A quick rant....I look forward to the day when this "statistic" of genuinally meaningless information will disappear from the automotive performance venicular. How can anyone, who truly loves automobiles, subject their four-wheeled child to such mechanical thrashing...all to create a number that in the daily course of driving provides little and essentially, useless information about a car's mettle.
I think 5-60 mph is something most of us, in the course of a week's worth of driving, might actually engage in every so often and certainly a 10-70 mph jaunt but it seems in this day and age, in America anyways, it's all about that dash to 60. Heck, cars are engineered from the drawings to be geared towards a great 0-60 time, only to fart out by the end of the 1320. I'm tired of all the importance placed on this stat, especially when comparing sportscars for Pete's sake. I have yet to see a checkered flag waved for the quickest car to 60 mph.
Enough already.
OK, I'm done.

 

Russ,
Could not agree with you more. I seem to get more excitment when I am doing between 40 - 50 and than push on it to get it into triple didgets.

 

Um, when I'm at a stop light I do accelerate 0-60 (not 5-60 or 10-70).

Guess what, in F1 racing they actually do a standing start. How about that (crazy idea huh?) . The car that can do 0-100 or whatever can get to the first corner faster than one that a slower car. So it actually is an important aspect of a race car and street car.

I Happen to look more at a 0-100 mph time or trap speed at the end of a 1/4. But all those times are influenced by the 0-30 or 0-60 time.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rai
Um, when I'm at a stop light I do accelerate 0-60 (not 5-60 or 10-70).
So you're telling me that you flail your car from every stoplight as if you're timing yourself to 60? My point is that most "racing" done away from the track, and dare I say, Formula One, doesn't stop at 60 and while I agree with you that in most cases, anything quick to 60 is usually quick to 100, that statistic is what most folks want to know when a car's performance is first spoken of, not it's 0-100 mph time or trap speed at the end of the 1320.

Guess what, in F1 racing they actually do a standing start. How about that (crazy idea huh?) .
Not sure how that startling bit of information relates to my rant above. Formula One cars aren't usually fodder for Car and Driver reviews or "come see what's under my hood" show offs while parked at Piggly Wiggly. The car that can do 0-100 or whatever can get to the first corner faster than one that a slower car. Well, of course it can...the other car is slower. Not EVERY car quick to 0-60 is going to out accelerate a car SLOWER to that speed. Case in point...Subaru WRX. So it actually is an important aspect of a race car and street car.
Race car? In a small way I suppose, but I don't think the grid of any F1 or 24 Hours of LeMans race is determined from that car's 0-60 time, and that's what I'm talking about...the futility of that # to baseline a car's performance.
As for street cars, I couldn't disagree with you more. Considering many people cannot roll off a sub 6-second 0-60 in their S2000 without practice and a mechanical beatdown they're not particularly motivated to repeat at each stoplight, how does that make the car any less of a true sportscar? My Alfa couldn't do an EIGHT second 0-60, let alone in under six seconds but it was every bit as much fun to drive as my S2000.
My point? The sum of a sportscar's DNA depends more on WHO is driving it than simply what's under the hood. This is why I love to read Euro car magazines like EVO or TOP GEAR because their reviewers don't expect their readership to skip the verbiage just to get to the stat sheets.
This is a car meant to be driven, not pointed in a straight line and mechanically whipped to 60 mph from each stop light.
I guess we'll agree to disagree. I was motivated to write this because SCC's test of the upcoming Neon SRT had it's 0-60 in 5.8 and several online enthusiast forum members are now running around trying to figure out which intake they can put in their automobile which can keep pace with the turbocharged Neon's 0-60 time.

 

When articles compare cars and post [0-30, 0-60 30-50, and 30-70] I pay the most attention to 30-70...

 

Launching the car is fun. Going 5-60 in the S2000 blows. Wait, wait, wait, okay now we're in VTEC...I'd rather be in VTEC right now.

A car's 0-60 time is by no means useless. It's an indicator of how a car launches, and is part of what differentiates RWD from FWD or AWD in any sort of motorsports competition where aggressive standing starts are a factor (drag, SCCA ProSolo, etc.). 0-60 is also a good indicator of how a car will perform in the only type of competition most car owners will ever participate in - namely, dicing it up to be first to the next stoplight or onramp. That's why the general public (at least in the States) places importance there, and will continue to.

The S2000, like every other Honda that isn't a motorcycle, lawnmower, or weedwacker, is a car. Cars are made of parts, parts that wear out. Sure, doing lots of hard launches may eventually snap an axle, but how is that really any different than wearing out a set of tires, brake pads, or rotors? "Whipping" your car isn't like whipping your dog, as your car won't whimper and poop in your shoes. Eventually it'll just break, you fix it, and things are good as new. There, good

Likewise, the act of "driving" has a unique meaning to every individual, just like the word "living". Those who have done so might say that you haven't "lived" until you've snorted cocaine while skydiving naked, but most of us are content without ever having "lived" by that definition. Same goes for driving - the fun is where you find it, whether it's pimping around town, autocrossing, launching the car at a dragstrip or stoplight, driving around a racetrack, or holding on for glory at Bonneville.

Everyone has their own value systems. Someone who values a car's 0-60 time above all (whether or not said car was designed to do 0-60 as quickly and reliably as possible) should not be held in lower esteem than another, who values some other characteristic (handling, styling, trunk space, etc.), just because they perceive their favored trait to be more important, noble, or relevant to the class of car.

p.s. Don't read Street Encounters, your IQ will drop
p.p.s. Stop whining

 

... squishy feeling in shoes ... car wants to be Zaino'd ... feeling like I'm on the leash here!



(nicely said, Jason)

p.s./ If Russ wants to rant, I say let 'im!

 

I'm all for people pimping their S2000's as they see fit, but I've got to disagree that spending money on a new tranny is akin to putting four
new tires on the car. I've owned 20+ sportscars and driven them rather aggressively and have never had to replace that particular "wear" item.
My main contention (or digression) from Rai's sentiments is he used Formula One racing as a means to back up why he thinks 0-60's are important. I guess when you've been weened in Europe (where I lived for a good deal of my life), you think of things a bit differently, especially since there are roads where one can drive the car at high speeds. There aren't many roads in Rome or Naples, Italy where you'd want to do 0-60 very often.
As I said, this frustration was born from reading various "oh my god, the Neon does 0-60 in 5.8, what are we to do?" threads.
There....I feel better now.

 

For what it's worth, I'm quite sure that if the S2000 posted low 5-second 0-60 times CONSISTENTLY, this thread would never have been started.

Not a flame, just an observation. And personally, I love 0-60 times. 5-60 times are even slower.

Viva la 0-60 benchmark!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Russ
[B]My main contention (or digression) from Rai's sentiments is he used Formula One racing as a means to back up why he thinks 0-60's are important.