0-60 mph Times question

[Smokie]

A lot of cars today are described in terms of their abilility to do 0-60 mph in a specific number of seconds, I don't know what my car can do 0-60 in.

I don't have anything other than the times that are provided in a timeslip, is there an accurate way to use the numbers I do have, to extrapolate my car's 0-60 time ?

I hope to have a figure that I can use to compare my car to those vehicles that have had their 0-60 times measured, I have used an online calculator to do just that, but the figure I got was in my opinion a little better than I was willing to believe, so I don't refer to it. I am looking for a number that will hold up to scrutiny and be accurate. Thanks.

[Logan]

A gyrometer is the most readily available way to give yourself a 0-60 time. G-Tech Pro is the ****zle dizzle..

[Smokie]

A gyrometer is the most readily available way to give yourself a 0-60 time. G-Tech Pro is the ****zle dizzle..
Yeah, I agree. I was hoping math could provide an answer that was fairly accurate and cost a little less.:D

[Marauder57]

I prefer the age old system....

Punch it....1 Mississippi, 2 Mississippi.......

0-60 in 5.6 Mississippi (Give or take a "ssippi")

:up:

[Smokie]

I prefer the age old system....

Punch it....1 Mississippi, 2 Mississippi.......

0-60 in 5.6 Mississippi (Give or take a "ssippi")

:up:
WOW now that's what I call high tech. I shall put my car to the Mississippi test tomorrow.:up:

[MI2QWK4U]

Logan is right, the Gtech Pro is great and is accurate. My best 0-60 time by the Gtech is 4.2 seconds.

[HwyCruiser]

I have a Passport GTimer. There's a accel (0-xx mph) and distance (0-60 ft, 0-300 ft, 1/8 & 1/4 mile) setup where you can define how much rollout to allow before the timer starts the clock.

It defaults to 12 inches of rollout for both. The manual says that 0-60 mph times are usually measured from 12 inches to xx mph so the vehicle can launch.

Rollout for a distance trial I can see to simulating tripping a timing sensor, but allowing rollout for acceleration time seems a little dubious.

With the 12 inch rollout, I'm getting 0.3 sec from 0-10 mph and around 6.3 sec from 0 - 60 mph. With no rollout, it's more like 1.0 sec from 0 - 10 mph and 7.0 sec from 0 - 60 mph. The latter obviously makes more sense. The longest time is between 40 - 50 mph during the 1-2 shift.

Opinions? Allow rollout for accel trials? I like the sound of 6.3 sec better than 7 sec for a 0 - 60 mph time, but if that is what it is then so be it. It can only get better from there.

- JD

[sailsmen]

Conversion links from 1/4 mile time slips
http://www.tciauto.com/tech_info/calculators.htm
http://www.speedworldmotorplex.com/calc.htm
http://www.smokemup.com/auto_math/index.php

[Logan]

Logan is right, the Gtech Pro is great and is accurate. My best 0-60 time by the Gtech is 4.2 seconds.
4.0 Flat for me on the 13psi street program... :rock:

[Marauder57]

4.0 Flat for me on the 13psi street program... :rock:

Man that is haulin' some major arse!!!!

[BillyGman]

4.0 Flat for me on the 13psi street program... :rock:So when did you get the 13 PSI pulley? Last I heard you had the stock 9.5-10.0 PSI pulley. BTW, I turned a 4.25 sec 0-60 MPH using the G-Tech device also on the street w/out heating up the tires nor dropping the inflation at all.

[Ross]

I prefer the age old system....

Punch it....1 Mississippi, 2 Mississippi.......

0-60 in 5.6 Mississippi (Give or take a "ssippi")

:up:

The only problem with that system is that some people speak more slowly than others. I can do it in 2.5 Mississippi's! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Smokie]

Conversion links from 1/4 mile time slips
http://www.tciauto.com/tech_info/calculators.htm
http://www.speedworldmotorplex.com/calc.htm
http://www.smokemup.com/auto_math/index.phpThanks for the links ! I did not find a 0-60 mph calculator, maybe I did not look properly. This is the one I used in the past, when I plugged in my numbers it gave me a 5.69 seconds results. I don't know how valid the number is.

Link:0-60 Calculator (http://www.teamnabr.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=8)

Maybe some of the guys that have measured 0-60 times can plug in their track numbers and compare to see if they are close ? If the calculator is accurate I will use the number.

[BillyGman]

I haven't even looked at that, but I don't see how any calculator can accurately render your 0-60 MPH times from you punching in other figures. There are too many variables. What if your car is quicker off the line than another car, but slower in the last half of the 1/4 mile and allows some other cars w/slower 0-60 MPH times to catch up by the finish line, or vice-versa?

[Smokie]

I haven't even looked at that, but I don't see how any calculator can accurately render your 0-60 MPH times from you punching in other figures. There are too many variables. What if your car is quicker off the line than another car, but slower in the last half of the 1/4 mile and allows some other cars w/slower 0-60 MPH times to catch up by the finish line, or vice-versa?
Billy if you plug in your track numbers, and the result is very different from your measured 0-60 then I guess that would answer the question.:cool:

[BillyGman]

Billy if you plug in your track numbers, and the result is very different from your measured 0-60 then I guess that would answer the question.:cool:"What we have here is a failure to communicate" :D What I mean Javier, is that when you're relying on that calculator that those links point you to for arriving at a 0-60 MPH time for your car, then how can you tell that there's any accuracy to the time it gives you? I doubt that there can be. I don't see how typing in your ET's, 60' time, and trap speeds can possibly give you an accurate or reliable 0-60 MPH time.

For this same reason I'd never rely on my G-Tech device for the HP estimation mode that it offers although I do use it for 0-60 MPH times, as well as ET's when I can't get to the track. A HP measurement cannot be reliable simply by using vehicle weight and ET to arrive at a HP figure. There's simply too many things that can factor into that equation that would effect HP negatively or positively. Too many varibles. And I think it's the same w/trying to get a 0-60 MPH time from an online calculator. There's simply too many variables.

Ya see, I tried to keep my previous post short, and there was miscommunication as a result. That's why my posts can get long at times. I try to avoid misunderstandings as difficult as that might be via the written word. ;)

[Smokie]

Billy, would you mind going to the calculator entering your numbers and report back ?

[dwasson]

The only problem with that system is that some people speak more slowly than others. I can do it in 2.5 Mississippi's! :lol: :lol: :lol:

So that's why southerners are always talking about fast their cars are? They just say their Mississippis slow.

[Ross]

So that's why southerners are always talking about fast their cars are? They just say their Mississippis slow.

The more beer you drink, the harder it is to say Mississippi. :beer:

[BillyGman]

Billy, would you mind going to the calculator entering your numbers and report back ?Okay, I went there, but I didn't see anything for calculating 0-60 MPH times. I had assummed that it had that since that's what you were asking for. I tried all of those links too. Did I miss it? I did use the HP calculator which I'm also very skeptical about, and it gave me 432 HP. That's 32 more than the Dyno showed, but I must tell you that I've been wanting to go back to the Dyno anyway because on the day of the Dyno pulls my car developed an alternator problem and wasn't charging the battery properly. So I wonder if having low voltage could've effected the electric fuel pump during the WOT while the car was on the Dyno.

Infact, after the first Dyno pull, my battery light went on, and the Dyno tech had to put the battery charger on the battery.

[Smokie]

Billy, not sure where you went :confused:

The link I posted: HERE (http://www.teamnabr.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=8)

[BillyGman]

okay. It's just as I suspected. I typed in the #'s for my 1/8th mile according to my timeslip, and it gave me a 3.61 second 0-60 MPH time. No way. But boy do I wish!!!!!

[Bluerauder]

I prefer the age old system....

Punch it....1 Mississippi, 2 Mississippi.......

0-60 in 5.6 Mississippi (Give or take a "ssippi")

:up:
I assume that there is a conversion factor if you happen to live in North or South Carolina or the Dakotas. (give or take a "lina" or "ota"). :D

[Smokie]

okay. It's just as I suspected. I typed in the #'s for my 1/8th mile according to my timeslip, and it gave me a 3.61 second 0-60 MPH time. No way. But boy do I wish!!!!!Yeap, I was afraid my number was no good. If we use your 4.25 number as accurate, then the 3.61 number is too low by about 15%. If I apply the 15% margin of error and assume the percentage as a constant than my real 0-60 would be 6.7 seconds instead of 5.69 seconds.

You math wizards feel free to chime in, I may have my math wrong...after all I was educated in Florida.:D

[QWK SVT]

The calculator is more accurate, the slower the vehicle. It calculates my 0-60 as 6.8, based on my timeslips. My G-Tech results are usually 6.9 seconds, for my bone stock (down to the original oil in the crack case)...

[sailsmen]

The calculators are just that calculators, some of it is fairly accurate, depending on the vehicle.

I find the Gtimer provided the instructions are properly followed is more accurate for times than the calculators. After all the gtimer is measuring speed/distance which translates exactly to time. It calculates HP which is just that a calculation. :rock:

SVT, I like your cars and signature. The MM will get faster thru the 10K eng. break in. Stock you can run in the 14's, one member in prefect air ran 14.5 stock. :banana2:

[TripleTransAm]

The MM will get faster thru the 10K eng. break in. Stock you can run in the 14's, one member in prefect air ran 14.5 stock. :banana2:


Yes, yes he did. ;) :up:

Geek mode on:
Back in University, I programmed my HP48SX engineering calculator with a mega program that evaluated a polynomial equation to guess the torque output of an engine across its RPM range. I would enter a dozen or so theoretical torque values (2 of them based on published ratings, ie. the peak torque at its RPM and the torque at the peak HP RPM), and provide aerodynamic and drivetrain (gearing, tires, etc.) data including shift points. I would then 'run' the simulation and I'd have to say the results were often right on the money with what was reported in car magazines. That included 0-60 times, 60 foot times, 1/4 mile times, top speed. Of course, wheelspin was not accounted for, so you had to accept these numbers with a grain of salt at all times, not being an ideal simulation and all.

The simulation came in handy when working for the hybrid-electric car project our school participated in.

Loser mode on:
I recently came across the directory on my calculator where the subprograms for this simulation reside, and I can't remember how it works. :( (those who know of the HP48SX will understand how this happens...)

[BillyGman]

The problem that I believe there is w/using a calculator to arrive at any reliable or accurate 0-60 MPH time is that there are atleast two if not three variables that are probably impossible for any calculator to account for which are as follows:


#1. Wheel spin and/or tire inflation which also would include type of tire (stock radial, drag radial, or slicks).

#2. rear end gear ratio used. You can fully appreciate this simply by looking at our own timeslips data base and making note of how my ET's are within a hair's breath of Zack's ET's, and yet his peak HP# is 76 HP more. This is due to two factors primarily. The first being the gear choices being different. All as you need to do is observe how different our 60' times are to realize that. And the second brings me to my third listed variable......

#3. The torque, or power curve. In other words, where in the RPM scale the engine in question is making the quickest power/torque increase. Again, using mine and Zack's car as an example to illustrate my point, I'm sure that with Zack's choice of S/Cer, his engine is making a greater portion of it's available power higher up in the RPM scale than my car is. Whereas the available power produced by my engine is coming on sooner (at a lower RPM) and therefore offers more power in the low, and midrange RPM's. I don't see any way possible that any calculator can account for exactly where in the RPM scale an engine is making it's quickest power increases. Only a Dyno can measure that, and this factor alone will greatly effect not only your quartermile ET's, but even moreso your 60' times, as well as your 0-60 MPH times.

So it's for these three reasons that I've listed, that I'd never pay much attention to any 0-60 MPH time that has been taken from a calculator.

Here's another comparisant that can also be used to illustrate my point...
Look at how close my ET is to that of Dave's listed ET (AKA "MI2QWIK4U"). Now note the significant difference in our 60' times, as well as our trap speeds, and our 1/8 mile times. Going by our timeslips info, my car gets a significant jump off the line, and is in the lead for the first 1/8 mile approximately. But Dave's car comes on stronger in the second half of the quartermile which is indicated by his ET and significantly faster trap speed. Yet again, our ET's are so close, it would be difficult to predict a winner should we ever actually go head to head down the dragstrip.

And in this example both of us are using a roots S/Cer under the hood. So this difference is a direct result of the different gear ratio choice. Mine being 4.56:1. So again, I don't see how any calculator can account for these variables when yielding any 0-60 MPH times. Using a calculator for that, would be similar to using a calculator to arrive at a 60' time. It's simply unreliable IMO. :)

[michburt]

A lot of cars today are described in terms of their abilility to do 0-60 mph in a specific number of seconds, I don't know what my car can do 0-60 in.

I don't have anything other than the times that are provided in a timeslip, is there an accurate way to use the numbers I do have, to extrapolate my car's 0-60 time ?

I hope to have a figure that I can use to compare my car to those vehicles that have had their 0-60 times measured, I have used an online calculator to do just that, but the figure I got was in my opinion a little better than I was willing to believe, so I don't refer to it. I am looking for a number that will hold up to scrutiny and be accurate. Thanks.
You might give a try to some of the car mags. Maybe a search on an old Road & Track, etc. That is usually how they do their tests.

Mike:rock: