Board logo

wot kind of 0-60 times and top speed do u get out of the ford sierra 1.8 turbo diesel unit in the lo
lee201283 - 27/1/03 at 11:46 PM

wot kind of 0-60 times and top speed do u get out of the ford sierra 1.8 turbo diesel unit in the locost

Findlay234 - 28/1/03 at 09:03 AM

whats the weight? the power? the torque?

cheers
fin

Mark Allanson - 28/1/03 at 08:19 PM

Kerb weight in lbs times 0.55 divided by the torque in ft/lbs = 0-60 in seconds

mdc124 - 31/1/03 at 08:51 PM

so 450kg = 990 kg
990 *.55 = 544.5
544.5/(say) 70ftlb = 8.1 sec

hmmm

philgregson - 31/1/03 at 09:50 PM

Faster than that I would have thought.

Phil

Mark Allanson - 1/2/03 at 07:38 PM

A 1.8 TD Locost is going to weigh a little more than 450Kg!, more like 600Kg if you are careful with the weight

MikeRJ - 2/2/03 at 10:44 PM

quote:
Originally posted by mdc124
so 450kg = 990 kg
990 *.55 = 544.5
544.5/(say) 70ftlb = 8.1 sec

hmmm


I agree with Mark, diesel engines are not particularly light. I'd have thought 650kg would be a reasonable figure. Also 70ft/lbs is pretty pessimistic for a turbo diesel, even the 1.8. I'd expect something around 120-130ft/lbs.

Mark Allanson - 2/2/03 at 10:52 PM

Try http://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/id/?id=31966

It recons 112lbs/ft

So 650Kg = 1430Lbs
1430 x .55 = 786.5
divided by 112 = 7 seconds

Bugger me, why am I pissing around with a 2.0i Pinto!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mark Allanson - 2/2/03 at 10:59 PM

Ah, yes I remembered,

http://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/id/?id=32230

600Kgs = 1320lbs
x 0.55 = 726
divided by 160 = 4.6 secs

Probably a bit optimistic, but WOW!!!

auzziejim - 3/2/03 at 09:00 AM

Mark could you possibly do me an estimate for my 0-60 using a 1.6 Pinto please? or anybody else?

Cheers

james

Simon - 3/2/03 at 01:47 PM

Mark,

You want optimistic?

How's this:

Rover V8 - 198 ft/lb - weight 500 (or 600)kgs

1100 (1320) x .55 = 605/198

3.05 (3.66) secs

Will now have to turbo my bike!!

Wicked:-) (Uh)

ATB

Simon

Liam - 3/2/03 at 02:11 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Mark Allanson
Ah, yes I remembered,

http://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/id/?id=32230

600Kgs = 1320lbs
x 0.55 = 726
divided by 160 = 4.6 secs

Probably a bit optimistic, but WOW!!!


Don't mean to burst your bubble, but a 2.0 efi pinto does not have 160lb ft of torque That's as much as a 2.8 V6. More like 160Nm - they seem to have made a cock-up on that particular page.

Anyway - how on earth can you predict a 0-60 time with engine torque and kerb weight?? What about gearing? I think mdc124's 450kg/70lb ft example above says it all - that's a bike-engined Locost. 8.1 seconds? Hmmm indeed. That formula might work reasonably for a bunch of similarly engined/geared/revving identikit production cars, but it has obvious limitations.

Liam

[Edited on 3/2/03 by Liam]

auzziejim - 3/2/03 at 03:04 PM

its just a rough estimate though that people are after isnt it?

Liam - 3/2/03 at 04:47 PM

quote:
Originally posted by auzziejim
its just a rough estimate though that people are after isnt it?


Yeah, but plug in a bec to that formula and it's more than 100% out - very rough idea. But in that example it's the gearing and shift speed that's the main source of error. Using that formula on cars with average engine speeds (say 6K) and associated gearing will give more trustworthy results - OK for an old ford engined Locost probably. I was just saying beware of such simple models that make so many assumptions that could be invalid if you use the model out of its original context. Using it on a bec highlights that - might give rubbish results for diesels too.

In your case, a 1.6 pinto has around 90lb ft (I think). Say 600kg...

8 seconds.

My mate had a 1.6 pinto before the bike engine - that don't seem too far off. I reckon it was quicker than 8 seconds though.

Liam

[Edited on 3/2/03 by Liam]

Mark Allanson - 3/2/03 at 06:38 PM

I think Andre Jute's formulae assume the perfect axle ratio and perfect gear ratio's. The formula works more accuratly in the mid range of powers and weights, I have tried it against a few production cars and it overestimates the acceleration of the high end cars and vice versa.

Has anyone got anything more in line with locost weights and usual power ranges?

Mark H - 3/2/03 at 08:43 PM

There's so many variables (aerodynamics and fat bastardness of the driver/passenger for instance?) that isn't it just worth finishing what you've got, then testing it.

We are sitting 4 inches from the ground with no real wind protection, so even at 20 it probably feels like double! (Haven't driven mine yet, so only guessing, but have driven a single seater round Brands Hatch. probably only got to 50 and hardly changed gear and felt like Shuey).

MikeRJ - 3/2/03 at 10:00 PM

I was a bit doubtfull about this formula, but having tried it on quite a few production cars it seems to be surprisingly accurate. It even predicted almost exactly the right 0-60 for a freinds TVR Chimera. It does seem to fall down a bit when 0-60 times go below about 4.5 seconds, as it dosen't take into account the traction problems that will be inevitable with that kind of power/weight.

Spyderman - 4/2/03 at 12:47 PM

Check out this site for details on performance measuring.
http://www.autospeed.com/A_1073/page1.html

Terry

auzziejim - 9/2/03 at 10:01 PM

Does anybody know the kind of 0-60 times and top speed a 1100cc GSXR powered locost would produce?