Top Speed Explained

[Brind]

Excellent info!

http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/topspeed.htm

[zentac]

Here is a really good top speed Calculator from Quaife should tell you what the theoretical top speed of the VR4 is if you know the gear ratios.

Top speed Calculator (http://www.quaife.co.uk/downloads/QSpeedCalc.exe)

[enigma]

Ok......here goes!

Gearbox:- Mitsubishi Galant VR4
Tyre:- 225/45 x 16
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Top Gear gives 25.608 MPH/1000 RPM and a top speed of 179.259 MPH at 7000 RPM

Engine speeds in top gear:-
30 MPH = 1171 RPM 40 MPH = 1562 RPM 50 MPH = 1952 RPM 60 MPH = 2343 RPM
70 MPH = 2733 RPM 80 MPH = 3124 RPM 90 MPH = 3514 RPM 100 MPH = 3905 RPM

Top Speed in 1 gear = 34.584 MPH
And changes into 2 gear at 3800 RPM dropping 3200 RPM
Top Speed in 2 gear = 63.704 MPH
And changes into 3 gear at 4836 RPM dropping 2164 RPM
Top Speed in 3 gear = 92.216 MPH
And changes into 4 gear at 4926 RPM dropping 2074 RPM
Top Speed in 4 gear = 131.038 MPH
And changes into 5 gear at 5117 RPM dropping 1883 RPM
Top Speed in 5 gear = 179.259 MPH
************************************************** ****************************************

[enigma]

or for 7250 redline

Gearbox:- Mitsubishi Galant VR4
Tyre:- 225/45 x 16
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Top Gear gives 25.608 MPH/1000 RPM and a top speed of 185.661 MPH at 7250 RPM

Engine speeds in top gear:-
30 MPH = 1171 RPM 40 MPH = 1562 RPM 50 MPH = 1952 RPM 60 MPH = 2343 RPM
70 MPH = 2733 RPM 80 MPH = 3124 RPM 90 MPH = 3514 RPM 100 MPH = 3905 RPM

Top Speed in 1 gear = 35.819 MPH
And changes into 2 gear at 3936 RPM dropping 3314 RPM
Top Speed in 2 gear = 65.979 MPH
And changes into 3 gear at 5008 RPM dropping 2242 RPM
Top Speed in 3 gear = 95.509 MPH
And changes into 4 gear at 5102 RPM dropping 2148 RPM
Top Speed in 4 gear = 135.718 MPH
And changes into 5 gear at 5300 RPM dropping 1950 RPM
Top Speed in 5 gear = 185.661 MPH
************************************************** ****************************************

[zedy1]

really need to put one on a test

any volunteers?

[enigma]

I'll do it.....but I would prefer it not to be on the public highway occifer!

[zedy1]

forgot that need a place anyone knows of one could have a meet too

[enigma]

Just your private test track, dear!!!!
Mrs BDA

[Kieran]

Oh god, she's at it again!

Dave, Sort it out!!

[zentac]

I dont think you will ever hit the top speed unless you put it on a rolling road, due to wind resistance. Im guessing that the VR4 is derestricted in the same way as the FTO which means that the restriction is simply move from 180kmph to 180mph so thats your top speed. The 5 speed Tiptronic FTO is geared to 205mph, weve had 180mph out of one on a rolling road with more than 2000rpm to go, but the limiter hit in.

[zedy1]

is that with a standard auto gearbox

[zentac]

Yeah, the FTO changed from a 4 speed Tiptronic INSERT INTO post VALUES (Auto) to a 5 speed Tiptronic in 1997.

[richieelliott]

The top speed limiter is 150 i have hit it several times its not nice my mate was very close behind as the needle span of its own accord to 145 shat my pants

[SNWMAD]

How come then the needle on my car carries on over the 180kmh line and govnerns at around 200kmh.
Also how do i get rid of the speed governor. eg. get to 250

[Stezie]

really need to put one on a test

any volunteers?


I have a mate that won't need to think twice about doing it! :drummer: He has a GTO and we managed to get the speedo to show over 170mph, /Hmmm BUT the GPS registered 145mph(only!!! :zzz: ). Then we ran outta hill!

He's a mad man, he only put new discs and pads int he night before and thats how he considers bedding them in!

/wall /wall

[Wodjno]

he only put new discs and pads int he night before and thats how he considers bedding them in!

/wall /wall

Is there any other way ?? :inquisiti :thinking: :uhoh:

[d3x]

managed 158mph last week in the vr4 with some push left. I reckon 170 can be had quite easily..

[enigma]

I reckon you must have had a very long stretch of road!

I clocked 154 on th estraight at Bruntingthorpe and I had 400BHP on tap. Most others struggled to hit 140..............

I was at about 6300 RPM in top and had plenty more but no more road. I would say I could hit 170, but a standard VR4 will struggle around 150, just not enough power!

[d3x]

I reckon you must have had a very long stretch of road!

I clocked 154 on th estraight at Bruntingthorpe and I had 400BHP on tap. Most others struggled to hit 140..............

I was at about 6300 RPM in top and had plenty more but no more road. I would say I could hit 170, but a standard VR4 will struggle around 150, just not enough power!

Mate, all I've got is a good air filter and one of your decat pipes. The road was indeed long though. As I've now moved to Kent, I get to use the M20 on a regular basis. Now that particular M road has a really long straight section leading to junction 10. I was following a beemer 645 and wanted to see if I could keep up. HAd to admit it was a hairy experience and not one to try too often but the needle was sooo close to reaching 160.

[Axeboy]

Speedos are usually out by miles though.

Testing using cheapo GPS should do the trick... youll find the same as the poster a few above... 170 on speedo is really about 145/150

[enigma]

My speedo showed 162, but I was GPS recorded at 154.

[d3x]

Speedos are usually out by miles though.

Testing using cheapo GPS should do the trick... youll find the same as the poster a few above... 170 on speedo is really about 145/150

Everyone know's the speedo is out but surely not by that margine. I guessed it would be out by at most 10 mph...

[Nick Mann]

The size of the tyres and the wear of them will make a difference. I saw a VR4 with 205/50/16's (it looked wrong - the wheels left a bigger arch gap than normal!) so the wheels being smaller will change the speed of the car in any given gear. The car will be going substantially slower than it thinks.

[Axeboy]

Ive tested various cars and most are out by 10mph at 70/80mph.

At 150mph, who knows.


Daves difference above is very good... ive not tested my car yet though.

[WildCards]

Speeds are alloowed to be out by up to 10% according to the law :-policema and according to most manufacturers they are 6-7% fast. Which means Daves was out by 5%, so d3x's even at 10% inaccuracy means he was doing 142MPH, slightly more than double the legal limit mate, but it's ok cus you were just testing your car. /yes

[Siamblue]

what are the standard tyre sizes for the Legnum in 16"17" and 18" equiv?

Gary,

[bradc]

Siam - the standard size is either 205/55/16 or 225/50/16 depending on which spec you buy. The most common size upgrades would probably be:

215-235/45/17
225/40/18

[dogwagon]

Ive tested various cars and most are out by 10mph at 70/80mph.

At 150mph, who knows.


Daves difference above is very good... ive not tested my car yet though.

I heard that speedos were supposed to over read by 10% , so that car manufacturers could not be held liable for their customers speeding offences!
i have tested my VR4, Focus & Daihatsu Mira against my Sat Nav unit ... all over read by 10% ... but I put wider tyres on the Daihatsu, which also altered the sidewall height & therefore the wheel dia., within the Tolerances allowed ( according to Michelin Technical!!!) and the car's speedo is NOW as near as Dammit spot on against the GPS reading!!!

Mmmmm!

[bradc]

with my VR-4 a similar thing happened, with the 225/50/16 tyres on the speedo was optimistic, now with 235/45/17 tyres on, the speedo is bang on :)

Now why on earth do you own a Mira?

[stu1888]

i have a saab 9000 aero running over 300bhp, i had gps in the car and it showed 164, and ran out of road.

but the speedo was bending on the trip button.

i think almost all speedos are out by a margin, tho the faster you go the less accurate.

so i think i would trust gps more than any speedo, tho
better getting it timed with real timing gear at a circuit.
:afro:

[MarkSanne]

A few months ago me and my gf were travelling to Austria over the German autobahn and that was the first 250km/h (155mp/h) on the Pioneer GPS (AVIC-HD1BT). And then the doors/rubbers began to make such an air-suctioning noise that I backed off. I'm very, very sure the engine will reach at least upto 280km/h (174mp/h) in my VR2 as some of you call FWD VR4's. A couple of weeks ago we went to Germany again and this time my gf drove. At a quite straight piece of autobahn was where she put it to her personal record: 240km/h (150mp/h). This (still standard) engine has got so much more in it, just needs to fiddle with it I guess, she said. Yeah baby!

[foxdie]

I feel I should point out at this point that GPS systems aren't perfect, despite relying on an electronic transmission thats supposedly travels at the speed of light, its still vulnerable to atmospheric effects and other inefficiencies. Couple in other factors, possibly conspiracy-influenced, and standard civilian GPS systems are quoted as having an accuracy within 15 meters per fix.

A GPS unit normally calculates speed by measuring the difference travelled between two fixes, each fix tending to happen on average every 1Hz / 1 second (you can get faster systems, I picked up a 5Hz / 0.2 second one for 40 quid off ebay). If each fix is only accurate within 15 meters there is a possibility that the speed it calculates can have a margin of +/- 15 meters. Here is a funky cheaply drawn diagram, think of it as buying a newspaper to only read the comics ;)

http://trackmygps.co.uk/images/gpsaccuracy.gif

Example #1: One when flying back from Germany I had a TomTom 510 on my person, the pilot pipes up on the PA and says we're flying at 460 MPH, I geek out and turn the TomTom on and wait until it gets 8~ satellites, the speed was jumping between 475 and 490ish MPH, and it sure as hell didn't feel as if we were constantly accelerating and decelerating :)

Example #2: Whilst on a road convoy trip (me and a friend in a MG ZS 180+, another friend in a Scooby) to Madchester, the both of us decided to check how accurate our speedos and sat nav systems were, so we got into a straight line and kept the distance between the cars as fixed as possible, with the car in front with its needle square on 70 MPH. The car in the rears needle was reading about 68-69 MPH which to be honest isn't all that alarming for a ten year old car), but both GPS systems were reporting we were only going about 65 MPH each.

Example #3: There's a stretch of Bristol Road South (A38) heading in to Birmingham (just past the Longbridge factory) that has a nasty speed camera hidden behind a fire station warning sign (its a real bitch, because if you are going too quickly you don't spot it until its the last possible moment and you have to brake quite harshly to slow down), I've been past that numerous times with my Sat Nav on, I've got my needle to a shaving under 40 MPH (as thats the speed limit there) and other cars have been at the same speed, yet the Sat Nav would persistantly read that I was only going at around 35 MPH. I've tested this with both a TomTom and a separate bluetooth GPS receiver I use for a live car tracking project I made, and they both consistently report the same speed (give or take 1 MPH)


So I think the moral of my seemingly pointless banter :p is that GPS systems are great if you want to find where you are, but because they're not perfect I wouldn't put too much merit on their accuracy or predicted speed calculations ;)

[orionn2o]

I'd like to comment on your 3 situations foxdie.

Example 1. Fair point, GPS isn't that accurate with the speeds you were travelling. Its fair enough that with a system that doesn't update regularly enough that this would happen.

Example 2. I would suggest that both the car speedo's were wrong and you both were doing 65mph

Example 3. Again, Sat Nav is right, car speedo is wrong.

To sum up, Sat Nav systems do have glitches and are only designed to refresh at a specific speed which makes them more accurate at lower speeds than higher speeds. However over a constant distance a GPS system is much more accurate than any car speedo.

Oh and the comment:

"despite relying on an electronic transmission thats supposedly travels at the speed of light"

electronic transmissions in air DO travel at the speed of light. Thats basic physics. Of course this is different in other conductors such as copper cables etc :)

[MarkSanne]

@foxdie: And to add a forth point to my 'defence' ;) : my pioneer AVIC HD1BT does not only rely on GPS signals to measure speed; it also has an embedded 3D gyroscope (to measure e.g. de-/accelleration) and it links to the cars rev/speed wiring to calculate the closest possible figure. I think it produces an honest, very reliable readout all together. And if you still doubt: try keeping up with me and look onto your own speedo what that has to say. Oh wait, you probably have that speedo going upto only 180km/h max... ;)

[Nick Mann]

GPS can read slightly under your speed - AFAIK most systems don't take into account hills, they assume you are travelling straight and level. I would suggest the GPS is closer than the speedo in each case, but the true speed is likely to be between the two. If your GPS speed reading is not constant when your speed is, then don't believe it, but I have never seen my satnav do that.

[elnevio]

GPS can read slightly under your speed - AFAIK most systems don't take into account hills, they assume you are travelling straight and level.

Slightly is right! If you've got a good enough piece of road to do ridiculous speeds, then I guess we can assume that it's highly unlikely to have a gradient of more than 5%.

Dusting off the trigonometry skills and remembering Pythagoras' Theorem, I reckon that if you are travelling up or down a 5% incline at 150.00mph, the GPS will read 149.8124mph. :scholar: I reckon that's just got me an A-level pass in Maths!

Anyone disagree? Or want my calculation diagram?!:idea2:

[foxdie]

Oh wait, you probably have that speedo going upto only 180km/h max... ;)

Heh, needle goes up to 200km/h on the sportraks, shame I can't or won't take it faster than 150km/h (namely because it shakes like the san andreas fault at that speed!) :D

[foxdie]

Oh and to the rest of you, I didn't say GPS was totally inaccurate, I'm just saying its not 100% accurate ;)

Another example of "GPS Drift"... I left my GPS tracker enabled all day long (9am - 5pm) to test it, this is what the result plotted on Google maps was:

http://trackmygps.co.uk/images/gpsdrift.png

Crazytown ;)

[elnevio]

Haha. You sure you didn't take the GPS to the pub, and that the plot was a record of your journey home?

:D

[Nevman]

Example #1: One when flying back from Germany I had a TomTom 510 on my person, the pilot pipes up on the PA and says we're flying at 460 MPH, I geek out and turn the TomTom on and wait until it gets 8~ satellites, the speed was jumping between 475 and 490ish MPH, and it sure as hell didn't feel as if we were constantly accelerating and decelerating :)


Small comment on that one mate.
In the air you're actually do constantly accelerating and decelerating.
A little bit more info here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airspeed
To make it short, on the flying speeds the air resistance makes a lot of difference and theoretical "small" changes in wind speed / direction actually slows down or speeds up the plane hence the constant speed floating within 15MPH is possible.
Furthermore you wouldn't feel that speed difference at all @ that speed.

IMHO

[djb160]

And you know when your in a plane thats going through turbulance, well the bigger the plane the larger the ups and downs are even though they feel the same. say in a larger aircraft ech time you lurch downwards the plane could be dropping in the range of 400ft.

[Nevman]

True.
It's because the planes are continuously changing the true height due to different air pressures. the planes are not using above-the-sea-level heights. They flying on levels depended on the air pressure.
Too much to explain, if you're interested then look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_level

The power of Wiki :happy:

[Kenneth]

To be honest, I don't know much about how the GPS systems work... so this could be total bollox and I hope someone does know the truth of it.

It was my understanding that GPS receivers actually connect to at least 3 satellites. These 3 satellites are then used to find the exact distance (well, exact enough!) from each of them. Using the earth as another reference point, the exact location can be found in 3 dimensional space. If you move, and your position is again calculated in 3 dimensional space, then plotting the distance between those 2 points gives you the distance traveled.

Because GPS is 3 dimensional, changes in altitude are automatically taken into account. It would take no 'special' work to do this as it needs to make the same calculations to figure out where you are anyway.

This being the case, GPS receivers should calculate your speed regardless of your change in altitude.

Put it this way, if the GPS can see you turn left 10 degrees, there is technically no difference to it seeing you turn 10 degrees upwards.

[Nevman]

It won't see you turning upwards or downwards specifically because the position of the satellites is not changing in horizontal position. It may only notice 180 deg turning by rotating the map if it's sensitive enough.

[Kenneth]

It won't see you turning upwards or downwards specifically because the position of the satellites is not changing in horizontal position. It may only notice 180 deg turning by rotating the map if it's sensitive enough.

It is my understanding that GPS satellites work by giving the distance you are away from them. to stay the same distance away from any one point in space (where the satellite is) you could travel anywhere across a sphere.

any point on that sphere you would be the exact same distance from the satellite.
Add another satellite and you get a ring of points where both spheres intersect. You can move anywhere along that ring and be the exact same distance from both satellites.

Add a third satellite and you are left with 2 points you could possibly be and be the exact same distance from all 3 satellites. One of those points is going to intersect with or very close to earth. Since chances are you are not in space, it is assumed you are on earth.

These 3 distances allow you to plot your point in 3 Dimensional space which has no concept of up, down, left or right. This isn't exactly great for some situations (apparently altitude in relation to sea level isn't that accurate), but when you talk about speed (or distance traveled over time) I cannot see why it would not be pretty accurate.

[orionn2o]

You are right Kenneth, you can generally get 2D locations with 3 satellites and 3D with 4.

Of course the whole world will change when Gallileo is launched.

Sat Navs are a bit different to GPS systems too which is something to be aware of. A sat nav will try to connect you to a road even if you're in the middle of a field. That is because it believes cars should only be on roads. This also leads to inaccurate positions and speed readings

[bradc]

hmm, my mmcs does something funny there, it still keeps some kind of knowledge of what direction you're travelling in, and what speed you're going, but thinks it is around Tokyo. Hence every time I drive over one particular stretch of motorway in Auckland it thinks I'm driving through a golf course at 100kmh :D

[arcstrike]

mine is limited where can you have it exocised pref mids area but will travel

[Wodjno]

mine is limited where can you have it exocised pref mids area but will travel

Just takes a Snip of the correct wire /yes

[Ryan]

It is my understanding that GPS satellites work by giving the distance you are away from them. to stay the same distance away from any one point in space (where the satellite is) you could travel anywhere across a sphere.

any point on that sphere you would be the exact same distance from the satellite.
Add another satellite and you get a ring of points where both spheres intersect. You can move anywhere along that ring and be the exact same distance from both satellites.

Add a third satellite and you are left with 2 points you could possibly be and be the exact same distance from all 3 satellites. One of those points is going to intersect with or very close to earth. Since chances are you are not in space, it is assumed you are on earth.

These 3 distances allow you to plot your point in 3 Dimensional space which has no concept of up, down, left or right. This isn't exactly great for some situations (apparently altitude in relation to sea level isn't that accurate), but when you talk about speed (or distance traveled over time) I cannot see why it would not be pretty accurate.

That's right, I believe this is called triangulation?

[Eric]

Oh and the comment:

"despite relying on an electronic transmission thats supposedly travels at the speed of light"

electronic transmissions in air DO travel at the speed of light. Thats basic physics. Of course this is different in other conductors such as copper cables etc :)


A few things about that...

There are tons of things that can interfere with the signal. Solar flares, atmosphere condition, planes flying in the vicinity, ground based radar systems, space debris, weather, etc. In theory yes electronic transmissions travel at the speed of light but atmosperic deflection can change the accuracy.

Generaly most civilian GPS receivers are acurate within 5 mph but some can be more acurate depending on the satelites that are tracking it. To give you an idea the GPS tracking that several countries militaries use are accurate within 2 mph and those can be traveling at over mach.



Geekyness taking over /help must drink beer to kill brain cells and seem cooler..... :givemebee

[Archie]

planes drop 400ft and you don't notice!!?? Thats intense!!

[WizardKing]

planes drop 400ft and you don't notice!!?? Thats intense!!


You would if they were only flying at that height to begin with. :dizzy2:

[djb160]

only the big ones. A cessna doing that would probably disintegrate :)

[valmes]

2300 kg+450bhp+0.31cx = 201mph top speed???

Some numbers must be wrong... either Clarkson or VW...

[valmes]

Well, I guess I can't ask questions if I don't have VR-4 anymore... I'll get my coat.

[elnevio]

Well, I guess I can't ask questions if I don't have VR-4 anymore... I'll get my coat.
Definitely NOT true! :smart:


2300 kg+450bhp+0.31cx = 201mph top speed???

Some numbers must be wrong... either Clarkson or VW...
No, those figures don't quite appear to stack up. What car was he on about?

[Ryan]

Think he may be referring to the W12 Phaeton Nev...

[elnevio]

Think he may be referring to the W12 Phaeton Nev...
Hmm, the clue was in a) the weight, and b) valmes' profile! /dunce

[valmes]

I got it already... it can't be that fast... it has to be Bentley or W12 Nardo for that speed.

[bradc]

What is the max speed you've got to?

[valmes]

I did 260kph at -10C and on winter tires (rated at 190kph only).... sorry couldnt get myself to go any faster... yet. Road condition didn't allow to go any faster, not the car...

[Nevman]

260kph (over 160mph) @ -10C and you reckon that road condition did not allow to go faster?
No... Really??? Jeeez... are you some kind of professional stuntman or something?

[valmes]

260kph (over 160mph) @ -10C and you reckon that road condition did not allow to go faster?
No... Really??? Jeeez... are you some kind of professional stuntman or something?

Hmm.... as a matter of fact I am. :uhoh: Why? /bat /Nuuu jk

Well, 260 kph in Phaeton feels quite right, as opposed to 240 kph in Legnum VR-4 on the same road... maybe because of weight?

Although I miss those sub 4 seconds 0-60 mph starts...

[Ryan]

Must suck not having the car do what it said on the box :sigh:

[noddy]

Guys how do I bypass the japan fitted speed limit? I am new to the import scene. cheers noddy.

[Ryan]

Guys how do I bypass the japan fitted speed limit? I am new to the import scene. cheers noddy.

Cut the speed sensor wire going into the ECU. IT is a green and white cable with silver dots and is connected to pin 16 IIRC.

Yup - pin 16 it is, check this out:

http://www.clubvr4.com/forum/showpost.php?p=469373&postcount=3

[Johny]

question: is the top speed on my car the top speed theyve got it to or the speed its at, at 6000 rpm in 5th?

[bradc]

I don't know quite what you mean, but a gdi in 5th at 6000rpm would be at 289kmh and your car won't get anywhere near that!

[Johny]

well i read that the top speed is 220 kph lol

[1timeVR4]

Ive had 165 from a Legnum VR4, bottled it any further.

[lancerevo3]

on a standard engine i wouldnt think anymore than 150-155mph flat

[senja_86]

can be galant vr-4 with 2WD
http://exchange.goo-net.com/usedcars...100321001.html

[elnevio]

can be galant vr-4 with 2WD
http://exchange.goo-net.com/usedcars...100321001.html
No idea on the relevance to this thread, or the fact that you posted exactly the same in a For Sale thread too! Are you a spambot?

Besides, that's a VR-G, which has a GDI engine, and not the 6A13TT.