Any mags run a 3.8 0-60?
10-19-2013, 12:39 PM
#1
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Member Since: May 2013
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any mags run a 3.8 0-60?
I've read a lot of reviews and haven't seen one that has been able to match the published 3.8s 0-60. Most (if not all) are above 4s.
Anyone know if an independent review has been able to verify the 3.8s time?
Anyone know if an independent review has been able to verify the 3.8s time?
10-19-2013, 01:25 PM
#3
10-19-2013, 02:08 PM
#5
Le Mans Master
The only test I read close to those posted speeds was Edmund's test. I'm sorry to say that I'm still waiting for test of the "Base" A6 and M7. I for one think they'll be lighter and faster especially with the 1LT interior. I've also read quotes from Corvette engineers stating the "Base" would "outperform the C6 GS ". Well for some reason I've only seen Z51 tests. Maybe I'm just being skeptical. 
10-19-2013, 06:12 PM
#7
Le Mans Master
The results people are getting with this car and almost every other car capable of sub 4 0-60 demonstrates the uselessness of this measurement. In every kind of science known to man, a test that cannot be repeated consistently is considered useless. There are too many variables that are unknown or unpredictable to make any sense out of it. I'd love to see people start showing us 20-70 or even 20-100. This would actually demonstrate a car's real world capability.
10-19-2013, 06:19 PM
#8
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Member Since: May 2013
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would those who have posted reviews of sub 4s runs share a link?
Robvuk - Please start a new thread if you'd like to debate the merit of this measurement. I'd like to keep this on topic
Robvuk - Please start a new thread if you'd like to debate the merit of this measurement. I'd like to keep this on topic
10-19-2013, 06:42 PM
#10
10-19-2013, 07:04 PM
#12
10-19-2013, 08:12 PM
#13
10-20-2013, 11:06 AM
#14
Le Mans Master
Thanks for sharing the MT article. That was the first test I've seen that more or less matched the advertised GM numbers. Of course MT always finds a way to laud the Germans..if not Porsche then BMW. But that's like watching the TV news...you know they've made up their minds before hand. But they do run some great tests and let's face it they're we get some realtime comparisons. I'm still waiting for a "base" test. Two years ago Road & Track did a test of every Corvette version. Hope soon someone does the same on the C7's. Maybe after the Verts are out too. 
But they do run some great tests and let's face it they're we get some realtime comparisons. I'm still waiting for a "base" test. Two years ago Road & Track did a test of every Corvette version. Hope soon someone does the same on the C7's. Maybe after the Verts are out too.
10-20-2013, 02:08 PM
#15
Racer
The results people are getting with this car and almost every other car capable of sub 4 0-60 demonstrates the uselessness of this measurement. In every kind of science known to man, a test that cannot be repeated consistently is considered useless. There are too many variables that are unknown or unpredictable to make any sense out of it. I'd love to see people start showing us 20-70 or even 20-100. This would actually demonstrate a car's real world capability.
10-20-2013, 04:31 PM
#16
Le Mans Master
Nope!
The times totals aside, this same day different car test shows that all that extra TECH was useless against basic, but controlled, truck torque! But, Pobst turned off PTM!
But, C&D left PTM on!
But, Pobst turned off PTM!But, C&D left PTM on!
