Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: vitaminc914 Jan 1 2007, 03:24 PM

I am curious, does anyone know if Road & Track or Car & Driver ever did a 0-60, top speed, handling, braking test on a 73 or 74 2.0? I am curious what the results were.

Posted by: smg914 Jan 1 2007, 04:52 PM

Car and Driver 1973:
0-60 - 9.0 sec.
Top Speed - 113mph observed
Braking 70-0 - 197 feet

Road & Track 1973:
0-60 - 10.3 sec.
Top Speed - 119 mph
Braking 60-0 - 186 feet
Braking 80-0 - 285 feet
Lateral acceleration - 0.742g

Road Test magazine 1973:
0-60 - 10.6 sec.
Top Speed - 115 mph
Braking 60-0 - 148 feet

Road Test magazine 1974:
0-60 - 10.7 sec.
Top Speed - ?
Braking 60-0 - 160 feet
Lateral Acceleration - 0.740g

Driving magazine:
0-60 - 10.3 sec.
Top Speed - ?
Braking 60-0 - 144 feet

Posted by: Pat Garvey Jan 1 2007, 08:40 PM

QUOTE(smg914 @ Jan 1 2007, 07:52 PM)

Posted by: dflesburg Jan 1 2007, 09:21 PM

10 seconds? Oh yeah, thats why I spent over 13 years putting a 3.2 motor in my car... I knew there was a reason...

I just forgot.

Posted by: Vacca Rabite Jan 1 2007, 10:10 PM

QUOTE(Pat Garvey @ Jan 1 2007, 09:40 PM)

QUOTE(smg914 @ Jan 1 2007, 07:52 PM)

Words words words...

Wow - more than 40 feet difference in 60-0 braking! That's like stopping before you hit a semi trailer, or before you enter the cab! What's with that? Not that thse are bad stats, but they are hugely different.

Posted by: Hammy Jan 1 2007, 11:55 PM

I'm assuming those 0 to 60's are all 2 liters.....

Posted by: vitaminc914 Jan 2 2007, 07:46 PM

I am always amazed at how these cars were so ahead of their times. Think about it. 4 wheel disc brakes, Electronic Fuel Injection, Independent rear suspension, Hallogen Bulbs, 5 speed, 15" wheels, seat belt tensioners and sensors. A lot of cars those days did not even have these options on their drawing tables. I just find it fascinating.

Posted by: Mid_Engine_914 Jan 2 2007, 10:56 PM

Here are some more useful stats.