0-60 mph - forget handling ability for 5.9 seconds

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by ahausheer

When numbers are publishes I will refer to Consumer Reports. My reason for this is their 0-60 times are from idle, no shenanigans. I like this because I too will not be using shenanigans when I drive it hard.

Several car magazines publish times for 5-60 mph, which is more or less rolling on the throttle from a stop sign. This is probably the sort of measurement you're looking for. It is a good indicator of how fast a car is without any drivetrain abuse (clutch drop/slippage).

Going by that sort of testing regime this car won't break the 7s.

[Eldorian]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

Uh not exactly, the Renesis pumps more air than a 2.0L engine per crankshaft revolution. More precisely, 2 crankshaft revolutions will pump the full displacement of the motor into the intake and out the exhaust, while a rotary pumps its full displacement out in 1 crankshaft revolution because it pumps 1.3L worth of air in and then 1.3L of exhaust out together.

I never claimed the Renesis was a 2.0. It's a 2.6. It's still a small, high strung, naturally aspirated engine, though.

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

Maybe they call it sporty, perhaps you feel like it's sporty, but the ratios are quite a bit lower and far apart http://www.new-cars.com/2004/acura/acura-rsx-specs.html

Auto definitely shifts faster, they're usually plagued by crap ratios.

Actually looking at that chart I totally understand why you complain about your car now, the manual transmission has 17% higher gearing in 1st, combined with torque converter slippage, ouch.

Yeah the automatic kinda sucks ass in my car. So do you think the FRS auto might have higher gearing this time comparable or better than the MT?

[serialk11r]

Hard to say, but it looks like they paid slightly more attention to the A/T than usual so it might turn out with close ratios. I think the reason A/T usually has widely spaced ratios is because they assume if you buy an A/T that sort of thing doesn't bother you, but in this car the philosophy looks slightly different. imo it would be sorta stupid to give the auto aggressive feeling shifts and sporty features, and then drop the typical crappy gear ratios in.

[Hachi]

Launch from 4k rpm, standing start @ 3.12 mins

I'm pretty sure 2nd gear will hit 100-110kph

My estimate for the low spec model? Between 6.2-6.4 sec .. not bad imo

[ryude]

Originally Posted by Hachi

Launch from 4k rpm, standing start @ 3.12 mins

I'm pretty sure 2nd gear will hit 100-110kph

My estimate for the low spec model? Between 6.2-6.4 sec .. not bad imo

Why does it sound like he's grinding gears every damn time he shifts?

[acheddadi]

I really doubt this car will do it in less than six. Get mentally prepared to be eaten off the line by pretty much any flagship sports car available right now as they pretty much all have more horsepower and better rubber. This car is for keen drivers who enjoy spirited driving, not smoking people between red lights.

[SUB-FT86]

Why does everybody on this site associate high hp/tq cars with traffic light races? I have seen honda civics thinking they are hot shit at stoplights too.

[Palmy]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

Why does everybody on this site associate high hp/tq cars with traffic light races? I have seen honda civics thinking they are hot shit at stoplights too.

Because thats all hp is to most people.

[fistpoint]

Originally Posted by Rampage

I am going to guess mid to high 6s. Toyota and Subaru are stating around 6 second 0-60 but in car marketing jargon (and drag racing) that could mean 6.99 sec. ie. "I ran in the sixes!"

The 2012 Honda Civic Si has comparble weight, hp and a little more torque. It runs 0-60 in 6.9 seconds. I would be shocked if a stock FRS/BRZ could best it by a full second to 60mph.

Edit: I better lock down a specific time because everyone else is. I will say MT = 6.5 AT = 6.7 (hey they said it was good!)

The Civic is almost 200lbs more than this car...

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by acheddadi

I really doubt this car will do it in less than six. Get mentally prepared to be eaten off the line by pretty much any [s]flagship sports car[/s] Camry or Accord V6 available right now

Fixed it

[rayman0690]

A stock EVO CT9A (VIII and IX) can technically do 0-60 in 5 seconds...but ask any AWD owner (especially one with a toothpick and teflon tape constructed transfer case) when the last time they actually did that was...

Around 6 seconds is plenty fast for the average guy and for timed events like auto-x as well.

[iff2mastamatt]

6.8 seems fine to me with Prius tires.

[86'd]

I say a bit under 6 for a good launch, mid 6s for OK launches. Sticky tires and bolt-ons: mid 5's. Plenty fast.

a 328i does 0-60 in the low 6s its 3340lbs/230hp = 14.5lbs/hp

an FR-S is about 2700lbs/200hp= 13.75lbs/hp

for more comparison

an S2000 is = 11.90lbs/hp = 0-60 is highly dependent on the driver but can get mid 5's

a Mini Cooper S is = 15.88lbs/hp = upper 6's

a Honda Civic Si is = 14.43lbs/hp = Mid/upper 6's

The FR-S has a bit more torque than a Civic and from what I've heard more usable torque down low, plus the FR-S is a bit lighter as well.