3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002) 1993-2002 Discussion including performance modifications and Technical Support Sections.
Sponsored by:

FD RX7; good launch bad acceleration?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 1, 2008 | 02:43 PM
  #1  
beqa16v's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
From: Tbilisi
FD RX7; good launch bad acceleration?

Looking at specs of FD RX7 we see that it does 13.8 on the strip and 0-60 in 5 seconds. i was thinking that 13.8 is not that good 1/4 mile time for a car which acceleretes 0-60 in 5 seconds?
Reply
Old Jan 1, 2008 | 03:48 PM
  #2  
edc's Avatar
edc
Junior Member
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
From: Sweden
That is quite a correct statement ... in the beginning of acceleration it is all about Wheight/HP relationship. Later on around 60 mph the airresistance is reminding that it is there to make it more and more tough to accelerate. Which is why top end speed mostly depends on foremost power and how aerodynamic your car is. (also gearratios but hey)

I was just checking out the corvette c5 automatic(345 HP stock) (my boss has one) and since it is stock I would guess that I would grab the lead if I change gear ok but then higher up the speeds he would come creeping.
Reply
Old Jan 1, 2008 | 08:14 PM
  #3  
dgeesaman's Avatar
Moderator
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 12,313
Likes: 27
From: Hershey PA
Originally Posted by beqa16v
Looking at specs of FD RX7 we see that it does 13.8 on the strip and 0-60 in 5 seconds. i was thinking that 13.8 is not that good 1/4 mile time for a car which acceleretes 0-60 in 5 seconds?
It's not that different from most other 14sec cars.
Reply
Old Jan 1, 2008 | 09:44 PM
  #4  
moconnor's Avatar
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 4,678
Likes: 96
From: Bay Area, CA
It pretty close to what you would expect. cf. http://www.albeedigital.com/supercou...0-60times.html
Reply
Old Jan 1, 2008 | 10:46 PM
  #5  
cptpain's Avatar
Torqueless Wonder
Tenured Member 15 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 3
From: Texas
you also need to consider that the FD had 255hp which would roughly translate to around 230 at the wheels....

its not bad considering an 04 EVO making 240-250 at the wheels will push it to a 13.3-13.6 (friend has a factory freak) as well for a heavier chassis thanx to AWD.....
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 04:57 AM
  #6  
beqa16v's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
From: Tbilisi
Originally Posted by cptpain
you also need to consider that the FD had 255hp which would roughly translate to around 230 at the wheels....

its not bad considering an 04 EVO making 240-250 at the wheels will push it to a 13.3-13.6 (friend has a factory freak) as well for a heavier chassis thanx to AWD.....
true but EVO is AWD so it should have better 0-60 time compared to later acceleration.
but for example 6 speed NSX has roughly same 0-60 time but can hit 13 flat on 1/4
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 08:09 AM
  #7  
Mahjik's Avatar
Mr. Links
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 27,595
Likes: 43
From: Kansas City, MO
Originally Posted by beqa16v
true but EVO is AWD so it should have better 0-60 time compared to later acceleration.
but for example 6 speed NSX has roughly same 0-60 time but can hit 13 flat on 1/4
The NSX which was rated at those times was the lighter model and 290 HP.

Post-1997 3.2 L North American Acura examples are known to achieve a 13.3 second quarter-mile time (1997-2005 model year NSX-T; the 149 lb (68 kg) lighter Zanardi Edition NSX is closer to 13 seconds flat)
The 1993 C4 Corvette was about a 14 second car. The FD's 1/4 mile performance "for it's time" was good.
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 01:38 PM
  #8  
beqa16v's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
From: Tbilisi
Originally Posted by Mahjik
The NSX which was rated at those times was the lighter model and 290 HP.
lightest 6 speed NSX weights 1270 kilograms, thats Type R and Type S Zero produced in japan only and they can run mid 12s. USDM-s weight 1420
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 02:00 PM
  #9  
arghx's Avatar
rotorhead
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 16,205
Likes: 461
From: cold
I don't get why you are even looking at 0-60 times. they are for bench racers. They mean very little.

If you look at the trap speed of a stock FD (around 100mph) then you will see that for this car a high 13 or 14 flat is about right, and like everyone said it's what you'd expect from a car of that era
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 03:10 PM
  #10  
XLR8's Avatar
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
iTrader: (52)
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 3,902
Likes: 10
From: NJ
Hell, High 13's are still good for a stock vehicle. Not to mention the handling that FD's possesed right out of the box. Rx7's have always been true sports cars. Much more to them then 0-60 times.
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 03:46 PM
  #11  
Mahjik's Avatar
Mr. Links
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 27,595
Likes: 43
From: Kansas City, MO
Question

Originally Posted by beqa16v
lightest 6 speed NSX weights 1270 kilograms
So, the same weight but more power (stock). So how do you not understand why it's faster?
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 04:04 PM
  #12  
moconnor's Avatar
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (14)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 4,678
Likes: 96
From: Bay Area, CA
Originally Posted by Mahjik
So, the same weight but more power (stock). So how do you not understand why it's faster?
He is confused that the 1/4 miles time is 13 flat but that the 0-60 is the same as a stock FD. Or at least the test he picked had those numbers.

0-60 times for the same car vary considerably - which is why you rarely see them discussed by car heads (or at least knowledgeable ones). For example, here are C&D numbers for a (USDM) NSX:

2001 Acura NSX V6 4.5 12.9 (C&D TV 2001)
Reply
Old Jan 2, 2008 | 08:06 PM
  #13  
cptpain's Avatar
Torqueless Wonder
Tenured Member 15 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 3
From: Texas
the gear ratios on the NSX changed very little over the years even when they went 6-spd
Reply
Old Jan 3, 2008 | 03:43 AM
  #14  
beqa16v's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
From: Tbilisi
cptpain
biggest change was that switching to 2nd from 1st didnt kick you out of VTEC. 5 speeds were loosing a lot of time because of that
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
bb6guy
Old School and Other Rotary
10
Oct 1, 2018 08:07 AM
JZW
3rd Gen General Discussion
29
Dec 21, 2016 11:23 AM
bb6guy
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
3
Aug 12, 2015 03:29 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:17 AM.