General 0-60 time thread...

DRII

New member
just wanted a thread dedicated to 0-60 times for all EB vehicles.

ran a couple of runs late last night, my neighborhood has a relatively sparce long stretch of asphalt.  although its not long enough for a 1/4 mile run, i can do 0-60 times.

according to Torque, the best i achieved was 5.5 secs with the most mild Unleashed 93 tune.  thats just a straight up, amateur time just pressing the gas pedal down and waiting till i get to 60 with all the nanny electronics on.  i really don't know, or haven't practiced, how to do it any other way.

i assumed 0-60 would be faster than that since mags have publicized 0-60 of 5.4 with stock MKSs.  the car definitely feels faster than the stock tune.

i found a small private airport close by me that has a long abandoned road surronded by trees on both sides.  I'll do some more testing out there and see what i get...
 
I do not think Torque is the best tool for measuring acceleration.  Seems that everyone who uses it reports slow times.  I use the Aeroforce gauge but before that just used a handheld stopwatch.  Either way, I am in the 4.2 - 4.4 range using a brake torque launch on newer pavement with good traction.

carstuff015_zps8839e087.jpg


I get my best times by brake torquing to 1700.  I did a 0-60 once by just flooring it from an idle and the the gauge showed 4.56 seconds.
 
FoMoCoSHO said:
ShoBoat said:
Calculated of my best 1/4 is 3.98 seconds


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Whoa! Nice!

Did you use the excel formula someone posted?
Exactly, there are also lots of websites that have this calculation available.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
is it that, Torque is unusually slow, or Aeroforce unusually fast when it comes to 0-60 ???

4.98 stock, seems extremely ambitous to me; C&D hasn't even gotten those type of times and they're known to get the lowest out of all the magizines...
 
MeanKS said:
is it that, Torque is unusually slow, or Aeroforce unusually fast when it comes to 0-60 ???

4.98 stock, seems extremely ambitous to me; C&D hasn't even gotten those type of times and they're known to get the lowest out of all the magizines...

Road & Track reported 5 flat for a stock MKS when they tested one a couple of years ago.  Pauly says "virtually" stock....not sure what mods he has.  The aeroforce gauge gets the data from the PCM so it is relying on the accuracy of the car's speedometer.  There could be some potential inaccuracy with it.  However, you are the 4th person I have seen who reported unrealistically slow times using Torque. 

Before I got my tune, I tested it with a stopwatch - had a passenger in the rear seat behind me watching the speedometer and using the stopwatch.  Crude, I know!  However, I was around 5.2 strictly stock using that method and a brake-torque launch.

One last thing:  TSS has an MKS and has used his MyCal, some other device and the Aeroforce gauge.  All 3 show numbers within a tenth.  Hopefully, he will chime in.... 
 
interesting...

i also have a slighty taller tire at 255/45-20; which affects the speedometer.  that might also have something to do with it.  the nannies probably have the most effect...
 
Just Roush CAI for mods on mine.  I think 4.98 is fairly close, when I log all three Aeroforce gauges at the same time with performance they are only about .02 off from one to the other.  Doesn't mean they are exact, but a good idea anyways.  Not like that is set in stone or anything.
 
Back
Top