[shantyrocks]

guys..

today i was reading the latest issue of the WHAT CAR magazine when i came across some interesting figures :

CAR 0-100KMPH 20-80KMPH(in 3rd gear)

sx4 12.10 secs 13.75secs

fiesta
duratorq 17.13secs 12.52secs

verna
CRDI 11.35secs 12.34secs

linea
MJD 15.04secs 11.86secs

so as the figures suggest the fastest car from 0-100 is the verna and the slowest is the fiesta.
butttt... how many of us really have the chance to rip our car starting from 0-100 on our roads/highways??
the linea is even quicker than the verna from 20-80kmph in 3rd gear.
even the fiesta is as quick as the verna from 20-80.
the sx4 is a whole second slower than the fiesta too!

so my question to all is : what is better for our daily routine driving conditions? a quick 0-100 or a better 20-80 in 3rd??

[vikram_d]

Better 20 - 80kmph time in 3rd is definitely better for daily driving.

[Vid6639]

Also 40-100kmph is equally important.

[Shan2nu]

Depends on your driving style.

I never do 20-80 in 3rd if i want quick acceleration from my car. I always choose the shortest gear available such that my car gives me the best acc possible from any given speed.

But if you're the kind of person who would want you car to acc without having to shift to often, then you would be much happier with the car that is good in such tests.

Everybody has a different routine even when it comes to daily driving.

Shan2nu

[shantyrocks]

so why do people stress soooo much on 0-100 timings??
shouldnt we guage a car by its performance from 20-80 / 40-100 ??
how many of us really bother to check the latter timings?

[shantyrocks]

what makes the linea quicker than the verna & sx4 from 20-80 in 3rd even when the they are more powerfull.even the 68bhp fiesta posts the same 20-80 timing as the verna.is it the gear ratios?

[Shan2nu]

Thats bcoz 20-80 in 3rd isn't exactly outright performance. I bet if you check the acc figs for these car from 20-80 through 1st-2nd-3rd gears, you will get a different result.

Shan2nu

[amitoj]

I guess it depends on where you are going to be driving often as well.
If your driving is going to be mostly in city, then 20-80 in 3rd makes sense, because you will stay in this band most often. But if you are going to be drive on highways more often, then 0-100 timings can give you a general idea about ease of overtaking slow moving traffic.

[siddartha]

i think the 20-80kmph times would matter more if we are comparing automatic cars , but if you are driving a manual transmission car and you want good 20 -80 times- just downshift.why keep it in 3rd and worry abt how long it takes.

[shantyrocks]

you are right. it isnt outright performance but my point is that a car with more power and more torque should be quicker in any gear than a car with lesser power and torque.then what is it that gives the extra nip from 20-80/40-100

[crn12]

Originally Posted by shantyrocks

so why do people stress soooo much on 0-100 timings??
shouldnt we guage a car by its performance from 20-80 / 40-100 ??
how many of us really bother to check the latter timings?

Absolutely, in city driving it should be 20-80, which is where you would be most often, and also while overtaking on the highways.
O/T: Not many of us would go buy the car with the actual performance, they do look at the parameters but not in detail, what matters is how you feel when you TD the car, be it its acceleration, torque or raw speed.Again if there is a person who is driving the car very excessive in highways, he would definitely do a TD on the highway before he commits, thats just my perception.

[Shan2nu]

what makes the linea quicker than the verna & sx4 from 20-80 in 3rd even when the they are more powerfull.even the 68bhp fiesta posts the same 20-80 timing as the verna.is it the gear ratios?

The Verna lacks turob boost below 2000 rpm so maybe the gearing in the Verna is such that at 20kmph in 3rd the engine is revving below boost.

Even an F1 car is quick only when its redlined through the gears. If you were to do a roll on in 7th gear from say 150kmph between an F1 car and a Veyron, the latter would leave it for dead, but in an outright acc from 0-300, the F1 car beats the Veyron by a good 6 secs.

So when you buy or drive a car its important to understand the charahcteristics of that particular car and choose the right gear wrt what ever speed you're doing.

Shan2nu

[Shan2nu]

you are right. it isnt outright performance but my point is that a car with more power and more torque should be quicker in any gear than a car with lesser power and torque.then what is it that gives the extra nip from 20-80/40-100

Not really, coz these tests are speed orieted and not rpm oriented, if you test all these vehicles from 2500-4000rpm in 3rd, the most powerful car will do it the fastest.

You will have to do some reading on how gear ratios, engine rpm and vehicle speed are related, to understand it better.

Shan2nu

[shantyrocks]

some more interesting facts :

even the swift ddis and the palio mjd are quicker than the verna from 20-80 and 40-100!

[rrs1951]

I agree with amitoj. It all depends on where you do most of your driving. I, for instance, seldom get a chance to accelerate form 0 to 60 kmph straight away, because I stay in a crowded area, and do a lot of driving through fairly slow moving traffic. What matters for me, is the ability to quickly overtake slow moving vehicles. In other words, it's the pickup in third/fourth gear that matters to me.

Most of the auto magazine compare times required to accelerate from 0 to 60 kmph or 0 to 100 kmph so that the comparison can have a common basis. It does not mean that these values are important to everybody. Another thing, I would not attach much importance to a difference of 0.3 - 0.5 seconds, because we drive cars on roads and not on racing tracks.