Dark Blue Mark

Holy ****, thats a whipping!

I take it back

Those wouldnt be a great idea with my S/C though - apparently one must have very good reaction times as the revs fly round at an alarming rate

MB

bluenose172

iTrader: (2)

...and you'll need that 0.2 of a second to make up for the 1.5-2s deficit from 60-100! lol

Seriously though that is quick for a standard car, that's the same as an M5 and a R34 GTR. Where did you come up with that time?

davecweed

car & driver did a test drive/review on a 2004 s60r(mines a 2004 model), here's the stats

ACCELERATION (Seconds)

Zero to 30 mph: 1.9

40 mph: 2.8

50 mph: 4.3

60 mph: 5.5

70 mph: 7.4

80 mph: 9.0

90 mph: 11.0

100 mph: 13.9

110 mph: 16.7

120 mph: 20.2

130 mph: 25.6

140 mph: 31.4


not bad for a volvo!, no mods done as yet

how's it going anyway paul?, last time i saw you was at knockhill, when you had your laguna v6, i had my leon cupra, do you remeber?

dave

LG John

Sounds appealing - I'm going hunting for one

davecweed

you dont need to hunt to far to find one, im over working in the edinburgh 2/3 times a week, im a rep, so on the road most of the time!

Ralph Wiggum

hmm thats odd as in auto car in numerous tests using racelogic VBOX they never managed to get the 0-100 to below 15.8 iirc definately a 15. high something m and they alway slag it off saying its nowhere near a m5 where its competing price wise anyway never broke into the 5 sec barrier for 0-60 either so i don't know where road and track did those figures maybe on a keyboard!!! or on drag slicks

ill believe the 5 or 6 times i ve seen the s60R featured in autocar timed tests thanks

davecweed

i was waiting for that!

they tested a early 2003 model, that was fulled loaded, which made it heavy, also there is a known problem with the ecu software of the earlier cars, since then there has been 4 ecu updates, to solve the performance issues, on an hot day, the car will under perform, the ecu shuts the power down, due to poor intercooler solution, to get the best from the car its needs to be below 15c.

there loads of guys in the US that have got the book time for the 1/4 mile, 14secs@101mph, 1.9secs 60ft etc, which means the 0-60 and 0-100 fall into there book times

here's the car & driver link,

http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=4

you can see how detailed the testing is, so it aint keybroad stats

the s60r is not in the same price bracket as a m5!, £60,000 for a m5 and s60r £34,000, which leads me to the conclusion you dont know very much about cars!

so stick that in your pipe and suck on it! lol

dave

LG John

Got to admit I'd like to take one of these bad boy on - sounds like a fair fight. What engine, power, weight, etc is it? I know I could google but you seem to like to talk about it

davecweed

lol, yes

300bhp@5500rpm
400nm(295lb-ft)@1950 - 5000rpm
6800rpm redline
6 speed box
awd
1600kg(the bad bit)

dave

LG John

You said you'd nail me too earlier in the thread but your stats don't concur Note we are using your stats which have been a little questioned. If we subtract 0-60 from 0-100 we get a time of.........8.4s 60-100 time

The S2000 does 0-50 in 6.2s and 0-100 in 14.5s which is.......8.3s 60-100.

I'd call that a draw

davecweed

lol, ah but you haven't taken into account in gear stuff

so if we both started at 60, i would beat you to 100, cos my high torque fig, then above 100 you are doomed!, if its wet your doomed! lol

i could improve 60-100, i could pull out the awd fuse, car would default to fwd only, and give you a jolly good spanking!

dave

LG John

I don't know the figures don't suggest it'll be that much if any faster at all. It is markedly heavier remember albeit with more outright power. The gearing on the S2000 is designed to work as the perfect multiplier of its lower torque output and its still very strong above 100mph. Its weakest gears are 1st and 2nd actually. Even in the wet I can usually give it full welly from 60mph - today however it threatened In gear stuff is an irrelevant consideration in the S2000 the gearbox is so snickity to use you sort of think of the gear you want and it almost changes by itself I have no objection to dropped gears. I'd dumped from 6th into 3rd at 80mph from 2nd into 1st at 30mph - they all go Worryingly its the only car I've had where you can take it out of 6th at ANY speed you want and select 1st with little to no resistance - drop the clutch and you have an instant £8k new engine bill.

Ralph Wiggum

i meant m3 typo there, when up against a m3 which is what autocar were pitching it against. I did read a article a few months back of a new improved version which got more praise, still a long way off a m3 was the general consensus, they saw fit to pitch it up against one hence why i mentioned it. there still american stats don't get me wrong i am a fan of volvos, personally i've always wanted a 850R or a T5-R , drove a chipped s40 which i enjoyed immensely,

to say i don't know much about cars is well being stupid, how do you know what i know, I'm a bigger car nut that yoiu'll ever realise

Ralph Wiggum

know what your saying about hondas gearboxes, i fell in love with the dc2 itr gearbox, makes you wanna shift it all the time,

focus RS also has a very mint gearchange,

davecweed

Ralph - chill, only joking! volvo started that "s60r, m3 beater", which is clearly wrong!, wot do you drive now?

saxo - if were both in correct gear for best acceration from say 60, i would still beat you!, "torque is king"

dave

Dracoro

Torque figures are irrelevant without gearing & revs. i.e. bhp funnily enough

john banks

As above, torque (at the flywheel at least) is not king, otherwise the S60R would outdrag the M3 with less torque, and the E39 M5 with 369 lbft would beast an M3 in gear with 269 lbft (despite extra weight which is mainly from the heavier V8) which it generally doesn't. Don't underestimate normally aspirated engines that breathe well at high revs and make little torque compared with their wheezy, breathless and laggy turbo cousins with soft throttle response, especially if coupled to a very quick gearchange. They don't feel fast because there is just one push in the back as you press the throttle pedal, rather than the exciting but primitive turbo kidney punch...

Dark Blue Mark

You had a run in with and S once didnt you John?

MB

s-man

Dave - how long have you had the s60? If its more than a year then I think it might have been yourself that I had a wee run-in with at the Gilmerton sliproad when I had my White Sti3 wagon?

Certainly haven't seen many other s60R's about and it was a bit of a suprise that you seemed to be pulling away from my 290bhp mota - so much so that I looked up the specs as soon as I got to work that day!! I thought I read they had 350bhp?

Incidentally my Sti never had any trouble showing s2000s a clean pair of heels (sorry again Kenny!)

john banks

Yes DBM, I thought the S2000 was pretty fast compared to a lot of other stuff I've come across.

Dark Blue Mark

This is my current project



Hopefully when finished it will look like this:


And hopefully it will do this :
http://videos.streetfire.net/Player.aspx?f...CC48F6&kw=3&p=2

MB

chris singleton

I can't be bothered to read all 6 pages odd of this thread but in answer to the question, I've spanked a few S2000's, albeit not in my scooby

Mark, see you've decided to go the supercharger route, awesome Will definately be more wary of S2000's from now on

Dark Blue Mark

Hi Chris, About 1/2 way through fitting it. An alleged 350bhp is going to be most amusing

MB

john banks

Dark Blue Mark

Thought it would appeal John

The PLX wideband im using is very impressive.

MB

LG John

Any excuse to post up about the s/c project

I miss that a lot sometimes.

A 290bhp sti is always going to leave an S2000. I'd be very surprised if a standard 300bhp S60R with considerably more weight to lug would leave your sti though - I expect this s60R was modified.

As John says torque is not as relevant as you think. Power (bhp) is derived from torque x rpm. So whilst your 295lbft equates to 300bhp at 5500rpm my 162lbft equates to my peak power of 240bhp at 8300rpm. You're car is at the end of a long hard day at 5500rpm.........mines isn't out of bed yet until 6000 and finishes up for the night at 9 on the dot

The best example of this is my 1:8th scale Hyper 7 buggy. It has a .21 engine that's about the size of a small pot of desert yet it produces 3-3.5bhp. Torque wise you could hold the wheels and resist it at full throttle but 3.5bhp is rather more impressive. Its produced at something silly like 40,000rpm though hence why the thing is rapid as f*ck! Tell you what - I'll race my Hyper 7 vs your volvo from 0-45mph

LG John

You know the only gearbox I've played with that had a shorter through than the s2000s is John Banks 6-speeder. The throw was measured in microns

Dark Blue Mark

My STi was pretty short as standard - about the same as the S I think.

Still mighty impressed with those gears though - if / when I go back to NA - I will be having those!

MB

davecweed

not me im afraid, wish it was!, but yeah sounds like the guy had chipped it, 340bhp from a chip approx, only had mine for 6months

the s60r and v70r was abit of a flop sales wise for volvo, not many sold in the uk, there was loads of volvo dealerships with there demo s60r unsold, some nearly 2 years on forecourt, why they didnt sell well, who's knows??

mine was a demo one, i picked it up at 1y3months old, 10,000 miles on it(used by volvo manager), its brand new price was £34,000, i picked it up for 20k, a bargin!, and only 300bhp as standard

dave

davecweed

is a supercharger?, looks like a turbo to me!, might be wrong tho lol