0-100 timings claimed by various mags !

Fiero · 21st March 2006, 13:57

hey guys ... i was wondering why the 0-100 timings of various mags differ so drastically in some cases
for example

Top Gear's claim for the corolla is 10.6 seconds , and ACI's claim is 9.07(which seems more accurate to me)
similarly TG for the swift is 13.8 sec , and the ACI figure is 12.29 sec(both figures come as a surprise to me considering how people claim its as fast as baleno)

i'm sure ACI does not rely on the ODO

why does TG always claim a car is slower to the dash than ACI and other mags ??

do they test the car with a full tank of fuel and 4 people in it ????

revharder · 21st March 2006, 18:11

i have no idea how other magazines carries the speed-tests (and other tests too) of their test-cars coz their figures changes after every six months or so!

but AutoCar India uses quite nice gadgets and equipments to tap the figures, so no such variations are found even after six months.

i have seen them a lot of times using those equipments on their test cars.
this is why i prefers ACI over other magazines.

ksethuram · 21st March 2006, 18:42

Every magazine have their own way of testing but none would depend on the built in odo as i have seen every magazine publishing odo error.
Timimgs can differ in many ways 1) Driver capability 2) Every car manufactured will be different from the other. etc.. etc.

CaliforniaKnight · 21st March 2006, 18:45

then whats the best way to check the 0-100 timings for these cars?? I know we can all get an approx by seeing these mags.

DCEite · 21st March 2006, 18:53

Dont know about Autocar, but the figure of Overdrive changes every 6 months.
For example,
Sometime before it used to say WagonR 17.xx seconds.
Now, its 15.xx seconds.

Now after another 6 months, it will be 11.xx seconds.

However, ACI thinks its 14.xx seconds.

Bu;;sh;t.

Fiero · 21st March 2006, 19:06

how much do you think d wagonR takes for that dash ???

i think for most cars,ACI figures seem most accurate in comparison with other mags.

don't know know how TG does their tests
according to european norms . Kerb weight is defined as a car in its ready to use state i.e with 90% tank full and a specified load ,i think 68KG in the boot . maybe they test the cars in this state.

Fiero · 21st March 2006, 19:14

according to feb edition ACI. wagonR takes 15.32 ... and zen takes 14.62.
kerb wieght of the wagonR is 755kg and that of the wagonR is 825kg(here kerb weight is only the weght of the car)

weight makes alot of diff in these smaller cars .

Fiero · 21st March 2006, 19:19

wagonR acc to AC(feb) takes 15.32sec as opposed to 14.62 for the zen. the wagonR is 70kg heavier than the zen and it does make alot of a diff in these small cars. i don't know about you dceite but i won't comment on the figures , but i can believe if the zen is just a tad quicker. only a 4hp and 3nm diff btwn the cars afterall.

aZa · 21st March 2006, 21:31

ACI i think uses a "VBOX" to check the Timings of a Test vehicle.

Quote:

The VBOX is a powerful new instrument used for measuring the speed and position of a moving vehicle. It is based on a new generation of high performance satellite receivers, and will measure acceleration, braking distances, lap times, cornering forces and much more. Due to the small size and simple installation procedure, the VBOX is ideally suited for use in cars, bikes, off-road vehicles and boats.

There by i think ACI specs would be more reliable.

revharder · 21st March 2006, 21:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by aZa

ACI i think uses a "VBOX" to check the Timings of a Test vehicle.
There by i think ACI specs would be more reliable.

not only equipments like this one, but also some more.
and their accuracy seems quite perfect.

DCEite · 21st March 2006, 22:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiero

wagonR acc to AC(feb) takes 15.32sec as opposed to 14.62 for the zen. the wagonR is 70kg heavier than the zen and it does make alot of a diff in these small cars. i don't know about you dceite but i won't comment on the figures , but i can believe if the zen is just a tad quicker. only a 4hp and 3nm diff btwn the cars afterall.

Zen is a tad quicker NO DOUBT. What i was saying that the figures keep changing between different road tests and comparos.

parijnan · 21st March 2006, 23:16

The fuel efficiency reported by ACI is a lot more accurate than Overdrive's tall claims. So I guess I would believe ACI's 0-100 timing over Overdrive.

Cheers.

Fiero · 21st March 2006, 23:23

as far as mileage is concerned , the actual figure is not as important as it is in comparison with figures of other cars

for eg
ACI reports 10.9kpl in the city for the NHC ZX , and 8.9 for the ford ikon ... having a ford ikon i can say that w/AC i get 10kpl in delhi . but in the same conditions i can safely say the NHC would give 13kpl.

Fiero · 21st March 2006, 23:37

i personally dislike overdrive as i think they are very biased against some cars.not that all mags aren't to a certain extent, but OD goes over the top.

for eg. they came out with a claim that ikon 1.6 takes 14.5 seconds to reach a ton.at the same time baleno,esteem,swift all got sub-12 second runs... i can understand if the driver was an idiot and screwed up all the timings...but only ikon??? i know its not as quick as the other 3.but 14.5 ???

... its ridiculous .. a zen does the dash in that much time.

ACI claims 11.9 for the ikon 1.6 and 14.2 for the ikon 1.3, which seems more like it.

prince85 · 22nd March 2006, 00:34

yea fiero, i agree with you, ikon 1.6 is much quicker to be reaching 100kph in 14.5 secs. I think the 1.6 manages a ton in 11.9secs and the esteem in 11.4secs, dunno about the baleno, can anyone give 0-100 figures of a baleno

Cheers

21st March 2006, 13:57	#1
Fiero BHPian Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Mumbai Posts: 352 Thanked: 146 Times	0-100 timings claimed by various mags ! hey guys ... i was wondering why the 0-100 timings of various mags differ so drastically in some cases for example Top Gear's claim for the corolla is 10.6 seconds , and ACI's claim is 9.07(which seems more accurate to me) similarly TG for the swift is 13.8 sec , and the ACI figure is 12.29 sec(both figures come as a surprise to me considering how people claim its as fast as baleno) i'm sure ACI does not rely on the ODO why does TG always claim a car is slower to the dash than ACI and other mags ?? do they test the car with a full tank of fuel and 4 people in it ???? Last edited by Fiero : 21st March 2006 at 14:08.
	() Thanks

21st March 2006, 18:11	#2
revharder BHPian Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: New Delhi Posts: 460 Thanked: 56 Times	i have no idea how other magazines carries the speed-tests (and other tests too) of their test-cars coz their figures changes after every six months or so! but AutoCar India uses quite nice gadgets and equipments to tap the figures, so no such variations are found even after six months. i have seen them a lot of times using those equipments on their test cars. this is why i prefers ACI over other magazines.
	() Thanks

21st March 2006, 18:42	#3
ksethuram BHPian Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Chennai , London (now) Posts: 233 Thanked: Once	Every magazine have their own way of testing but none would depend on the built in odo as i have seen every magazine publishing odo error. Timimgs can differ in many ways 1) Driver capability 2) Every car manufactured will be different from the other. etc.. etc. Last edited by ksethuram : 21st March 2006 at 18:49.
	() Thanks

21st March 2006, 18:45	#4
CaliforniaKnight BHPian Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: IND + DXB Posts: 980 Thanked: 141 Times View My Garage	then whats the best way to check the 0-100 timings for these cars?? I know we can all get an approx by seeing these mags.
	() Thanks

21st March 2006, 18:53	#5
DCEite Senior - BHPian Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: NCR Posts: 3,417 Thanked: 2,549 Times	Dont know about Autocar, but the figure of Overdrive changes every 6 months. For example, Sometime before it used to say WagonR 17.xx seconds. Now, its 15.xx seconds. Now after another 6 months, it will be 11.xx seconds. However, ACI thinks its 14.xx seconds. Bu;;sh;t.
	() Thanks

21st March 2006, 19:06	#6
Fiero BHPian Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Mumbai Posts: 352 Thanked: 146 Times	how much do you think d wagonR takes for that dash ??? i think for most cars,ACI figures seem most accurate in comparison with other mags. don't know know how TG does their tests according to european norms . Kerb weight is defined as a car in its ready to use state i.e with 90% tank full and a specified load ,i think 68KG in the boot . maybe they test the cars in this state.
	() Thanks

21st March 2006, 19:14	#7
Fiero BHPian Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Mumbai Posts: 352 Thanked: 146 Times	according to feb edition ACI. wagonR takes 15.32 ... and zen takes 14.62. kerb wieght of the wagonR is 755kg and that of the wagonR is 825kg(here kerb weight is only the weght of the car) weight makes alot of diff in these smaller cars .
	() Thanks

21st March 2006, 19:19	#8
Fiero BHPian Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Mumbai Posts: 352 Thanked: 146 Times	wagonR acc to AC(feb) takes 15.32sec as opposed to 14.62 for the zen. the wagonR is 70kg heavier than the zen and it does make alot of a diff in these small cars. i don't know about you dceite but i won't comment on the figures , but i can believe if the zen is just a tad quicker. only a 4hp and 3nm diff btwn the cars afterall.
	() Thanks

21st March 2006, 23:16	#12
parijnan BHPian Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Bangalore Posts: 66 Thanked: 0 Times	The fuel efficiency reported by ACI is a lot more accurate than Overdrive's tall claims. So I guess I would believe ACI's 0-100 timing over Overdrive. Cheers.
	() Thanks

21st March 2006, 23:23	#13
Fiero BHPian Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Mumbai Posts: 352 Thanked: 146 Times	as far as mileage is concerned , the actual figure is not as important as it is in comparison with figures of other cars for eg ACI reports 10.9kpl in the city for the NHC ZX , and 8.9 for the ford ikon ... having a ford ikon i can say that w/AC i get 10kpl in delhi . but in the same conditions i can safely say the NHC would give 13kpl.
	() Thanks

21st March 2006, 23:37	#14
Fiero BHPian Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Mumbai Posts: 352 Thanked: 146 Times	i personally dislike overdrive as i think they are very biased against some cars.not that all mags aren't to a certain extent, but OD goes over the top. for eg. they came out with a claim that ikon 1.6 takes 14.5 seconds to reach a ton.at the same time baleno,esteem,swift all got sub-12 second runs... i can understand if the driver was an idiot and screwed up all the timings...but only ikon??? i know its not as quick as the other 3.but 14.5 ??? ... its ridiculous .. a zen does the dash in that much time. ACI claims 11.9 for the ikon 1.6 and 14.2 for the ikon 1.3, which seems more like it.
	() Thanks

22nd March 2006, 00:34	#15
prince85 BHPian Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Mumbai Posts: 971 Thanked: 123 Times	yea fiero, i agree with you, ikon 1.6 is much quicker to be reaching 100kph in 14.5 secs. I think the 1.6 manages a ton in 11.9secs and the esteem in 11.4secs, dunno about the baleno, can anyone give 0-100 figures of a baleno Cheers
	() Thanks