Maybe I'm old fashioned but since there is not much chance of reaching the top speed in an urban environment and because I don't frequent the drag strip often, the only thing that excites me is how quick I can get to 60 and how that compares to the car next to me. It's one of the main criteria when I go car shopping.

I use this site for comparing 0-60 times http://www.sportscarstandings.com/

 

0-60 is an odd one. I had a TTRS and it was supposedly as fast or faster than my V12 Vantage, except it didn't feel faster. My R8 V10 was for sure faster than my V12 Vantage, but it didn't really feel any faster on the street.

For street car, how fast a car is and how fast a car feels are not always in sync.

And for a track car, 0-60 is not all that relevant because you are never starting from a stand still. I just sold a. Cayman R that was not fast 0-60, but very quick on the track. To be honest the gearing on that car was more important than the 0-60.

Ultimately it has very little to do with the driving of cars, but everything to do with selling cars and magazines.

 

Completely agree. In gear /at speed acceleration, flexibility, power to weight, torque to weight all generally more helpful to gauging a car's performance than 0-60. Standing starts to higher speeds are probably more useful than 0-60 as well. And as you say gearing is very important: a car that drives well on a higher speed circuit may not fare as well on one with tighter corners, and similarly a car that is geared well for a circuit may not be a good road car, factoring in speed limits. IIRC, Harry Metcalfe of Evo was complaining a while back about gearing, saying how a lot of cars are now developed on the 'Ring, and as a result have gearing not well suited to most roads.

 

^^^ 0-60 places a great deal of emphasis on off-the-line traction. Rear-engined cars -- 911s -- have quicker 0-60 times than comparable front-engined rear-drive cars (like Astons) with similar power-weight ratios because the weight over the rear wheels lets them launch harder. The same is true for all-wheel-drive cars. That's pretty meaningless on the road. Quarter-mile speed is a better indicator of acceleration, IMO, because it puts less emphasis on the launch and tests a greater performance range.

 

I still race from light to light. Not against another car, but just because it's the only time the accelerator can touch the floor. Who cares what the standing mile is, that's easy to do on any freeway and yet it's go to jail time if there is a cop. I think Car & Driver actually publishes both numbers, 0-60 and 5-60, they call it a street start. It's all what makes you feel good on the street or track. A great track car will suck if it's slow on the straights and you have to wave by all the morons with big engines and no cornering speed. A fast car that's big and heavy may suck on a mountain road. I always laugh at the guys that spend all their time garage racing (or maybe it's internet racing now) and have never needed a new set of tires or brake pads.

 

That's the only time? Ouch. You must live in a very built up area...

 

Another key factor is whether the surface has been prepared. Some magazines won't even sweep away any debris or gravel in their efforts to be more "real world". This really can skew numbers.

Of course the AWD Audis are so good at transferring power to the road that often they feel slower than they are.