[ddh1313]

I find it curious why the media is not able to produce the same performance numbers as Lexus. One thought is that they may be using regular gasoline "89 Octane". ***Anyone that has ever driven a V6/I6 equipped Toyota vehicle knows the difference premium makes in these particular engines. Anyone else have any ideas? Oh, and I wont suggest that MT/C&D have any bias to worry about. I am sure everyone knows that's simply not the case. Thanks

 

[triz]

I think sometimes car companies just say things sometimes to build up hype for a car. I havent timed my car from 0-60 but sometimes it feels like its a lot quicker than 7.1. Then again sometimes it feels slower.

 

[Lexus_IS300]

Originally posted by ddh1313:
I find it curious why the media is not able to produce the same performance numbers as Lexus. One thought is that they may be using regular gasoline "89 Octane". ***Anyone that has ever driven a V6/I6 equipped Toyota vehicle knows the difference premium makes in these particular engines. Anyone else have any ideas? Oh, and I wont suggest that MT/C&D have any bias to worry about. I am sure everyone knows that's simply not the case. Thanks

note: the IS300 requires premium unleaded gas, not regular unleaded.



------------------
'01 IS300
'91 NSX
'95 Maxima

 

[ddh1313]

Lexus_IS300,
That is a very good point, that of which I didnt take into account. For the sake of keeping my dignity... Maybe they put regular in anyway!

 

[WhyNoISCoupe]

As a long time enthusiast of pony cars (Mustangs, Camaros, and Firebirds) I've come to realize that 0-60 times are not a very good test of a car's acceleration. It's been a standard for magazine readers for years, but the true test of a car's acceleration is the 1/4 mile. To test the time it takes a car to to reach a certain speed from a dead stop is a very one-sided test. It only gives you one piece of information about the car's acceleration. Measuring the time it takes a car to spring from point A to point B and then factoring in the speed at which it was traveling at point B and various points in between gives you much more information about the car's accelerating abilities. For example: two cars can run 13.50 in the 1/4 mile, but if one does it at 102 MPH and the other is traveling at 110 MPH at the 1/4 mile mark, you can tell which is quicker "up high" and "down low". 0-60 can't tell you that, and power "down low" (roadway speeds) is where a productive street car, like the IS, needs it.

------------------
I'll dump my Mustang for an IS...if and when they EVER make an IS coupe!

 

[JW]

The thing I like about C&D's tests is that they include rolling starts (5-60 mph) and tests from 30-50 mph and 50-70 mph. I think those are better for "real-world" conditions than 0-60 mph.

 

[sigss]

When a car is fast 0-60, it will be proportionally fast in the 1/4 mile too. You can't get one without getting the other. On the way to 1/4 mile, you have to do 0-60.

 

[TEG]

The testers at car magazines aren't complete idiots. They do try to get the conditions as optimal as possible. The original Lexus published times of 7.1 were listed as being for "prototype vehicles", so they may have changed something as they switched to mass production.

Also, the transmission ECU is supposed to learn the driving style to tune the shift points, so some magazines may have gotten worse times because they tested a car that had been driven "sedately" for a while before the test. I suspect if you drive hard every day the car will tune itself to perform a bit better.

Also (unlike many old cars which would start to "fall apart" after they are new) Toyota/Lexus engines have somewhat of a reputation for "freeing up" some power after you put some miles on the car. It is possible that they might get better test results using a well broken in model rather than a brand new one.

Another thing which may work against the IS300 is the super grippy standard tires. Often a little wheel slip is a good thing for 0-60 times because it helps get the engine to the max power band. The IS300 tires are so grippy that it doesn't show much slip. The grippy tires are still a great thing for the handling and braking tests but may harm 0-60 a bit.

With all this said, the IS300 is still somewhat of a dissapointment from the 0-60 standpoint. Lexus tried to "break their mold" with this model and show us that they have a younger, sportier side. The IS300 has done an OK job of that goal, but the 0-60 times don't get the performance people all excited.

 

[WhyNoISCoupe]

Sigss, a car's 0-60 times and its 1/4 mile times are not linear measurements. In fact, they are far from it. You do run 0-60 on the way to the 1/4 mile mark, but a lot can happen after that point. Also, they are measuring two differnt things. One tests the amount of time it takes to spring between two points and the other tests the amount of time needed to reach a certain speed. I could construct a modified vehicle that could run a wicked 0-60 (using effective gearing, traction, and weight displacement) but then have it drop off by the 1/4, and visa versa. If you use a transmission with a (for example) 3.40:1 first gear, a 2.80:1 second gear, and a 3.73:1 rear end gear combined with suspension parts that are optimized for launching from a dead stop (50/50 ratio rear shocks, 90/10 front struts, soft springs), and as much weight focused twards the rear of the car as possible you will run a great 0-60 with the right engine combination, but the car will not necessarily run a comparitve 1/4 mile unless it can use the gearing, suspension, engine's powerband, ect., to optimize "up top" acceleration. There are a lot of examples, even in production cars, where one car could be quicker 0-60 but slower in the 1/4 compared to another car.

------------------
I'll dump my Mustang for an IS...if and when they EVER make an IS coupe!

 

[S38]

A good example is the S4. A chipped S4 has impressive 1/4 times but has low trap speeds. In contrast, cars with high rpm power (like mine) will be at the high end of trap speeds for any given time. That means essentially that even if an S4 might beat me to the 1/4, I am gaining and if we race to 120mph it is likely I will catch him.

Since 90% of the fast driving I do is from 30mph+, 0-60 is only good for conversation.

------------------
S38
91 M5
Dinan springs and camber plates; Bilsteins and RD adj. bars
Dinan chip
18" BBS RC w/Yoko AVS Sports

 

[sigss]

I'm not sure i buy what you said. Show me a test in any of the car magazine where a car wins 0-60 but loose 1/4 mile, or the other way around. No special purpose cars, please.

 

[WhyNoISCoupe]

Siggs, I'm not a huge fan of magazine times but since I have no other way to show examples of my claim I'll have to use them. The best example of 0-60 times in comparison to 1/4 mile times that I can find is in the November 2000 issue of Motor Trend. In their article "High Speed Shootout: America vs. the World" they have both 0-60 and 1/4 mile times listed for 9 performance cars. The fastest four cars 0-60 were the Shelby Series 1 (3.71 sec.), Ferrari 360 Modena (3.92), Porsche 996 Turbo (3.98), and the Dodge Viper ACR (4.16). None of these cars ran the 1/4 in the same order compared to their 0-60 times. The fastest car was the Porsche (11.92 @ 116.0), second was the Shelby (12.14 @ 120.0), third the Viper (12.19 @ 119.1), and last the Modena (12.25 @ 113.5). Also notice that the Porsche ran a quicker 1/4 mile time than both the Shelby and the Viper yet it had a lower trap speed. This is uncommon with a turbo car, but it goes to show that a lot can happen "up top" as they call it in drag racing. I know these aren't "average" cars, but no magazine publishes numbers on average cars as extensive as these. This kind of relationship between both tests exists in all types of vehicles, magazines just don't publish it because 0-60 times are easier for the reader to understand. Most readers don't understand the concept of trap speed, nor are too familiar with drag racing.

------------------
I'll dump my Mustang for an IS...if and when they EVER make an IS coupe!

 

[ckolsen]

I agree that 0-60 is not the best performance measurement by far, it's just the easiest to compare and easiest for the layman to understand.
My theory is that the prototype IS300s had a higher redline (or shift point), and made 60 mph in 2nd gear, since having to do a shift to 3rd before 60 would add about 0.3 sec to the time. Or Lexus inflated the times, that's possible as well.

 

[WhyNoISCoupe]

The IS goes into third gear before 60 mph?!?! That's insane. Does anyone know the gear ratios in the car? I remember in my Mustang I was able to run 60 mph in first gear when it had the factory 2.73:1 rear gear. That's with an automatic with a 2.46:1 (i think?) first gear. Granted I was turning 6,100 rpm's with a 6,250 rev limiter...but I was still doing 60 in first. I can't think of any other factory car that will redline second gear before 60 mph. The IS must be gear very deep.

------------------
I'll dump my Mustang for an IS...if and when they EVER make an IS coupe!

 

[sigss]

WhyNOISCoupe: thanks for the details. It's true that 3rd and 4th gear ratios may not be as aggressive as 1st and 2nd. Last but by no means least is the effect of air resistance which increases tremendously at high speed (square of the speed, I believe), so cars with high drag will loose out, everyything else being equal. The gear ratios are listed in the IS brochure.

 

[sigss]

But then again, since the speed limit is around 60, 0-60 time is much more important than 1/4 mile time for off-track driving which is 99.99% of the time.

 

[WhyNoISCoupe]

Sigss, yeah, for most IS300's out there, off-track driving consists of 99.99% of their driving time. And to drag race an IS would be akward in the first place. An autocross or road course would make an IS feel more at home.

------------------
I'll dump my Mustang for an IS...if and when they EVER make an IS coupe!

 

[cturek]

there are 2 reasons why 0-60 times are off. One is that some car mags get cars with very low miles and them. A car needs anywhere from 1,000 to 3,000 miles. For instance a friend of my had a ford lightning that we took to the track with about 800 miles on it. It ran a lot 15.8 at 82 we went back about 4,000 miles later similar weather it ran a 14.8 at 92.
The second big reason is most mag don't have good test equip they use dash mounted devices like the Gtech or Vericom. Both of these are about as accurate as using a stop watch i.e. CRAP. Lexsu probably used a third wheel which is very accurate thus the time difference. Also car manufactured do lie sometimes. So iguess that is really 3 reasons.

 

[WhyNoISCoupe]

Weather conditions, track conditions (traction), driver, and tires have a lot to do with it too.