Parralax is the error between the angle of your eye and the needle\dial against the intended value. Nothing to do with traffic or anything else.

"You should be cruising at the speed and then put your foot down. An already accelerating car has already done half the work IMO..."

Yes' date=' Yes, Yes - that makes sense!

The reason why they give out these figures in road tests (I guess) is to show how well a car would overtake - so yes, you are doing a steady 50mph behind a lorry - you then pull out and accelerate past it - so I'm certain the times are from a steady starting point . . . .

Well done that man![/quote']

Totally logical really isnt it?

For example, if you are sitting behind a lorry at 50 as you say, and then overtake, you have to get the car going first. However, if you have a long run up, then its obviously going to take a LOT less time to pass.

just done some runs in my car and got some very strange looks but here we go

btw octavia 4x4 1.8T with jabbasport re-map, fmic and some samco pipes

cruising at 50 then floor it and stop the clock at 70 and i got:-

3rd - 4.05

4th - 5.48

5th - 9.05

was fairly happy but still want more power!!

If you want more power get a 2.0 Fabia, they do 6.7 seconds in 5th.

thats only cos my turbo isn't boosting yet

and the biggest thing i think is i wouldn't be in 5th to accelerate from 50!

NO NO NO NO!

I just read what I typed out before and I made a big a** typo.

3rd gear is correct at 5.5 seconds.

4th gear is 6.7 seconds

5th gear is 8.9 seconds.

It would be impossible for a 2.0 NA to do 6.7 in 5th, it is a longer geared car. I mean for crying outloud 4th gear can hit 160kmph and 5th 220kmph. I'd need a sixth gear to do that kind of time.

Bengie has a more powerful car than I do it's impossible for me to beat his time.

In any case, who would try accelerating in 5th at such low revs?

So sorry about that guys, I was at work when I was replying to all of you. My bad.

Bengie, nice times And guys, the way Bengie is doing it is correct. That's exactly the way I did it. How can you start from 0 on 3rd or 4th or 5th gear???

Video should be complete by Sunday, doing 50 to 70 in 3rd.

Steve, if you're on an empty road doin' a straight you could easily look at the speedo and clock in your run. Unless you have eyesight problems (not you personally, in general)

So anyone else with their times?

So anyone else with their times?

Yes: 0 - fun spontaneously. Beat that! If you enjoy driving the car, just do it. Bu**er the figures! Or, to quote a zen expression "Don't analyse the banana - eat it!"

thats about right for 5th tbh, as mine is a bit heavier and les powerfull off boost but it started to come on boost at abour 60ish so started to make up for it, if we did say a 50 - 100 in 5th then i think mine would beat yours easily mil as i would have boost for nearly all of it.

I totally agree with you. As far as post 70 is concerned what times do you have 70 to 110mph? I got 20 seconds flat out.

ooohhhh, might have to visit my mates runway and find out

in what gear btw?

just found it, 4th. will find out and report back later!!

just found it, 4th. will find out and report back later!!

Yeah 4th from 70 to 110..I have to gear change at 107mph...

will find out for ya!

test No.! finished and it took..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

18 seconds, tbh i was expecting it to be faster but hey it does what it does

People, you're forgetting one thing, gearing.. it will change things dramatically.. for example my car gets 50-75 (80-120kph, 112 would be difficult to measure in metric system) in 5th approx 11-12 seconds. Cars with similar power usually take lot longer on the same gear. This makes it easy for me to overtake most normal cars in 5th in everyday driving (not talking about racing as I clearly don't have the power for any longer periods or when changin down, 4th gear will lose me 1-2 second but 3rd will be slower as I have to change gears). This also takes to fact that for 1.4 tdi for example the power rating is claimed lower than it actually is, various dyno tests confim this from all over the world. People usually getting 80-85bhp from this engine. Also fabia vrs is not 130bhp, actually 140bhp standard would be more closer.. come on, 130bhp on 1300kg car, it would mean at least 10secs 0-62mph no matter how much torque.. torque does not accelerate the car no matter what you say just makes your driving easier

edit: the last statement is a bit misleading (didn't think that one through) as appears in the next few messages..

This also takes to fact that for 1.4 tdi for example the power rating is claimed lower than it actually is, various dyno tests confim this from all over the world. People usually getting 80-85bhp from this engine. Also fabia vrs is not 130bhp, actually 140bhp standard would be more closer

Got anything to back this up? Both cars putting out 10bhp more than quoted sounds like rolling road error to me

Chris

Talking about rolling road results from many sources, magazines (www.motor.terra.es for example they dyno each car they test), various forums etc. If you look at the tdi engine power figures they are usually stated lower than the actual 0-62 performance figures would make possible considering the weight of the car. For example a new 2.0 tdi engine would not make 9sec with just 140bhp with 1400kg car.. You'd need at least 150bhp for that.. The factory figures are just that, figures, in real world each engine is a bit different from the other but with tdi engines it would usually seem that the performance is a bit better than spec. Sometimes when people quote they get better times than factory claims it might be that they just have better running engine (piston rings seated better during break-in) or newer software ecu than previous model etc..

for example I can do 12.5 sec 0-62 with my car, vw claim 13.6.. now with new polo facelift the engine performance has changed to 80bhp but torque is the same and at the same RPM.. also 0-62 time is now 12.5sec.. coincidence? maybe, but kinda makes you think..

its the torque that does it not people lying about the power

jt, do know how they work out bhp??

its a calculation of rpm vs torque plus a few seemingly random number.

its torque that accelerates you not the bhp

its the torque that does it not people lying about the power

well you can always dyno the car, but then someone could always make it the dyno is not accurate.. anyway I've hear about dyno days where some cars give better results than promised while others with same engine give worse, it's perfectly normal.. I have checked my speedo with a radar so it's accurate (running 205/45/16 wich is larger diameter than standard 185/60/14 so the speedo error is thus pretty much corrected)..

btw, the reason your car may not be fast at speed is that 4wd eats power away at higher speeds.. fast from standstill and on slippery surfaces though

its torque that accelerates you not the bhp

Is that really true? Isn't torque just a turning force, whereas the power of the engine determines how much the car will move? Otherwise wouldn't lorries be able to accelerate ridiculously fast?

Rob.

jt' date=' do know how they work out bhp??

its a calculation of rpm vs torque plus a few seemingly random number.

its torque that accelerates you not the bhp[/quote']

This takes us to the fact about tractors that produce a lot of torque, are they fast?.. to split hair I'd say it's the torque vs rpm that accelerates the car =bhp

jt, do know how they work out bhp??

From a random page in the interweb:

BHP is a rate of doing work and in order to do work you need to put in some effort and then you need to see a result for that effort.

The effort is, in our case, the torque generated by the engine. The result is the distance moved by the flywheel (expressed in RPM). The simple formula for calculating bhp is based on 33,000ft lbs of work, being done in one minute. This amount of work is regarded as one horsepower. The formula is:

Torque x RPM = HP

5252

From this you can see that when the RPM is at 5252 the HP and the torque are the same.

Talking about rolling road results from many sources,

So you're measuring power at the wheels and then guessing/working out the power at the flywheel? On a bench dyno they measure power at the flywheel!

Chris