So, with the SE being around 100KG heavier, does anyone know how detrimental this is to performance?
Were the official Rover performance stats taken from a non SE car to portray the 260 in the best possible light?
Printable View
So, with the SE being around 100KG heavier, does anyone know how detrimental this is to performance?
Were the official Rover performance stats taken from a non SE car to portray the 260 in the best possible light?
Isnt it...
6.2 non SE
6.7 SE
thought the brochures said the same for both? But the extra weight cant help much?
:cool:
So that begs the question what if I strip the car down to a bare shell and drivers seat?Quote:
Originally Posted by SH4RKY
Just how much weight could be removed?
what would that do to the 0-60 times and for that matter the MPG?
plastic windows, carbon fibre bonnet and boot lids, remove interior.... gotta get the weight down to about sub 1400. Scooter mentioned the 500 is about 1500, but that has a Full FIA roll cage which is err 'quite' heavy :)
165bhp/tonne with 260bhp and 1.6 tonnes....
200bhp/tonne with 260bhp and 1.3 tonnes....
250bhp/tonne with 400bhp and 1.6 tonnes....
Supercharger is probably still the most comfortable way of getting more power! haha
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith
Who begs for that question? Let's face it, if you wanted outright power and speed you wouldn't buy a 260...
...however, if you are after understated power, unassuming presence, great driver's car and ultimate Q factor, then...
given the lardy nature of any ZT I don't think 100kg would make much noticeable difference. I doubt the performance times given by Rover anyway, I've always thought them a little on the generous side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by obiwan
Completely agree, ultimate performance was never the underlying reason to buy
No of course, but where do those performance figures quoted above come from?
6.2 vs 6.7 is certainly quite a difference, and as such I think I would prefer a non SE if they were accurate.
Just get a an SE with an accufab and that difference will be nothing if not the other way round.
This doesn't really address the SE Vs non SE question but I came across the attached in the mechanics manual.
Apparently you can do a driver performance slimming course.
0.05 secs for every stone you loose:~
Just enjoy the car:D
50-70 in 4th in 5.9 :eek: surely a mistake? my diesel ZT takes that long to doQuote:
Originally Posted by obiwan
50-70 in 5th,if this is a true figure how long does it take to do 50-70 in 5th?
Your diesel ZT can get from 50 to 70 in 5th quicker than it can do it in 4th:shock:jaw:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by rolled1
Me thinks you've either something wrong with your car or it ain't a standard ZT oil burner.
50-70 mph in 4th: ZT CDTi = 8.0 sec; ZT 131 CDTi = 6.8 sec; ZT 260 = 5.5 sec.
Ah...I didnt mention it doing 50-70 quicker in 5th than 4th,BUT it does 50 -70 in 5th as stated in 6secs, 50-70 in 4th is slightly quicker,the fact the diesel doesnt rev very high doesnt help in 4th,over 60 in 4th its just screaming to be changed up,nothing really special about mine,like most diesel ZT owners who read the forums you soon realise a few cheap mods release a lot more power,bigger air intake,egr bypass,better air filter and best of all roverrons tuning box,only 150-160bhp but almost as much torque as the 260 and 45mpg easy,still want a 260 though,just for the noise :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajay
Easy - get one of these https://www.two-sixties.co.uk/mgoc26...ead.php?t=5781Quote:
Originally Posted by rolled1
????????????? cant get access to that :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragman
Sorry try this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9XAC-BvUyo
I've always liked the idea of that keith - a stipped out street racer. I'd do it if she didn't moan, but i just know she would.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith
Surely it would improve the mpg as well.
...and there was me thinking that at a supposed 300Nm at 1000rpm, the 260 matched the CDTi at its peak :rolleyes:.Quote:
Originally Posted by rolled1
What does your breathed on CDTi pruduce at 1900rpm ?
My 75cdt has been 'breathed on' and is close on the torque feel of the V8 I would say. But the thing is though it is close the V8 seems limitless where as the cdt is still wheezing at about 115 to 120mph. I've got the ronbox, airfilter and a slightly adjusted air inlet.
And running on tractor fuel :~Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim
hopefully not the red stuff!Quote:
Originally Posted by VMax1000
:cool:
Even that is 80p per litre round here (at a commercial pump) we do pay (slightly) less on the farm
Do we have to talk about diseasel. I get enough of that tripe on mg .org. Thought i was safe in here lads.:(
Could always talk about big cylinder diesel, you know, do it like the yanks?
Oh Yeah :D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B-nU2qj580
edit -
Sorry, lets keep this V8 related shall we? ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_vki...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9A0y_...eature=related
I went for the non SE, as I have a history with Rover/BL etc and really like their cars, but they just didn't develope them.
As such I thought that all of the toys on the SE would probably be a liability.
However I think that from this forum, that this is probably not the case?
My second reason was that I also wanted the lighter car. After stripping weight from my Mustang It really makes a massive difference to not only the acceleration but also handling, brakeing, MPG. It's just like free horespower.
I also feel that the non SEs are not exactly Popular plus spec. But I must admit that I have added leather seats, electric rear sunblind. And I am in the proccess of adding electric rear windows and the Chinese double din head unit.
Regards,
SJR