juice14

Im sure some of you guys have already seen this article. road and track did a comparison test between the G35, Acura TL, and the IS350..
the IS posted a 4.9 sec time on 0-60....
here is the link:
http://www.lexus.com/models/IS/reviews.html

but thats not the point. I was curious on how they achieved this time. so I went to their message board and asked them about how did they launched the car....

I asked: did you power brake? to what RPM's? ECT on? etc...

Shawn Bailey, Detroit Editor answered:
"All stability/traction control was off. Car was power braked to stall speed, about 4000 I think. It will very with surface and tire choice, so you'll have to experiment. I suggest you ignore the 0-60 while at a drag strip, and look at the 0-100 feet data, and 1/4 mile times"

-Shaun

here is the link to the page:
http://forums.roadandtrack.com/cars/...&thread.id=983

what u guys think???

CRB

I think Bailey seems like a reptile from the pictures in the magazine.

Oh, you meant about the number.

Road & Track is notorious for lousy test numbers so, for them, that number is exceptional. That is a pretty old article too.

ffpowerLN

iTrader: (1)

So they used the pedal dance to shut off the VDIM completely?

Bichon

The pedal dance is only required on the 2006 models.

APBT4Me

car & driver got 5.1 and lexus claims 5.3

the problem with all these figures is that there are so many variables that will affect the results. tires, air temp, amount of gas in tank, weight of driver, road conditions/quality of pavement, altitude/air pressure. basically if you take an average, it is safe to say that most IS350 will be around 5.1+

blk_is300

All these car magazines are very baised, Road & Track favors the IS over the G35 and TL while Edmunds rated the G35 over all its competitors. Edmunds took price as a huge factor so that's why G35 won the comparison test, for those people who prefer to dig a little deeper into their wallets just to get a better vehicle, should not be listening to these critics.

Gernby

iTrader: (1)

It's a shame drag strips don't provide 0-60 times on their time slips. I would like to know what I got with my 13.09 (or Caymandive's 12.8).

Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

This is why I miss being able to use TTS Datamaster at the track like my last car... plug a laptop into the OBD port and it'd record everything the engine saw, and could use it to compute your 0-60 (and tons of other useful info)... only worked on OBD-1 GM cars though

I suppose there's always the G-tech type devices

Gernby

iTrader: (1)

I never did any 1/4 mile runs when it was totally stock. The only way I could guess my "perfect" times to be would to simply use Caymandive's numbers. Our cars perform pretty similarly and have similar mods and tires.

IS350jet

Drag strips can't record 0-60 because they have no way of knowing when you hit exactly 60 MPH. It's easy to record 60 ft. times, though, because you break the beam at exactly 60 feet. Can't do that with MPH.

Gernby

iTrader: (1)

I doubt it would be that costly to install radar or laser speed detection devices.

TEN TIL 4

I have a g-tech meter and my best 0-60 stock was only 5.30

I added a joez intake and my best now is 5.12, I just want to break into the 4's...so close!!!

IS350jet

That is a good point, but when you take into consideration, the rate of acceleration, (sometimes greater than 20 mph per second) it would be impossible for radar to follow. Your 60 ft. times are recorded in one hundredths of a second. The radar would need to know the *exact* point at which you hit *exactly* 60.00 mph within 1/10th of a second, and when you're accelerating that fast, it's impossible. I, too, wish a track could somehow record 0-60. That would be awesome.

Lextasy89

did you completely disable the vsc/ traction control?

did you do a really good burnout before your 0-60 run?

you need to test out what the best rpm for your car to brake torque is.. without spinning off the line bad.. some slight spin is fine tho

also.. those g-techs can be a tenth or 2 off

Gernby

iTrader: (1)

I don't think it would be impossible at all. Radar uses doppler shift to measure speed. It fires a constant beam of radar waves at a precise frequency then listens to the waves that bounce back. If the wave comes back at a higher or lower frequency, it can calculate the speed of the object that bounced it back. Basically, it would just need to identify the precise time that the radar wave hits the exact frequency of a 60 MPH object.