FTO AUSTRALIA

is hyundai tiburon faster than FTO?

my frnds say it can give fto a good competition.

Yes 2.7L V6 version will give a FTO a good run for its money, of course it all comes down to the driver as well.

It has a 2.7L from a 4WD, you cant be serious!

Power: 127KW@6000RPM.

0-100: 8.2 Seconds.

Match, Game, FTO!

I seriously don't know what this car is for and who would buy it?

if one of our member got done by a 70-80kw civic, anything is possilble. Plus they have 45Nm more torque which also arrive much eariler.

FTO is not a drag car, full stop.

FTO338 wrote:if one of our member got done by a 70-80kw civic, anything is possilble. Plus they have 45Nm more torque which also arrive much eariler.

FTO is not a drag car, full stop.

yep

rememebr that 0-100 figures are not a true reflection of who will win in a straight line race as it is assumed that the rate of acceleration is constant by all cars - to diretcly compare. Its not...i.e 2 cars with same 0-100 figire of 5s one being a turbo sykline and another being a V8 commie...the commie is gonna beat the skyline in a straight line (assuming equiv. drivers) due to its low down torque...u wanna know why...I will give u a hint...its traveeled more distance in the 5s...even though they reach 100kmph at the same time! now work that out

so Kev's point of extra torque means that this car COULD travel more distance while accelerating...what u need to see is the breakdown of speed vs time (so u can work out distance) I noticed Motors magazine do this in their review today actually..as a car may get form 0-40 faster...then be slower over the next 40-100...while a car might be slow over 0-50 but be damn fast over the 50-100...i.e. a turbo! its the total distance travelled that wins the race...not your power or time..hehe but it sure helps!!

1/4 miles times are more useful as the distance is fixed...and time is the variable...therefore it indicates more accuratley who has travelled the ~400m in the quickest time...although this can be debated also...

also in the end of the day...power figures don't mean toop much and 0-100 figires are usually arrived at from a redline (or lots anyway) drop of the clutch which is not gonna be a relaisic way of driving in the long term for your clutch and gearbox...but will get power down fast!!

my 2 cents.

oh and hyundai tiburon ... I know of a highly modded hyundai tiburon which does 0-100 in ~5s...so there u go.

i know a twin turbo one from strathfield lols does 11s 1/4 mile

What's the retail on one of those?

FTO338 wrote:if one of our member got done by a 70-80kw civic, anything is possilble. Plus they have 45Nm more torque which also arrive much eariler.

FTO is not a drag car, full stop.

either it was a sleeper or the guy couldnt drive

khunjeng wrote: rememebr that 0-100 figures are not a true reflection of who will win in a straight line race as it is assumed that the rate of acceleration is constant by all cars - to diretcly compare. Its not...i.e 2 cars with same 0-100 figire of 5s one being a turbo sykline and another being a V8 commie...the commie is gonna beat the skyline in a straight line (assuming equiv. drivers) due to its low down torque...u wanna know why...I will give u a hint...its traveeled more distance in the 5s...even though they reach 100kmph at the same time! now work that out

WRONG.

It depends on the actual wheel spin and take off eg they wheel spin and ony do 10-20kph for the 1st 2 seconds.

If they both take off the same, they both will reach the same distance.

d_stroy_r wrote:

khunjeng wrote: rememebr that 0-100 figures are not a true reflection of who will win in a straight line race as it is assumed that the rate of acceleration is constant by all cars - to diretcly compare. Its not...i.e 2 cars with same 0-100 figire of 5s one being a turbo sykline and another being a V8 commie...the commie is gonna beat the skyline in a straight line (assuming equiv. drivers) due to its low down torque...u wanna know why...I will give u a hint...its traveeled more distance in the 5s...even though they reach 100kmph at the same time! now work that out

WRONG.

It depends on the actual wheel spin and take off eg they wheel spin and ony do 10-20kph for the 1st 2 seconds.

If they both take off the same, they both will reach the same distance.

hehe year 12 maths mate...never say someone is wrong if you don't fully understand..

Firstly, I am 100% aware of the inaccuracies in modelling the distances travelled in my example. And my point is that 0-100km/h times do not reflect the distance travelled over that interval. Without knowing the distance travelled, there is no way to tell which car will be in front. And that is indisputable, I'm sorry to say

My point is that people use this figure as a definitive measure of performance i.e. the car with the lower 0-100km/h time will be faster. My point is that this is not true!


Heres something I knocked up which may simplify it...?
(btw, it is not mathmatically accurate, and is just to highlight the concept)

CAR A: Fast starting car with tapering off top end

0-10kmh = 1 second = 2 metres
10-20 kmh =1 second = 4 metres
30-40kmh =1 second = 8 metres
50-60kmh = 1 second= 12 metres
70-80kmh =2 seconds= 40 metres
90-100kmh = 4 seconds= 160 metres

Total 0-100 time is 10 seconds and covers 226metres

CAR B: Slow starting car with strong finish

0-10kmh = 3 seconds = 6 metres
10-20 kmh = 2 seconds = 8 metres
30-40kmh = 2 seconds = 16 metres
50-60kmh = 1 seconds = 12 metres
70-80kmh = 1 seconds = 20 metres
90-100kmh = 1 seconds = 40 metres

Total 0-100kmh time is 10 seconds and covers 102metres

khunjeng wrote: hehe year 12 maths mate...never say someone is wrong if you don't fully understand..

Same to you;)

read this;
http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=29929

lol. they are on a slightly diff. tangent and assumed linear accleration which is their first mistake...but sufficent for their topic. as it so happens thats my point...its not linear.

Hands up for thread movement into gibberish!

*Sticks up hand*