My car so far

Skywalker · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:30

CLICK ME

Roughly 5.8 seconds , wait a god damn minute , thats under 6 seconds :eek:

Ladforce · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:33

Proof the cars stock?

Skywalker · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:38

Ladforce said:
Proof the cars stock?

I have pointed the owner in this direction and at the time his car was stock

[TW]Fox · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:41

5.8 seconds to 60 in a 200bhp Accord?

What!?

Ladforce · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:46

yea sorry but an accord is not faster than a s2000 which owners say is only marginally quicker than an integra (owners that have owned both). Even the s2000 is over 6 secs to 60.

penski · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:47

Ladforce said:
yea sorry but an accord is not faster than a s2000 which owners say is only marginally quicker than an integra (owners that have owned both). Even the s2000 is over 6 secs to 60.

But it has a wiiiiing!

*n

Jez · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:47

Its a 1350KG saloon powered by a fairly average engine and is front wheel driven. I dont believe 6.0 to 60 for a second youtube video or not.

penski · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:48

Jez said:
Its a 1350KG saloon powered by a fairly average engine and is front wheel driven. I dont believe 6.0 to 60 for a second youtube video or not.

But the wiiiiing!

Remember that this wing provides so much downforce that without it, the car would be undriveable and would oversteer into the nearest hedge.

*n

Jez · 13 Mar 2008 at 15:50

penski said:
But the wiiiiing!

Remember that this wing provides so much downforce that without it, the car would be undriveable and would oversteer into the nearest hedge.

*n

Going on these calculations mine would be good for around 5.0 to 60 if mercedes had bothered taking the time to fit one. Idiots, if only they had been browsing ocuk when they designed it

GT3 · 13 Mar 2008 at 16:04

Put it in that letstorquebhp site thats usually not far off the mark.

Power at Flywheel (BHP) : 200
Weight without Driver (KG) : 1350
Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 150.53
0 - 60 (Secs) : 7.12
0 - 100 (Secs) : 18.61
60 - 100 (Secs) : 11.49
Quarter Mile (Secs) : 15.52
Terminal Speed (MPH) : 91.33

hmm

L0rdMike · 13 Mar 2008 at 16:07

Speedos are also 100% accurate and dont overread at all.

Skywalker · 13 Mar 2008 at 16:12

GT3 said:
Put it in that letstorquebhp site thats usually not far off the mark.

Power at Flywheel (BHP) : 200
Weight without Driver (KG) : 1350
Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 150.53
0 - 60 (Secs) : 7.12
0 - 100 (Secs) : 18.61
60 - 100 (Secs) : 11.49
Quarter Mile (Secs) : 15.52
Terminal Speed (MPH) : 91.33

hmm

Put the bhp upto 218 and the weight to 1300

Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 170.38
0 - 60 (Secs) : 6.42

Now factor in LSD and a 6k launch with no wheelspin

DreXeL · 13 Mar 2008 at 16:19

Skywalker said:
Now factor in LSD and a 6k launch with no wheelspin

As much as I feel that there is some 'have a dig at Skywalker' bandwagon jumping going on in this thread, there is no way a 200+ bhp FWD car can launch at 6k with no wheelspin, LSD or not

GT3 · 13 Mar 2008 at 16:20

Warmed up race slicks on that extra grippy tarmac near pedestrian crossings perhaps?

Mr.Bon · 13 Mar 2008 at 16:20

Skywalker · 13 Mar 2008 at 16:26

DreXeL said:
As much as I feel that there is some 'have a dig at Skywalker' bandwagon jumping going on in this thread, there is no way a 200+ bhp FWD car can launch at 6k with no wheelspin, LSD or not

Didnt think there was a group that huddle on the dig at people on here :rolleyes:

Wasnt my video buddy so I have no idea how he done it

Ladforce · 13 Mar 2008 at 16:27

DreXeL said:
As much as I feel that there is some 'have a dig at Skywalker' bandwagon jumping going on in this thread, there is no way a 200+ bhp FWD car can launch at 6k with no wheelspin, LSD or not

I dont know the guy and have nothing against him or his car, in fact I was looking to get an accord R before I got my integra. I just dont believe his claim that it can do a sub 6 0-60 as an integra cant and that is a faster car.

Gaijin · 13 Mar 2008 at 16:28

[TW]Fox;11289503 said:
I dont have a big wing and mine has a higher top speed

Design ethos. I doubt the racetrack was even thought about when they designed the 530. Having an engine with a large displacement engine which is capable of a relatively high top speed, has very little to do with it. A wing is simply not needed for 99.99999999% of 5 series owners.

penski said:
Then why fit a half-assed harness?

*n

When he had them in his old ATR, I personally thought they were brilliant. Like being nailed to the seat. And with his driving, that is handy

ryder said:
Nice car, not keen on the double jap cans, one would be fine...
Other than that, lookin good. Can we see how low the back end sits with the coilovers fitted?

The exhaust looks much better in the flesh. He is just rubbish at taking pictures

penski said:
Don't worry though. When you roll your car and are pinned to the seat as the roof caves in, compressing your spine and leaving you dying a slow death from internal bleeding, we get to say 'I told you so...'

*n

Lets not get carried away with ourselves shall we Mr Penski?

Lets face it, its a planted type R, not the veritable bouncy bags of rust you post on here

[TW]Fox · 13 Mar 2008 at 16:32

Gaijin said:
Design ethos. I doubt the racetrack was even thought about when they designed the 530. Having an engine with a large displacement engine which is capable of a relatively high top speed, has very little to do with it. A wing is simply not needed for 99.99999999% of 5 series owners.

Whereas it is for Honda Accord owners?

M5 has no wing either. It has 400bhp and an Accord would not see which way it went.

Skywalker · 13 Mar 2008 at 16:34

Gaijin - My car on paper is as fast as your civic standard which Im sure you will shed some light on please buddy , If you can a give a comparision between a standard vti and your special vti and my accord with a stick on wing that does nothing please

My car so far

Man of Honour