0-60 in 5.1secs with 2002 SS A4???
 

I used EFI Live to time my 0-60 times and with 2 runs, I got 0-60 in 5.3 seconds and then 5.1 seconds another time.

Shouldn't I be faster than that? I have a Granatelli MAF, K&N filter, TSP lid, Borla Cat-back and Nitto DRs.

Thanks!

Not too sure. I don't think EFI Live taps into the odometer.

I just use the track and then I used a couple 0-60 calculators that base your probable 0-60..

Bone stock I am getting 4.2.. Which isnt far off... I am doing 8.6@85mph in the 1/8th.. 13.1@108 in the 1/4... with a 2.1 60'... so if I could launch harder (which I would of done if it werent for the clutch heating up) and pull a 1.9 I could in theory do a 3.9-4.0 0-60 and will have a 12.8x-12.9x bone stock Z28...

so adding 25 mph from 60 in 4 sec is more probably than in 3...

You're getting 0-60 in 4.2 bone stock? You can't tell me that having an M6 versus an A4 makes that big a difference? What else do you have done to your car?

Jim

sorry man, unless your car is seriously modded, there's no way it's making the 0-60 jaunt in 4.1 seconds, aint happenin. stock z's run around 5.3. jchrisos your times are right on.

ok.. so you are telling me that I am getting 25mph gain in 3 seconds? Fine. So I can gain 8+mph per sec.. Thats pretty neat..

I personally used two calculators:
simple web 0-60 calculator

and

this formula to cross reference: (found it off a google search)
But can you calculate 0-60 times based on horsepower and weight
Well, having decided that in theory it's not possible we're reminded of the engineer's adage - In theory, practice and theory are the same thing, but in practice they're not.

We analysed the manufacturer's 0-60 times for a range of popular sports cars and found that in practice the quoted 0-60 times are easily and quickly calculated to the nearest second by dividing the weight of the car in Kg (Kilogrammes) by the cars' maximum brake horse power. Further analysis revealed that the more precise formula for most cars is:-

weight of car in kilogrammes
0-60 time = ---------------------------
maximum bhp of car * 0.9
OK, it's not a precise science, but it does work (most of the time)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My formula looks like this 1646.54 /318*.9
Although I will add that I am getting another dyno soon as I am certain that the car is somewhere around the 324 range on rwhp.
There are no mods done to the car. I merely broke it in and have not abused it. I also spend more time driving and fixing anything wrong with my driving than I do worring about mods.. My car is quick and with me driving, I can give most a good run, even those with bolt ons.. On my next outing at the track, I will be trying for the 12's.. stock... Items I have changed on the car are:
Oil - the manual said to.. .I have changed it only when the light comes on and tells me to.. Have gotten as much as 9500 miles from 1 change.
Gas - This is a weekly occurance.. I add gas more than change it though.. Always either Exxon or Shell.
Air Filter - My employees bought one for me.. AC Delco replacement filter. At the time of the runs below I was still on the original stock filter with 36K+ miles on it.

So, on the first one I used my best run at the track. I entered the 1/8th mile info then the 1/4 mile info..
For the 1/8th I got a result of 4.29
For the 1/4 I got a result of 4.06
Using the equation and the weight of the car on that run I got:
4.66
My track times are:
60' - 2.104
330 - 5.693
1/8 - 8.601
MPH - 85.25
1000 - 11.085
1/4 - 13.174
MPH - 108.00
Car weight - 3630 (1646.54 Kilograms ) (full tank of gas, filled up 6 miles before track)

I'll also add that you cant always go off of magazines...

My 1995 LT1 with CAI, Y-pipe, Catback, pulley, LCA and airbags did a g-tech 0-60 reading of 4.6 then a 4.4 at the track.. And it was running 13.3's @ 105. So serious mods are not needed.. Driver is a huge mod people.. Learn to drive your cars better and you will get the car faster cheaper than modding it.. then you will also get more out of your mods..


Case in point..
17yr old gets a 2003 Mach1..
Doesnt know how to drive.. talks to me.
goes to track.. get 14.0's repeatedly.. then 1 13.5..
Goes back 2 weeks later and is now getting 13.5's repeatedly and 1 13.3... Goes back the following week but has bad weather. then 2 weeks later returns and pulls 13.1. No mods... Just learning to drive the car better by paying more attention to the car and what he is doing per run..

ok, you ran a 4.4 to 60 in 1 95 lt1? That must mena that you could run a stock ls1 vette to 60 in under 3 seconds? Even the all wheel drive (hard to screw up the freaking launch) wrx sti is limited to 4.6 to 4.7 to 60. That time would put your 95 lt1 in the super car class stock.

There's no way your car runs that. Have you ever tried the 1/4 mile calculators according to weight of the car and HP? They are multiple seconds off! The fact that you have an M6 makes it even more unbelievable since automatics do accelerate from 0-60 faster because the first gear is shorter.

actually my weight and horsepower = to 13.19 1/4 mile times.. So calculators are accurate to a point.. again, if you like to believe that you can make up 25mph in 3 seconds, fine by me! hehe

Oh, just for fun I thought I'd try to get similar numbers out of Cartest 2000.

I got a pretty nice match on the performance numbers (1/8 and 1/4) which should yield a decent curve.

It spit out,
60' 2.12 33.86mph
100ft 2.82 44.34mph
330ft 5.61 66.47mph
500ft 7.20 78.76
660ft 8.51 88.16
1000ft 10.96 99.05mph
1320ft 13.08 107.45mph

This works out to....
0-30mph 1.86s
0-40mph 2.53s
0-50mph 3.25s
0-60mph 4.78s
0-70mph 6.06s
0-80mph 7.37s
0-90mph 8.80s
0-100mph 11.26s

Take that all FWIW, simulations are fun to play with.

0-60mph is a lot about traction, and I don't really think that a 2.1 60' is good enough traction for a low 4 sec 0-60mph time.

If I fiddle with the traction so that you can get a 4.2 0-60mph time, it makes the same car have a 1.79sec 60' time.

Again, all things being equal, to have a 3.9 sec 0-60mph time on the same curve, you'd have to hit about a 1.59s 60'.

This is all just playing with better traction.

BTW, a 1.59 60' would drop your 1/8 to an estimated 7.76 and the 1320 to 12.31 according to Cartest.

BTW, anyone that just loves messing with this stuff and likes a full featured and well thought-out simulator might check out cartest 2000. Just google it, don't have the link handy. I actually bought it cus it is just fun to play with.

Oh heck, one more for fun.....

To get a 2.09 60' and a 4.19sec 0-60mph in a 3450lb car....

480hp @5600rpm and 480ftlb @ 3100rpm of torque.

{edit} grrr. I must have been looking at a different timeslip Psycho.... I just looked and my dern numbers were different than what you posted above.... I'll rerun if I get bored, but I think the point is still illustrated.

Post Whoring :)

Closer to Psycho's track numbers...

60' 2.12s 34.67mph
100' 2.80s 44.67mph
330' 5.61s 68.37mph
500' 7.20s 76.91mph
660' 8.54s 85.69mph
1000' 11.03s 99.92mph
1320' 13.15s 108.1mph

to mph:
30 1.81s
40 2.48s
50 3.66s
60 4.69s
70 5.80s
80 7.66s
90 9.24s
100 11.04s

3630lb simulated weight, so the curves should be similar based off the real life track numbers.

What's so hard to believe about that? IMO, the LS1s "sweet spot" would be in the 50-90mph range (2nd and 3rd gear for an M6).

Going by your "math" it takes you 4.2 sec to go from 0-60, 4.4 sec to go from 60-85 and 4.5 sec to go from 85-110 (108 is your trap so at the end of the 1/4 you'd probably be very close to 110).

So...again, going by your math, your car pulls just as hard from 60-85 (25mph increase) as it does from 85-110 (25mph increase)...and it's quicker 0-60 than it is from 60-85? :confused:

I dont consider 2-3 being the "sweet spot". I dont have the same peaky cam as the 98-00 cars.. The cam the 01-02 cars have is much smoother and delivers power all around.

Also its easier for a car to accellerate in the lower speeds to do less drag...