# What would be really helpful: A speed chart or matrix

#

**11**3rd Gear Member

Join Date: Feb 2006

Location:

Posts: 523

**RE: What would be really helpful: A speed chart or matrix**

ORIGINAL: nkx1

I was thinking about what cars I might run across at stop lights.Then I thought it would be so cool if 0-60mph times and ETs were available in a spreadsheet or other manipulative format, so we could see what cars we can and can't beat.

I was thinking about what cars I might run across at stop lights.Then I thought it would be so cool if 0-60mph times and ETs were available in a spreadsheet or other manipulative format, so we could see what cars we can and can't beat.

********yze it. The other guy probably sucks too, so the 0-60 times that Car and Driver got are irrelevant. Plus most people that want to race have modified their car anyway, so the published 0-60 is moot.

#

**12**5th Gear Member

Join Date: Feb 2007

Location:

Posts: 2,691

**RE: What would be really helpful: A speed chart or matrix**

I have found that the GT is about 'on par' with most cars... What this means is if you race from a light then youll look like a fool because even a civic will keep up with you. Yes, youll beat it, but you won't look so cool when its from about 2 car lengths at the most. Remember, we're talking 0-60, not a full 1/4 mile race which never happens during stoplight racing.

Heck, even a minivan will keep up in the 0-60.

In other words take it to the track for other reasons besides the obvious of safety.

Heck, even a minivan will keep up in the 0-60.

In other words take it to the track for other reasons besides the obvious of safety.

#

**14****RE: What would be really helpful: A speed chart or matrix**

ORIGINAL: ohnoesaz

I have found that the GT is about 'on par' with most cars...

I have found that the GT is about 'on par' with most cars...

**What this means is if you race from a light then youll look like a fool because even a civic will keep up with you. Yes, youll beat it, but you won't look so cool when its from about 2 car lengths at the most.**Remember, we're talking 0-60, not a full 1/4 mile race which never happens during stoplight racing.
#

**15**5th Gear Member

Join Date: Feb 2007

Location:

Posts: 2,691

**RE: What would be really helpful: A speed chart or matrix**

You really think youre going to put 6-7 car lengths on a civic or something like a civic in the time it takes to hit 60mph, which is where most small street races end? Youre dreaming.

#

**17**3rd Gear Member

Join Date: May 2006

Location:

Posts: 700

**RE: What would be really helpful: A speed chart or matrix**

ORIGINAL: ohnoesaz

You really think youre going to put 6-7 car lengths on a civic or something like a civic in the time it takes to hit 60mph, which is where most small street races end? Youre dreaming.

You really think youre going to put 6-7 car lengths on a civic or something like a civic in the time it takes to hit 60mph, which is where most small street races end? Youre dreaming.

Let's compare two vehicles from Edmunds articles. First is 2006 Mustang Shelby GT-H (an auto driven by anyone). Second is a 2007 Civic SI (a manual driven by an expert).

Edmunds got their Mustang to do 0 - 60 mph in 5.6 seconds (faster than their stock manual). The Civic SI did 0-60 mph in 7.1 seconds.

The equation is pretty easy, but high school was a while back. Anyway, assuming constant velocity (it's not) the Mustang hits 60 mph in 246 feet. The Civic SI goes 194 feet in 5.6 seconds. Isn't that about five car lengths? My math could be off.

#

**18****RE: What would be really helpful: A speed chart or matrix**

ORIGINAL: wmtheflash

ORIGINAL: ohnoesaz

You really think youre going to put 6-7 car lengths on a civic or something like a civic in the time it takes to hit 60mph, which is where most small street races end? Youre dreaming.
Well, remember, it's a lot more complicated than that. Cars don't have constant acceleration rates.

Let's compare two vehicles from Edmunds articles. First is 2006 Mustang Shelby GT-H (an auto driven by anyone). Second is a 2007 Civic SI (a manual driven by an expert).

Edmunds got their Mustang to do 0 - 60 mph in 5.6 seconds (faster than their stock manual). The Civic SI did 0-60 mph in 7.1 seconds.

The equation is pretty easy, but high school was a while back. Anyway, assuming constant velocity (it's not) the Mustang hits 60 mph in 246 feet. The Civic SI goes 194 feet in 5.6 seconds. Isn't that about five car lengths? My math could be off.

You really think youre going to put 6-7 car lengths on a civic or something like a civic in the time it takes to hit 60mph, which is where most small street races end? Youre dreaming.

Let's compare two vehicles from Edmunds articles. First is 2006 Mustang Shelby GT-H (an auto driven by anyone). Second is a 2007 Civic SI (a manual driven by an expert).

Edmunds got their Mustang to do 0 - 60 mph in 5.6 seconds (faster than their stock manual). The Civic SI did 0-60 mph in 7.1 seconds.

The equation is pretty easy, but high school was a while back. Anyway, assuming constant velocity (it's not) the Mustang hits 60 mph in 246 feet. The Civic SI goes 194 feet in 5.6 seconds. Isn't that about five car lengths? My math could be off.

#

**19**3rd Gear Member

Join Date: Feb 2006

Location:

Posts: 523

**RE: What would be really helpful: A speed chart or matrix**

ORIGINAL: wmtheflash

Edmunds got their Mustang to do 0 - 60 mph in 5.6 seconds (faster than their stock manual). The Civic SI did 0-60 mph in 7.1 seconds.

The equation is pretty easy, but high school was a while back. Anyway, assuming constant velocity (it's not) the Mustang hits 60 mph in 246 feet. The Civic SI goes 194 feet in 5.6 seconds. Isn't that about five car lengths? My math could be off.

Edmunds got their Mustang to do 0 - 60 mph in 5.6 seconds (faster than their stock manual). The Civic SI did 0-60 mph in 7.1 seconds.

The equation is pretty easy, but high school was a while back. Anyway, assuming constant velocity (it's not) the Mustang hits 60 mph in 246 feet. The Civic SI goes 194 feet in 5.6 seconds. Isn't that about five car lengths? My math could be off.

Assume, for simplicity,linear acceleration for the first 60 ft and again between the 60ft mark and the end, also assume both cars can do the first 60 ft in 2 seconds (remember, the Honda is very light, so it's HP deficit isn't as significant initially). That means both cars average 10mph for the first 60 ft ((0+20)/2), then the rest, 20 to 60, averages to 40 mph. The difference in time of 1.5 seconds at an average speed of 40mph comes to 88 ft, but you have to subtract 60ft from that leaving a difference of 28 ft which is about 2.3 lengths (assuming 12ft/car).

The previous example works if the Mustang hits and then maintains 60mph and you measure the distance between the cars only after the Civic also hits 60. BUT, you're not racing to 60mph for both cars. The real question is,when the Mustang hits 60 how much distance will there be between the two cars? The race really starts at 20mph assuming the equal 60ft times, thus in theory both cars have the same 0-20. The next 40mph for the Mustang goes by in 3.6 sec. The average rate of acceleration for the Civic from 20-60 is 7.8mph/sec, so when the Mustang hits 60, the Civic will have hit 48mph. The Mustang will have averaged 40mph while the Civic will have averaged 34mph over the same 3.6 sec. For simplicity assume each car is 12ft long and you'll find the Mustang should be ahead by about 2.7 lengths when it hits 60.

note: if I substitute 12ft/car in your numbers it comes to 4.8 lengths. Given inaccuracies in both our methods we can probably say with a fair amount of certainty that there should be around 3-4 lengths between cars.

Thread

Thread Starter

Forum

Replies

Last Post

BeatnikFink

New Member Area

6

10-01-2015 09:00 PM

musnicki

Classic Mustang General Discussion

8

09-23-2015 08:11 AM