RX7Club.com - Mazda RX7 Forum

RX7Club.com - Mazda RX7 Forum (https://www.rx7club.com/)
-   3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002) (https://www.rx7club.com/3rd-generation-specific-1993-2002-16/)
-   -   How does your FD measure up in this test? (https://www.rx7club.com/3rd-generation-specific-1993-2002-16/how-does-your-fd-measure-up-test-17645/)

technonovice 08-26-01 09:00 PM

How does your FD measure up in this test?
 
As a benchmark, many owners were asked to time their cars from 40 to 70 MPH in 3rd gear.

How to Measure Your 40 to 70 Acceleration Time

Start in third gear at about 35 mph, floor it, start the stopwatch at 40 and stop it at 70. Do it on level ground and time going both ways if possible and average the runs.

On average, a stock car should do it in about 4.9 seconds and a slightly modified car can bring it down to the 4.2 second range.

I'll be measuring mine this way tonight.

kwikrx7 08-26-01 10:36 PM

I remember I did this when my FD was stock and it was like 6.5 secs :eek: I had a tear in my lower ic hose so ... no boost :D Right now I bet it would be like 3 secs - I'll have to test it and post back.

Sidestick 08-26-01 11:42 PM

I think mine was about a 4.2

technonovice 08-27-01 12:41 PM

Using a stop watch I did three runs with my stock 93 Touring with 100,000 miles, 3/4 full fuel, and the temp here was 88 degrees.

1. 6.1 sec ...with my wife in he car too.
Dropped her off and went solo...
2. 5.5 sec ...felt as if I hit the trigger to early?
3. 5.7 sec ...that one felt like I slipped on the trigger
4. 5.6 sec ...felt about right, but I hit a very slight uphill grade at the end

Well unless I see some similar times, it looks as if I am down in power as I suspected.

SPOautos 08-27-01 03:28 PM

Why not start in 2nd? Does the shift time add to much and actually decrease or is it to eliminate user error from picture?

If I can find a stop watch I'll do it both ways and let ya know what I get

Later,

technonovice 08-27-01 06:21 PM


Originally posted by SPOautos
Why not start in 2nd? Does the shift time add to much and actually decrease or is it to eliminate user error from picture?

If I can find a stop watch I'll do it both ways and let ya know what I get

Later,

The test was designed more as a bechmark of performance rather than a competition. It can be useful in diagnostics and comparison which is what I did mine for.
Eliminating a gear change keeps it more standard: people are of varying skills and this takes the skill out of it. This is meant more as a mechanical test. It can alo be useful for boost pattern.
There is more on the robinette site where I found it.

QuIcKSiLvEr 08-28-01 04:22 AM

Damn..
 
Ok i measured mine tonight, and i don't know if the results were bad or good.. with 2 people in the car.. i weigh about 145lbs.. and my friend weighs about 165lbs.. on a 1994 touring.. the times i got were:

1) 5.37s
2) 5.94s
3) 5.83s
4) 5.83s

Average: 5.74s

I tried it with only me in the car, but i found it too hard to watch the road and time at the same time hehe.. i did 2 runs..

1) 4.78s
2) 5.36s

Average: 5.07s

annarborman76 08-28-01 06:27 AM

My car is almost totally stock right now. If anything my slightly heavier wheels slow it down just a bit on a rolling start like this. I'm going to be doing some modifications this weekend so I thought this would be a good time to try this test. I did a total of three runs, each with only myself in the car and a half a tank of gas.
I got the following times:
1) 4.52 seconds
2) 4.25 seconds
3) 4.60 seconds
The first two runs were in the same location but in opposite directions. The third run was in a different location. I felt like I did a fairly accurate job with the stopwatch. I'm just glad nothing jumped in front of me while I was looking at the speedometer.


evot23 08-28-01 06:59 AM

Did this by myself so can't be a good judge on the accuracy of it all.

two runs
1. 4.6
2. 4.4


QuIcKSiLvEr 08-28-01 02:31 PM

..
 
Yeah it's pretty hard testing this yourself, cuz it's so hard to time while driving.. and the passenger would also slow it down.. but i guess 5.74s is alright..

spooledUP7 08-28-01 07:40 PM

This is where a mounted camcorder would be nice. You time it after the fact.

technonovice 08-30-01 09:21 AM

Re: ..
 

Originally posted by QuIcKSiLvEr
Yeah it's pretty hard testing this yourself, cuz it's so hard to time while driving.. and the passenger would also slow it down.. but i guess 5.74s is alright..
Your numbers are pretty close to the claimed stock average. I'd be pleased if my stock FD did that.

I wished we'd get more participants to get a better sample.

If you post your numbers be sure to state your mods or mention if your stock.

technonovice 08-31-01 11:52 AM

I think it would be helpful to all if we got more number posted on this. It would be nice to have a comparison to see what an average is, what mods do what, expectations ...etc...

QuIcKSiLvEr 08-31-01 02:08 PM

...
 
Yeah i'm not sure if i said it already, but i'm completely stock at the moment.. so 5.74s stock isn't bad i don't think..

Maelstrom 08-31-01 02:51 PM

I performed this test today. Although now I discovered that I performed it incorrectly. Instead of flooring it at 35mph and starting the stop watch at 40mph, I didn't floor it until actually reaching 40mph. Thus, my times are a little high.

Test 1 = 5.03
Test 2 = 5.06

Temperature = 66 degrees

I will perform the test correctly tomorrow morning. I believe I should be able to hit mid to high 4's. Right now I am completely stock except for my 17" RacingHart wheels and a boost gauge. I am getting my car dyno'd next week. Soon I will be stage 2 and will report back with the change.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:36 PM.


© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands