0-60 times in the SE, SSEi
02-19-2005, 01:29 PM
#11
Senior Member
True Car Nut
92 SSEi
0-60 7.3
1/4 15.9 @ 87
0-60 7.3
1/4 15.9 @ 87
Thats almost as quick as a stock series 2 L67. I think the ser 2 L67 is 0-60 6.9 sec; 1/4 mile 15.1@ 92mph stock.
02-19-2005, 01:30 PM
#12
Senior Member
True Car Nut
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 5,158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jwikoff99
Ya know, Motor Trend tested a 92 SSEi at 9 seconds, but I've never believed it was that slow.
I thought it was Road and Track who got the 9 seconds? I say so because R&T always lists their test conditions - which were under high temperatures, high humidity (not sure?), and high altitude. So, most others who don't apply to these conditions will experience a faster SSEi
02-19-2005, 03:55 PM
#14
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
Originally Posted by Scott85
From Car & Driver 9/92 -
92 SSEi
0-60 7.3
1/4 15.9 @ 87
92 SSEi
0-60 7.3
1/4 15.9 @ 87
Anyway, a stock 92 SSEi will spank any pre-92, assuming both cars are in good shape. A trashed 92 SSEi against an earlier model that'* not supercharged? Sure, there might be a chance.
I don't remember driverjohn'* best times from last year, but it was Mid-16'*. This was done with 110° track temps, high miles, poor tires, CRAPPY suspension, broken ELC, and exhaust leaks. Everyone ran half to a full second slower than their PB'* that day, so assume the 15.9 for his car taking ONLY temperature into account.
02-19-2005, 05:39 PM
#16
Senior Member
Certified Car Nut
SSEi
1992 Mid 15'*
1993 lil quicker then '9
94/95 lower 15'*
96-99 One'* pulled off a 14.9 (good job SSSuperchargedEI) so expect about 15 if you don't eff up
00+ Lil slower, they are significantly heavier, not as hard launching, etc. Expect 15.2 give or take.
15.9 is BS. I ran that with bald tires, and FE1 suspension. The common 92 SSEi with some issues, average maintenence sure, but not anyone who takes theirs to a track. My new springs made the car torque up abou 1/3 of what it used to when launching. My car would always pull a 2.2x 60', no matter what rev'* i launched from. I can safely say my tires were the limiting factor for that. I figure a 2.1 or 2.0 is possible with my car with good tires.
1992 Mid 15'*
1993 lil quicker then '9
94/95 lower 15'*
96-99 One'* pulled off a 14.9 (good job SSSuperchargedEI) so expect about 15 if you don't eff up
00+ Lil slower, they are significantly heavier, not as hard launching, etc. Expect 15.2 give or take.
15.9 is BS. I ran that with bald tires, and FE1 suspension. The common 92 SSEi with some issues, average maintenence sure, but not anyone who takes theirs to a track. My new springs made the car torque up abou 1/3 of what it used to when launching. My car would always pull a 2.2x 60', no matter what rev'* i launched from. I can safely say my tires were the limiting factor for that. I figure a 2.1 or 2.0 is possible with my car with good tires.
02-19-2005, 11:40 PM
#17
Senior Member
Posts like a Northstar
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Northern KY
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
02-20-2005, 12:17 AM
#18
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
That list is the same info that'* circulating on several websites. In many cases, there are big errors. It might be a general guide, but not much more than that.
They don't tell you that it was supercharged.