GolfGTIforum.co.uk

Model specific boards => Golf mk2 => Topic started by: boogeysheftel on 03 November 2003, 06:42

Title: 0-60 in 9
Post by: boogeysheftel on 03 November 2003, 06:42
just did 0-60 in 9secs with my '90 gti 8v, i think it is slow, because it suppossed to be 8 secs, or it is normal for an old car to loose 1 sec?
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 03 November 2003, 09:45
what timing gear did you use?
 :)
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: boogeysheftel on 03 November 2003, 18:26
what do you mean by that?
i've reached 60 in 3th gear
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: AdamB on 03 November 2003, 18:29
I think he may have meant what did you use to time yourself, and how do you know you got to 60 mph, other than counting and reading from the clock as you accelerate
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: tinman on 03 November 2003, 18:58
You need to do this slightly differently.

Find someone with a GPS and get your exact speed.

Then get a mate with a stop watch to sit behind your ear. You concentrate, he times.

You will need to blast of many many times. You'll never get it right first time. And even if you do, keep trying and eventually you'll get a really good time.

Tin
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: boogeysheftel on 03 November 2003, 22:43
>Then get a mate with a stop watch to sit behind your ear. You >concentrate, he times.

yes, this is how it was

i did it several times, almost every time it was about 9 secs, on average 9, i was expecting 8
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: golfvr6 on 04 November 2003, 00:13
9 secs, sounds quite quick for an 8v, cabs probably do it in 10 secs  :-*
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: AdamB on 04 November 2003, 00:22
I think you underestimate us - had mine hit 60 in a shade over 8. its not completly standard I admit.
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: golfvr6 on 04 November 2003, 09:17
What mods have you got Adam?
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Zoid on 04 November 2003, 09:19
VW claim 8.3 for the Mk2 8v and 7.9 for the Mk2 16v
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: golfvr6 on 04 November 2003, 09:28
The cab time should be a bit longer as it is heavier  ;)
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: free on 04 November 2003, 09:31
dont wast time goin in to 3rd eva mate, leve it in 2nd and let it hit the limiter. at 62MPH
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: golfvr6 on 04 November 2003, 09:34
or 70 in a vr6  ;D
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Rodreguez on 04 November 2003, 09:38
Yep true that, was surprised to get a shade under 65 in second gear! red lining like a mo' fo' though  ;D
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: AdamB on 04 November 2003, 12:36
What mods have you got Adam?
Its got a K&N filter, some odd system that gives it a triple spark! (the theory sounded good when it was explained)and a mongoose/powerflow exhaust sytem, coupled with regular servicing. I'm not sure what else was done prior to me owning it, but it was owned by a mechanic!
when the new wheels go on, the wheel radius will be smaller too, so it should make an improvement I've been informed.
I dont really use it for racing about in though - I just like to pose 8)
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: boogeysheftel on 04 November 2003, 16:52
in 2nd 8v goes only until about 50, short gearing
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 04 November 2003, 16:54


73mph in my valve in second


VR6's? I sh!t em
 ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: golfvr6 on 04 November 2003, 16:56
I used to have a 16v, 70mph in second, no way! must be a very fast speedo.
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 04 November 2003, 16:57
>Then get a mate with a stop watch to sit behind your ear. You >concentrate, he times.

yes, this is how it was

i did it several times, almost every time it was about 9 secs, on average 9, i was expecting 8




If your mate is in the car - you're gonna be slower

duh ::)
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 04 November 2003, 16:59
I used to have a 16v, 70mph in second, no way! must be a very fast speedo.

Read it and weep my fine feathered over pistoned friend.

it pulls way over 70 in second
and over 90 in third

hows your heavy front end now?
 ;)
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: golfvr6 on 04 November 2003, 17:02
Its cool, and i've got an electronic speedometer, which gives me the true speed  :-*
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: tinman on 04 November 2003, 17:09
I used to have a 16v, 70mph in second, no way! must be a very fast speedo.

Read it and weep my fine feathered over pistoned friend.

it pulls way over 70 in second
and over 90 in third

hows your heavy front end now?
 ;)



Errm, 2nd gear doesn't have a ratio to propel it to above 65. So there is no way you are actually "doing" more than 65.

Unless you have removed your rev limiter - the cog is just too SMALL.

And the cog is same on all 16vs.

I have said this many times before - get your car checked with a GPS. The speedo in a Golf is nothing more than a vague approximation of a speed it may of been doing, or might be doing, soon.

Tin
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: golfvr6 on 04 November 2003, 17:12
Yep, the electronic speedometer is far more accurate than the old cable method. They don't break either!
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: tinman on 04 November 2003, 17:12
>Then get a mate with a stop watch to sit behind your ear. You >concentrate, he times.

yes, this is how it was

i did it several times, almost every time it was about 9 secs, on average 9, i was expecting 8




If your mate is in the car - you're gonna be slower

duh ::)


I always thought 0-60 times were measured with half tank of fuel and driver&passenger.

If its only driver, then reduce the fuel load to compensate for some of the weight of the passenger.

There is no way that a driver alone will get a decent reading unless the car is geared up with the correct tools.

Tin
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Blue MK2 on 04 November 2003, 18:25
I get more than 60mph in second in my 8V is that good for a 128,000 miler?
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: tinman on 04 November 2003, 18:52
I get more than 60mph in second in my 8V is that good for a 128,000 miler?


 ??? eh?

but how accurate is your speedo? whats mileage got to do with gear ratio?

Tin
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: sKrEwBaLL on 04 November 2003, 21:48
Fellas,

Personally I prefer to be in 5th when driving at 60mph.  Its a hell of a lot quieter, and I may be wrong here, but apparently its better for fuel consumption too.   8)
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Blue MK2 on 04 November 2003, 22:39
i stated the milage, just wanted to know if my car still has it or not? ???

How can i check for the speedo accuracy?

I never rag my car that much i also prefer it in 5th :)
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 05 November 2003, 09:57
Quote

I always thought 0-60 times were measured with half tank of fuel and driver&passenger.

If its only driver, then reduce the fuel load to compensate for some of the weight of the passenger.

There is no way that a driver alone will get a decent reading unless the car is geared up with the correct tools.

Quote



Forgot this was a serious scientific forum! :)

Yeah you're right about uncalibrated speedos - but maybe I was going down hill, with the wind behind me and I was slipstreaming a bus.

See

Keep the laughs coming Tin ;D


btw - electronic speedo's are not all calibrated accurately  ;)
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: tinman on 05 November 2003, 11:09
yeah yeah point taken.

I was trying to point out that timing a car that hasn't been calibrated and involves the driver couting to 10 could be considered a waste of time.

If we ever meet up, I would be more than happy to bring my GPS along and we'll actually test everyones car for accuracy.

Name one benefit of having a speedo that you know is out by Xmph? You can go through speed cameras at the real speed of the road and not what your lame speedo says.

Tin
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 05 November 2003, 12:17
Name one benefit of having a speedo that you know is out by Xmph? You can go through speed cameras at the real speed of the road and not what your lame speedo says.


Benefit?

Well none really - I don't care as long as the car is going fast (and no OB or Gatsos/Truvellos are around!)

Most speedos on modded cars are going to be out:

wrong wheels, age blah

I'm still tickled by the fact you actually have a GPS device and you're serious

Let's all get our cars up to a dyno - battle of the dubs style

 ;D 8) ;D



Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: tinman on 05 November 2003, 15:17
I'm still tickled by the fact you actually have a GPS device and you're serious

Let's all get our cars up to a dyno - battle of the dubs style

I bought the GPS without actually thinking through any reason to buy it.

Checking the speedo against the car has been very worthwhile. I checked my last car (Fiat Bravo) and found it to be accurate within 0.5% all the way to 115.

I even got stopped by a policeman who reckoned i was doing 58 in a 40 zone. I told him flat - i was doing 50 buddy. He said "are you calling me a liar?" so I replied "no, just short sighted".

Anyway, out popped the GPS and I challenged the validity of his car, or eyesight.

After alot of haggling, and insults, I let him off with a reprimand.

However, checking the Golf with a GPS is a real let down. It spoils your day, not to mention hundreds of wonderful stories about daring speeds you actually didn't get to.....

Tin
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Rodreguez on 05 November 2003, 16:14
Sure I heard somwhere that all speedo's in english cars are roughly 10% out anyway ???
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 05 November 2003, 16:19
yeah and all French ones are 30% out

(bit of a broad random statement) ;D

I reckon most speedos just show a rough approximation.





Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: golfvr6 on 05 November 2003, 19:36
I heard that all speedos are about 10% fast.
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: COCKEL on 06 November 2003, 16:35
NOT ALL CARS JUST MK2 GOLF GTI 8V BY THE SOUND OF IT...MINES GOT THAT PROBLEM AND IVE REPLACED THE CABLE, MAYBE ILL CHANGE THE SPEEDO NEXT.
THE COMPUTER DISPLAY IF I ZERO IT ON MPH AND KEEP AT A CONSTANT SPEED GIVES ME A READING 10MPH SLOWER THAN IM ARE ACTUALLY DOING...HMMM
I FOLLOWED A MATE THE OTHER DAY, I TOLD HIM TO STAY AT 30MPH.....I WAS DOING 40MPH...OH BUGGER
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: tinman on 06 November 2003, 18:17
NOT ALL CARS JUST MK2 GOLF GTI 8V BY THE SOUND OF IT...MINES GOT THAT PROBLEM AND IVE REPLACED THE CABLE, MAYBE ILL CHANGE THE SPEEDO NEXT.
THE COMPUTER DISPLAY IF I ZERO IT ON MPH AND KEEP AT A CONSTANT SPEED GIVES ME A READING 10MPH SLOWER THAN IM ARE ACTUALLY DOING...HMMM
I FOLLOWED A MATE THE OTHER DAY, I TOLD HIM TO STAY AT 30MPH.....I WAS DOING 40MPH...OH BUGGER


you could just put bigger wheels on your car to compensate.

Tin
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: COCKEL on 08 November 2003, 19:52
WOT!!! BIGGER THAN 15'S ON A 50 PROFILE?

WOTS THE STANDARD SIZE FOR A GTI 8VALVE 88?
WOT YA THINK I SHOULD USE?
NEVER HAD THIS PROB WITH OTHER CARS, IF I HAD IT WAS NOT THAT NOTICABLE......
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Blue MK2 on 08 November 2003, 20:12
Im sure bigger wheels and tires on a car make it run/cruse faster?
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: ducatimad on 09 November 2003, 11:22
As this topic seems to becoming mad, I took my hand held gps out yeterday and the figures were -

GPS                         Speedo
30mph                     30mph
40mph                     38/39mph
50mph                     47mph
60mph                     57mph
70mph                     66mph

Also I would take into consideration that other peoples/my speedo cable may be slacker or speedo drive worn - I used to have a Astra gte - please dont boo money was hard!  the electric speedo was 100% accurate the timing gear I use is professional as I test speed boats for a living!  As for the 0 - 60 time I have many views the whole 8 valve - 16 valve saga! this is my experience - I live in lovely North Devon and due to our painful hills the 8 valve copes much better because of its bottom grunt although it is only marginally different to the 16 valve but when we get to a decent road the 16 valve midrange will pull it off - for me personally I find the 8 valve more economical and less reving the engine right through the gears than the 16 valve, after all as well as a fun car these cars have to get you to work and back economically and you want a car thats pretty relaxing and grunty if you cant be bothered to change gear so much on the way home - but these are only in my circumstances!  If I lived in a urban envoirment then I would own a 16 valver!

regards to all

I hope you view my text as more of my experience and not saying my cars better thanyours this is not the case the GOLF GTI is great which ever you drive!

 :)
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Alexg40 on 09 November 2003, 23:38
When my G40 went to Bruntingthorpe my max speed on the day according to the speedo was 130 mph and the GPS timing gear showed 125.9 mph.  Not too far out really.  

Bit crap for me though I had the speedo showing 138 on the way home!!!  Bloody fickle superchargers.
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: boogeysheftel on 10 November 2003, 07:14
8v is much more economical and what i really like, that it has power right from the begining (low revs), although 16v should be faster in 0-60. Is 16v really faster in 0-60?
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 10 November 2003, 10:36
Is 16v really faster in 0-60?



Yes

simply because an 8v can't do 60 in 2nd with a std gearbox
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: tinman on 10 November 2003, 11:13
Is 16v really faster in 0-60?



Yes

simply because an 8v can't do 60 in 2nd with a std gearbox

and because it has less power.....
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 10 November 2003, 11:29
so if you changed the cogs around in an 8v gearbox, you saying the car still wouldn't be able to do 60?
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: boogeysheftel on 10 November 2003, 22:01
has anybody tried 8v vs 16v in reality, not just guessing?
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: ducatimad on 10 November 2003, 22:43
Do you not remember the top gear episode when they did a back to back run with 8v versus 16v and the 8 valve won!

Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Blue MK2 on 11 November 2003, 10:08
My 8v is slow i get pissed on by a new renult megan 4 door in the mornings. PISSES ME OFF BIG! But i do get away the quickest.
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: golfvr6 on 11 November 2003, 10:40
8v is about as fast as a pig on dope  ;)
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 11 November 2003, 10:47
you're giving your pig the wrong dope buddy!
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: golfvr6 on 11 November 2003, 10:51
You can't compare an 8v to 16v, 16v is streets ahead  :o
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Zoid on 11 November 2003, 11:06
I've raced a Mk2 16v off the lights (many years ago) in my old Mk1 8v, ok I know it's not the best of comparisons but, I held the 16v all the way to 60mph, it was only when the 16v got into 3rd that it started pulling away from me. I guess that's where the longer gears and all the extra higher revving power really make a difference.
Although I wish we could just settle this once and for all, can't we all just agree that both the Mk2 8v and 16v are great cars?

Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 11 November 2003, 11:16
they are both good in their own ways.

You have to enjoy thrashing the nuts off a valve to get it to perform - which I like  ;D. Only pain is when someone buzzes you and you have to drop down two gears.

Not everyones cup of tea.

Whilst some drivers like pootling along in their 8valve and just dropping one cog to get some action.

HOrses and courses
Swings and Roundabouts

Valve is the faster car - and hence the BETTER car.


FIN
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: golfvr6 on 11 November 2003, 11:19
I'll go along with that  :-*
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: AdamB on 11 November 2003, 11:58
I've always prefered a car with more torque, but you have to ask yourself why do people often go for the 16v conversions on the 8v, but I have never heard of someone dropping an 8v into a 16v car.......
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: golfvr6 on 11 November 2003, 11:59
Thats right, who would want an 8v anyway?  :-*
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: AdamB on 11 November 2003, 12:02
'6- I give you a bit of credit and you slap me in the face!!! or is it still jealousy ;)  I'm not going to play with you any more  :P
I'm going to play with my 8v instead, it's politer!!
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 11 November 2003, 12:08
even the 8v with the hairdryer - I mean G-Lader is pants (in vanilla)


16v ltd  = oh yes, bring it on (pop - whoops!)


20v T = more tea vicar
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Blue MK2 on 11 November 2003, 12:14
Yeh 8v's are slow like mine but what ever suits you i guess?
16v are more complex are they?

My mate in his XR2i got pissed on by a girl in her fiesta 1.25 16v with 4 fat people in. NOW THAS PISS TAKING!
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: AdamB on 11 November 2003, 12:16
whats he doing trying to impress a fat girl who drives a fiesta???????????
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Blue MK2 on 11 November 2003, 12:18
u get me! Just a little credit on 16v's
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 11 November 2003, 12:19
you've got mates with Fiestas?


chuck em!
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: AdamB on 11 November 2003, 12:20
My mate in his XR2i got pissed on by a girl

oo-er, did it stain his seats :o
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Slim Shady on 11 November 2003, 12:23
lol

I have to pay  for that privilege.
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: Blue MK2 on 11 November 2003, 12:26
Yeah ive converted my mates. Ther all dubbers now 8)
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: tinman on 11 November 2003, 13:37
I've raced a Mk2 16v off the lights (many years ago) in my old Mk1 8v, ok I know it's not the best of comparisons but, I held the 16v all the way to 60mph, it was only when the 16v got into 3rd that it started pulling away from me. I guess that's where the longer gears and all the extra higher revving power really make a difference.
Although I wish we could just settle this once and for all, can't we all just agree that both the Mk2 8v and 16v are great cars?



A well looked after 1800 Mk1 GTI will give a 16v Mk2 a run for its money. You'll need miles to overhaul a steriod induced Mk1 1800 in a valver.

I can't remember a 8v owner ever keeping up with my valver at over 50.

We have settled this once and for all. Read my earlier posts - it blows a serious hole in this idea that the 8v is a better town car because it has a huge amount of torque at low end.

The 16v is a better hot hatch. Face it.

Tin
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: tinman on 11 November 2003, 13:41
Yeh 8v's are slow like mine but what ever suits you i guess?
16v are more complex are they?

My mate in his XR2i got pissed on by a girl in her fiesta 1.25 16v with 4 fat people in. NOW THAS PISS TAKING!

Your comparing chalk and cheese.

The 1.25 16v Ford engine is very sweet. In the fiesta - it is a very quick car. Quite simply, its a sheep in wolves clothing and should be aproached with care.

Tin
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: S11EPS on 11 November 2003, 14:32
Sorry to be a bit boring, but I've only just caught up with this thread, so..... going back to the original question of is 0-60 in 9 secs pants (when the book quotes 8 seconds or whatever) what you have to bare in mind is how the manufacturer or test driver extracts these published figures from a car.

I seriously doubt that anyone here has ever equalled or bettered a published figure with a standard car, because no-one would ever drive their own car like a test driver drives a manufacturers test or press car.

These cars really are caned and caned and caned to get the best possible figures from them. Unless you are best friends with Mr Clutch, I doubt that you use the same standing start technique as a test driver, and if you have one ounce of mechanical sympathy in your body, then 1 second adrift from a manufacturers claims really isn't that bad at all.

There are obvious exceptions to this rule (like when a manufacturer publishes figures for a given car,  that every car mag in the country then go out and smash, and then proclaim as a much faster car than previously imagined, sneaky manufacturers, eh?) but on the whole those figures are unrepeatable in the real world. But its ok, because that applies to every make and model of car, as they are all tested in the same way.
Title: Re:0-60 in 9
Post by: boogeysheftel on 12 November 2003, 07:37
yes, maybe, good point, also i remember i drove that time with two mates in a car, it was heavier