A minor point, but the HJ road tests usually seem to quote the acceleration over 0-60 mph, when most manufacturers give theirs (with the exception, probably, of Morgan & Bristol !) as 0-100 kph (or the 'anglicised' 0-62mph )
Is this deliberate when quoted directly from the manufacturer blurb, if so, is the figure 'pro-rata' ?
The 0-60mph vs. the 0-100kph figure can be as much as 0.3/0.4 second, depending on optimal gear change rpm one would suppose.
cheers
woodbines
|
I would say that the 0 to 60/62 figure is almost irrelavent in todays motoring and a more worthwhile figue is the in gear rolling acceleration.Thats why a torquey diesel can often prove better in an everyday situation.
I mean,when did any of you last drive your car on a race track with a sprint start or heaven forbid a sprint start on the road !
|
With a name like Woodbines you must light up the tyres now and again?
I'd a 1.8l Jetta GTI 16 valve many years ago and IIRC it had a very fast 0-60 time .
Basically it hit the rev limiter in second at 60 and saved a gear change.
I tried it once and the engine stuttered as it hit the limiter and fluffed for a while afterwards. IIRC some blue smoke from the exhaust as well. Luckily no permanent damage but it taught me not to emulate journalists.
--
I wasna fu but just had plenty.
|
|
|
I would say that the 0 to 60/62 figure is almost irrelavent in todays motoring
Really, that's nothing to do with my question. If a performance statistic is quoted it's of interest
to know whether it's accurate or not & how it's arrived at. Simple.
>>I mean,when did any of you last drive your car on a race track with a sprint start or heaven forbid a sprint start on the road !
With due respect, what's that got to do with anything?
|
I am just trying to point out that 0 to 60 is a figure which does not reflect how a car is used on a road.By all means ask the question,but when you get the answer, will it have a bearing on which car you will buy ?
So to turn the question back to you, in what way is this time important to you.I am not trying to be argumentative, just curious.
|
I understand your point Mr.Tee43 - I just thought you misunderstood mine - so sorry for my rather terse reply!
Simply, I like facts. If a manufucturer has supplied a statistic about a product, let's have it accurately
conveyed & propagated (or confirmed as such).
It wouldn't be the clincher to know that a car accelerated slighlty faster or slower than a certain figure, but it may, in conjunction
with other statistics and/or preferences, colour a decision.
Exactly comparable measures are useful, otherwise we might as well compare apples with oranges.
regards
woodbines
|
is the figure 'pro rata'?
It will obviously take a little bit longer for a car to get to 62 than 60mph. Presumably a manufacturer based in mainland Europe wants to publish a single set of data, so they use a European benchmark figure rather than a British one? Or is there now an EU directive on how to present acceleration figures!?
(I see Vauxhall still publish 0-60 figures but Ford publish 0-62 times).
IMO its a bit academic as some manufacturers are said to be conservative with their figures, and occasionally you read a road test where the manufacturers figure is optimistic; similarly engine bhp can vary 10% or more from the published figure.
;o)
|
>>It will obviously take a little bit longer for a car to get to 62 than 60mph>>
In the real world it really doesn't matter and probably varies between different drivers using the same vehicle.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
If you assume that acceleration is constant (it isn't in practice) then it's possible to convert 0-60mph to 0-100kph using Applied Maths, 40 years ago I could have given the calculation!
Aston-Martin, Land-Rover, Jaguar, Morgan And Bristol apart, virtually all vehicle development is carried out in metric countries so presumably it's the 0-100kph that's actually tested but individual manufacturers would need to be asked whether they convert to 0-60mph by calculation or retesting.
|
|
|
