0-60 in 5.9 sec.?

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by LSxJunkie

There is no way. Cars that run 15s don't get to 60 in under 6 seconds. Cars that get to 60 in under 6 seconds run low 14s. And 200hp 2500lb cars don't run low 14s.



Forced induction.

What?

If the FR-S weighed that much it would easily run into the low 14's.

[Khyron686]

Could just be the tires? Doesn't show the 60' time, so who knows.

[Honesty]

I don't really think it's making so much gear-crushing torque that it's spinning the tires that hard off the line, but that's a good point. Those Prius tires can't really handle too much.

I'm leaning toward it being an estimate though. Regardless, this car is not designed to be a 1/4 mile machine.

[ydooby]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

I think it's a typo. It's actually 6.9 judging by the 1/4 mile.

I think it's a typo too. It's actually 14.3 judging by the 0-60 time.

[serialk11r]

Although at face value it looks like this car has more torque, it does NOT have variable lift, so there is likely a huge sag in torque between the range where the long duration intake cam is giving good VE and the rpm that port injection shuts off, and stops helping combustion efficiency. Not to mention that high EGR results when intake is advanced to improve VE at lower speeds, which kills power due to preventing knock and higher temperature.

Low CoG would result in slightly less weight transferred to the rear under acceleration as well by virtue of geometry, so it's hard to say. FWD cars get weight transferred to the rear, but they are nose heavy in the first place.

[miata]

Personally I would rather have a RWD 6.9 sec coupe that gets 35mpg hwy than a 5.9 sec car that gets 30mpg.

[Honesty]

This car also has an extremely high compression ratio - which is largely responsible for that torque figure.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by miata

Personally I would rather have a RWD 6.9 sec coupe that gets 35mpg hwy than a 5.9 sec car that gets 30mpg.

I'm the opposite of you. I'd rather 30 mpg with more torque(200-220hp/180-190tq) to easily achieve the 5.9 seconds. Acceleration is part of the fun in owning a sports car IMHO.

[serialk11r]

And I'm the nerd who sits here with BSFC charts saying "why did they not go 4.1 f/d ratio standard, with a 0.56 6th gear like the Corvette? great acceleration in gears 1-5, and 50mpg cruising!"
Although unlike you SUB, I am not a believer in low end torque :P low end = fuel economy range, less torque is better, all else being equal. I think people will be extremely disappointed with the low end torque on this car as the torque peak is 6600. But this will do wonders for mpg, thanks to D4-S.

[Max Schnell]

This car is going to be 2700-2768 lbs from the looks of it. Add the driver weight average of 170lbs you are looking at 2900-2950lbs. 200hp means on most calculators (we have nothing real world to go off of) will estimate it to run somewhere between 14.3 to 14.9 in the 1/4 mile.

For comparison purposes the 1999 Type R runs 14.7 or so stock with very similar specs.

Driver skill, tires, track conditions, how abusive you launch, track prep, how much above sea level the track is all will affect things.

[ryude]

I don't think this car will have any problems at all running 14s stock, 0-60 should be similar to it's competitors as well.

[Max Schnell]

Lets not be too optimistic here either. The BMW E30 M3 has similar numbers and runs 15.6 1/4mi stock.

[arghx7]

don't expect this car to be any faster than an Rx-8, which will do a 1/4 mile in the high 14's with trap speed in the mid 90s if you're lucky.

[danyo]

Estimated...