If the 0-60 of a Standard 850 t5 (225bhp/221 lb/ft) is about 7.2 then the 0-60 of a R 850 t5 (250bhp/258 lb/ft) is about 6.5 whats the 0-60 of a t5 that has been rica'd to 304 bhp/317 lb/ft?? under 6 if you can get the power down?
[QUOTE=tr03bor]If the 0-60 of a Standard 850 t5 (225bhp/221 lb/ft) is about 7.2 then the 0-60 of a R 850 t5 (250bhp/258 lb/ft) is about 6.5 whats the 0-60 of a t5 that has been rica'd to 304 bhp/317 lb/ft?? under 6 if you can get the power down?[/QUOTE] 850 T5 : 0-62 is 7.4 (saloon) 7.5 (estate). 850 T-5R : 0-62 is 6.9 (saloon) 7.0 (estate). I suspect the 304bhp will be about 6.5 seconds
[QUOTE=Andrew]850 T5 : 0-62 is 7.4 (saloon) 7.5 (estate). 850 T-5R : 0-62 is 6.9 (saloon) 7.0 (estate). I suspect the 304bhp will be about 6.5 seconds[/QUOTE] i thought the R was faster than that o well lol
The latest V70R is meant to do 0-62 in 5.6seconds (manual) and 6.5seconds (geartronic) and is 300bhp as standard.
[QUOTE=Andrew]The latest V70R is meant to do 0-62 in 5.6seconds (manual) and 6.5seconds (geartronic) and is 300bhp as standard.[/QUOTE] the volvo website says 5.9secs for 0-62 for the v70r, and 5.7secs for the s60r, the 5.6 sounds like the 0-60, which would make the s60r 5.4secs to 60
Rica'ed T5 running right will be a shade under 6 seconds, i have a vid of mine doing it :)
[QUOTE=Justin]Rica'ed T5 running right will be a shade under 6 seconds, i have a vid of mine doing it :)[/QUOTE] Post It!!!! lol
[QUOTE=Justin]Rica'ed T5 running right will be a shade under 6 seconds, i have a vid of mine doing it :)[/QUOTE] I'd be interested in hearing a bit more about timing equipment etc. At somewhere like the pod I presume. ?
Anyone know what the 60-120 mph would be?
think its about 10 seconds video here http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-4847995834896224686&q=850+volvo
There ya go :) http://www.vpcuk.org/membervids/0-60J.nookie.AVI
[QUOTE=Justin]There ya go :) http://www.vpcuk.org/membervids/0-60J.nookie.AVI[/QUOTE] ta mate
[QUOTE=tr03bor]think its about 10 seconds video here http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-4847995834896224686&q=850+volvo[/QUOTE] there's no way it could do it in 10 secs, a 911 turbo with 420bhp, weight 1500kg (same as a volvo), it can do 0-60 in 4.1 , and 0-120 in 14.4 secs, which gives a 10.3secs 60-120 time, more like 15/16secs for a chiped t5 (300bhp)
[QUOTE=franky]there's no way it could do it in 10 secs, a 911 turbo with 420bhp, weight 1500kg (same as a volvo), it can do 0-60 in 4.1 , and 0-120 in 14.4 secs, which gives a 10.3secs 60-120 time, more like 15/16secs for a chiped t5 (300bhp)[/QUOTE] That gives the 911 a 10.3secs time from a standing start, on the move i.e starting timing from 60 could well be alot different due to gears that are in at the time.
[QUOTE=franky]there's no way it could do it in 10 secs, a 911 turbo with 420bhp, weight 1500kg (same as a volvo), it can do 0-60 in 4.1 , and 0-120 in 14.4 secs, which gives a 10.3secs 60-120 time, more like 15/16secs for a chiped t5 (300bhp)[/QUOTE] well look at the vid and time it
seems like 12/13 secs to me, also how do we know if the speedo is correct?, if it has a 5% error, then could be 114mph, add on another sec for that to get to 120, which makes 13/14secs, which sounds closer to real figs, wot mods has that t5 had??
if it had a speedo error then it work would on the start mph aswell as the end mph too which makes it worthless,
not really, 5% error at 60 is 63, 5% error at 120 is 126, so as speed climbs the error on the speedo gets worse!
My ex-C70 (the black one) was timed doing 0 - 60 in 5.7secs at Donny Park last year... here's the photo...
[QUOTE=franky]not really, 5% error at 60 is 63, 5% error at 120 is 126, so as speed climbs the error on the speedo gets worse![/QUOTE] Speedos are not allowed to have the error in that way. i.e. be doing more speed than they actually say they are. The error has to occur the other way i.e. if it says 60 you must be doing 60 or less. It's a legal requirement. The speedo can also be knocked out by running different tyres or wheels than was meant for the car. GPS is the best way to measure speed or has Dave has done - get it on quarter of mile (although this is not fool proof either). Ideally you need some proper timing equipment especially when your talking about tenths or hundreds of a second. Ac.
[QUOTE=After_Shock]That gives the 911 a 10.3secs time from a standing start, on the move i.e starting timing from 60 could well be alot different due to gears that are in at the time.[/QUOTE] Well yes, but lets be honest, if you were going to time the car from 60 up, you would put it in as low a gear as possible in order to get the fastest time you could out of it, it could be slightly slower in a turbo car though if starting at 60 rather then coming through 60 from 0, in the Rover I would wager it would have a slower 60-120 than the 60-120 portion of a 0-120, purely because the turbo would take a half second to spin up as opposed already being at full boost if coming from 0. [quote=franky]there's no way it could do it in 10 secs, a 911 turbo with 420bhp, weight 1500kg (same as a volvo), it can do 0-60 in 4.1 , and 0-120 in 14.4 secs, which gives a 10.3secs 60-120 time, more like 15/16secs for a chiped t5 (300bhp)[/quote] to be honest it's hard to say, the only way to properly get a figure is with timing gear, not sure if a 300 bhp T5 would be quite as slow as 15/16 though but it's definately not 10 seconds lol. Dissapointed in the 911 turbo though, is that the newest one? 0-120 in 14.4 isn't overly stunning especially off of a 4.1 0-60, don't get me wrong it's certainly not slow but I had expected faster of it, as usual though most times you hear about a car you get its 0-60 and its top speed, both of which are impressive on the 911, the middle part seems to be a bit less than I expected though. I'd like a shot on some timing gear in the Rover to see what it's intervals were like, done 113.9mph in 12.88 and 114.5 in 13.0 before from 0, 0-60 will be in the low to mid 5's I would reckon as it's fwd and scrabbling, so the 60-up must be pretty good, as far as speedos go, for both those runs I list above, 113.9 and 114.5, the speedo was reading over 120, probably 8 or 9mph over the actual speed and as was said it only gets worse as the speeds get higher. I'll need to see if I can find a 911 turbo next time I'm out lol, the Carrera S wasn't up to it by a notable amount. So basically, if you really want to know, do what wobbly did and go time it on some timing gear, or do some 1/4 miling as you can take much more educated guesses off of their split times, especially pods with the 1/8th mile split as well etc. Ross
ive just ordered one of these http://www.gtechpro.com/rr.html so ill have some figures next week, they have been around for 13 years now and are supposed to be very accurate
Never tried that one or seen it in use, I tried one years ago though, different one and probably not as well developed but the same idea, but I didn't find it up to much to be honest, was around 0.4/0.5 out on a 1/4 mile compared to the strips gear, supposedly can measure horsepower??? well I ran the same car 3 times and it gave me 3 different powers with a spread of about 40 bhp if I remember rightly. Looks like it's been well researched and tested but I still wouldn't put a huge amount of stock in the results. Just my opinion. Ross
i think its horses for coarses really, there are a vast amount of dynos out there that arent calibrated correctly either, 1/4 mile will be the way to tell, but after 13 years of being in buisness they should know what there on about
to measure the horsepower, im sure you have to enterthe weight of your car, so get it on the scales. I know this coz I have got one!
[QUOTE=Andrew]Speedos are not allowed to have the error in that way. i.e. be doing more speed than they actually say they are. The error has to occur the other way i.e. if it says 60 you must be doing 60 or less. It's a legal requirement. The speedo can also be knocked out by running different tyres or wheels than was meant for the car. GPS is the best way to measure speed or has Dave has done - get it on quarter of mile (although this is not fool proof either). Ideally you need some proper timing equipment especially when your talking about tenths or hundreds of a second. Ac.[/QUOTE] yeah for sure, just using that as a example
"Dissapointed in the 911 turbo though, is that the newest one?" the times for the 911 turbo were from the 2001 evo mag, so older 911, group test type thing
Been thinking about getting one of these for a while now - http://www.race-technology.com/WebPage2/Products/AP22/AP22FAQ.html You can set it to record the times between any 2 speeds as well as a whole bunch of other stuff.. * End of Roll Out * 60ft * 330ft * 660ft * 0-60mph time * 0-100mph time * Peak g-force * Peak Power * 1/4 mile You can read a bunch of reviews from various carmags as well - seems to be pretty accurate (1% they reckon when calibrated)
New 911 Turbo as timed by EVO magazine August 2006: 0 - 60 = 4.0 0 - 100 = 8.7 0 - 100 - 0 =13.4 4th gear acceleration 60 - 80 =2.5 80 - 100 =2.4 100 - 120 =3.2 (The Porsche Carrera GT in 4th gear from 80 - 140mph in = 8.9sec)
this is my rica'd 850 60-120 (private road) gets a bit shakey coz its on a phone http://media.putfile.com/60-100-78
[QUOTE=T5R+]New 911 Turbo as timed by EVO magazine August 2006: 0 - 60 = 4.0 0 - 100 = 8.7 0 - 100 - 0 =13.4 4th gear acceleration 60 - 80 =2.5 80 - 100 =2.4 100 - 120 =3.2 (The Porsche Carrera GT in 4th gear from 80 - 140mph in = 8.9sec)[/QUOTE] Thats more like it, I'd still have a go though out of pure cheek lol. Ross
Here are 2 video's of my motor: 100-200 km/hour (62-124 mile/hour) in 3 and 4 gear takes ~12.5 sec: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_-GMQdWngk 100-200 km/hour (62-124 mile/hour) in 4 gear only takes ~13.3 sec: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2LamZRJfl8