6 ms·
The Miata actually gives good context, that era was a 8.5s 0-60. The EV1 was ~7.7s. However, if you were to run this race today with the 2023 Miata...well, the
by agloe_dreams 3y ago
The Miata actually gives good context, that era was a 8.5s 0-60. The EV1 was ~7.7s.
However, if you were to run this race today with the 2023 Miata...well, the thing got a new sport, as it now has a 5.7s 0-60, utterly trashing both cars here.
Actually, our T5 Volvo XC40 does 0-60 in 6.3s, Toyota will sell you a camry that does it in 5.6s...but that's almost cheating as the thing makes freaking 300HP lol. Gas cars got fast out of nowhere because it moves units and CAD changed everything for engine design.
- renewiltord 3y agoThat's actually crazy, since my Subaru Forester does 0-60 in 6.8. Normal cars did get fast.
- foobarian 3y agoThis kind of comparison seems disingenuous to me due to the EV max torque at rest. Of course the EV will do well. Pretty much every other property of these cars would be more interesting to compare.
- sbierwagen 3y agoDid you not see that three ICE cars had faster 0-60 times? The EV1 was not a Tesla. 137 horsepower, 110 lbft of torque. (Depending on the trim level, a Model S can do up to 825 horsepower and 960 lbft)
- dsfyu404ed 3y ago>Gas cars got fast out of nowhere because it moves units and CAD changed everything for engine design. Gas cars got fast because sufficiently high quality computer control matured to the point where making a high power for its size/weight engine that both met emissions standards and reliability expectations and did so at a reasonable price point was doable. The ability to actually build the hardware has preceded the ability to run it in a reliable and emissions compatible manner ever since we've had emissions rules. Having better FEA software so some engineer could shave a gram off a piston, get his bonus for achieving his KPI and ensure half a million engines start knocking at 120k on the dot was never the bottleneck.
- xeromal 3y agoIt doesn't help that modern engines can't use leaded gas like the days of old. Leaded gas acted as a crutch for many years
- jackmott42 3y agoI think everyone trying to name a single first order reason for more power is wrong. I think many little innovations occurred and became possible for various reasons. 1. better computer control 2. advances in variable cam timing mechanisms 3. direct injection 4. coil on plug ignition systems 5. improvements in sensors (knock sensors, mass air, oxygen, etc) 6. improvements in machining/forging etc leading to tighter tolerances 7. improvements in engine oils probably dozens of other things
- TheSpiceIsLife 3y agoComputer modelling also helped in optimising airflow in and out of the combustion chamber.
- flavius29663 3y agoA Toyota Tundra truck from 2020 can do 7.4s, just saying.
- Gordonjcp 3y agoMy 4.6 litre Range Rover from 1997 will do 0 to 60 in around 14 seconds, but it will do it just as quickly pulling another Range Rover on a trailer, or across a ploughed field. Never really got the attraction of getting to 60mph as fast as possible. How often do you attempt that in real-world use?
- jackmott42 3y agoI go 0-60 all out much more often than I pull range rovers
- pengaru 3y ago> Never really got the attraction of getting to 60mph as fast as possible. How often do you attempt that in real-world use? When it can be done quietly, according to John Carmack speaking about driving his Tesla Roadster vs. past modded Ferraris, at practically every light.
- steveoscaro 3y agoPretty much every single drive from my house since that involves a short freeway on-ramp... How often do you tow a range rover with your range rover?
- Gordonjcp 3y agoEvery couple of months or so. During the winter I regularly tow stuck vehicles out of the snow, biggest one so far was a fully-laden 28-tonne curtainsider.
- ethbr0 3y agoWhy not both? Obligatory: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eYxwgmACJMY&t=1m26s https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eYxwgmACJMY&t=1m26s
- jacquesm 3y agoHehe. Former CL 55 owner here, that was pretty predictable...
- AnotherGoodName 3y agoWeirdly the massive increase in car performance has led me not to care about car performance anymore. I've been driving for a long time and now everything is freaking fast (by 40+ year old standards). Today you can buy literally any car on the market and have way more acceleration, power and top speed than you need day-to-day. Take a really cheap car like the crappy $16k Nissan Versa which has 122hp in the base model. Compare to a 1970's Porsche 911 (125hp). They both weigh about the same too if that's what your thinking - modern materials are light! Unless you're towing it's not practical to care about car performance anymore. You have a car? You likely have more power to weight than a sports car from 50 years ago.
- jacquesm 3y agoAgreed. Even my daily driver from the 80's would get along just fine in today's traffic. Acceleration hasn't been a problem since 1980 unless you were driving something by Wartburg or so.
- sokoloff 3y agoThere were plenty of anemic diesels in the 80s with 0-60 times over 20 seconds. Highway merges, especially in PA (with many short merge zones) could be white knuckle affairs in those underpowered cars.
- rplst8 3y agoWrong. Most compact cars and midsized sedans from the 80s were downright awful. Sub 100 hp motors, with restrictive exhausts and poorly designed emissions systems. They were mostly garbage. My family's Pontiac 6000 had a 2.5 liter 92 hp pile of hot garbage for an engine, and couldn't get out its own way.
- jacquesm 3y agoSub 100 hp is plenty for day to day traffic. 50 would be enough. A Pontiac is an overweight monstrosity, the fact that 92 HP isn't enough to move a personal car is proof positive of that.