1.8 Standing Quarter

[Zippokovich]

I know our pugs are hardly performance machines, but I'm trying to compare my 1.8 LX to some motorbikes and bikes annoyingly don't tend to publish 0-60 times but instead use standing quarter times.

So anyone any idea on a stock 1.8 petrol 406 on a standing quarter?

[STALLED]

15.7 years.

[lozz]

Complicated question that mate,
err, car wouid have nothing on a bike, lot of differnce in weight,


Your not thinking of racing against a pug with a Motorbike are you?

[highlander]

I know our pugs are hardly performance machines ... my 1.8 LX

Yours is most definitely not a performance machine (had one of those myself!)

The only way to really know your standing quarter time is to measure out a quarter mile of straight private road, put a person with a stopwatch (or a timing computer with infra-red trigger) at the far end, then time how long it takes you to drive from a standing start right to the other end of that quarter-mile straight.

Hint - it won't be brilliant, and it certainly won't compare to any motorbike.

In a quarter-mile drag race, there are five main factors which will determine the winner:

1) Power-to-weight ratio (your car will produce around 85 BHP per tonne)
2) Torque (your car will produce about 120 ft/lbs of torque)
3) Aerodynamic drag (not sure on this for the 406)
4) Traction (the car's ability to lay power down on the track)
5) Driver skill (your reaction time to the lights, how quickly you shift gears, etc)

Here's an online calculator I just found that might give you a theoretical quarter-mile time:
http://www.letstorquebhp.com/calculator.asp

My own car's output:

Power at Flywheel (BHP) : 160
Weight without Driver (KG) : 1355
Power to Weight Ratio (BHP Per Ton) : 119.98
0 - 60 (Secs) : 8.71
0 - 100 (Secs) : 25.31
60 - 100 (Secs) : 16.59
Quarter Mile (Secs) : 17.15
Terminal Speed (MPH) : 82.33
Drag Strip Quarter Mile (Secs) : 16.95
Drag Strip Terminal Speed (MPH) : 83.70

One last bit of advice - don't drag-race with a cold engine - the engine oil won't be able to effectively protect the moving parts until the engine is up to temperature, so you may well damage the engine. Also, not to mention, the engine in these cars was not designed for this type of punishment, so proceed with caution.

[sirwiggum]

The Xantia 1.8 was approx 110bhp so I'm assuming similar for the 406.

A Calibra can do it in 8.14 sec @ 174mph ...

http://cars.uk.msn.com/news/articles.as ... =147862897

[highlander]

The Xantia 1.8 was approx 110bhp so I'm assuming similar for the 406

Same lump, roughly the same weight, so yeah. Works out to be about 85 BHP per tonne, so it's not exactly a rocket (but then, neither is mine!)

[sirwiggum]

The Xantia was nippy enough to be fair, though no sports car, and that 1.8 PSA lump was more reliable than the HDi, though the economy wasn't great.

Have been in a 2.0 turbo Activa version and that was a flying machine. Uncanny handling too!

[FarmerPug]

the 2.0 turbo in the xm was just as quick as the v6 they used.

[sirwiggum]

the 2.0 turbo in the xm was just as quick as the v6 they used.

Test-drove a 1991 2.0 turbo auto XM back in January.

Absolute flying machine, onto the motorway then looked down and it was doing licence-losing speeds, while still effortlessly cruising!

Would like a later turbodiesel if I was doing to get an XM though. Rare and some places like Wolseley House look silly money

[andymacg]

youd be surprised just how nippy a 1.8 16v actually is

my estate is powered by that very lump mind you it is the ally block version which according to my tame pug mechanic is bit more powerful from the factory,mind you i think the induction kit, straight through exhaust and remap helps, pulls away as quick as my mates astra coupe, and is aright pain in the wet if you need to get into a gap in traffic a bit sharpish as it just spins the wheels