performance figures

m193twa · Post by **m193twa** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 1:50 pm

does any1 no the performance figures for my 1.0l

?. e.g the 0-60 times and top speed etc.
just curious as to what they can do

LogIK · Post by **LogIK** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 2:12 pm

I've wondered this for my 1.0l, but I'm not sure if I really want to know!

For the 0-60 times, I doubt stopwatches went that far, back then

But seriously, 0-60 must be around 17-20 seconds and top speed under 100.

Tahrey1043 · Post by **Tahrey1043** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 5:32 pm

Stock 1.0, according to official VW figures, is (to the nearest second, from memory)

0-50mph (80k), 12 secs -scary
0-62mph (100k), 20 secs -yaaaaaaaaaawn

(otherwise known as a Town Called Thrashesville)

Top speed: 90.5mph (145kmh).... in 4th. Even if you have the 5 speed*

*may not apply for the REALLY close 5sp

Which seem to be reasonably accurate, though i've timed myself clocking mid 17s with a stopwatch and the speedo (who knows how far out it is, though? it'll claim the car is cruising at 95 some days..)

Economy is silly numbers like 57mpg at 90kmh/55mph, 42mpg at 120k/74mph, high thirties in town ... but they seem to bear out. (can get over 60mpg just slipstreaming trucks on the m'way, not bad for a 14 year old car)

Gareth_GT_Hatch · Post by **Gareth_GT_Hatch** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 5:41 pm

Direct from the brochure:

45bhp at 5200rpm
56lbft torque at 2800rpm

0-60 19.5 seconds, (19.3 with 5-speed)
Top Speed 90mph

LogIK · Post by **LogIK** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 6:20 pm

Tahrey1043 · Post by **Tahrey1043** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:00 pm

oooh, they downgraded it for the users manual

now were they overselling in the brochure (by 1lbft and 0.5 secs) or being cautious in the manual?

Gareth_GT_Hatch · Post by **Gareth_GT_Hatch** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 9:39 pm

Tahrey1043 wrote:oooh, they downgraded it for the users manual

now were they overselling in the brochure (by 1lbft and 0.5 secs) or being cautious in the manual?

I have no idea

amstrange1 · Post by **amstrange1** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 10:13 pm

Gareth_GT_Hatch wrote:
Tahrey1043 wrote:oooh, they downgraded it for the users manual

now were they overselling in the brochure (by 1lbft and 0.5 secs) or being cautious in the manual?

I have no idea

You care?

carmadaaron · Post by **carmadaaron** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 10:18 pm

didnt realise that the 1.0 were that slow..... anyway any1 actally use it on da motorway?

Gareth_GT_Hatch · Post by **Gareth_GT_Hatch** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 11:18 pm

amstrange1 wrote:
Gareth_GT_Hatch wrote:
Tahrey1043 wrote:oooh, they downgraded it for the users manual

now were they overselling in the brochure (by 1lbft and 0.5 secs) or being cautious in the manual?

I have no idea
You care?

no not really.

TheWhiteBeast · Post by **TheWhiteBeast** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:35 pm

i did 0-60 in 16.5 in my stanted 1043 polo and i got up 2 96mph

SpikeyG40 · Post by **SpikeyG40** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 7:13 pm

i've done 15seconds or less in mine somehow! 15 seconds was with my bro in the car timing with a bad start and gear change.

trying to time myself, i've got in the 13-14 bracket! which seams very fast for the car, my speedo might be out i spose!

as for top speed, she'll do 90mph+ on the flat and i've had her up to 105mph on a slight hill! shocking!

i will understand if u don't believe me but thats wot i have seen!

GroovyCarrot · Post by **GroovyCarrot** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 7:44 pm

carmadaaron wrote:didnt realise that the 1.0 were that slow..... anyway any1 actally use it on da motorway?

Not often, but they're actually pretty decent little cars on the motorway, for what they are. Compared to any other car of the same age (and plenty of newer cars..) they're very refined, and I've never once had a problem maintaining a decent speed in it. In fact, I quite enjoy seeing the look on people's faces as I overtake them in an 18 year old 1 litre breadvan

Tahrey1043 · Post by **Tahrey1043** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 11:14 pm

It's not drastically slow, there just comes a particular point where in any other car you may push the pedal to get a little extra power for any number of reasons and you suddenly realise you already have it mashed into the bulkhead. At 5500rpm.
But that's only mere percent/s of the time, all other points along the drive it's fine. For a 45hp car (typical specific output for the capacity given the design age of the engine) its not so terrible. You can still outrun Nissan Serenas at least!

13 seconds for a 1 litre sounds like BS to me mate, you're kissing GT territory there (never mind 1.3CL!)... did you do the run 2-way to even out any gradient? You can get a 5 second variation either way without properly noticing you're on a hill in some locations (coming onto the M1 south at J24 is a particular killer - you dont really notice you're slogging up quite an incline, til you look down and find the car is having trouble reaching 70 from 60!)...

Yeah it's alright for the motorway, apart from certain stretches of the M1 / M6 Toll you can be the fastest thing on the road - so long as you're ruthless with the gears and loose with your lane discipline..... and pretty much keep the pedal slammed all the time!
Or, if you're not trying to break the sound barrier, just cruise, it'll keep up to the limit on pretty much any motorway gradient, though you might need to use 3rd (/4th) occasionally. And of course you'll have no problems with slipstreaming along behind trucks if you wanna save some fuel (as they'll be in trouble LONG before you are - when the average artic is slogging down to 45, you can still make a clean getaway around them).

STILL I would prefer something with at least another 10hp, eg a 1.3! Or, even if it's a 1108cc punto... (but not the 1.2 panda - it a HEAVY mofo!). For now needs must however!

You care?

no not really

and not that it probably makes any real difference out on the road anyhow...

PS really need to get it RRd, several times in different conditions. Hill testing it to see the effects of different gears vs the official figures for max power revs etc, i find that dropping from 3rd to 2nd at a bit under 45 means you can make fair acceleration instead of stagnating/very gradually slowing, but 4th to 3rd at around 65 makes very little difference to the proceedings (ie speed remains constant in either gear). Make of that what you will...

(or, ~3400 to ~5300rpm vs 3700 to 5200rpm - shouldnt think there'd be an incredible difference between the two, but there is.. both under similar conditions, had been running about five or six minutes from starting off... considering the max torque figure, shouldnt be within even 1hp of maximum before 4125 as an extreme figure... maybe its the chip, "invisibly" boosting the midrange

)

Gareth_GT_Hatch · Post by **Gareth_GT_Hatch** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 11:28 pm

GroovyCarrot wrote:
carmadaaron wrote:didnt realise that the 1.0 were that slow..... anyway any1 actally use it on da motorway?
Not often, but they're actually pretty decent little cars on the motorway, for what they are. Compared to any other car of the same age (and plenty of newer cars..) they're very refined, and I've never once had a problem maintaining a decent speed in it. In fact, I quite enjoy seeing the look on people's faces as I overtake them in an 18 year old 1 litre breadvan

Yeah its great doing 85 in the fast lane "crusing" just below 4000rpm in my mk2. Overtaking silly people in silly new expensive cars.

I would be very suprised if anyone with a 1 litre mk3 got any better than 16 or so seconds. The 1.3 SPi claims 14.5 to 60 (13.8 on the mk2 equivalent) and the GT is 11.1. But the 0-60 times by VW are quite conservative really, which is why I say you probably will see a slightly better time than the official one. But tbh ive never done an out and out 0-60 run in any of my cars so I cant prove that theory right or wrong.