Originally Posted By: Vladiator
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: Vladiator
Originally Posted By: Powerglide
Yep, and anyone that says “my car runs much smoother on xxw-30 than xxw-20” is delusional. Same with “my car feels kinda sluggish on QS xx-40. So I switched to PYB xx-30 and it’s sooo much peppier”. Get your head checked, have a beer and worry about something else.
Some of us score "average" or below average on hearing test, and some of us have a hearing that is waaaay above average. Some of us can feel a bean through seven mattresses, while others won't feel a rock through a blanket they're laying on. Just because your senses are on the low end of the spectrum - doesn't mean that everyone is the same way.
Case on point from personal experience:
- 2006 Pontiac Vibe AWD with a 1.8L 1ZZ-FE Toyota engine and drivetrain. With most 5w30s and some 5w40/0w40 oils it did 0-60mph in 18-18.8 seconds. Painfully slow, I know. (FWD version is much peppier) BUT with Valvoline MST 5w40 or with Castrol 5w40 Professional that 0-60mph figure moved to 20-21 seconds. Measured with GPS on the same straight road, same temps, about 930ft above sea level.
Because this is outrageous, I figured I'd plug those numbers into a calculator to get an idea as to the power difference you are claiming to experience between oils of the same grade. Calculator can be found here:
https://www.carspecs.us/calculator/0-60
Specs I'm using are from here:
Motortrend 2006 Pontiac Vibe specs and here:
Auto123 AWD Vibe specs
HP: 123
Curb weight: 1350 kg/2976lbs
Assuming a 180lb driver and 50lbs of fuel we are at 3,206lbs, which yields a 0-60 of 9.9 seconds, which, based on what I can find via some limited searching should be about right.
So, just to get your base figure of 18 seconds I had to drop the specific output to 55HP. Then, to get that to 21 seconds I had to drop it further to 45HP.
I would advise you take it to a drag strip and get some actual numbers, because these seem completely out to lunch
Your car is ~70HP off from where it should be based on your "timed" 0-60 figures, which casts some serious doubt on the validity of any of that claimed "data".
Hehe love your data skills. Unfortunately theory does not always gets confirmed in practical tests. You should really take a ride in one of those to see how your data stacks up against real world results.
Well, the car is supposed to 0-60 at around 10 seconds, so if your car is literally twice that, either your method is wildly flawed or there is something seriously wrong with your car.
Oh, and my sister has one, FWIW. It isn't a rocket ship, but it isn't a vintage VW beetle either