stock 0-60MPH times???

[RoadWarrior222]

Hi folks,

Anyone know where to find stock 0-60 times? Wondering what it should be for an 88 Voyager.

Also, I found a online calc for 0-60mph to quarter mile times a while back and now I've lost it, anyone know of it, or another?

My van is running after a bit of a layup, fixed up the front end now, got in the MP shift kit mods to the VB, added a line pressure mod, got about 15% over stock I figure. Did the S spring LSD mod, put in sidegapped, lower resistance plugs. ~5.8k (R44XLS) vs 12-30K of some types, have 2.5 inch cat and sound fx muffler on it, which technically is an upgrade since stock was all 2.25 I think. Timing set "so it sounded good" LOL a while back the dizzy was loose, I set it by ear, been that way ever since. Anyhoo, as you see nothing really reckoned to get big HP, has 52mm TB which is stock on the 88 but it's on the oldskool plenum.

So did a couple of blasts from a standstill and seemed to be getting about 10 seconds 0-60 time, this is with a full interior (3 rows) power everything A/C van, 200lb driver, full tank and at least 100lb worth of crap (battery chargers spare fluids, tools, parts...) kicking around in it. So I figure it's got to be weighing a minimum of around 3600lbs. This is also a "floor the gas and go" launch, not powerbraked. Changes great, nice and firm, got good traction...

So, while I figure I "might" have gained 5 hp in drivetrain efficiency with recent mods, I didn't expect anything special. Anyhoo, messing around with some calcs, seems to indicate that about 165HP would be expected at the crank to get 10 second 0-60s with 3600lb... just surprised me a bit..... yeah I know, benchracing.....

Anyhoo what should the stock 0-60 and quarter mile times be for 3.0 1st gen vans?

RW222

[Ondonti]

stock 3.0 cars (not van) are supposed to be some BS 0-60 of 9.9 seconds...which is bs.

[roguetrip]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ondonti stock 3.0 cars (not van) are supposed to be some BS 0-60 of 9.9 seconds...which is bs.

i thought it was 7.7 or 7.8 seconds for most 3.0 cars. Now i'm gonna have to look it up

EDIT: I'm finding around 8.9 seconds for the 3.0 cars

I would of thought 10-11seconds for a van though.

Dunno how good of a source this is but anyways:
all cars all years 0-60 and 1/4mile time - Ultimatecarpage.com forums

Quote:

Dodge Year | Make | 0-60 | 1/4 1983 Dodge 600ES 11.8 18.5 1995 Dodge Avenger 10.0 17.1 1995 Dodge Avenger ES 9.3 17.1 1974 Dodge Challenger 318ci 9.6 16.9 1982 Dodge Challenger 12.1 18.4 1968 Dodge Charger, Auto, 4.8, 13.5 (C&D Nov '67) 1973 Dodge Charger SE 440ci 7.4 15.2 1977 Dodge Charger 400ci 11.8 17.4 1982 Dodge Charger 2.2 10.1 N/A 1983 Dodge Charger - Shelby 10.0 17.5 2006 Dodge Charger SRT-8 5.0. 13.5 (MT Dec.'05) 1972 Dodge Colt Wagon 16.7 21.3 1974 Dodge Colt 13.4 18.9 1974 Dodge Colt GT N/A 19.4 1977 Dodge Colt 1600 14.5 19.8 1979 Dodge Colt Hatchback 10.4 N/A 1980 Dodge Colt RS 11.1 18.1 1984 Dodge Colt Vista 13.2 19.0 1986 Dodge Colt Turbo 9.2 16.8 1974 Dodge Coronet 360ci 9.5 16.6 1965 Dodge Dart GT 273ci 8.2 16.9 (C&D Feb '65) 1973 Dodge Dart Sport 318ci 8.8 16.7 1986 Dodge Daytona Turbo I 8.6 16.4 (allpar.com) 1987 Dodge Daytona Turbo II 7.6 15.8 (allpar.com) 1990 Dodge Daytona ES 8.4 16.2 1993 Dodge Daytona IROC R/T 6.3 14.8 1993 Dodge Intrepid ES 8.8 16.5 1994 Dodge Intrepid 10.3 17.5 1998 Dodge Intrepid 8.9 16.7 2000 Dodge Intrepid R/T 7.8 16.0 2005 Dodge Magnum R/T AWD 5.9 14.5 (C&D Aug '05) 2005 Dodge Magnum SRT8 5.1 13.6 (C&D Sept '05) 1995 Dodge Neon Sport Coupe 8.0 16.2 1996 Dodge Neon Highline 9.1 16.8 1998 Dodge Neon R/T 7.5 15.9 2000 Dodge Neon R/T 7.7 16.4 2000 Dodge Neon ES 8.8 16.9 2001 Dodge Neon R/T 7.6 16.1 1985 Dodge Omni GLH 9.4 17.2 1986 Dodge Omni GLH Turbo 8.1 16.2 1986 Dodge Shelby GLHS 6.5 14.8 1987 Dodge Shelby GLHS 6.7 14.9 1987 Dodge Shelby CSX 7.0 15.4 1991 Dodge Spirit R/T 6.5 15.0 1992 Dodge Spirit ES 11.0 17.9 2003 Dodge SRT-4 5.6 14.1 2004 Dodge SRT-4 5.3 13.9 2005 Dodge SRT-4 6.0 14.4 (MT Dec '05) 1991 Dodge Stealth ES 7.1 15.6 1991 Dodge Stealth R/T Turbo 6.0 14.5 1992 Dodge Stealth R/T Turbo 5.7 14.2 1995 Dodge Stratus ES 9.4 17.0 2001 Dodge Stratus R/T 7.4 15.7 2002 Dodge Stratus R/T 8.7 16.7 2003 Dodge Stratus R/T 7.2 15.9 1992 Dodge Viper RT/10 4.8 13.1 1993 Dodge Viper RT/10 4.5 13.2 1996 Dodge Viper RT/10 5.0 13.2 1997 Dodge Viper GTS 4.0 12.2 1998 Dodge Viper GTS 4.1 12.2 1998 Dodge Viper RT/10 4.1 12.3 2001 Dodge Viper GTS ACR 4.3 12.6 1996-2002 Viper Hennessey Venom 1000TT 2.3 9.52 2003 Dodge Viper SRT-10 3.9 11.7

[Ondonti]

do we se how BS those numbers are

spirit ES
11 seconds 0-60 and 17.9 1/4

daytona ES
8.4 seconds 0-60 and 16.2 1/4

I would put money on the spirit beating the daytona in the 1/4 if they are both auto trans. stock for stock

Avenger ES is also a lot slower then a spirit ES but those fake numbers would disagree

[acclaim200hp]

my acclaim with intake,exhaust and 52mm tb on 16inch wheels ran a 16.7
1/4 mile

[Ondonti]

josh and I both went 16.1's in our spirits with just 52mm tb and stock exhaust and crap tires. Him on 3 speed me on 4 speed auto.

Your car must be a bit sick or your 60' is bad.
Anyways stock spirits are like 16.3-16.7 second cars near sea level with good driver.
Daytonas are about the same or slower (with auto trans) because they are heavier.
And I dont really think 5 speeds are faster unless the person with the auto is not brake torquing @ the line and launching aggressively. Trap speeds will be lower with the auto...but thats not 0-60 :P

[irocelectric93]

Beg to differ about weight brent. Daytonas def arent heavier than spirits/acclaims. Ive had both....both 3.0s. Ive had a 5 speed and auto daytona and auto 3.0 acclaim. Speed and performance wise the 2 auto 3.0s being the acclaim and daytona are about the same. That was before i added a ported plenum, throttle body and 3' exhaust to the auto daytona. Grant it this is all street wise...nothing at the track but still it was pretty noticable. Daytonas weight in around 2800-3000 which is ...really close to spirits and acclaims but id still rather have a daytona any day of the week.

[acclaim200hp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ondonti josh and I both went 16.1's in our spirits with just 52mm tb and stock exhaust and crap tires. Him on 3 speed me on 4 speed auto. Your car must be a bit sick or your 60' is bad. Anyways stock spirits are like 16.3-16.7 second cars near sea level with good driver. Daytonas are about the same or slower (with auto trans) because they are heavier. And I dont really think 5 speeds are faster unless the person with the auto is not brake torquing @ the line and launching aggressively. Trap speeds will be lower with the auto...but thats not 0-60 :P

i had some wheel spin on every run (that i 4got to mention)

[Ondonti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by irocelectric93 Beg to differ about weight brent. Daytonas def arent heavier than spirits/acclaims. Ive had both....both 3.0s. Ive had a 5 speed and auto daytona and auto 3.0 acclaim. Speed and performance wise the 2 auto 3.0s being the acclaim and daytona are about the same. That was before i added a ported plenum, throttle body and 3' exhaust to the auto daytona. Grant it this is all street wise...nothing at the track but still it was pretty noticable. Daytonas weight in around 2800-3000 which is ...really close to spirits and acclaims but id still rather have a daytona any day of the week.

Sorry, a 93-95 spirit is lighter because they have NO options available
Im sure the 90-92 spirits (and ES) are a bit heavier like the daytonas.

[irocelectric93]

Well it goes the same fore daytonas.....less options equals lighter for the most part. Not much lighter but lighter none the less. Still though....id rather drive a daytona for my daily driver. Ive always liked the way they looked personally. I mean brent youve already proven that a spirit can throw down good times though. Im not arguing that. Daytonas are heavy for a two door car but....they arent all that small really. I know my 93s arent too much smaller than my buddies 02 mustang gt. The Doors themselves are long and all steel....which means heavy....and thats just the doors.

[Ondonti]

i really dont know much about the v6 daytonas...just that the 16v r/t's usually have tons of options and are pretty piggish.

I almost bought a iroc v6 in 2002 but the guy was asking 6k for a 140k mile 91 that needed the valve guides changed soon. I offered 3k :P no deal.

[irocelectric93]

3k still would have been too much. Bought my 93 iroc v6 with 79,000 original miles on the 3.0 for 2200 bucks. No valve guide problems ever. It blew a head gasket at like 93000 or so. I put it new valve guides then so i wouldn't have the problem later. i think i have 103,000 now.

[CoolV300C]

The site says a 92 Sundance/Duster is 8.4 Does that sound more like it? And 16.3. If its a Duster, that would be the 3.0 I believe.

[irocelectric93]

a 3.0 duster would go faster to 60 than 8.4 for sure at least IMO. My iroc daytona is faster than that.

[Ondonti]

yeah bs again.
3.0 duster will blow doors off a daytona ES or the spirit v6's.

Sounds like magazine racing where dodge wants the daytona to perform better then the duster because it is the sportier model.
Duster is just so much lighter. I dont really know how it compared to the shadow v6 but ive always seen better times from dusters. might just be more people race their dusters and mod then.