60 – 100 Mph

Sorry to break this to ya, but those numbers are at a minimum one second off of reality for almost every car. A Viper in 4.8, Z06 5.2, Gallardo 5.1. Wow, def. wrong numbers.
I don't know of any specific numbers or tests for cars doin 60-120, but the reason you get hit by it so hard is b/c Ferrari's are small displacement high revving motors as in your Maserati. It would make for a good test though, I think the reason they don't test that though is b/c you're not allowed to hit 100 on the streets, most ppl will never test that acceleration, maybe up to 80/85, but rarely 100.

Wow I just realized in these numbers, the Murcielago is slower than the Viper, as much as I hate to admit it, the Murcielago is def. faster than the Viper 0-60 at least. Did you seriously get these numbers from Road and Track?

 

I have the last 12 years of Road and Track, Car and Driver, Motor Tread, Automblie, and a couple of others. If you have any questions just ask and give me a couple of days and I will find it out for you..

 

#s aside...That was a great question and my answer is yes!!!

DL

 

In a city the most you could "test" the performance relatively safely on a quieter public road would be to around 80mph.

After a brake disc change, in order to get the new ones worn in and up to temps quickly, I find a nice quiet road through the parklands, pull over to the side until there's a large break in the traffic, then gun it up to about 80mph, brake fairly heavily down to around 25mph, accelerate again, brake, accelerate, etc until the brakes bites nicely. Wind the window down and there's a nice toasty smell afterwards.

 

R&T has the always has the worst times for the NSX. They have no idea how to drive that car.

The z06 is fast as hell! Wow! How fast is the C6?

 

60-100 mph in a well tuned carbed 308 will make up for its "obsolete performance"

 

I agree that is a better acceleration # than 0-60 or even 0-100. I also like in most euro magazines how they give times around the ring and hockenheim.

 

I thought R&T use to do 50 - 70 test for passing, but it was a top gear test.

 

I agree it would be a better testing procedure but it doesn't consider the reality that most people never drive that fast. Doesn't anyone else find it strange that their 0-60 times are off?

 

Yeah sorry reread the original post and made my edit, but you were too fast for me

 

Autoweek and C&D do the top gear 30 to 50 and 50 to 70 I believe. I don't see how 30 to 50 has any relevance at all. Who in the hell is in 5th or 6th at 30 mph?! Testing of high performance cars should, at minimum, involve acceleration #s through 150 mph. I'd really like to see up to 200 for the big guns. Let's start a letter-writing campaign boys; who's with me?

 

What sounds wrong with these numbers? They seem plausible to me for 60-100mph. -Ray

 

I tend to agree. On another note, the Viper dominates .

 

Vipers are torque Monsters!

 

The R&T numbers for the 360 Modena are 5.9 sec. In contrast, Autocar was 4.6, just another data point.

>>A super run by Autocar
Some car makers are very cautious in supplying cars to journalists for test. To newspaper or independent journalists, it does not matter which car to be chosen. However, to some influential magazines, they must make sure to choose a well conditioned, well run-in sample in order to record a set of headline-topping performance figures. Among all magazines, I believe Germany’s Auto, Motor und Sport are the most influential to the whole Europe mainland while British magazine Autocar rules the world of English motor writing. What about R&T or C&D ? Don’t their staffs also read Autocar for the latest development in Europe ?
So it is not very surprising to see Autocar’s test result better than others, especially is it performed the test 4 months after the launch of 360 Modena, hence allowing a good run-in probably in the hands of Ferrari’s test drivers.

However, seeing the figures recorded can’t help astonishing how good this car was. Although 0-60mph of 4.2 sec is just marginally faster than the 4.3 sec recorded by Road & Track, the 8.8 sec to 100mph is really amazing, which versus R&T’s 10.2 sec<<

Gary

 

R&T May 1986

1986 328 GTS - 9.9 seconds

1983 308 GTS - 11.3 seconds

 

"60-100 mph in a well tuned carbed 308 will make up for its "obsolete performance" "

No it wouldn't but driving it off stone Mt. would ! LOL !

 

the name of the magazine IS Road & TRACK. 60-120mph figures would be great, considering many of the cars that they test are purchased and used primarily for track use (Challenge Stradale, anyone?) The normally also post a rather unusable top speed figure in the actualy articles on the cars.

 

You cannot just subtract the piece of time you want to get an accurate 60-100 time. Also doing this test is very easy. Anyone can do this on an on-ramp to a highway. 100mph comes up quickly in a sports car.

Autocar mag is best in testing cars in in-gear acceleration times. Sports cars have different maximun speed in their gears. Look at some of the gear ratios. Example the Gallardo has tall gears. I can dig up Autocar numbers if you want?