Popular cars straight line run times

[AV8R]

Stinger is in there

 

[Gerard]

5,68 s. 0-100 km/h poor measurment or it was 2,0 L version.

 

[Ozstung]

5,68 s. 0-100 km/h poor measurment or it was 2,0 L version.

Loose gravel on tarmac means not getting away cleanly.

 

[DaJackson]

None of the 2WD cars got good launches. The Type R looked like it was idling off the line.

 

[BlaydeX15]

Yeah, something was up with their runs. The Lexus LC500, right after the Stinger, almost had a 6.1 sec 0-100km, but it should be faster than the Stinger a good bit.

 

[Kamauxx]

For their next test they'll drag race a Bugatti Chiron against a Chevy Spark.


...on sand.

 

[mldavis2]

Yeah, something was up with their runs. The Lexus LC500, right after the Stinger, almost had a 6.1 sec 0-100km, but it should be faster than the Stinger a good bit.

It's within 0.1 second according to Car & Driver reviews. You can see it online on their website. They claim 470 bhp but only 20 ft/lbs more torque.

 

[DaJackson]

Yeah, something was up with their runs. The Lexus LC500, right after the Stinger, almost had a 6.1 sec 0-100km, but it should be faster than the Stinger a good bit.

They said in the beginning that they chose the airfield to mimic a normal road to test how the car puts he power to the ground not what the potentially fastest time was.

That being said, there were some large rocks being flung up at launch in the close up shots of he wheels. Maybe that’s an average road in Australia?

 

[AV8R]

Hey guys I just noticed a few of you have not put your location in your profile. Can you edit to reflect country, state and city thanks.

 

[Ozstung]

They said in the beginning that they chose the airfield to mimic a normal road to test how the car puts he power to the ground not what the potentially fastest time was.

That being said, there were some large rocks being flung up at launch in the close up shots of he wheels. Maybe that’s an average road in Australia?

You got it, we also patch roads rather than resurface them. Kia was saying they tune the suspension different to different markets including down here.

 

[AV8R]

You got it, we also patch roads rather than resurface them. Kia was saying they tune the suspension different to different markets including down here.

Don’t forget we also have to dodge kangaroos and emus lol !

 

[Crisis]

The Mustang's 1/4 mile results are really baffling. I can understand that it has problems putting its power down and, therefore, gets a relatively poor 0-100km time of 6.6 seconds and a similarly slow ET in the 1/4 of 14.432 seconds. What makes no sense to me is its trap speed of only 139.9 km/h. That's a much slower trap speed than other cars with slower ETs and is the slowest trap speed of any car tested. I would have thought that once it got some traction, the Mustang would have accelerated strongly down the track and have a trap speed higher than cars with a similar ET.

Other than simply an error in the recorded data, does anyone else have an explanation for this?

 

[StungBlueGT2]

The Mustang's 1/4 mile results are really baffling. I can understand that it has problems putting its power down and, therefore, gets a relatively poor 0-100km time of 6.6 seconds and a similarly slow ET in the 1/4 of 14.432 seconds. What makes no sense to me is its trap speed of only 139.9 km/h. That's a much slower trap speed than other cars with slower ETs and is the slowest trap speed of any car tested. I would have thought that once it got some traction, the Mustang would have accelerated strongly down the track and have a trap speed higher than cars with a similar ET.

Other than simply an error in the recorded data, does anyone else have an explanation for this?

I agree and thought the Mustang would have caught the Stinger in the 1/4m at least. Maybe the combo of poor traction and a slow manual trans hurt it more than expected?

 

[Grayt 8]

The Mustang's 1/4 mile results are really baffling. I can understand that it has problems putting its power down and, therefore, gets a relatively poor 0-100km time of 6.6 seconds and a similarly slow ET in the 1/4 of 14.432 seconds. What makes no sense to me is its trap speed of only 139.9 km/h. That's a much slower trap speed than other cars with slower ETs and is the slowest trap speed of any car tested. I would have thought that once it got some traction, the Mustang would have accelerated strongly down the track and have a trap speed higher than cars with a similar ET.

Other than simply an error in the recorded data, does anyone else have an explanation for this?

The 139.9 km/h seems like a mistake. Maybe 169.9? However, hot weather perhaps? Did they state if they corrected the ETs? Is that a 2017 Mustang and 6 speed manual?