|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,100
Addicted CEG\'er
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,100 |
HAHAHA>. I was laughing my butt off at that, too.
Ray
'99 CSVT - Silver #222/276
In a constant state of blow-off euphoria.
Originally posted by Kremitthefrog:
I like to wear dresses and use binoculars to watch grandmas across the street.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by kerrychin:
A 2006 BMW 330i will do 0-100 in 14.3 sec @ 98 mph
Is that anything like Motor Trend's wacky correction factor.  
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760 |
The car will go 0-100 in 14.0 seconds, then it takes it another .3 seconds to slow down to 98mph...geez c'mon gues. Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by kerrychin:
A 2006 BMW 330i will do 0-100 in 14.3 sec @ 98 mph
Mark
Ryan
Trollin!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 661
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 661 |
Ooops...what was I thinking?  Anyway, my point was a) The 330i is pretty fast, you must be significantly faster b) The SRT-8 has 425 hp and is seriously fast, so you are in heady company Kerry
99 SVT Contour Silver Frost, #365/2760, DMD
98 Audi A4 2.8 Quattro Tiptronic, 30V -- SOLD!
91 Isuzu Impulse XS Kammback, Handling By Lotus
Victoria, BC, Canada
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 319
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 319 |
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by SeR Guy1:
I hit 60 in about 4.7 seconds. Oh you mean in a Contour.. Nevermind... 
Sounds quick.
I'll run ya.
Hey....I'll run both of you.
I run close to those times in the z with 265 hp at the wheels in a very light car (less than 10 pounds/hp), rwd, posi-trac and shaved tires. somebody's g-tech isn't working properly!!!
not that I am a big fan of them, don't like the styling...but an srt-4 neon will run about 6 seconds to 60 mph, and 14-14.4 in the 1/4, in a car that has 10k on the odo, and street tires....with an experienced driver. The stats say they are faster in both 0-60 and the 1/4, but realworld is often different. ...either way you can't ignore the power to weight ratio (12.7 per hp) so anyone running similar times in their contour with drag tires would really have to be at similar power to weight ratios to get close to those times.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
HP is just one small piece of the puzzle.
The ACTUAL power curve & the gear ratios play a much larger part in acceleration then "peak" HP does. That's even taking traction out of the equation.
People need to wake up and see the whole picture.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140 |
Remember, the accelaration curve of a car, assuming the tires are hooking up, follows the TORQUE curve. This is modified by the gear you are in, so it's better to have 100 lb-ft with a 3:1 reduction than 125 lb-ft with a 2:1 reduction (300lb-ft vs 250 lb-ft at the wheels). So a peaky engine with no midrange will accelerate slowly through the middle of the rev range, then really pick up just before the shift. A car with a slightly flatter tq curve will pull harder for the first part of each gear, but not quite as hard towards peak. As you can see, area under the tq curve is the critical part. Also, only the part you use counts: If a redline shift puts you at 4k in the next gear, then what the engine does below 4k only counts in first, where traction is probably the issue anyway, thanks to the high multiplier effect of the low first gear.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 319
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 319 |
I am familiar with the whole picture, ie gearing and traction. I swapped the rear end in the z to an R200, and the tranny to a T-5 for that purpose. It still would have outrun my contour with the 4 speed and R180 rear diff, because it has a lot more power, plain and simple.
I think Hp and power to weight is a big piece of the puzzle, not a small one. That is why you, and I and many others spend countless hours and thousands of dollars beefing up the hp in our cars, and swapping body panels for lighter pieces before we touch the diff.
Anyway, you are right in saying that they all work together and that people need to consider this
...back to the srt comparison, the neon still has the advantage with power and torque curve.
|
|
|
|
|
