| Author |
Message |
Lawrence Coppari (Lawrence)
Member
Username: Lawrence
Post Number: 433
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 6:03 pm: | |
I would not waste my time with the 0-60 tests. They are too dependent on road surface. Far better is a 70-100 mph test. And it is less abusive. Or do it in some increment that does not involve a gear change and wheel spin or clutch slip. That provides a much more accurate assessment of hp delivered to the road. And do it in both directions at the same place and average to cancel gravity effects. |
Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Member
Username: Hugh
Post Number: 408
Registered: 1-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 5:52 pm: | |
when did you do your braking test? if the tires were cold, thats part of the problem.
i used the g tech pro, a few times, but have since stopped; been tempted to get a gps linked analyzer to take to track days to plot my performance, but haven't bit the bullet yet. |
neal (95spiderneal)
Junior Member
Username: 95spiderneal
Post Number: 61
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, December 22, 2002 - 5:17 pm: | |
just got back from deserted parking lot near beach where i live. used Tazzo analyzer and got interesting stats. all improved from warm temp tests last summer.
0-60ft in 2.06 sec, 0-60mph in 5.80 sec, braking 60-0 180 feet and 1.02 lateral g's. acceleration seems reasonable since most mags showed 0-60 about 5.5 and i do conservative launch without any wheel spin. lateral g's seem way too high but kuhmo mx's are fantasic tires, dont know why breaking distances so long.
anyone else ever test their cars with tazzo or g analyzer? |