In fact I have two new sets of tires one on 04 wheels and one on 01 wheels. New diff on the way as I will be going FI soon. BTW I already have a Mugen clutch. But, thanks for your concern. In both runs I let off around 90mph you can clearly see by looking at the graph.

 

Magazines do not use G-Tech's or even "the same type of device". The equipment they use operates differently (not accelerometer based) and cost tens of thousands of dollars (not a few hundred).

In fact, Car and Driver just happened to test Performance Meters in their May '05 issue and did not find the G-Tech to be nearly as accurate as the "4 - 5 thousands" you have experienced (even when properly calibrated).

In fairness, you are correct that magazines do not always produce the absolute best times (the best correct for temperature and pressure). Additionally, they can test with "green" engines and obviously not every motor makes the exact rated HP.

That being said I'd trust their results over anything I might read on a message board without a timeslip attached (even then whose to say that slip wasn't produced by a different car with say an LS1 under the hood). After all, I've read about stock S2000's topping 165-170 mph on internet boards also. Does that make it true?

 

Good answer....change the topic of the thread to a new one? I guess you're still searching for a "5.2 source"?

 

[QUOTE=Ray S (Chicago),Apr 17 2005, 07:04 PM] Magazines do not use G-Tech's or even "the same type of device".

 

Excellent!! You're going to post a timeslip (1/4 mile I assume) to prove your assertion that a stock S2k can go 0-60 in 5.2 seconds? Yet you admit that it won't provide a 0-60 time (the whole purpose and title of this thread BTW)?

Wow, you've clearly proven me wrong!

Care to change the topic again???

 

Yeah I do care, my head is beggining to hurt listening to your very precocious reasoning.

 

i don't give a rats a$$ about 0-60 times but i do remember seeing some article that had posted a 5.2sec 0-60 out of a stock s2000. i'd have to find the source, i'll try and find it.

 

the 5.2 seconds is wrong and impossible. 5.5 seems about right I guess. I am the one who started this topic and everybody got my queston wrong. I do also think it does it in 5.5 seconds. It also doesn't matter what it doeseven if it does it in 8 seconds, it is an awesome car. My question was why do some magazines say it is 6.2??? How do they come up with these numbers???

babyslapmafro, I think the 5.2 seconds you saw is wrong. I am not saying that you are lying, but whoever wrote it probably did a mistake. Because I also remember 4.9 seconds 0-60 time back in 2000 (I think December 2000) in an issue of Road & Track. It was completely wrong... That issue was just after the September 2000 issue where they compared the Audi TT, BMW M Roadster, Boxster S and S2000. In that issue they said it was 5.5 seconds and after like 3 or 4 issues, they did 10 Best Sports Car Test and said 0-60 for S2000 is 4.9 seconds. It was completely wrong because they put the specs of the NSX under S2000. What I am trying to say is you may have seen 5.2 but it doesn't mean the car can do it in 5.2

 

I couldn't find the article but it is the January 2001 issue not the December 2000. Please post the test result if anybody can find it

 

4.9 seconds. I read it once in a magazine and that's good enough for me.


In fact, I think I'll get "TYPO" for my next vanity plate.