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

How does your FD measure up in this test?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 26, 2001 | 09:00 PM
  #1  
technonovice's Avatar
Thread Starter
Jinx
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,260
Likes: 1
From: Raleigh, NC
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.
Reply
Old Aug 26, 2001 | 10:36 PM
  #2  
kwikrx7's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,392
Likes: 0
From: Mechanicsburg, PA USA
I remember I did this when my FD was stock and it was like 6.5 secs I had a tear in my lower ic hose so ... no boost Right now I bet it would be like 3 secs - I'll have to test it and post back.
Reply
Old Aug 26, 2001 | 11:42 PM
  #3  
Sidestick's Avatar
Senior Member
Tenured Member 15 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 359
Likes: 1
From: Ft. Lauderdale
I think mine was about a 4.2
Reply
Old Aug 27, 2001 | 12:41 PM
  #4  
technonovice's Avatar
Thread Starter
Jinx
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,260
Likes: 1
From: Raleigh, NC
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.
Reply
Old Aug 27, 2001 | 03:28 PM
  #5  
SPOautos's Avatar
Hey, where did my $$$ go?
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,413
Likes: 0
From: Bimingham, AL
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,
Reply
Old Aug 27, 2001 | 06:21 PM
  #6  
technonovice's Avatar
Thread Starter
Jinx
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,260
Likes: 1
From: Raleigh, NC
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.
Reply
Old Aug 28, 2001 | 04:22 AM
  #7  
QuIcKSiLvEr's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: VanCity
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
Reply
Old Aug 28, 2001 | 06:27 AM
  #8  
annarborman76's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
From: Ann Arbor, MI
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.

Reply
Old Aug 28, 2001 | 06:59 AM
  #9  
evot23's Avatar
Classy
Tenured Member 10 Years
iTrader: (17)
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 6,900
Likes: 2
From: Gainesville, FL
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

Reply
Old Aug 28, 2001 | 02:31 PM
  #10  
QuIcKSiLvEr's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: VanCity
..

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..
Reply
Old Aug 28, 2001 | 07:40 PM
  #11  
spooledUP7's Avatar
There and back again
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
From: Camarillo, Ca
This is where a mounted camcorder would be nice. You time it after the fact.
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2001 | 09:21 AM
  #12  
technonovice's Avatar
Thread Starter
Jinx
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,260
Likes: 1
From: Raleigh, NC
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.
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2001 | 11:52 AM
  #13  
technonovice's Avatar
Thread Starter
Jinx
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,260
Likes: 1
From: Raleigh, NC
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...

Last edited by technonovice; Aug 31, 2001 at 11:54 AM.
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2001 | 02:08 PM
  #14  
QuIcKSiLvEr's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: VanCity
...

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..
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2001 | 02:51 PM
  #15  
Maelstrom's Avatar
Junior Member
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
From: Minnesota
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.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Jeff20B
1st Generation Specific (1979-1985)
73
Sep 16, 2018 07:16 PM
toplessFC3Sman
2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992)
6
Mar 20, 2018 01:54 PM
gxl90rx7
Haltech Forum
6
Jun 30, 2017 11:30 PM
Bauer778
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
10
Nov 4, 2015 04:42 PM
risingsunroof82
1st Generation Specific (1979-1985)
2
Sep 9, 2015 08:06 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:10 PM.