# Whats your car and your 0-60 time



## adamvr619 (Jun 12, 2010)

Thought this would be interesting so will see how it goes.

I have a leon cupra 180 and is around 7.7 seconds completely standard


----------



## davies20 (Feb 22, 2009)

This is going to be the best ***** measuring competition of all time!


----------



## Steve (Mar 18, 2014)

Aaaaaahhhhg shhhiiitttteee


----------



## Kimo (Jun 7, 2013)

Racekor - 3.2


----------



## Nanoman (Jan 17, 2009)

X-trail. 0-60 in about 15 seconds but I'm hung like a racehorse so I win.


----------



## ffrs1444 (Jun 7, 2008)

Corsa limited Edtion 1.3 75 bhp 
0-60 1h and 3 days


----------



## Supermario (Jul 8, 2014)

C63 AMG 0-62 in 4.5 seconds


----------



## LSpec (Apr 7, 2013)

citroen C2 VTR, I think like 11 seconds


----------



## pantypoos (Aug 7, 2014)

Nissan Leaf - About 7 seconds (although afaik no official figures have ever been released)


----------



## MDC250 (Jan 4, 2014)

pantypoos said:


> Nissan Leaf - About 7 seconds (although afaik no official figures have ever been released)


Maybe...if driven off a sheer cliff


----------



## Rayaan (Jun 1, 2014)

Lexus RX450h F-Sport - Official time 7.8s - managed to squeeze out 7s flat with full battery and TRC off though with use of the unofficial hybrid launch technique


----------



## bigmac3161 (Jul 24, 2013)

GolfR 5.1 by book but different reviewers recon under 5 is doable


----------



## James Bagguley (Jul 13, 2013)

53 plate Civic Type S, 8.2 according to Parkers, a K24 swap should knock a couple of seconds or so off that (when the lotto pays out )


----------



## rory1992 (Jul 22, 2012)

Megane 265 0-62 2.65s


----------



## John74 (Mar 12, 2007)

rory1992 said:


> Megane 265 0-62 2.65s


Wow faster than a lot of Supercars


----------



## Bigoggy (Sep 1, 2014)

Insignia 130 deisel. 0-62 = f*****g ages . New car or a remap soon tho


----------



## Geordieexile (May 21, 2013)

rory1992 said:


> Megane 265 0-62 2.65s


Is that a typo or have you done something outrageous under the bonnet?


----------



## Black Magic Detail (Aug 17, 2010)

BMW E39 M5 around 5 seconds 0-60


----------



## Lugy (Nov 4, 2009)

Thought it'd be funny to investigate what my BMW 740 does, apparently 7s dead, not bad for a 1925kg living room!


----------



## Luke M (Jul 1, 2013)

Delorian 0-88mph in minus 30 years. Give or take


----------



## gex23 (Mar 6, 2009)

BMW Z4 3.0si - 5.5.


----------



## S63 (Jan 5, 2007)

I had a BMW that was measured at approx 1.2 seconds, it was one helluva ride.


----------



## Talidan (Sep 2, 2014)

Teg Type R - 6.2.


----------



## stevobeavo (Jul 22, 2009)

Mk 1 skoda fabia vRS - about 8.5 seconds (when the turbos not blowing up)


----------



## angel1449 (Apr 15, 2012)

subaru impreza wrx300. book says 0-60 4.8 seconds


----------



## milner3226 (Apr 14, 2011)

Fiesta st, the spec sheet says 6.9 seconds


----------



## rob28 (Nov 7, 2008)

A couple of F-150's
The 4.6 takes about 8 seconds and the 5.0 is apparently 6.8 seconds. Not bad for 6000lb trucks.


----------



## R7KY D (Feb 16, 2010)

330i e93 6.1 seconds - Maybe a tad quicker due to air intake & exhaust M sport upgrades

F430 - 4 seconds 

Wifes 1.2 Ka - 13 seconds ....yaaaaaaaaawnnn


----------



## Turkleton (Apr 18, 2010)

Mini - 4 Mississippi's


----------



## tones61 (Aug 21, 2011)

mitsubishi evo 8 fq 300 
0-60 4.9s

dax rush quadra 4x4
cosworth yb powered @16lbs boost-280/300bhp
0-60 2.9s

:car:


----------



## goRt (Aug 26, 2013)

GT-R - comfortably below 3 seconds in stock form, no longer on stock form, but still comfortable.


----------



## tones61 (Aug 21, 2011)

goRt said:


> GT-R - comfortably below 3 seconds in stock form, no longer on stock form, but still comfortable.


:argie:


----------



## CoOkIeMoNsTeR (Mar 6, 2011)

2005 DB9 4.9 seconds
1980 911 3.0 SC 6.6 seconds
2001 CLK 230K cab 8.7 seconds
2004 S40 2.0D 9.2 seconds and you can tell :doublesho


----------



## zsdom (Aug 30, 2011)

Ford Fiesta zs, mildly tuned

Mid 6's I reckon


----------



## Dannbodge (Sep 26, 2010)

E36 328i - probably around 5.5/6 sec.


----------



## nbray67 (Mar 22, 2012)

John74 said:


> Wow faster than a lot of Supercars





Geordieexile said:


> Is that a typo or have you done something outrageous under the bonnet?





rory1992 said:


> Megane 265 0-62 2.65s


No way is it as low as that, it's sub 6 secs but not sub 3 unless it's got some major reworking going on, in that case, it's not a 265.

I apologise if I'm wrong here


----------



## Lloyd71 (Aug 21, 2008)

Honda CRV - Just over 10 seconds
Kia Picanto Auto - 13 seconds
Toyota Supra 3.0 Turbo - 6.4 when it was new, god knows now. It's quick enough.



MDC250 said:


> Maybe...if driven off a sheer cliff


They can do it in 7 fairly easily if you just plant it. They are surprisingly quick, I went in one recently and the instant torque is such good fun.


----------



## dubber (Oct 2, 2011)

I dont have a stop watch with enough seconds on for mine.


----------



## MDC250 (Jan 4, 2014)

Lloyd71 said:


> Honda CRV - Just over 10 seconds
> Kia Picanto Auto - 13 seconds
> Toyota Supra 3.0 Turbo - 6.4 when it was new, god knows now. It's quick enough.
> 
> They can do it in 7 fairly easily if you just plant it. They are surprisingly quick, I went in one recently and the instant torque is such good fun.


Linear acceleration or not, don't reckon it's that quick...just checked a few sites so unless I'm missing something...

http://www.0-60specs.com/nissan-leaf-0-60-times/

http://www.topspeed.com/cars/nissan/2014-nissan-leaf-ar161509.html

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-figures/nissan/leaf/hatchback-2011/


----------



## rory1992 (Jul 22, 2012)

nbray67 said:


> No way is it as low as that, it's sub 6 secs but not sub 3 unless it's got some major reworking going on, in that case, it's not a 265.
> 
> I apologise if I'm wrong here


Only joking, would be nice if it was tho as you say should be just under 6 which tbh is not the reason I brought the car its the handling that amazes me. These golfs and evos get some amazing 0-60s 4wd is king I suppose


----------



## Rob74 (Jul 29, 2012)

Volvo v70d5 
I'm sure I got to 60 once


----------



## Willows-dad (Jul 12, 2012)

Impreza wrx sti wr1. Prodrive say 0-62 in 4.25 seconds, but you'd have to really hammer it to get under 4.5. Still goes off like a scalded cat when you plant it.


----------



## nbray67 (Mar 22, 2012)

rory1992 said:


> Only joking, would be nice if it was tho as you say should be just under 6 which tbh is not the reason I brought the car its the handling that amazes me. These golfs and evos get some amazing 0-60s 4wd is king I suppose


Lol.
We had the RS250 which I always thought was rather quick off the mark. but not sub 3 secs!!
As you say, the handling is something else in the Meg RS.

As for ours, approx 6.7s - Clio RS.


----------



## Oldsparky (Jun 18, 2014)

Civic type R 6.4 but u have to rev the dooh dahs off it!


----------



## mcla13 (Mar 11, 2014)

Mercedes a-class 180 cdi I forgot to get to 60 as I fell asleep


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

If anyone has spent a day at a drag strip, you'll soon realise the difference between what the car is supposed to do and what the driver can actually manage is often huge. 

Even driving in a straight line is beyond many people and they fall way short of what the car is capable of. 

0-60mph times are getting a bit irrelevant these days. FWD cars will pretty much always produce the slowest 0-60mph times for similar powered cars, but that might not actually mean the car is slower in the real world for everything else. 

Some of the 4wd cars can post staggering 0-60mph times giving the impression they are much faster than they really are. Once on the move they'll only offer similar performance to cars with similar power/power to weight ratios. 

Also for especially the guys with 4wd, ask them how long their clutch lasts doing lots of full on standing starts.


----------



## B8sy (Dec 6, 2014)

Mg zs 180, had a little done to it so gets there in about 6.5, it's more impressive to higher speeds as doesn't stop pulling. No bigger bang on a track for 1k.


----------



## Rundie (Oct 2, 2007)

BMW X5 40d - 6.6 seconds
Supra Twin Turbo - 4.9 seconds


----------



## PaulaJayne (Feb 17, 2012)

Xj6 7.9
xk8 5.9
st1300 3.49


----------



## GleemSpray (Jan 26, 2014)

S63 said:


> I had a BMW that was measured at approx 1.2 seconds, it was one helluva ride.


 An all-electric power plant with almost unlimited range too !!

None of this hybrid malarkey ...


----------



## GleemSpray (Jan 26, 2014)

Kerr said:


> If anyone has spent a day at a drag strip, you'll soon realise the difference between what the car is supposed to do and what the driver can actually manage is often huge.
> 
> Even driving in a straight line is beyond many people and they fall way short of what the car is capable of.
> 
> ...


 This.

Have long thought that 40 / 50 to 70 time is a far more relevant figure, in terms of showing how properly "fast" a car is on real roads.


----------



## ncd (Dec 12, 2005)

RAV4 XTR. 0-60? I don't really give a toss


----------



## Soul boy 68 (Sep 8, 2013)

Audi S1 and 0 - 60 in 5.4 seconds:driver: strangely though it feels quicker due to the Quattro and all that grip that it feels like you are punched in the back.


----------



## Lugy (Nov 4, 2009)

Kerr said:


> If anyone has spent a day at a drag strip, you'll soon realise the difference between what the car is supposed to do and what the driver can actually manage is often huge.
> 
> Even driving in a straight line is beyond many people and they fall way short of what the car is capable of.
> 
> ...


I can't actually remember the last time I did 0-60, something like 30-70 has to be more relevant in the real world IMO. A standing mile would be a good thing to try as well, that'd show up a well sorted car.

Re the 4WD, I wonder how many Golf R DSGs will be due for clutches when the leases are up, with that launch control they have :lol:.


----------



## jack-c (Oct 21, 2012)

Clio 182. 

0-60.... Don't really care. 

Corners..... Now we're talking!


----------



## rory1992 (Jul 22, 2012)

jack-c said:


> Clio 182.
> 
> 0-60.... Don't really care.
> 
> Corners..... Now we're talking!


Totally agree, think the next thread should be a g rating and a grin factor thread


----------



## Rayaan (Jun 1, 2014)

"0-60 doesnt really matter anymore" is completely true. 

Although my 2.2 tonne SUV does 0-60 in 7.8s officially, the mid range power is impressive. Pushes you right into the seat which is down to the instant torque from the 2 electric motors - front and back, making it feel much quicker than the figures suggest. 

There's a reason why people buy diesels and thats because of that smack in your face torque which makes the car feel like its going rather quickly until it gets to 4k rpm and runs out of puff. 

I for one, do not like that characteristic, instead preferring a petrol engine which progressively increases in power as you go higher up the range.


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

Lugy said:


> I can't actually remember the last time I did 0-60, something like 30-70 has to be more relevant in the real world IMO. A standing mile would be a good thing to try as well, that'd show up a well sorted car.
> 
> Re the 4WD, I wonder how many Golf R DSGs will be due for clutches when the leases are up, with that launch control they have :lol:.


There is already been quite a bit of fallout from the R boys. Already been a few going wrong at Crail.

One had a turbo failure and I believe it wiped out the engine.

Guy put it into the dealers and they refused the claim as the remap, which had been removed, had been detected.

Apparently it was the development car used by one of the main tuners and they thought the remap wouldn't be detected.

The guy was trying to suggest that he got the car with 40 miles on the clock and must have been mapped prior to his purchase.

The guy had all his times removed from the Crail website and removed all his youtube videos attempting to cover his tracks.

Not heard an update of how he's now getting on after he was outed with the real story.

It does seem the Haldex based cars are a little bit better with their clutches than Subarus and Evos.


----------



## bigmac3161 (Jul 24, 2013)

The old TD1 flagged even after the map was removed 
Boom goes the warranty.


----------



## Ross (Apr 25, 2007)

Well my Legacy Spec B may not be the quickest to 60 but 3rd gear for owertaking :car: I call it the Stealth B :thumb:


----------



## MagpieRH (May 27, 2014)

Volvo C30 1.6, after a quick calculation probably 3-3.5 seconds (vertically...)

In reality, somewhere around 10 seconds I think


----------



## 4d_dc2 (Mar 28, 2008)

R33 gtr 5seconds maybe. Don't know not going to launch it to try.


----------



## Jdudley90 (Mar 13, 2011)

Cooper SD 8.1 seconds in the book. 50mpg too. Wouldn't like paying the fuel bills on some if the cars mentioned.


----------



## possul (Nov 14, 2008)

Soul boy 68 said:


> Audi S1 and 0 - 60 in 5.4 seconds:driver: strangely though it feels quicker due to the Quattro and all that grip that it feels like you are punched in the back.


Id want to feel like ive been punched in the chest if my car was that quick.
A punch in the back would be reversing surely, or is it not that quick


----------



## possul (Nov 14, 2008)

Im with Jack-c, show me some bends all day long.
Not in the bagga ****e focus though. Thats well past its day


----------



## CLS500Benz (Jul 28, 2013)

Omega 3.2 V6 Elite - About 7.5 sec maybe less in the right conditions.

Don't tend to push it that hard often these days with near 200,000 on the clock, Still not bad for a 2 ton barge


----------



## essjay (Mar 27, 2007)

BMW 330d book says 5.5 and currently getting 52mpg


----------



## PugIain (Jun 28, 2006)

Mine is a 136hdi Peugeot 407, and it's 0-60 time is the same as an iceberg. But it has heated red leather seats and does 50+ mpg. So I don't much care!


----------



## Beatman (Jun 6, 2010)

Mines a ten yr old z4 3.0, and can still put in a good 6sec 0-60


----------



## alan hanson (May 21, 2008)

i set of last week and still trying to get to 60! flinstone feet may have to be used


----------



## Alex_225 (Feb 7, 2008)

2005 RenaultSport Megane 225 Trophy, official figures say 6.5 seconds. 

This has s remap to around 265bhp so your guess is as good as mine.

In damp weather though, getting the power down is tricky even at low revs. In gear acceleration is probably more impressive.


----------



## Steve (Mar 18, 2014)

vxlomegav6 said:


> Omega 3.2 V6 Elite - About 7.5 sec maybe less in the right conditions.
> 
> Don't tend to push it that hard often these days with near 200,000 on the clock, Still not bad for a 2 ton barge


Whats the matter with you? Old vauxhalls don't die they get faster !

I rollered mine to other day with 206k on the clock


----------



## Rowe (Jul 4, 2013)

4.4 to 60 according to my cobb handset.


----------



## Starbuck88 (Nov 12, 2013)

Seat Exeo 2.0TDi CR 170.

0 - 60 = 8.3 Seconds


----------



## JBirchy (Oct 9, 2010)

MK7 Golf GTI DSG - 6.4 secs I think... Never tested it properly!


----------



## Steve (Mar 18, 2014)

0..60


it doesn't get to 60


----------



## Talidan (Sep 2, 2014)

Rowe said:


> 4.4 to 60 according to my cobb handset.


That bm in love !


----------



## Shiny (Apr 23, 2007)

jack-c said:


> Clio 182.
> 
> 0-60.... Don't really care.
> 
> Corners..... Now we're talking!


^^this^^

Where's the fun in straight line drag? The twisties is where the smiles are made. :driver:


----------



## Guitarjon (Jul 13, 2012)

My jaguar STR gets to 60 in 5.2 according to the books but what's more impressive is the speed it can get to 100. In fact I can't remember ever dpbeing at 100mph because as soon as you know it your touching 110+

I wish I had somewhere to try it out. It's limited to 155mph and I'm sure it could easily do it. The strange thing is that it just doesn't feel like your going really fast as its almost 2 tonne and very refined. I can't imagine what a stripped out one would be like. 400bhp and 408 ft-lbs torque keeps me happy. A few guys are swapping out supercharger pullies for smaller diameter ones which improves 0-60 times further at a relatively low cost.


----------



## cole_scirocco (Mar 5, 2012)

Corsa D 1.2 Limited Edition.

Seven hundred hours.


----------



## Freddie (Mar 17, 2013)

ffrs1444 said:


> Corsa limited Edtion 1.3 75 bhp
> 0-60 1h and 3 days


Hahaha. Our corsa 1.3 90 bhp diesel isnt much faster! Prob 3 hours and 1 day!

My civic is a bit faster at 8.5 seconds.


----------



## Mike! (Jul 3, 2010)

3.9 in standard from, which it isn't

Evo 9


----------



## bidderman1969 (Oct 20, 2006)

chevvy Epica diesel, 9.9 secs, not too bad really tbh


----------



## Lloyd71 (Aug 21, 2008)

MDC250 said:


> Linear acceleration or not, don't reckon it's that quick...just checked a few sites so unless I'm missing something...
> 
> http://www.0-60specs.com/nissan-leaf-0-60-times/
> 
> ...


The 2nd link is the 2014 specs which are slower IIRC. The older model is apparently faster, and a few places have claimed around 7 seconds on the 0-60 time. Admittedly these have been timed with basic digital watches but it still makes me wonder what's going on with it's performance. The official figures claim 11-12 seconds, others have said around 9. Personally I'd say it definitely feels faster than my CRV (so under 10 secs at least) but it could be the instant torque tricking me there. I'll do a few runs when we get ours, see if the 2015 is the same.


----------



## Rowe (Jul 4, 2013)

Guitarjon said:


> My jaguar STR gets to 60 in 5.2 according to the books but what's more impressive is the speed it can get to 100. In fact I can't remember ever dpbeing at 100mph because as soon as you know it your touching 110+
> 
> I wish I had somewhere to try it out. It's limited to 155mph and I'm sure it could easily do it. The strange thing is that it just doesn't feel like your going really fast as its almost 2 tonne and very refined. I can't imagine what a stripped out one would be like. 400bhp and 408 ft-lbs torque keeps me happy. A few guys are swapping out supercharger pullies for smaller diameter ones which improves 0-60 times further at a relatively low cost.


they're good for about 180 mph unlimited according the the STR forum


----------



## CLS500Benz (Jul 28, 2013)

vxlomegav6 said:


> Omega 3.2 V6 Elite - About 7.5 sec maybe less in the right conditions.
> 
> Don't tend to push it that hard often these days with near 200,000 on the clock, Still not bad for a 2 ton barge





Steve said:


> Whats the matter with you? Old vauxhalls don't die they get faster !
> 
> I rollered mine to other day with 206k on the clock


That's true :thumb:

Don't worry though, She still gets to blow those cobwebs away in the right place and time with ease 

Come to think about it I can't recall was there a topic on high milage cars?


----------



## Guitarjon (Jul 13, 2012)

Rowe said:


> they're good for about 180 mph unlimited according the the STR forum


Any idea how one 'unlimits' it? I'm not bothered as I doubt I'll ever see the limit its on. So much torque through out. I know they can't be remapped but I bet they will plug in some how.


----------



## Rowe (Jul 4, 2013)

Guitarjon said:


> Any idea how one 'unlimits' it? I'm not bothered as I doubt I'll ever see the limit its on. So much torque through out. I know they can't be remapped but I bet they will plug in some how.


You can get them mapped  and that's where lies the limiter. It can be remove with a remap/retune. 
There was also a bit of a discussion that jag never actually limited them. Who even tries to go that quick anyway lol


----------



## stephengrey (Mar 15, 2014)

Polo 6n2 1.0 (daily)
0-60........eventually
Polo 6n2 1.4 16v (project)
0-60 not sure yet lol


----------



## Guitarjon (Jul 13, 2012)

Stephen gray, your not from rotherham are you? I used to go to school with a lad called Stephen grey.


----------



## Guitarjon (Jul 13, 2012)

Rowe said:


> You can get them mapped  and that's where lies the limiter. It can be remove with a remap/retune.
> There was also a bit of a discussion that jag never actually limited them. Who even tries to go that quick anyway lol


Which forum have you got this info from! I'm on jaguarforum.co.uk but I haven't found my way round all the post yet. I spoke to a us who maps the other engines in the s type range but he said he cant do the s type R.


----------



## stephengrey (Mar 15, 2014)

@guitarjon nah I'm from Ireland hahah


----------



## ivor (Sep 24, 2008)

My cooper works book time is 6.1 but thats as standard and being as I've played with the breathing and had a remap it's most likely a bit quicker lol


----------



## msb (Dec 20, 2009)

Quite alot of optomistic times in this thread!


----------



## Steve (Mar 18, 2014)

Well I set off at half 6 this morning... Still not at 60 yet.. were up to about 18mph.. I will update you all through the day later


----------



## Aucky (Oct 3, 2008)

MK7 Golf R
Book figure is 4.9 secs, 
Apparently people have been getting faster than that with stock though. 

Clio 182 Trophy
Book figure 6.9secs, EVO managed 6.7secs iirc. 
Mine isn't standard so I'd guess 6.6secs.

MK1 Mazda Eunos. 
God knows, 7-8ish.


----------



## Bluffin (Oct 7, 2014)

Originally a 997 with 39 bhp
Now 1630 with 135 BHP and weighs 800kg

0-60 erm quick!!!


----------



## Bluffin (Oct 7, 2014)




----------



## Rowe (Jul 4, 2013)

Bluffin said:


>


19 :lol:


----------



## Rowe (Jul 4, 2013)

Guitarjon said:


> Which forum have you got this info from! I'm on jaguarforum.co.uk but I haven't found my way round all the post yet. I spoke to a us who maps the other engines in the s type range but he said he cant do the s type R.


think arden performance do them


----------



## Steve (Mar 18, 2014)

28.3 MPH

were still climbing


----------



## robertdon777 (Nov 3, 2005)

ivor said:


> My cooper works book time is 6.1 but thats as standard and being as I've played with the breathing and had a remap it's most likely a bit quicker lol


Traction is FWD's cars problem, even if you double the power getting under 5 seconds is almost impossible.

You need a very odd suspension set up (high at back & stiff, very low at front a bit softer) Very deflated tyres and a very very sticky surface. FWD is not a great 0-60 tool. Much better to measure 30-100mph


----------



## Steve (Mar 18, 2014)

45.7 were getting there kids,.


----------



## pantypoos (Aug 7, 2014)

MDC250 said:


> Linear acceleration or not, don't reckon it's that quick...just checked a few sites so unless I'm missing something...
> 
> http://www.0-60specs.com/nissan-leaf-0-60-times/
> 
> ...


It all depends on where you look, here http://www.zeroto60times.com/Nissan-0-60-mph-Times.html it is listed as 7.9 seconds and here itr is listed as 7 seconds http://green.autoblog.com/2010/10/22/unofficial-nissan-leaf-does-0-60-mph-in-7-seconds-tops-out-at/

All i'll say is have a go in one (nissan are dying to let people test drive them and you can get a full week test if you want it) and then see what you think.


----------



## Steve (Mar 18, 2014)

51.3 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Steve (Mar 18, 2014)

60mph


----------



## Steve (Mar 18, 2014)

So about 6 hours. :car::driver:


----------



## Dazzel81 (Apr 20, 2013)

Hyundai coupe 2.7 V6, 8 seconds (parkers.co.uk) 
But has a few mods & def feels quicker than standard :driver:


----------



## GleemSpray (Jan 26, 2014)

I just measured mine and from a standing start, I can get to 60 on the clock in less than 3 seconds.













.... Oh, did you mean MPH ?, I thought you meant MPG (smug)


----------



## Phssll (Nov 8, 2014)

2 Tonnes of Cayenne Turbo s 

4.5 secs in standard form

Now fitted with a sprint booster 
and secondary cats removed :thumb:


----------



## VW Golf-Fan (Aug 3, 2010)

Mine is a MK6 2012 Volkswagen Golf Match 3dr 1.4 *TSI* (122 BHP)

0-60 mph - 9.2 secs


----------



## Gaffa22 (Aug 24, 2014)

Honda S2000 6.2 secs

Honda Fireblade 2.9 secs if you can hold on and keep the front wheel down

Honda Blackbird 3.0 secs


----------



## Kriminal (Jan 11, 2007)

Audi TT Mk2 S-Line (210bhp) 2011

0-60 mph 6.1 secs


----------



## dillinja999 (Aug 26, 2013)

i couldnt give a ****


----------



## Nick-ST (Mar 4, 2013)

330d E90 6.6s


----------



## dubstyle (Jun 13, 2007)

E46 M3 SMG , 4.9 on a dry day


----------



## Pittsy (Jun 14, 2014)

Car: X trail
0-60:later :thumb:


----------



## Kash-Jnr (Mar 24, 2013)

M135i - 4.6 seconds :thumb:

edit (2014 model - so has launch control)


----------



## adamvr619 (Jun 12, 2010)

Wow some great times here guys


----------



## Clancy (Jul 21, 2013)

Mk3 golf gti 16v, around 6.9 give or take 

Gsxr 600 does a shade over 3 seconds, doesn't lift till the last bit either so actually pretty achievable 

Klx 300, no idea, rarely go that fast off road lol


----------



## PyRo (Oct 25, 2014)

ZZR 1400 performance edition, under 3

M135i 4.9

Jeep Cherokee eventually


----------



## -Jamie- (Nov 6, 2012)

So many BS times being posted in here.


0-60 times mean nothing these days anyway IMO. 30-100 or even 0-100 is a far better benchmark. For me i would only call a car fast if it can do 0-100 in 10 seconds or under.


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

-Jamie- said:


> So many BS times being posted in here.
> 
> 0-60 times mean nothing these days anyway IMO. 30-100 or even 0-100 is a far better benchmark. For me i would only call a car fast if it can do 0-100 in 10 seconds or under.


0-100mph still has that issue where 4wd cars with launch control and double clutch gearboxes will still manage figures that suggest the car is faster than it is. Take out the standing start and other cars are actually faster.

0-100mph in under 10 seconds is quick. There isn't many in this thread at all that will get under 10 seconds.


----------



## -Jamie- (Nov 6, 2012)

I don't understand why people these days get some hung up on 0-60 times and top speeds etc. It has very little relevance to how quick a car actually is.

Take FWD stuff running decent power, Terrible to get off the line but in gear pull's can be staggering. I know mine is poor at getting off the line even with 245 section soft track tyres and an LSD. Once its going though its a much better representative of how quick it is.


----------



## dann2707 (Mar 25, 2011)

Clio 182

6.9 seconds I think

Not very fast in a straight line but give me a corner and i'm away


----------



## adamvr619 (Jun 12, 2010)

Jeez some negativity here its only a bit of knowledge being given and what peroples cars are capable its not a discussion on "whats the best way to test how fast a car is" probably the best way is quarter mile times but its not a thread on that and many wouldnt know either but mine is 6.7s


----------



## -Jamie- (Nov 6, 2012)

Negativity? Knowledge?

Hardly, Theres several posts in here that are a bit, how shall i put it, Exaggerated.

It's a forum for motoring discussion, This is what we are having. You can't expect someone to start a thread like this and someone not to post an opinion. Thats the nature of open forums.


----------



## Nanoman (Jan 17, 2009)

I think the thing everyone is forgetting about is that just about anyone who has been in any competitive motorsport would run rings round 99.9% of people in this thread regardless of the vehicle. 

It's more pronounced with bikers because half the people with all the gear and a 'fast' bike can't corner for ****. 

I've ran rings around people with much faster cars & bikes than me, but I've also had numerous occasions where someone with a bit of skill has made me look like I'm standing still.

There's also a big difference between 0-60 times given by manufacturers and what you can actually achieve.


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

Nanoman said:


> I think the thing everyone is forgetting about is that just about anyone who has been in any competitive motorsport would run rings round 99.9% of people in this thread regardless of the vehicle.
> 
> It's more pronounced with bikers because half the people with all the gear and a 'fast' bike can't corner for ****.
> 
> ...


The one I've used as an example a few times is lap times at Knockhill.

There always seems to be guys who consider themselves to be very fast and don't actually realise they aren't.

There was a guy boasting about his performance in his Nissan GTR. He was managing 1.05 and thinking that was very quick.

As I pointed out to the guy, who went berserk, the little Fiesta XR2s with 97bhp and not far off road standard, are doing 1.03s around Knockhill.

Even if you can manage 550 bhp on a straight, it's amazing what you can lose in the corners.

Even at Crail on the quarter mile, it's amazing how bad the majority of people are. So many people can't perform a standing start and 2/3 gear changes without making a mess of it.

Maybe that's part of the reason cars need so many driving aids these days. It's less fun when the car has to do everything for you in my opinion.

Even the kids laugh at other kids when they turn the driving aids on in Gran Turismo.


----------



## Paintmaster1982 (Oct 23, 2007)

Pug 406 hdi lx 110 estate. Will beat anything to 60 and I mean anything.











































Over speed bumps


----------



## Kriminal (Jan 11, 2007)

-Jamie- said:


> So many BS times being posted in here.
> 
> *0-60 times mean nothing these days anyway* IMO. 30-100 or even 0-100 is a far better benchmark. For me i would only call a car fast if it can do 0-100 in 10 seconds or under.


^ you're right...

....0 - 20 would be better, as that's what a lot of roads are getting limited too these days  :thumb:


----------



## meraredgti (Mar 13, 2011)

14.9sec 1/4 mile @ 94mph, so 6.8sec at a guess


----------



## Steve (Mar 18, 2014)

Kriminal said:


> ^ you're right...
> 
> ....0 - 20 would be better, as that's what a lot of roads are getting limited too these days  :thumb:


Fastest you can travel in brizzle?


----------



## Franzpan (Mar 2, 2009)

Kerr said:


> 0-100mph still has that issue where 4wd cars with launch control and double clutch gearboxes will still manage figures that suggest the car is faster than it is. Take out the standing start and other cars are actually faster.
> 
> 0-100mph in under 10 seconds is quick. There isn't many in this thread at all that will get under 10 seconds.


Very true. On paper my AWD DSG TT should do 0-60 in 5.7 which is a second quicker than a lot of hot hatches. But in day to day driving its no faster really.


----------



## The_Bouncer (Nov 24, 2010)

All I know on my old barge is that the fuel gauge under these conditions, moves faster sometimes !


----------



## Pip66 (Dec 17, 2014)

Mine goes into free fall. :lol:


----------



## Steve_6R (Jun 9, 2014)

2013 Polo R Line 1.2 3 cylinder. Does it in about 13 seconds but sounds good while at it


----------

