What are the 0-60 times for a roush stage 1 supercharger?

[3beeps]

You're not gonna get accurate 0-60 times. You don't buy a blower for 0-60 times on the street lol.

Sponsored

 

[clevernickname]

I mean, I figured it's the best "bang for buck" considering a tune, intake, and install can cost like $1.5k and gets you..30 extra hp that most people won't even feel?

 

[3beeps]

I mean, I figured it's the best "bang for buck" considering a tune, intake, and install can cost like $1.5k and gets you..30 extra hp that most people won't even feel?

You're right, but you're using the wrong metric to judge a horsepower increase. More horsepower doesn't translate to better 0-60 times unless you can maintain full traction.

 

[clevernickname]

Oh I understand that you'd need stickier tires and all that. But you're saying it still wouldn't be worth it?

 

[3beeps]

Oh I understand that you'd need stickier tires and all that. But you're saying it still wouldn't be worth it?

If I were to take this literally and you were only going 0 to 60 mph in your races, no it wouldn't be worth it.

But if you go above 60 mph at all or hit the gas on the highway ever, boost is absolutely the way to go.

 

[clevernickname]

Not many freeways here. What would be the best bang for buck to get better 0-60? Already changed my tires.

 

[sublimaze]

If your only goal is the best 0-60 time, then you bought the wrong vehicle (you should have bought an AWD)

What everyone is trying tell you is the more power you put thru a single axle, the more likely you will boil the tires and not make any forward progress. How quickly you accelerate is not only determined by horsepower, but also by how much traction you have. There is a physical limit to how much traction your tires can offer. This limit is reached more quickly in 2WD vehicles. Adding any type of forced induction can easily overcome the available traction at a stop. Breaking traction while moving is more difficult, but still possible. This is what blaket0w tried to explain. You can still spin the tires at 60 mph, provided that you have enough power and/or not enough traction. If you do forced induction, you can still win 0-60 races provided that you learn how to modulate power to the wheels and don't waste it by spinning the tires. Doing this is much easier in a vehicle with traction control, which automagically reduces engine power and/or uses brakes to reduce wheelspin.

 

[Mustang_Owner]

I have a Roush phase 1 SC (670 HP) and with the stock wheels/tires, I spin all through first gear and from 4000 - 5500 RPM in second gear in warm dry weather. I updated my wheels to MPSS 325 wide in the rear. Now, I spin in most of first gear and do not spin in second (except for possibly a brief spin around 5000 RPM). My 0-60 times on the included factory trackapp always show 'much' higher than the actual 0-60 times with an accurate accelerometer. However, I have not tried/found my old accurate accelerometer in a while. When I do, I'll post some times. The best 0-60 I had before the Roush SC on 305 rear tires was around 4.3 seconds on a hot dry newly paved asphalt road. Ford jumped the base HP up from 435 to 460 now, has a better traction control on the 10-speed auto (from what a car magazine claims) and were able to get 0-60 at 3.9 seconds. If I had 'slicks' or sticky tires and was on a track with lots of rubber put down, I'd probably be low 3 second 0-60. With slicks at the track made of a very soft compound, I heard you can run small tires (275 to 295) and still get very good traction. For a normal asphalt road, you lose traction versus a smooth surface like concrete. I'll move to MPSS 345 rear summer tires in the near future as the only way to somewhat compensate for somebody else who has 4-wheel drive is to have very wide rear tires, less weight, sticky tires if possible, or try the new 10-speed auto that 'might' give better launch traction control. Ideally, you use a shorter rear axle and move the suspension inwards by cutting the trunk and doing some custom welding to fit a wider tire that does not poke out of the fender. Of course, on a new car with some warranty, you would not do any mods that void your warranty. I've also seen some fender flare kits you can bolt on if you want a really wide rear tire to not poke out as much.

Note that the fastest 0-60 cars have lots of torque (only corvette z06 and hellcat have more torque than a 10 or 11 psi supercharged Mustang GT) and 4-wheel drive to get better traction. You can still beat them on the street with wide enough rear tires and lots of extra boost. Some guy at work today sent me a video link showing a Tesla P100D beating a foxbody mustang. I replied with a link showing him a CTS-V and a 2013 mustang beating a P100D at the track. The P100D has over 900 RWTQ on launch, but the torque drops rapidly starting around 50 MPH. Note torque naturally decreases with higher wheel speed as you change your gears. When they dyno a mustang for torque, they do it in 5th gear with 3.73 gears. Therefore, the torque numbers you get are much less than if they dynoed the car in first gear. There is some chance the torque on a SC mustang is close to 900 in first (0-30MPH), but I didn't see anybody try to measure this. So if you can get a race with a new Tesla from a rolling start around 50 MPH, you have a good chance at beating them as you increase in speed. The problem is you can't get much traction in first from 0 to 30 MPH on summer tires on asphalt. The basic 10 to 11 psi supercharged mustang GT does around 500 RWTQ measured in 5th gear (over 100MPH). Some tuning and maybe new fuel injectors/BAP with E85 or octane boost brings that up to 600 RWTQ. A $160K base price 911 porsche turbo has 580 HP / 553 TQ. Since there is a 15% difference between the flywheel HP/TQ you see advertised by the vehicle manufacturers and the actual RW HP/TQ measured, just multiply the advertised values by 0.85 to get the actual rear wheel values. So the new top of the line porsche only has 493 RWHP / 470 RWTQ. A supercharged mustang beats that easily. It's the weight difference and shift time that you also need to overcome (hence the 10-speed auto might compensate for some of the shift time difference). Note the P100D has 10" wide front x 2 and 10.8" rear x 2 wheels. That's a total of 41.6" of tire width on the ground. The widest I can fit at the moment with my 11.5" wide rear wheels is only a total of 27.6" of tire on the ground for acceleration. If I also use sticky tires on the street, my 27.6" wide is probably equivalent or better than a Porsche/Tesla summer 41.6" wide tire. So if I wanted to beat a P100D 0-60 2.3 second time on the street, I'd go with sticky tires, a sticky surface (if possible such as smooth concrete) and possibly extra boost.

I've seen heavily modded cars (typically weighing much less than the ~4000 lbs of car we have - I'm including the weight of the SC) hitting 180 MPH in 4 seconds. That implies a 0-60 time of way less than 2 seconds and the acceleration g-force up to the end of the run is fairly constant. They are making well over double the HP and TQ the fastest production cars make. The rear wheels they use are sticky tires on a somewhat sticky surface. They use powerglide transmissions, tube chassis, and weigh between 2000 and 3000 lbs. That's really going down the road of useless 'other' than a track car in my opinion. As far as fully functional cars like the mustang, porsche, corvette, and tesla, I wasn't sold on Tesla since the P100D costs 134.5K base price, needs 8 or 9 hours to charge, and the motors can't be upgraded. My mustang cost $42K for almost a base model with a supercharger (+ dealer fee + tax, tag, title). The 911 turbo costs more than the tesla and should be similar (or possibly worse) in acceleration to my car on a sticky surface (after a good tune, sticky tires, and slightly higher boost). Since my car weighs more, only has two wheels to accelerate with, and shifts a little slower, I need a bit more power and wider rear tires on the street to compensate. So the Mustang is still the best deal for the money, but you need a few basic changes to compete including paying for new wheels/tires (ideally slicks), a custom tune, and not drive your car in wet/snowy conditions with slicks if you want good 0-60 times like the $100K+ sports cars. I also am almost sure that the wider you go in summer tires, the higher chance of slipping in the rain as the water has no where to go on the inner tire grooves, so be extra careful on turns in the rain with extra wide tires. This sounds counter-intuitive, but if you don't want the rear end of your car to fishtail around, don't accelerate on wet roads during even a slight turn at high speeds or you might not recover. Those wide summer wheels only hold extra well in dry conditions, in wet conditions, they hold worse than tires not as wide in my opinion. If you only care about 60 MPH to 100 MPH times (on the street, this is getting much more dangerous depending on other drivers around you), you can just keep extra wide rear summer tires on your car all the time (like I do) and still beat just about all other cars knowing your car was cost much less than typical sports cars and exotics. You can also get cheaper repair parts for your car and service is cheaper.

If you want to really be faster than the 911 turbo and P100D in 0-60, you may also consider gutting the car (seats, airbags, replacing hood/trunk with carbon fiber) for weight reduction. Then, you need much less power/torque to get a good 0-60 time. Before I bought my new 2017 GT a month ago, I was 'very' close to getting a 2013 viper instead, but the viper didn't have any warranty and the required back seat I need for a child. Viper forced induction was much higher in price than the Mustang. Buying a mustang gives you better options for less money in my opinion. Although, on 2018+ models, the prices seem to be rising for the base model as well as for the same options on a 2017. Try to get a good deal on a 2017 while you still can

Edit:

I found a sample dyno graph of torque versus gears. Even though the P100D dyno graph shows 900 torque from 0 to about 50 MPH, my supercharged mustang should easily have more torque at these speeds than the best tesla they have.

 

[djcodeman]

I have a Roush phase 1 SC (670 HP) and with the stock wheels/tires, I spin all through first gear and from 4000 - 5500 RPM in second gear in warm dry weather. I updated my wheels to MPSS 325 wide in the rear. Now, I spin in most of first gear and do not spin in second (except for possibly a brief spin around 5000 RPM). My 0-60 times on the included factory trackapp always show 'much' higher than the actual 0-60 times with an accurate accelerometer. However, I have not tried/found my old accurate accelerometer in a while. When I do, I'll post some times. The best 0-60 I had before the Roush SC on 305 rear tires was around 4.3 seconds on a hot dry newly paved asphalt road. Ford jumped the base HP up from 435 to 460 now, has a better traction control on the 10-speed auto (from what a car magazine claims) and were able to get 0-60 at 3.9 seconds. If I had 'slicks' or sticky tires and was on a track with lots of rubber put down, I'd probably be low 3 second 0-60. With slicks at the track made of a very soft compound, I heard you can run small tires (275 to 295) and still get very good traction. For a normal asphalt road, you lose traction versus a smooth surface like concrete. I'll move to MPSS 345 rear summer tires in the near future as the only way to somewhat compensate for somebody else who has 4-wheel drive is to have very wide rear tires, less weight, sticky tires if possible, or try the new 10-speed auto that 'might' give better launch traction control. Ideally, you use a shorter rear axle and move the suspension inwards by cutting the trunk and doing some custom welding to fit a wider tire that does not poke out of the fender. Of course, on a new car with some warranty, you would not do any mods that void your warranty. I've also seen some fender flare kits you can bolt on if you want a really wide rear tire to not poke out as much.

Note that the fastest 0-60 cars have lots of torque (only corvette z06 and hellcat have more torque than a 10 or 11 psi supercharged Mustang GT) and 4-wheel drive to get better traction. You can still beat them on the street with wide enough rear tires and lots of extra boost. Some guy at work today sent me a video link showing a Tesla P100D beating a foxbody mustang. I replied with a link showing him a CTS-V and a 2013 mustang beating a P100D at the track. The P100D has over 900 RWTQ on launch, but the torque drops rapidly starting around 50 MPH. Note torque naturally decreases with higher wheel speed as you change your gears. When they dyno a mustang for torque, they do it in 5th gear with 3.73 gears. Therefore, the torque numbers you get are much less than if they dynoed the car in first gear. There is some chance the torque on a SC mustang is close to 900 in first (0-30MPH), but I didn't see anybody try to measure this. So if you can get a race with a new Tesla from a rolling start around 50 MPH, you have a good chance at beating them as you increase in speed. The problem is you can't get much traction in first from 0 to 30 MPH on summer tires on asphalt. The basic 10 to 11 psi supercharged mustang GT does around 500 RWTQ measured in 5th gear (over 100MPH). Some tuning and maybe new fuel injectors/BAP with E85 or octane boost brings that up to 600 RWTQ. A $160K base price 911 porsche turbo has 580 HP / 553 TQ. Since there is a 15% difference between the flywheel HP/TQ you see advertised by the vehicle manufacturers and the actual RW HP/TQ measured, just multiply the advertised values by 0.85 to get the actual rear wheel values. So the new top of the line porsche only has 493 RWHP / 470 RWTQ. A supercharged mustang beats that easily. It's the weight difference and shift time that you also need to overcome (hence the 10-speed auto might compensate for some of the shift time difference). Note the P100D has 10" wide front x 2 and 10.8" rear x 2 wheels. That's a total of 41.6" of tire width on the ground. The widest I can fit at the moment with my 11.5" wide rear wheels is only a total of 27.6" of tire on the ground for acceleration. If I also use sticky tires on the street, my 27.6" wide is probably equivalent or better than a Porsche/Tesla summer 41.6" wide tire. So if I wanted to beat a P100D 0-60 2.3 second time on the street, I'd go with sticky tires, a sticky surface (if possible such as smooth concrete) and possibly extra boost.

I've seen heavily modded cars (typically weighing much less than the ~4000 lbs of car we have - I'm including the weight of the SC) hitting 180 MPH in 4 seconds. That implies a 0-60 time of way less than 2 seconds and the acceleration g-force up to the end of the run is fairly constant. They are making well over double the HP and TQ the fastest production cars make. The rear wheels they use are sticky tires on a somewhat sticky surface. They use powerglide transmissions, tube chassis, and weigh between 2000 and 3000 lbs. That's really going down the road of useless 'other' than a track car in my opinion. As far as fully functional cars like the mustang, porsche, corvette, and tesla, I wasn't sold on Tesla since the P100D costs 134.5K base price, needs 8 or 9 hours to charge, and the motors can't be upgraded. My mustang cost $42K for almost a base model with a supercharger (+ dealer fee + tax, tag, title). The 911 turbo costs more than the tesla and should be similar (or possibly worse) in acceleration to my car on a sticky surface (after a good tune, sticky tires, and slightly higher boost). Since my car weighs more, only has two wheels to accelerate with, and shifts a little slower, I need a bit more power and wider rear tires on the street to compensate. So the Mustang is still the best deal for the money, but you need a few basic changes to compete including paying for new wheels/tires (ideally slicks), a custom tune, and not drive your car in wet/snowy conditions with slicks if you want good 0-60 times like the $100K+ sports cars. I also am almost sure that the wider you go in summer tires, the higher chance of slipping in the rain as the water has no where to go on the inner tire grooves, so be extra careful on turns in the rain with extra wide tires. This sounds counter-intuitive, but if you don't want the rear end of your car to fishtail around, don't accelerate on wet roads during even a slight turn at high speeds or you might not recover. Those wide summer wheels only hold extra well in dry conditions, in wet conditions, they hold worse than tires not as wide in my opinion. If you only care about 60 MPH to 100 MPH times (on the street, this is getting much more dangerous depending on other drivers around you), you can just keep extra wide rear summer tires on your car all the time (like I do) and still beat just about all other cars knowing your car was cost much less than typical sports cars and exotics. You can also get cheaper repair parts for your car and service is cheaper.

If you want to really be faster than the 911 turbo and P100D in 0-60, you may also consider gutting the car (seats, airbags, replacing hood/trunk with carbon fiber) for weight reduction. Then, you need much less power/torque to get a good 0-60 time. Before I bought my new 2017 GT a month ago, I was 'very' close to getting a 2013 viper instead, but the viper didn't have any warranty and the required back seat I need for a child. Viper forced induction was much higher in price than the Mustang. Buying a mustang gives you better options for less money in my opinion. Although, on 2018+ models, the prices seem to be rising for the base model as well as for the same options on a 2017. Try to get a good deal on a 2017 while you still can

Edit:

I found a sample dyno graph of torque versus gears. Even though the P100D dyno graph shows 900 torque from 0 to about 50 MPH, my supercharged mustang should easily have more torque at these speeds than the best tesla they have.

Beautiful explanation

 

[djcodeman]

Bump! If anyone has more solid numbers for 0-60. Don't have a track near me. I'm pretty much just a spotlight racer...

And save up for a 911?! That's quite a bit more expensive than a supercharger lol.

Get a dragy! My 0 to 60 is terrible, I'm riding nitto 555g2s in the rear and they don't hook. My 0 to 60 in my 2015 2300 roush is 6.0s. I expect once I put on nitto 555r2 or something stickier I should be around 4s, with quarter mile in the 11s

 

[kapiteinlangzaam]

Roush P2, 625 WHP, 6MT transmission 3.73 diff.

4.33s street tyres on the street is my best (with Dragy). 4.08 with a 1ft rollout.

With stickier tyres under 4s would be possible.

EDIT: Just realised thats a 0-100 (0-62mph) so im guessing you can take a 10th off those times.

 

[AZ18yote]

Get a dragy! My 0 to 60 is terrible, I'm riding nitto 555g2s in the rear and they don't hook. My 0 to 60 in my 2015 2300 roush is 6.0s. I expect once I put on nitto 555r2 or something stickier I should be around 4s, with quarter mile in the 11s

The g2s won't hook NA power even. The r2s are a night and day difference and can even handle dd / rain which for a DR is not common.

 

[Firsttexan]

Anyone know the 0-60 for the stage 2 roush supercharger?

Are you talking automatic or manual? How about rear end gearing?

 

[djcodeman]

Are you talking automatic or manual? How about rear end gearing?

Manual, 3.73

Sponsored