Si@Fiske Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Can anyone please tell me an accurate time for a starlet sr 0-60mph time with an induction kit and exhaust.Thanks Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sparky Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 Mine does it in low 10 seconds but i probably lost performance with a Max Flower induction kit Quote Link to post Share on other sites
keirz Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 ive never really timed my 0-60. i just do the a bollard test. standard but with heavy 16s on i hit 72mph and with light 15s, induction kit, jdm mani and exhaust i hit 82. in terms of time i cant help but the mods i mentioned helped me improve it. i would like to think its close to 10 secs. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Idrees Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 My dads old Sportif - 14" GT Wheels and a Green Cotton Induction kit, hit low 9's. Now I look back and think my phone's Stopclock was dodgy, but my dad says the Sportif was definitely quicker then my brothers SR which we haven't timed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mark Edwards Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 My dads old Sportif - 14" GT Wheels and a Green Cotton Induction kit, hit low 9's. Now I look back and think my phone's Stopclock was dodgy, but my dad says the Sportif was definitely quicker then my brothers SR which we haven't timed.I should expect the sportif to be quicker anyway as it doesn't have all the electronics on it (extra weight) that the SR does. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
keirz Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 woo hoo sportifs rock.low 9s!!!!! think the stop clock may have been misused!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Idrees Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 think the stop clock may have been misused!!What do you mean? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Idrees Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 I should expect the sportif to be quicker anyway as it doesn't have all the electronics on it (extra weight) that the SR does.I agree, but the SR is just better!! Hehe!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
keirz Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 i mean low 9s would be an incredable time. a stop watch is a very vague time anyway.my dads old 130bhp passats 0-60 was 9secs and that was a monster, also my mates 2ltr focus is 9secs and they would both piss on mine big style. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Idrees Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 Hmm, my cousin was driving at the time and hes a top driver - The driver matters! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
keirz Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 the driver matters yes but also having 130bhp instead of 75bhp makes a difference too. are you telling me that a driver can make a car go faster than what its capable off?im not doubting that when you pressed stop at what you beleived was 60mph the stop watch it did say low nines. im just saying that for an n/a starlet to hit low nines is a major acheivement and althought i havent timed mine yet it seems unlikly that it would.and a stop watch is an unaccurate way of measuring as there is human error involved. and im not a shit driver before you start the "you cant drive it right to hit low nines" comments. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mark Edwards Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 the driver matters yes but also having 130bhp instead of 75bhp makes a difference too.Very true, but 800kgs instead of 1400kgs or whatever a passat weighs makes a hell of a difference too. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
keirz Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 yes very true. but do you really think an n/a would beat either of those two car i mentioned to 60. or that an n/a could run a 9sec 0-60? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rob_bower Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 Come on ladies, handbags away! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Idrees Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 the driver matters yes but also having 130bhp instead of 75bhp makes a difference too. are you telling me that a driver can make a car go faster than what its capable off?im not doubting that when you pressed stop at what you beleived was 60mph the stop watch it did say low nines. im just saying that for an n/a starlet to hit low nines is a major acheivement and althought i havent timed mine yet it seems unlikly that it would.and a stop watch is an unaccurate way of measuring as there is human error involved. and im not a shit driver before you start the "you cant drive it right to hit low nines" comments.I never said that the driver can make a car go faster than what its capable of, but the majority of times book speed/times are a pile of shit.Parkers guide etc say a standard Starlet does 103mph, but i've seen a bog standard one showing 120mph. The speedo obviousy isnt very accurrate, but its not that much out of accuracy.And i never said you were a shit driver so i dont know where that came from and i don't know why you think i'd say such a thing.Very true, but 800kgs instead of 1400kgs or whatever a passat weighs makes a hell of a difference too.You hit the nail right on the head mate! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Idrees Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 yes very true. but do you really think that an n/a could run a 9sec 0-60?If its a decent one that hasnt been ragged to bits, yes. I'll prove that one day! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mark Edwards Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 yes very true. but do you really think an n/a would beat either of those two car i mentioned to 60. or that an n/a could run a 9sec 0-60?I have no idea about the 0-60 time to be honest as it's not something i've even thought about trying to find out. As for beating either a focus or a passat, i have no idea on that one either really, neither are particularly fast cars. The only point i'm making is that the extra 55hp that the passat had was probably needed to overcome the weight difference anyway, the big difference would have come from the torque difference i should imagine. Weight has a hell of a lot to do with how fast a car accelerates and 600+kgs difference between the two cars is a very large amount. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mark Edwards Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 Parkers guide etc say a standard Starlet does 103mph.I've had 104 from mine. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Idrees Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 I've had 104 from mine. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
keirz Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 ok im not into forum arguments over petty stuff as im not a child and i like to deal with things in real life and not bicker through a key board and a screen. i made a comment that a stop watch is inaccurate and you seem to have perceived that as me saying that you are not telling the truth about recording a low 9. i would love to be able to say my starlet runs that time but in all honestly i dont think it does. and as for the cars i mentioned im fuly aware that they are lugging around more weight but i have driven both the cars and they would piss all over an n/a. simple as that. its not like im someone with a more powerful car slagging off n/a starlets, im a fellow n/a owner who does not feel that low nines is acheivable.i will put it to you again that a stop watch is a very inaccurate way of measuring this sort of thing. thats not me saying that you are a retard and cannot use one. its me saying it is fucking inaccurate. simple as. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mark Edwards Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 ok im not into forum arguments over petty stuff as im not a child and i like to deal with things in real life and not bicker through a key board and a screen. i made a comment that a stop watch is inaccurate and you seem to have perceived that as me saying that you are not telling the truth about recording a low 9. i would love to be able to say my starlet runs that time but in all honestly i dont think it does. and as for the cars i mentioned im fuly aware that they are lugging around more weight but i have driven both the cars and they would piss all over an n/a. simple as that. its not like im someone with a more powerful car slagging off n/a starlets, im a fellow n/a owner who does not feel that low nines is acheivable.i will put it to you again that a stop watch is a very inaccurate way of measuring this sort of thing. thats not me saying that you are a retard and cannot use one. its me saying it is fucking inaccurate. simple as.Oh trust me, i'm not arguing about any of it. Im definately a person to go by hard evidence not pub talk. I've had too much of it when i had my mr2, people saying it couldn't do what i said it could. But they soon had to shut up when it was proved time and time again at santa pod, ten of the best, the jtuner thrash and various times on a dyno in front of witnesses. Low 9's from an n/a starlet might be possible i guess but i would like to prove it for myself. but yes, a stop watch to do it is a waste of time, you can never start it at the right time for starters and any innacuracy in the speedo will affect when you stop it too. The only way to do it is with proper gps timing equipment. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
keirz Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 wasnt really aimed at you dude. like i say it just seems to good a time and its done on a stop watch. thats all im saying im not trying to argue just mearly putting my opinion across because that time would only be about 1.5 sec of a glanzas time! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mark Edwards Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 just mearly putting my opinion acrossAnd until someone can prove it one way or the other that's all any of us can do.Mine should be starting it's diet soon so that'll help. Speaking to Corbeau about fitting my pro series seats into mine. Lightweight wheels help to as there's less weight to turn so the Enkei's are a big help. There's a lot more to it than just power. The glanza's have a major torque advantage over an n/a though which us n/a owners will never get around. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
keirz Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 yeah i noticed a massive difference when i switched from my bsa to my rotas. i would love to strip mine out but i use the car to give people lifts to football and work and stuff so cant really. i may strip it out for the weekend to see if there is a nice difference though.=====edit=======ps i wont edit my posts to make it seem as though i was not being arsey. no names mentioned. peace out. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.