0 - 60 times
#1
0 - 60 times
Car and Driver magazine recently had an article on the Fit vs. Mazda 2 vs. Ford Fiesta. 0-60 times for the 2010 Fit was 8.3 seconds. I recall that the 2007/2008 0-60 times were around 8.7-9.0. However, Car and Driver times are usually faster than some other publications. I know that the 2nd generation Fit has more horsepower than the 1st generation. But does it really accelerate faster than the 1st generation? Does anyone know of any head to head tests pitting the 1st gen vs. the 2nd gen?
#2
Car and Driver not only test acceleration correctly without "cheating", but they correct their times as well. Use their 5-60mph street start if you want to compare real world acceleration with other cars.
Motortrend recorded 0-60 in 8.3 secs as well for the GE 2 years ago.
And yes, the GE is faster than the GD. If you gather all the magazines times for both gens, the GE is about 1 sec faster for both the manual and AT.
If you don't believe in the magazines' times for both cars, then you can't trust in anything else you'll find, i.e., "claimed" 1/4 mile track times, hearsay, etc.
Motortrend recorded 0-60 in 8.3 secs as well for the GE 2 years ago.
And yes, the GE is faster than the GD. If you gather all the magazines times for both gens, the GE is about 1 sec faster for both the manual and AT.
If you don't believe in the magazines' times for both cars, then you can't trust in anything else you'll find, i.e., "claimed" 1/4 mile track times, hearsay, etc.
#3
I've never done a timed 0 to 60 in my GD but it feels like it would do better than 8.3... maybe my butt dyno is lying to me. I may be wrong but I think the GE cars have a numerically higher final drive ratio. If so they should be faster... My wife test drove one and said it felt slow but neither of us are into 0 to 60 acceleration..
Last edited by Texas Coyote; 09-16-2010 at 03:53 AM. Reason: After thought.
#4
Two friends have/had a GE8 auto and GD3 auto. Raced (chill they only went to like 60) and the GE was a good car length ahead. To my knowledge, its not so much a hp difference, but gearing, like Coyote said..
And honestly, I feel like low 8 seconds is pretty accurate for my ge. Which, considering 1.5l with about 120hp (with mods), thats impressive to me. Honestly, the Fit is "faster" than i thought it would be. Fast being relative
And honestly, I feel like low 8 seconds is pretty accurate for my ge. Which, considering 1.5l with about 120hp (with mods), thats impressive to me. Honestly, the Fit is "faster" than i thought it would be. Fast being relative
#7
Maybe I did something wrong? My 0-60 was pretty bad when I tested it a few weeks ago. I don't even want to post it hahaha. I'm disappointed because I have Tanabe Concept G exhaust and an Injen cold air intake and I don't think they added anything but sexy noise. Maybe it's because I added a subwoofer too which I'm guessing weighs about 50lbs. But yeahh my 0-60 is worse than stock right now
#9
What is te speedometer error in the Fit? In older Hondas, it seemed to be in the 5% range. On many Japanese motorcycles (Kawasaki in particular) it's as great as 10% high. On the ninja, as a rule of thumb, I subtract 1 mph for every ten (I.e. Indicated 60 = ~54). Honda got sued over the odometer error, as it was 4% high, throwing off MPG and valuation calculations - they added a few miles to my factory warranty on the Element as part if the settlement.
#10
Car and Driver magazine recently had an article on the Fit vs. Mazda 2 vs. Ford Fiesta. 0-60 times for the 2010 Fit was 8.3 seconds. I recall that the 2007/2008 0-60 times were around 8.7-9.0. However, Car and Driver times are usually faster than some other publications. I know that the 2nd generation Fit has more horsepower than the 1st generation. But does it really accelerate faster than the 1st generation? Does anyone know of any head to head tests pitting the 1st gen vs. the 2nd gen?
#11
a car with 117hp to the crank and an estimated 89-98hp to the wheels, i wouldnt really worry about 0-60 times.
i would be more inclined to increase my lateral g's, handling and decrease my stopping distance so that i would be able to spank any car on the road through the twisty stuff.
i would be more inclined to increase my lateral g's, handling and decrease my stopping distance so that i would be able to spank any car on the road through the twisty stuff.
#15
Thank you, I wondered who would catch that... I don't do 0 to 60s but I've walked off from cars that are said to do it in 6.0 seconds... The second sentence of that post wasn't meant as sarcastic humor and is 100% correct about what was said... I have no opinion being I haven't driven a GE and 0 to 60 times are superficial and irrelevant in real world driving situations anyway.
Last edited by Texas Coyote; 09-16-2010 at 08:00 PM.
#20
Thank you, I wondered who would catch that... I don't do 0 to 60s but I've walked off from cars that are said to do it in 6.0 seconds... The second sentence of that post wasn't meant as sarcastic humor and is 100% correct about what was said... I have no opinion being I haven't driven a GE and 0 to 60 times are superficial and irrelevant in real world driving situations anyway.
The freeway by my house is often busy (it's Cali highway 1) and the onramp is uphill with a minimal length merge lane. At 65 speed limit, with mos traffic at 70+, and no "move over to let mergers in" mentality like in the southeast, gunning it to 60+ is an almost daily activity. Its either that, or be the assholr that tried to merge into 70 mph traffic at 45.