General Vehicle Discussion/News Non-Mustang Vehicle Chat, Other Makes

Average Quarter-Mile Times for All Vehicles

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 01:12 PM
  #1  
TMSBrad's Avatar
Thread Starter
The Mustang Source FOUNDER
 
Joined: January 29, 2004
Posts: 9,890
Likes: 11
From: Vestavia Hills, Ala.
Got this from Car-Stats.com.
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 01:19 PM
  #2  
JeffreyDJ's Avatar
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
 
Joined: February 2, 2004
Posts: 3,621
Likes: 5
From: Dallas, TX
What's interesting is there have been dips down as low as 2003 before. So you wonder if the trend is faster -> faster, or if the trend is instead slower -> faster -> slower -> faster.

Either way, pretty interesting stuff.
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 01:45 PM
  #3  
Scothew's Avatar
Stubborn Bear
TMS Staff
 
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 22,692
Likes: 48
does that average include 1 of every vehicle made or does it take quantities of each vehicle made into consideration?
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 01:46 PM
  #4  
Scothew's Avatar
Stubborn Bear
TMS Staff
 
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 22,692
Likes: 48
for example to my previous post, if say they had made 100,000 more 03 cobra's, that number would be ALOT lower (14.0 range i'd guess), but if its just 1 of each production car, then well you cant change it up much.
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 01:48 PM
  #5  
TMSBrad's Avatar
Thread Starter
The Mustang Source FOUNDER
 
Joined: January 29, 2004
Posts: 9,890
Likes: 11
From: Vestavia Hills, Ala.
It's just one car per year. And it's not exact because it's based on magazine tests. The Lamborghini Diablo VT 6.0 is only listed for 2001, but I'm sure they made them for more than one year, and it counts just as much toward the avarage as the Toyota Camry does, though they sold a gazillion more Camrys.
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 02:28 PM
  #6  
JeffreyDJ's Avatar
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
 
Joined: February 2, 2004
Posts: 3,621
Likes: 5
From: Dallas, TX
Yes, that would make a difference, and explain why (in all reality, despite the jumps up and down on the graph) why the changes haven't been DRASTIC, but rather predictable over the course of 17 years.
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 03:07 PM
  #7  
Horsepower844182's Avatar
GT Member
 
Joined: January 31, 2004
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
1987 - 16.89's
2003 - 15.70's

Like it was said before, these are the good old days.
Reply
Old Feb 12, 2004 | 12:59 AM
  #8  
Dr Iven's Avatar
Cobra Member
 
Joined: January 31, 2004
Posts: 1,261
Likes: 0
My two vehicles averaged together is 15.8. I'm average.
Reply
Old Feb 15, 2004 | 01:14 AM
  #9  
hatsharpener's Avatar
Bullitt Member
 
Joined: January 29, 2004
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Actually, I'd be interested to see if the dips in performance (err, slower 1/4 mile times) actually coincide with new federal emissions regulations, crash test safety, etc. Then the cars slowly get faster, then new laws slow them down again, etc.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Jim74656
SN95 Mustang
8
May 1, 2023 02:15 AM
unnoticedtrails
V6 Performance Mods
20
Aug 18, 2015 03:11 PM
Sacmus
1964-1970 Mustang
1
Jul 22, 2015 02:59 AM




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:06 PM.