4 ms·
> its faster than a Mustang GT from the 90's What?
by bicknergseng 13y ago
> its faster than a Mustang GT from the 90's
What?
- milesokeefe 13y agoI have that car and I can attest to it not being incredibly fast. Unfortunately horsepower != speed.
- cloverich 13y agolol. Source: http://www.zeroto60times.com/ http://www.zeroto60times.com/ 1996 Ford Mustang GT 0-60 mph 6.7 Quarter mile 15.1 1999 Ford Mustang GT 0-60 mph 5.4 Quarter mile 13.9 2006 Honda Accord EX (V6) 0-60 mph 5.8 Quarter mile 14.3 Only when they re-designed the GT in the late 90's did it get faster - which isn't really relevant, I was making the general point that modern cars have gotten a ridiculous amount of power, often in a lighter vehicle (e.g. the 2006 honda accord I drive). > Unfortunately horsepower != speed Horsepower doesn't give a direct comparison across vehicles, but generally speaking, yes horsepower = speed. > I have that car and I can attest to it not being incredibly fast. Perhaps you dont have the v6 manual? Any car that gets to 60mph in under 6 seconds is fast. And again - my comparison with the mustang GT was to paint a picture - we all recognize that as a fast car, and are perhaps surprised that modern sedan's are as fast - and often faster, while typically having a smaller (i.e. lighter) engine. Hell, look at the list of Mercede's on the same site (http://www.zeroto60times.com/Mercedes-Benz-0-60-mph-Times.html http://www.zeroto60times.com/Mercedes-Benz-0-60-mph-Times.ht...). There's cars on there coming in the 4 second range. So - just wanted to point out that without more details, the story isn't complete, and perhaps not as surprising as first-pass suggests.