Nissan GT-R Forum banner
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

· Founder/Admin
Joined
·
26,011 Posts
at first glance that looks off but take a look at this

i think this is fairly accurate

1.9 second 60' time = 43.0 mph @60' = 4.6 second 0-60 time
1.8 second 60' time = 45.5 mph @60' = 4.0 second 0-60 time
1.7 second 60' time = 48.1 mph @60' = 3.4 second 0-60 time
1.6 second 60' time = 51.1 mph @60' = 2.9 second 0-60 time

so for instance i have ran 1.7 60fts in the car from having alot of spin off the line and still acheived 11.2 1/4's

but at the same time 1.6 -1.65 60s are documented on this car and ive seen a 1.64 out of mine..... and that puts it back under 3 secs...so the car is certainly capable of 2.9 0-60s but its really all about the surface and the conditions that day....
 

· Registered
Joined
·
839 Posts
at first glance that looks off but take a look at this

i think this is fairly accurate

1.9 second 60' time = 43.0 mph @60' = 4.6 second 0-60 time
1.8 second 60' time = 45.5 mph @60' = 4.0 second 0-60 time
1.7 second 60' time = 48.1 mph @60' = 3.4 second 0-60 time
1.6 second 60' time = 51.1 mph @60' = 2.9 second 0-60 time

so for instance i have ran 1.7 60fts in the car from having alot of spin off the line and still acheived 11.2 1/4's

but at the same time 1.6 -1.65 60s are documented on this car and ive seen a 1.64 out of mine..... and that puts it back under 3 secs...so the car is certainly capable of 2.9 0-60s but its really all about the surface and the conditions that day....
I have run a # of my cars with a vbox at the track. The #'s you listed above are not accurate at all for any of them (CL65, CTS-V, and GT-R). You can't generalize a 0-60 mph time based solely on a 60' time...there are way too many variables.

Tom
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top