Board logo

0-100 in under 10 - whats needed?
franky - 21/2/11 at 02:48 PM

I've been having a good discussion at work about whats needed for a sub 10 second 0-100. All this was started when people asked 'how fast is my car going to be'. I said I haven't got a clue and that what ever car it is is limited by traction more than anything, I guess launch/traction control/rubber will help here.

What sort of engine/weight/configuration combo is needed? or what cars on here will do it? A Middy must be good due to the extra weight over the driven wheels I guess?

omega0684 - 21/2/11 at 03:06 PM

i bet a a BEC with a hairdryer on it could do it

bigrich - 21/2/11 at 03:08 PM

http://www.letstorquebhp.com/calculator.asp


try this, 250bhp in a 700kg rwd car should do it

StrikerChris - 21/2/11 at 03:10 PM

Pretty sure mine could but obviously its never been over 70!About 200horses and fairly light 7 should be near without traction controll etc in my opinion!

mcerd1 - 21/2/11 at 03:18 PM

quote:
Originally posted by bigrich
http://www.letstorquebhp.com/calculator.asp


try this, 250bhp in a 700kg rwd car should do it

or 180bhp with 500kg
or 300bhp with 1000kg

if you beleve that site

Mr G - 21/2/11 at 03:24 PM

A high cliff

franky - 21/2/11 at 03:25 PM

quote:
Originally posted by mcerd1
quote:
Originally posted by bigrich
http://www.letstorquebhp.com/calculator.asp


try this, 250bhp in a 700kg rwd car should do it

or 180bhp with 500kg
or 300bhp with 1000kg

if you beleve that site


I'm not sure I do.... the brick wall areodynamics we have might have some effect getting on for those speeds, eating a few HP.

I can remember in one mag years ago where a car was quicker with 2 people in due to the extra weight over the rear.

sorens2 - 21/2/11 at 03:47 PM

I think mine does. Or its pretty close.
190 bhp and 490 kg.
ZX12 and I think 4th gear is 160 km/h

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oN_45MHerYw

Soren S2

flak monkey - 21/2/11 at 04:06 PM

Mine would do it comfortably. 291bhp, 520kg.

A shade under 3 sec to 60mph and another 4sec to 100mph so 7secs

Otherwise have a look here:
http://www.strikeengine.com/performance-car-specs-0-60-0-100-power-weight-top-speed.html
and
http://www.torquestats.com/index.php?pid=mph100

Loads are listed.

franky - 21/2/11 at 04:21 PM

quote:
Originally posted by flak monkey
Mine would do it comfortably. 291bhp, 520kg.

A shade under 3 sec to 60mph and another 4sec to 100mph so 7secs

Otherwise have a look here:
http://www.strikeengine.com/performance-car-specs-0-60-0-100-power-weight-top-speed.html
and
http://www.torquestats.com/index.php?pid=mph100

Loads are listed.


Did you test it properly 0-100? Its got me thinking of what mine might be like too.

rodgling - 21/2/11 at 04:45 PM

I don't think that site is much use because it doesn't take into account the high torque of your engine - your car is going to accelerate hard from 2000 - 8000 rpm, not just in a narrow 2-3000 rpm powerband.

I think the only real answer is to buy some sticky tyres, take it to a track and find out. But to get your best possible time, you're going to have to be willing to abuse your clutch, which makes it all a bit academic.

blakep82 - 21/2/11 at 05:08 PM

that letstourquebhp site is total mince. doesn't take into account any aerodynamics of the car, and especially GEARING,

for a 700kg car, 200bhp, it reckons it'll do it in 10.75 sec.

great, but supposing i have a crap gearbox with a 5th gear with a 1.5 ratio, and a 3.44 diff. i can only manage 92mph accourding to gearcalc.

total nonsense

cloudy - 21/2/11 at 05:31 PM

R4 will do it pretty comfortably in 10, 170hp/~350kg (just under 7 to 100) you don't need mega power just loose that weight!

James

flak monkey - 21/2/11 at 06:23 PM

Yep FWIW I datalogged it just before I sold the car

0-60 2.9 sec (2nd)
30-50 0.9sec (2nd)
50-70 1sec (3rd)
60-100 4 sec (4th)

franky - 21/2/11 at 06:47 PM

quote:
Originally posted by flak monkey
Yep FWIW I datalogged it just before I sold the car

0-60 2.9 sec (2nd)
30-50 0.9sec (2nd)
50-70 1sec (3rd)
60-100 4 sec (4th)


Cool. What did you use to log it? Thats a quick car!!!

Dave, its a new clutch(well 2k old) so it should take some abuse. The racelogic should do the rest, you'll know well before me

flak monkey - 21/2/11 at 06:55 PM

My dash had a built in datalogger. Aim MXL Pro

daniel mason - 21/2/11 at 06:58 PM

Am hoping mine will get close! What's the caterham r500's time? Am sure it's about 8 seconds

RazMan - 21/2/11 at 07:31 PM

My Evodash tells me 0-60 is 1.9 secs ......... if I spin the wheels coz it's speedo sensor is in the gearbox

dlatch - 21/2/11 at 07:39 PM

franky
i think your car would be capable of doing a 10 something sec 1/4 mile
there is a "if" though........ perfect Launch

russbost - 21/2/11 at 08:04 PM

Well if you lot put the engine at the right end you'd find it much easier!

Sure the new Furore will do it easily tho' haven't found any dry roads to check on as yet!, 190BHP 113 ft/lbs (times the torque multiplier b4 the gearbox for a fair comparison!) ZZR1400 in 560Kgs

James (Cloudy) surely your car can't really be sub 350kgs??? Where have you had that weight checked (I've had variations of over 250kgs from IVA stations for very similar cars - gives you great confidence in their equipment & measuring techniques!!!)

cloudy - 21/2/11 at 08:25 PM

I'm pretty sure it's within 25kg of that - I used the 4 bathroom scale method - hence the ~ !

The fact I can pick the front of the car up and it's logged performance does seem to verify those measurements however

James

franky - 21/2/11 at 08:42 PM

Is it a GPS logged figure though? or just wheel speed on a ETB dash?

cloudy - 21/2/11 at 08:48 PM

Both, I calibrated my ETB by GPS comparison - but I do have a 10Hz gps device

James

flak monkey - 21/2/11 at 08:54 PM

My datalogged times are wheel speed timed without wheel spin.

chris mason - 21/2/11 at 09:10 PM

Franky, with the m3 power you'll breeze it, My old s2000 powered Mk indy did 110mph in 12.1 and went through the 1/8 trap at 92mph in 7.7 seconds, so i'd say 230bhp in a cec is enough to do 100mph in 10 seconds

My current car takes approx 500bhp to do it, but then it does weigh just shy of 2 ton

[Edited on 21/2/11 by chris mason]

cossiebri - 21/2/11 at 10:03 PM

Two wheels

franky - 21/2/11 at 10:14 PM

quote:
Originally posted by chris mason
Franky, with the m3 power you'll breeze it, My old s2000 powered Mk indy did 110mph in 12.1 and went through the 1/8 trap at 92mph in 7.7 seconds, so i'd say 230bhp in a cec is enough to do 100mph in 10 seconds

My current car takes approx 500bhp to do it, but then it does weigh just shy of 2 ton

[Edited on 21/2/11 by chris mason]


2002ish RS6 by any chance!? Shame they never put a manual box in them!

Benzine - 21/2/11 at 10:14 PM

quote:
Originally posted by cossiebri
Two wheels





Can't see it myself!

franky - 24/9/11 at 09:20 AM

To bump an old thread....

I had a chance for a run on an old runway yesterday at Swinderby, at the time it was a one off run against this
http://www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsArticle/AllCars/255590/ although it was running a little more bhp than listed(550bhp). An awesome properly fast car. Oh 285 rear's and launch control on it too!

We had one run on a very poor surface. The good news is that it was left for dead and managed a 0-100 in 8.0

By using more revs and a little practice on a decent surface a 7.something should be quite easy to do. Just trying to work out how to convert the vid and edit it down now.

So kitcars 1 super cars 0

Mark Allanson - 24/9/11 at 09:37 AM

Designing and Building Special Cars | eBay book has loads of maths to calculate such stuff, it is a good read too - no connection with me though

There are 4 on ebay at the moment, ranging from £3.48 to £38

[Edited on 24/9/11 by Mark Allanson]

franky - 24/9/11 at 10:01 AM

I might have a look for one.

The above figures are data(gps) logged though so I know they're correct.

Antnicuk - 24/9/11 at 10:21 AM

it would be interesting to know what 1/4 mile times these cars that can do 7 seconds - 100 would have. You also know its measure properly that way

franky - 24/9/11 at 10:32 AM

I don't think it'll do a 7.0 with me in it using road legal rubber.

Vid link is below, you can see just before my specs came off I had lifted off and its a good 5 seconds still till it went past. Good to see what our little cars will do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRJOPNOiZaM

SausageArm - 24/9/11 at 12:55 PM

quote:

Did you test it properly 0-100? Its got me thinking of what mine might be like too.


Me too.

I'd imagine my Mac#1 Worx shoudl be able to do it in 10 seconds, it has 297bhp/132.5lbft @ wheels, weighs around 450kg, will do 137mph on the limiter in 6th.

Would be nice to know for sure, will find out once i've sorted the clutch issue out.

bmseven - 24/9/11 at 01:10 PM

Torquestats have a fair few figures
R500

Year Introduced 2009
Kerb Weight 506kg
Engine Type Straight 4
Valves 16 valve
Cylinders 4 cylinder
Aspiration Naturally Aspirated
Displacement 1999cc
Fuel Petrol
Drive RWD
Transmission 6 speed Manual
Engine Location Front Mounted

BHP 263 @ 8500rpm
Torque (lbs/ft) 177 @ 7200rpm
BHP/Ton 528
0-60mph 2.9s
0-100mph 7s
60-100mph 4.1s
1/4 Mile 11.58s
Terminal Speed 119mph
Kilometre N/A
Top Speed (mph) 150
Nürburgring N/A

franky - 24/9/11 at 01:37 PM

quote:
Originally posted by bmseven
Torquestats have a fair few figures
R500

Year Introduced 2009
Kerb Weight 506kg
Engine Type Straight 4
Valves 16 valve
Cylinders 4 cylinder
Aspiration Naturally Aspirated
Displacement 1999cc
Fuel Petrol
Drive RWD
Transmission 6 speed Manual
Engine Location Front Mounted

BHP 263 @ 8500rpm
Torque (lbs/ft) 177 @ 7200rpm
BHP/Ton 528
0-60mph 2.9s
0-100mph 7s
60-100mph 4.1s
1/4 Mile 11.58s
Terminal Speed 119mph
Kilometre N/A
Top Speed (mph) 150
Nürburgring N/A



That's a generated time, caterham list it at 8.1(flat shifting with a sequential box with the car set up for it).

If you've 297bhp at the wheels in a genuine 430kg car it should be bloody quick if you can put the power down. Its lighter and more powerful than my car.

bmseven - 24/9/11 at 02:29 PM

There are real cars times in the modified section including a lovely Evo with 0-100 in 4.3 seconds

Modified cars 0-100 times

T66 - 24/9/11 at 03:42 PM

With my Fiat Im looking to make 300bhp and around 600kg.



Nat/Cal reckon it will be good for sub 3 secs to 60mph, I was banking on about 7.5s to 100.




This article caught my eye recently, 0-60 @2.6s with 0-100 @6.2s with 280bhp




http://www.minimag.co.uk/2010/12/13/monster-machine-z-cars-special-with-supercar-performance/

franky - 24/9/11 at 05:45 PM

quote:
Originally posted by T66
With my Fiat Im looking to make 300bhp and around 600kg.



Nat/Cal reckon it will be good for sub 3 secs to 60mph, I was banking on about 7.5s to 100.




This article caught my eye recently, 0-60 @2.6s with 0-100 @6.2s with 280bhp




http://www.minimag.co.uk/2010/12/13/monster-machine-z-cars-special-with-supercar-performance/


If you're rear/mid engined that should help, along with a dedicated setup. Your car looks much better than the mini though

Ninehigh - 24/9/11 at 07:14 PM

A rocket?

T66 - 24/9/11 at 07:26 PM

Thanks for that - Its now sporting a Quaife Powertec back axle from (MydT9)s Darrian Blackbird.


The secret sock budget is well and truly bashed, and I have a big mortgage again so I officially become a true Locoster from now on....



The Zcars Mini Monte Carlos are very nice to look at, always liked the big arched rallycross look.

franky - 24/9/11 at 07:30 PM

quote:
Originally posted by T66
Thanks for that - Its now sporting a Quaife Powertec back axle from (MydT9)s Darrian Blackbird.


The secret sock budget is well and truly bashed, and I have a big mortgage again so I officially become a true Locoster from now on....



The Zcars Mini Monte Carlos are very nice to look at, always liked the big arched rallycross look.


They do look nice but a very common look/car now(in relative terms!). Your's isn't which is the best part.

What sort of build cost are you looking at?

daniel mason - 24/9/11 at 07:56 PM

Hi chris Mason! Are you sure you posted correct on this thread? If you were at 92mph in 7.7 how come it took another 5 to get to 110?
Also if you think 230 bhp will do it in under 10. What power did your s2000 make to do it in 12.1 to 110? Or is there a big gap between 100 and 110 mph?
If you could clarify this it would be great as I'm currently building an s2000 engined mnr and was hoping for under 10 secs. Cheers chris

franky - 24/9/11 at 08:11 PM

quote:
Originally posted by daniel mason
Hi chris Mason! Are you sure you posted correct on this thread? If you were at 92mph in 7.7 how come it took another 5 to get to 110?
Also if you think 230 bhp will do it in under 10. What power did your s2000 make to do it in 12.1 to 110? Or is there a big gap between 100 and 110 mph?
If you could clarify this it would be great as I'm currently building an s2000 engined mnr and was hoping for under 10 secs. Cheers chris


You should be well under 10.


I guess it depends on diff ratio's and number of gear changes too. I can hit it in 3rd which helps, 4th to about 130ish then 5th to a geared 160ish.

How's the build coming along? Found that bucket of motivation yet?

beaver34 - 24/9/11 at 08:16 PM

Watched the vid, goes well!

Antnicuk - 24/9/11 at 08:21 PM

it is interesting to see the R500's times. I was looking at my 1/4 mile slips from santa pod when i first built the car and i was hitting 96mph at the 1/8 in 7.5 seconds. Yet i went past an R500 on the straight at woodbridge without any problem at all. I had 300 hp at the time but as its turbo charged, i had more torque and better aero, So i think those figures are a little optimistic in a real world test

franky - 24/9/11 at 08:22 PM

quote:
Originally posted by beaver34
Watched the vid, goes well!


Cheers, when I man up a little I'll have another go at it with a helmet on and use the last 1000rpm. Wiring in the full throttle shift should help save a little too.

chris mason - 24/9/11 at 08:24 PM

quote:
Originally posted by daniel mason
Hi chris Mason! Are you sure you posted correct on this thread? If you were at 92mph in 7.7 how come it took another 5 to get to 110?
Also if you think 230 bhp will do it in under 10. What power did your s2000 make to do it in 12.1 to 110? Or is there a big gap between 100 and 110 mph?
If you could clarify this it would be great as I'm currently building an s2000 engined mnr and was hoping for under 10 secs. Cheers chris


Figures are correct Daniel, the 7 shape is far from being efficient when it comes to Aerodymanics, you need a lot more than 230bhp if you want to be accelerating really quick above 100mph, on the same day another indy with 350bhp went through the 1/8 in a similar time and speed, but hit a terminal speed of 116mph by the 1/4.

What also doesn't help is gear change at circa 9k in 4th 105mph in to 5th so in the last 4.4 seconds (not 5) it accelerated 18mph and changed gear once. This would compare with your average performance tin tops 50-70 second time, so it's not slow by any means.

My old RS6 would go through the 1/8 slightly slower but terminal the 1/4 slightly higher, yet it weighed 3x the indy and only had just over twice the power.

I would think (could be wrong here) but the MNR nose cone has a far larger surface area than an Indy, so would imagine that the 1/4 terminal could be slightly lower.

It's probably fair too assume that the 0-100mph of the car on that particular run, would've been circa 9.5 seconds of thereabouts.

Edited to add figures, it made 229bhp on the rollers, but where it gained was from just under 4000rpm through to around 6500rpm where it made on average 33bhp more than the stock s2000s do.


[Edited on 24/9/11 by chris mason]

beaver34 - 24/9/11 at 08:35 PM

quote:
Originally posted by franky
quote:
Originally posted by beaver34
Watched the vid, goes well!


Cheers, when I man up a little I'll have another go at it with a helmet on and use the last 1000rpm. Wiring in the full throttle shift should help save a little too.


Yeah, more revs from start too? I had to be above 5k in mine to get away properly quick,

daniel mason - 24/9/11 at 08:37 PM

Thanks chris. Useful info there! How does the r500 manage to do it so quick then in around 7.5 -8 seconds with similar power? I suppose they are a fair bit lighter than my mnr. also what diff did you run on your Indy? I'm using the 4.1:1 from the Honda with 13" r500 wheels and a048's
Franky my motivation started to come back today when I fitted my stack oil pressure gauge and collected my modified drive shafts from Honda diff to sierra outers! So might get to take it for a litte private road drive tomorrow!

franky - 24/9/11 at 09:26 PM

quote:
Originally posted by beaver34
quote:
Originally posted by franky
quote:
Originally posted by beaver34
Watched the vid, goes well!


Cheers, when I man up a little I'll have another go at it with a helmet on and use the last 1000rpm. Wiring in the full throttle shift should help save a little too.


Yeah, more revs from start too? I had to be above 5k in mine to get away properly quick,


It makes too much torque to hold it that high, at 3500rpm it had about 1.5 seconds of spin on initial launch. Just below where the torque starts climbing.

It seems to be a bit of a black art getting off the line quick as so much seems to depend on gearing/engine/tyres etc.

franky - 24/9/11 at 09:27 PM

quote:
Originally posted by daniel mason
Thanks chris. Useful info there! How does the r500 manage to do it so quick then in around 7.5 -8 seconds with similar power? I suppose they are a fair bit lighter than my mnr. also what diff did you run on your Indy? I'm using the 4.1:1 from the Honda with 13" r500 wheels and a048's
Franky my motivation started to come back today when I fitted my stack oil pressure gauge and collected my modified drive shafts from Honda diff to sierra outers! So might get to take it for a litte private road drive tomorrow!


I've a bit of a soft spot for stack gauges

Its an awesome motor you're putting together and i'm sure a little run would help with motivation!

chris mason - 28/9/11 at 08:25 AM

3 Different cars, while the 7 shows to be the quickest to around 90mph, after that it struggles to hold a torch to the others, had the distance being longer i'm sure the gap would've been a lot bigger.

S2000
370bhp/ton

60ft in 1.932 seconds
0-92 in 7.7 seconds and 1/8 mile
0-110 in 12.1 seconds and 1/4 mile

18mph acceleration in 4.4 seconds
195/50/15 tyres - S2000 6 speed gearbox and diff

Sprint R1
460bhp/ton

60ft in 2.093
0-93 in 8.2 seconds and 1/8 mile
0-113 in 12.5 seconds and 1/4 mile

20mph acceleration in 4.3 seconds
This run was on a damp track on slicks, having to lift significantly at one point during the run.
200/54/13 slicks - chain diff

RS6
270bhp/ton

60ft in 2.132 seconds
330ft in 5.553 seconds
0-88 in 8.4 seconds and 1/8 mile
0-111 in 12.8 seconds and 1/4 mile

23mph acceleration in 4.4 seconds
255/35/19 tyres - Automatic gearbox - idling at lights



[Edited on 28/9/11 by chris mason]

franky - 28/9/11 at 08:52 AM

quote:
Originally posted by chris mason
3 Different cars, while the 7 shows to be the quickest to around 90mph, after that it struggles to hold a torch to the others, had the distance being longer i'm sure the gap would've been a lot bigger.

S2000
370bhp/ton

60ft in 1.932 seconds
0-92 in 7.7 seconds and 1/8 mile
0-110 in 12.1 seconds and 1/4 mile

18mph acceleration in 4.4 seconds
195/50/15 tyres - S2000 6 speed gearbox and diff

Sprint R1
460bhp/ton

60ft in 2.093
0-93 in 8.2 seconds and 1/8 mile
0-113 in 12.5 seconds and 1/4 mile

20mph acceleration in 4.3 seconds
This run was on a damp track on slicks, having to lift significantly at one point during the run.
200/54/13 slicks - chain diff

RS6
270bhp/ton

60ft in 2.132 seconds
330ft in 5.553 seconds
0-88 in 8.4 seconds and 1/8 mile
0-111 in 12.8 seconds and 1/4 mile

23mph acceleration in 4.4 seconds
255/35/19 tyres - Automatic gearbox - idling at lights



[Edited on 28/9/11 by chris mason]


with 320bhp in a '7' you can get to 120 in about 10-11secs. Or 5 seconds quicker than a 550bhp m5.

rodgling - 28/9/11 at 09:05 AM

quote:
Originally posted by franky
quote:
Originally posted by beaver34
quote:
Originally posted by franky
quote:
Originally posted by beaver34
Watched the vid, goes well!


Cheers, when I man up a little I'll have another go at it with a helmet on and use the last 1000rpm. Wiring in the full throttle shift should help save a little too.


Yeah, more revs from start too? I had to be above 5k in mine to get away properly quick,


It makes too much torque to hold it that high, at 3500rpm it had about 1.5 seconds of spin on initial launch. Just below where the torque starts climbing.

It seems to be a bit of a black art getting off the line quick as so much seems to depend on gearing/engine/tyres etc.


I tried a launch at 5500 the other day (similar car to Franky on T1Rs). The car basically just sat around for several seconds with the wheels spinning... amusing but not the best start ever. I guess next time I'll try a lot less RPM.

chris mason - 28/9/11 at 09:36 AM

quote:
Originally posted by franky

with 320bhp in a '7' you can get to 120 in about 10-11secs. Or 5 seconds quicker than a 550bhp m5.


Yeah i can imagine that, the problem with a 7 though is aerodymanics, at some point your 320bhp 7 will accelerate slower than the M5 you talk about, obviously this would be a some ridiculous speeds.

It's not too long ago that cec's had under 100bhp and becs just over 120bhp, the bar has been raised somewhat over the past few years, there's now quite a few becs and cecs pushing 300bhp+ which helps overcome the relatively poor aero of the cars around 100mph.

At the moment though, yours and a few others are exception too the rule, with most people running 200bhp or less, this sadly means aero at 100mph is still a factor.

While you can't say 0-100 figures and beyond are dull, the whole point of a 7 for me, is the lightweight ethos, the most fun (not quickest) i had in a 7 from a track driving perspective was the Indy blade i built or the Road Runner SR2, both cars had 125bhp or less. The others, with considerably more power, just weren't the same

franky - 28/9/11 at 12:28 PM

quote:
Originally posted by chris mason
quote:
Originally posted by franky

with 320bhp in a '7' you can get to 120 in about 10-11secs. Or 5 seconds quicker than a 550bhp m5.


Yeah i can imagine that, the problem with a 7 though is aerodymanics, at some point your 320bhp 7 will accelerate slower than the M5 you talk about, obviously this would be a some ridiculous speeds.

It's not too long ago that cec's had under 100bhp and becs just over 120bhp, the bar has been raised somewhat over the past few years, there's now quite a few becs and cecs pushing 300bhp+ which helps overcome the relatively poor aero of the cars around 100mph.

At the moment though, yours and a few others are exception too the rule, with most people running 200bhp or less, this sadly means aero at 100mph is still a factor.

While you can't say 0-100 figures and beyond are dull, the whole point of a 7 for me, is the lightweight ethos, the most fun (not quickest) i had in a 7 from a track driving perspective was the Indy blade i built or the Road Runner SR2, both cars had 125bhp or less. The others, with considerably more power, just weren't the same


We all thought i'd get the jump on it then he'd pull me in and pass, I think at 145+ he'd pull me in quick. V-max must be about 155ish with the car as it is(zero aero mods), it pull's very quickly to 145ish.

BHP is cheap now days so I guess thats why more cars are running silly power.

The best thing about the day wasn't the straight line stuff, the car's not dominated by the engine or straight line speed at all.

coozer - 28/9/11 at 12:37 PM

quote:
Originally posted by cossiebri
Two wheels


+1

Torque and less weight... octane or electric





[Edited on 28/9/11 by coozer]

franky - 28/9/11 at 12:54 PM

quote:
Originally posted by coozer
quote:
Originally posted by cossiebri
Two wheels


+1

Torque and less weight... octane or electric





[Edited on 28/9/11 by coozer]


Agreed but that's not comparing apples with apples.

Johneturbo - 28/9/11 at 01:54 PM

quote:
Originally posted by cloudy
I'm pretty sure it's within 25kg of that - I used the 4 bathroom scale method - hence the ~ !

The fact I can pick the front of the car up and it's logged performance does seem to verify those measurements however

James


so if arnie swarzitsface can pick the front of my car up with his little finger mine weighs 200kg !

cloudy - 28/9/11 at 02:08 PM

Sounds accurate to me