Repair-It

Here's a convenient reference:
https://www.0-60specs.com/0-60-times/

Two examples. 0-60 in 5.0 and 5.7. Not only is there ET variation but significant trap speed variation. 7.6 mph of variation at the 5.7 range and a whopping 14.9 mph variation at 5.0! To put that in perspective, the difference between my STS and an STS-V is 10 mph. And that is a world of difference. 14.9. Within the same 0-60.

And even for ET, a 5.7 0-60 means you may be anywhere from a high 13 to a mid 14 and the 5.0 means could be very low 13s all the way up to very high 13s. That is a big difference.

That is why 0-60 doesn't tell you that much.

Another thing I am told is "Well 0-60 is how I drive anyway." Here's the thing: when you end up in a quick car, like over 100 mph trap, your 60mph limit suddenly becomes 80 or 85. 60 seems fast enough because you've been flooring it for 8 seconds. Well, floor it for 8 seconds in a car that traps over 100 and you'll be going more like 80 or 85 and suddenly your standards change.

I would still be willing to bet that the big 1/4 mile delta is due to the slower car not having top end speed, which most people don't notice or care because they aren't trying to accelerate at 90. So I am saying I would rather a car be faster 0-70 or 80 and fall off at 90 than be slower to 60 and be faster 90 to 120. Unless I am on a track, which I am not. Being set up for slower to 60 and than another car but faster 90 to 120 is a much less useful performance envelope for me.

Everyone has different preferences.

5-60 is better (off idle powertrain flexibility and usually takes traction out of the situation). 30-50 or 50-70 passing is better. Basically I think anything is better than 0-60 - the information the number gives you is way out of proportion (low) with how many people seem to rely on that number (a lot) for information.

I still think you are underrating speeds well over 60 because of the time and distance your current cars require to make it to those speeds. Duking out a 4.5, 5.0 or 5.5 0-60 is pointless when the real differences show up at much higher speeds. The difference between a 5.0 and 5.5 in the 0-60 is 1.5 car lengths or so, which would qualify as cutting someone off if you changed lanes in front of them after beating them in that race. If both of you even managed a perfect max traction launch, which you wouldn't. But the trap speed always indicates rolling acceleration, regardless of launch.

This is also why people with highly modified cars like the standing 1/2 mile or 1 mile racing (or rolling start 1/2 mile racing), because the same thing happens to the 1/4 mile ET with those cars, especially when they aren't on a prepared surface.

5-60 is better (off idle powertrain flexibility and usually takes traction out of the situation). 30-50 or 50-70 passing is better.

I don't really have a problem with these. I am really just saying that the cars 85-120 is really less important to me. If I win the lottery and start to go to the track regularly, that might change.

You need to get a fast car so we can see if you still value the 0-60. Like I said, even cars like my CTS-V can touch 100 and slow back down to 70 while your 3 might have gotten to 80. Passes that you never would have attempted become very possible and the 0-60 doesn't tell you about rolling acceleration capability. Put another way, everything that happens after 5 mph is better reflected by any other performance metric.

For me, none of it is like "I'm gonna beat that guy off this light, thankfully I bought a car with a superior 0-60 so I know I can do it." First, no one races off lights so you can probably beat them in anything you drive just by flooring it. And second, duplicating the tested 0-60 requires a max torque and max traction launch which isn't always easily repeatable. What I want is trap speed to STAY ahead after the launch, or GET ahead if I lost the launch. You can always reel someone in with trap speed. If you fail on the launch, with a 0-60 car, you're done. I know this because that's the only way to do anything competitive in my Caprice. Trap speed is better. If you really want to learn about low speed acceleration, I still say the 5-60 is a better indicator. It tells you a lot about powertrain responsiveness and flexibility, especially when you do compare to the prepared 0-60 (the idea is to come as close to it as you can but it is always slower, which tells you something about the artificiality of the 0-5 part of it).

I will say my Caprice has the kind of direct launch feel that does give me confidence as far as out-launching most cars but it turns out none of them are ever racing in those situations. That, and even if I was ahead by 20 mph, they are going to walk or run away if the race continues much longer, which is highly unsatisfying. I mean maybe you just want to drive around and launch your car at WOT, at max traction, from 0-60. I don't understand why you'd do that though...

I think 0-60 used to be more meaningful when cars were slower and AWD and EVs were not a significant part of the mix. For example, in the 80s and 90s, the difference in rolling acceleration ability between a car that did 0-60 in 10.0 seconds and a car that did 0-60 in 11.4 (the same percentage difference between 5.0 and 5.7) was probably pretty pronounced with little/no overlap between the two groups. The line is definitely blurred now by different types of powertrains. For example, how many Focus RS owners do you think believe their car is faster than a Civic Type R based solely on 0-60? In most real world scenarios, the Type R is going to leave the RS in a straight line based on 1/4 mile trap speed.

I guess the other way to look at it is, two cars with the same on paper 0-60 probably don't have the same 0-60 in the real world. Again, Focus RS vs Civic Type-R. It is easier and less abusive to achieve the Civic's tested 0-60 than it is the Fusion RS (5-60 is much more predictive of the results of an impromptu street race off a light). Which is why trap speed is so important to me. Trap speed superiority means that, when two cars lineup, the one with the higher trap speed will eventually walk the other one. The speed at which that happens will vary depending on the launch, but it will happen. And that's what I care about.

kevm14 wrote:I guess the other way to look at it is, two cars with the same on paper 0-60 probably don't have the same 0-60 in the real world. Again, Focus RS vs Civic Type-R. It is easier and less abusive to achieve the Civic's tested 0-60 than it is the Fusion RS (5-60 is much more predictive of the results of an impromptu street race off a light).

Civic Type-R 5-60: 5.8
Focus RS 5-60: 5.7

Driver's race.