive, the combination of your gearbox ratios means it is only your fifth gear that makes your top speeds so impressive.
It is probable that the shortage of space in the scoob gearbox forces the final drive to be higher (lower top speed) only to have smaller main gears.
Simon De Banke has already explained to you that wider tyres are not going to help you with straightline traction, if anything narrower tyres will. Only other benefit would be lowering the pressure if I am to understand simon correctly.
And another thing. stop going on about bloody final drive! It makes no difference what final drive is, you need to mutiply that bu the ratio of the gear you are in. You might find that although you have a bloody tall final drive, the combination of your gearbox ratios means it is only your fifth gear that makes your top speeds so impressive.
It is probable that the shortage of space in the scoob gearbox forces the final drive to be higher (lower top speed) only to have smaller main gears.
18 January 2002, 03:24 PM
#26
Shagmeister
Stack figure: 13.07s standing mile recorded.
Actual timing gear figure: 13.05s
Stack figure: 183mph
Actual timing gear figure: 180.9mph (shagged tyres)
Stack figure: 172mph
Actual timing gear figure: 172mph (new tyres)
The Stack is extremely accurate - at 180.9mph (Datron) it showed 183mph (bearing in mind this was a year after the gauge had been calibrated and the tyres were down from brand new to just above legal limit (you have to measure the circumference of them and program it in the Stack, it then times the rotational distance and works out the speed), so the circumference would have been less which effected the speed reading on this occasion.
Obviously the accuracy reduces with wear of the tyre and so the speed starts to be affected until new tyres are fitted again (unless you take regular measurements and program these in as the tyre wears). When the Speedo was first fitted (and the tyres were the circumference programmed in) I did 172mph at Alconbury in 1.2m (419bhp engine) and the Stack recorded the exact same speed. The only think it doesn't do is show tenths of a mile an hour, but you can get an approximation as it switches to Km/h and the speedo registers a peak of 300 in this mode (186.41mph).
Steve3drALS,
I have an account with Stack and we offer a decent priced fitting service. However, to get an accurate speed, you will need a disc / bell set up, as the speed sensor needs something like the nuts on the bells to pick up the speed from. The more of these it has, the more accurate it is, as it counts them and works out the rotational distance from the figure that you input (hence why you have to measure the tyre circumference). The ST500SR with shift lights, odometer and speedo is £488 with everything required. If we supplied the bits, we would do the installation for £20-30.
Best regards
Mike R
Stack figure: 13.07s standing mile recorded.
Actual timing gear figure: 13.05s
Stack figure: 183mph
Actual timing gear figure: 180.9mph (shagged tyres)
Stack figure: 172mph
Actual timing gear figure: 172mph (new tyres)
The Stack is extremely accurate - at 180.9mph (Datron) it showed 183mph (bearing in mind this was a year after the gauge had been calibrated and the tyres were down from brand new to just above legal limit (you have to measure the circumference of them and program it in the Stack, it then times the rotational distance and works out the speed), so the circumference would have been less which effected the speed reading on this occasion.
Obviously the accuracy reduces with wear of the tyre and so the speed starts to be affected until new tyres are fitted again (unless you take regular measurements and program these in as the tyre wears). When the Speedo was first fitted (and the tyres were the circumference programmed in) I did 172mph at Alconbury in 1.2m (419bhp engine) and the Stack recorded the exact same speed. The only think it doesn't do is show tenths of a mile an hour, but you can get an approximation as it switches to Km/h and the speedo registers a peak of 300 in this mode (186.41mph).
Steve3drALS,
I have an account with Stack and we offer a decent priced fitting service. However, to get an accurate speed, you will need a disc / bell set up, as the speed sensor needs something like the nuts on the bells to pick up the speed from. The more of these it has, the more accurate it is, as it counts them and works out the rotational distance from the figure that you input (hence why you have to measure the tyre circumference). The ST500SR with shift lights, odometer and speedo is £488 with everything required. If we supplied the bits, we would do the installation for £20-30.
Best regards
Mike R
18 January 2002, 03:44 PM
#28
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thinner, tyres = more grip? whatyouonaboutyoucrazyfool?????
Even my gran knows that dragcars etc have wider tyres for more grip.
Bigger Tyre Footprint= More Grip!
Mike- Got 330mm disks with bells, so no problemo, ill deffo do this asap, ill e-mail u when i get home.
Even my gran knows that dragcars etc have wider tyres for more grip.
Bigger Tyre Footprint= More Grip!
Mike- Got 330mm disks with bells, so no problemo, ill deffo do this asap, ill e-mail u when i get home.
18 January 2002, 03:57 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 26,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jon - I don't reckon it would be any slower once you get past about 10mph. Your 0-60 should be under 3 if you nail it so 2.5 60-100 seems reasonable. No doubt all the cossie boys will start wanting to race you from 57 MPH to 79 MPH or what ever suit them best