Corrado Official 0-60 stats

[Baz2004 0]

I know most of you have tuned your Corrado’s in some way or another but what’s the official VW 0-60 on all C models ?

 

Is there an official website I can find out this information?

[Supercharged 2]

http://www.corradoclub.co.uk/specifications.html

[Nick_Micouris 0]

The specs on there (0-60) aren't favourable nor factory for the VR6!! In fact - the unofficial EVO figures are 6.2 secs - 1 sec difference. I thought factory was 6.7 or something?

[vr6corrado 0]

Yes Evo has it at 6.2 and Autocar's roadtest time is 6.4 seconds.

[Baz2004 0]

7.2 for VR6?

7.2 for the Campaign V6?

7.2 V6 storm? Is this right?

8.7 seconds for the 1.8 16V?

8.9 for the G60? Is that right?

10.2 for the 16V 2.0??

10.7 for the 8V 2.0?

 

Comments please!

 

The 16V doesn’t have Electric windows as standard, I know that for sure.

[Kevin Bacon 5]

I always go by the figures in the handbook, which are :-

 

16v 2.0 - 9.3

G60 with Cat - 8.5

G60 without Cat - 8.3

VR6 - 6.9

 

Anything less than factory and timed properly with laser telemetary is obviously a bonus. I'm happy with 6.9. With the Schrick etc it's probably a bit less but I ain't bothered as 0-60 is no real indicator of how fast a car is in the real world.

 

For example, TDIs always post a slow 0-60 time but we all know how punchy they are in the midrange.

 

K

[Supercharged 2]

Yeah, I'd say thats about right, G60s aren't the quickest off the mark because of the first two gears so 8.5 sounds about right for standard, it also indicates that i will get a not huge but hopefully noticable difference by removing the CAT.

 

...and thats 10.7 minutes for the 2.0 8v

[Nick_Micouris 0]

worth noting too that VW s handbook figure of 6.9 was for 0-62mph (for what its worth) so I guess mid 6's is accurate...

[Linus Van Pelt 0]

...think we went over this one before...

 

It was pointed out last time that the official VW figures used two-up and luggage...

 

(Mr brain could be failing of course, I'm not getting any younger :lol: )

 

DtM.

[vr6storm 0]

moving this into "common corrado questions" :wink:

[Scott 0]

I reckon on early 6 sec figures for the VR going by the amount of machinery I have driven recently....

 

And Kev is right about the TDi.... I am test driving the Audi TDi Sport this weekend.... same engine as the Golf PD 150 does 60mph in something like 8.7 secs?... seems slow for a 150bhp / 240lbft torque... but you wait till the mid range kicks in..... seriously rapid....

 

Scott

[CorradoWannabe 1]

Guys check out http://www.carstats.co.uk

[Storm 0]

Yeah, I'd say thats about right, G60s aren't the quickest off the mark because of the first two gears so 8.5 sounds about right for standard, it also indicates that i will get a not huge but hopefully noticable difference by removing the CAT.

 

...and thats 10.7 minutes for the 2.0 8v

I've never understood this. G60's have 160BHP and are lighter but miles off of the VR pace on the 0-60.

 

With a pulley, chip and Stage 4 charger they should give 190-200BHP and because they are lighter surely this means that they murder VR's

[Jim 2]

Its because the VR6 gearing is 'longer' than the G60 gearing - so it takes 2 gear changes to get past 60 on the G60 whereas 60 is attainable in 2nd on the VR6...

 

So in real world performance where you are both booting it around with your chipped & pullied G60, you will keep up with the VR6.. but off the lights you'll get a bit stuffed.

[Linus Van Pelt 0]

Guys check out http://www.carstats.co.uk

 

 

Sorry bud, I'm trying really hard to not be rude here, but I would seriously question the validity for most of those so called "stats" (they're just badly cobbled together figures from magazines)...

 

...unless you meant this in a they have got to be kidding, kind of way :?:

 

LvP.

[g60racing 0]

You cant get 60mph out of the G60 gearbox unless you grab 3rd. So that slows you down. Plus I think you have to change early as the 8v head dont flow to well above 5.5k RPM so you stop accelerating as hard.

[PhatVR6 0]

......I ain't bothered as 0-60 is no real indicator of how fast a car is in the real world.

 

For example, TDIs always post a slow 0-60 time but we all know how punchy they are in the midrange.

 

K

 

agreed.....0-60 isn't important, it's just a benchmark figure to impress magazine readers.

[Kevin Bacon 5]

And you'll notice all the supercar 0-60s are within 10ths of a second of eachother....... wow, big deal.

 

I want to see magazines scrap 0-60 altogether because A) it encourages people to do that in potentially busy areas and B), it's just a dated and pointless measurement. They should just quote the incremental times which is purer reflection of the car's day-to-day abilities.

 

You're more likely to be overtaking a lorry (50-70 time) than trying to get to 60 as quickly as possible.

 

But my cynical side bets some brands pay the publishers a back hander to make their car come off favourably.

[PhatVR6 0]

even worse, manufacturers even put sh1te gear ratios in their cars to make the 0-60 time better! you don't need to hit 60 in 2nd. being able to use 3rd and 4th from as little as 20mph makes and enormous difference to driving enjoyment.

[Storm 0]

And you'll notice all the supercar 0-60s are within 10ths of a second of eachother....... wow, big deal.

 

I want to see magazines scrap 0-60 altogether because A) it encourages people to do that in potentially busy areas and B), it's just a dated and pointless measurement. They should just quote the incremental times which is purer reflection of the car's day-to-day abilities.

 

You're more likely to be overtaking a lorry (50-70 time) than trying to get to 60 as quickly as possible.

 

But my cynical side bets some brands pay the publishers a back hander to make their car come off favourably.

Kev, you should try not to hold things back. You've got an opinion and you should express it. Stop being an introvert and learn to shout a bit. :wink:

[dr_mat 0]

LOL :)

[PhatVR6 0]

And you'll notice all the supercar 0-60s are within 10ths of a second of eachother....... wow, big deal.

 

I want to see magazines scrap 0-60 altogether because A) it encourages people to do that in potentially busy areas and B), it's just a dated and pointless measurement. They should just quote the incremental times which is purer reflection of the car's day-to-day abilities.

 

You're more likely to be overtaking a lorry (50-70 time) than trying to get to 60 as quickly as possible.

 

But my cynical side bets some brands pay the publishers a back hander to make their car come off favourably.

Kev, you should try not to hold things back. You've got an opinion and you should express it. Stop being an introvert and learn to shout a bit. :wink:

 

I think I should just let it all out too. I bottle things up instead of saying what I really think :lol:

[Jim 2]

I think we need an 'anger hour' on here so you guys can just let all the anger out! :)

[TomB 0]

To be honest, I'd also question the top speed given for the 2.0l 16v. Without taking into account the inacurracies in the Speedo, mine has hit 135mph with 3 people and luggage @ approx 6,000rpm (6,200 before it starts bouncing off the rev-limiter). The only mod I can think of that might make a different is the exhaust, however, it was fitted by my local (non-specialist) garage as Corrado exhaust althought it doesn't seem to be standard.

That brings up another question to mind though, is a rev-limiter a standard feature?

Cheers,

Tom

[Scott 0]

At that kind of speed your speedo will be around 8 - 10% over reading... therefore its likely you were doing a real 122mph ish....

 

GPS will confirm this.

 

Its why I can see over 150mph on the VR6 and its still pulling.........