Mazda 6 Forums banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I know allot depends on 0-60 times (i.e. driver, air temp track conditions etc) but the 0-60 time s from the numerous car mags have a great degree of variation. I have seen 5.4, 5.9 6.1,6.2, and 6.6, could it be that these MS6's were delivered from the dealer with 87 octane gas and did not have the power loss reflash????
Which times are more accurate for the MS6 with 93 octane and the powerless reflash??? IMO the mid 5 sec ranges are more accurate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,748 Posts
91 octane vs 93/94 octane.
Launching rpm (Some mag's refuse to do high rpm launches, while others have a "street start" time)
Power loss vs no powerloss.
Hot temps vs cold temps.
(Some of the tests were in winter ambient temps, some in summer ambient temps).

Based on owner testing, I'd say the variance is normal and accepted. Car runs about a 6.0 second 0-60 and 400m (1/4 mile) in around 14 seconds with an average driver on an average day.

Times can be better (as good as 13.7 in the 1/4) and worse (14.5-14.8 in the 1/4) depending on driver and conditions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
272 Posts
It's driver/launch related.

I ran 6 runs at the track on Friday with my Gtech setup to verify results. The 1/4 miles matched within 0.05 s, and my 0-60s ranged from 5.7 to 6.1 (DSC was on). I run 94 octane with no power loss, and two people dropping the clutch from about 2800 RPM.

An decent launch with DSC will yield a 6.1, a decent launch 5.7, a great launch 5.4 or less.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
272 Posts
That's why I had to change lanes, one was really sticky and I didn't want to drop the any higher than 3000.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
I still laugh at the Road and Track 0-100 MPH of 24 seconds! They had to of had a car that was suffering from signficant power loss. They thought it was just the use of 91 octane gas that caused the car to run slower.

My old Toyota Echo could get to 100 MPH in 24 seconds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,424 Posts
I still laugh at the Road and Track 0-100 MPH of 24 seconds! They had to of had a car that was suffering from signficant power loss. They thought it was just the use of 91 octane gas that caused the car to run slower.

My old Toyota Echo could get to 100 MPH in 24 seconds.
[/b]
Yah those crack addicts published those results as if they were legitimate. I wrote them a nice little letter encouraging them to use a little common sense and logic especially since they have the benefit of hopefully some wisdom in that arena. You would think someone would think something was wrong when a car cranking out nearly 300 hp takes 24 seconds to get to 100.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,138 Posts
It's driver/launch related.

I ran 6 runs at the track on Friday with my Gtech setup to verify results. The 1/4 miles matched within 0.05 s, and my 0-60s ranged from 5.7 to 6.1 (DSC was on). I run 94 octane with no power loss, and two people dropping the clutch from about 2800 RPM.

An decent launch with DSC will yield a 6.1, a decent launch 5.7, a great launch 5.4 or less.
[/b]
I just figured out why your times are slow... WHY IN GODS NAME DO YOU HAVE DSC ON!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
272 Posts
I just figured out why your times are slow... WHY IN GODS NAME DO YOU HAVE DSC ON!
[/b]
I had it on for the 0-60 at 6.1. It was my forth run and I was turning off the car while waiting for the 10 cars in front to go. Forgot to turn it off as I got to the line. My other runs it was off.

I ran three [email protected] runs, two with my wife in the car, one alone. I reviewed my gtech data vs a run I did on the other night. Third gear was not pulling fully, the times were slower, and it didn't feel like it was pulling as hard. Heat soak is my answer. I had to sit in line for 10-15 minutes after driving for 1.5 hrs to get to the track.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
595 Posts
Yah those crack addicts published those results as if they were legitimate. I wrote them a nice little letter encouraging them to use a little common sense and logic especially since they have the benefit of hopefully some wisdom in that arena. You would think someone would think something was wrong when a car cranking out nearly 300 hp takes 24 seconds to get to 100.
[/b]
IMO they did the right thing - they clearly noted on the chart and even explained that they believed the numbers were low, and said they thought it was due to the 91 octane - which didnt help at all. When they tested the car, we were barely talking about the powerloss - the mag articles are written 3 months at least usually before you get your hands on the mag. They said, these are the numbers that the car that they were given to test ran. It is better that they didnt lie or make stuff up. The bad press might have gotten Mazda more of a jump to fix the problem. They knew it should have been faster.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
About this Discussion
9 Replies
7 Participants
stl_ls1gto
Mazda 6 Forums
Mazda6club.com is a forum dedicated to the Mazda6 / Atenza. Come and discuss reliability, performance, modifications, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top