hey- 1/4 mile times?

the thing i ahte about the internet is the huge array of answers for a specfic question one might have. I would like to know how fast the 2000 is 0-60, and 1/4 mile realistically. i have heard everything from 14.4 to 13.8 for 1/4 and 6.0 to 5.7 0-60. can anybody gimme REAL times? thanks alot. I'm looking to get one. also- has anyone found the need for stiffer suspension of lowering in track (not drag) conditions? thanks a ton.

[Coleman]

Car and Driver this month did a test of the S2000 vs. Boxter vs. Z4 3.0 vs. 350Z vs. TT (the S2000 won!). The times in this test were as followed:
1/4 mi 14.1
0-60 5.4

[snowbebe]

13.8 injen intake(not cold air) (14,000 miles)

13.7 intake, hks exhaust (28,000 miles)

[APEX]

Originally Posted by I_dont_own_a_2000

the thing i ahte about the internet is the huge array of answers for a specfic question one might have. I would like to know how fast the 2000 is 0-60, and 1/4 mile realistically. i have heard everything from 14.4 to 13.8 for 1/4 and 6.0 to 5.7 0-60. can anybody gimme REAL times? thanks alot. I'm looking to get one. also- has anyone found the need for stiffer suspension of lowering in track (not drag) conditions? thanks a ton.

And why you need to know 0-60mile times? Damn that kids...

[kevin870]

13.8 Stock and 5.3 0-60

Because when I tell people how amazign they are it's relatively easy to explain its good handling though i have no real comparisons. quarter mile times help put things in perspective. Sure for a car liike the ohh soo sexy 2000 1/4 isnt what it's made for, but it shows how good it is that it kicks soo much ass at it. just one more feat covered. anybody hered turbo theirs? I imagine in track conditions (touring tracks) that eouldnt really be helpful, but it seems like a logical thing to do. they take well to turbos???

sorry for posting in a row, but is 13.8 TRUE? i odnt mean to sound like an asshole here, but i'm just a little curious of it being that low. thats what they post wrx sti's time as. anybody got slips to prove a 13.8 or areound there with out mods? not that i wouldnt have mods if i bought one

[s2ook]

13.8 is very optimistic and if it was possible would certainly fry the clutch. Check this out, a little bit more realistic: http://www.autosite.com/new/grabbag/perform/2894.asp
14.2 secs........

[S2K ART]

I took my S2K to drag b4..the best run was 14.3..first time of driving S2000,no experience on this car at all.
And my another friend got the same S2k,standard,he did 13.9...

[kutter]

There sure does seem to be a lot of disparity in the results from those test. Is there a reason for that, I can see some fluctuations obviously, but a full second in the quarter, thats a signifigant change.

[MattG]

Well there are many governing factors, here is but a few:

1. Weight - motors without a lot of torque suffer from additonal weight substantially - spare tyre in boot, how much fuel in tank,weight of driver, any addtional items in the car, aftermarket stereo and speakers?

2. Driver experience - reaction times, gear shifting, take-off,

3. Tyre grip - under-inflated? wheel spin?

4. Mods - naturally make a difference (better or worse).

5. Condition of car - clutch a slipping a little, engine not perfectly tuned etc.

6. Fuel type - premium fuel is better than standard. The best widely available (non specialist racing fuel) in Australia is 98 octane rating, regular can be between 92 and 95, other premiums up to 96 RON.

7. Outside Air temperature - high temperatures mean less dense air and therefore less oxygen to burn. Hence why people get cold air intakes.

8. Elevation - height above sealevel determines also the density of the air, at high elevations the air is thinner and therefore less oxygen to burn.
(OK thats getting a bit technical, but it can make a difference).

9. Wind assistance - tail winds always help

MattG I realize that all those things can effect the times, although I confess I had not thought to in depth about some of them, but I would expect that major automotive publications would be aware and set the cars up accordingly to produce the fastest possible times.

I have a theory about this though. When I first read articles about the S2K I decided that I had to have one, and now 4 years later I do, patience is rewarded but I digress. Some of the articles I read described it as a true enthusiast automobile, crisp handling, high performance, secure cockpit. While others said, 'the ride is too harsh, performace is lacking then sudden in its onset and the interior is too small.' A very good friend once told me, 'Figures lie and liars figure.' Stats have no meaning since they can be manipulated by the people who getting them, if you want it to look bad it will. Half a second in the quarter mile equals something like 500lbs of weight. Thats excesive, as for temps, well there is not much to be done, but can't it be corrected for?

I am just ranting here since I feel like most Japanese imports are biased against by the big auto magazines.

Just my opinions, I could be wrong....

[kutter]

By the way, that was my post, I forgot to log in

[MattG]

If you are talking about new car reviews - then yes I agree they all should be fairly close, although I was mainly talking about the variation in figures on that website posted earlier.

However with a brand new car for review, they cars are generally not "run in" when they are sent on the rounds to the various car magazines. Usually there are only a limited number of cars that go out for review and the magazines just queue up to drive it. Maybe this accounts for some of it?

Another factor is the timing method, if you are timing with a stopwatch that is probably the most inaccurate method possible. I guess the best bet would be on a professional dragracing strip.

I guess a final thought is that not all countries have the same standard features on the car, eg Australia has headlight washers. But none of these features seem to be real weighty.

With all cars there is also a variation in what the engine is supposed to have, and what it has in reality. Automated manufacturing processes always have a slight variance.

But in the end I guess it all comes down the the person reviewing the car and what they want to write about it - just as you said. I guess the idea is to get the average for all the reviews that you see.

M@

I'm sorry, but you must not know much about drag racing if you think the s2k has impressive ET s..... Take the car to an autocross and you won't want to drag again...

[Red]

On official drag race in Estonia S2000 I own drive 1/4 mile with 14.69 sek

This official time.

brgds, Red

14.2 bone stock 2001 S2k
12.8 "JUN"ed out 99 prelude
10.2 99 CBR900RR with Yoshi RS-3, K&N filter and jet kit.

Well we should not argue the point there's many reason you can get times from between 13.8 to 14.4. I have the Japan Market type S2000 and driving for the first on track in three trys went from 14.4 to 14.1. If I had run again I would have made the 13.8/9 time and this is on a full tank of gas,spare tire and no mods My weight is 180lbs. This is in Antigua W.I. Looking to go Turbo , cams , flywheel, trottlle body etc. will tell my time after that 11.5-12.2.
CurtiS2000