Is the 2.9s 0-60 time that is all over the net for the LM an actual tested time or only an estimate? The only official figures I can find for the LM are 0-60 in 3.9s and 0-100 in 6.7s as tested by Mclaren and witnessed by Car magazine (source http://autozine.kyul.net/index.html).

Also, the plaque at the Mclaren factory says 0-60: under 3 seconds, which seems a bit weird if there were an actual figure available.

I've got a poster that says it is about 3 seconds to 60. But Motor Trend tested it as 3.9 to 60. The 0-100-0 time was 11.5 seconds.

I just checked a few of the sites that had a 2.9 0-60, and each of them listed 6.7 as the 0-100 time, which says to me that they are misquoting the 3.9/6.7 figures.

Mclaren's own website has a 0-60 of 4.0 and a 0-100 of 6.7 from when they did the 0-100-0 record.

It seems most likely that it has only ever been tested at 3.9 (or 4.0) and 6.7, but as Mclaren predicts a possible sub 3 second time (or at least "about 3 seconds flat" time, people have taken some poetic licence and changed it to 2.9s.

Just another quick question: in the current edition of an Australian car mag called Wheels, it says that the LM's 0-100-0 time was done on cut slicks (I think that's what they called them - regardless they were referring to them as slicks that had some simple grooves added for street legallity). Can anyone confirm this or list which tires were actually used? I strongly doubt Wheels' statement.

The information i have seen for the F1 were the same 2.9-60mph. Yeah probably misquoting the times

I've always seen 0-60 in 3.1. 2.9 is new to me.

i've always seen 2.9 seconds for the LM. it seems believable to me too. the F1 has 627 HP while the F1 LM has closer to 680 HP. the F1 LM is lighter and the gearing is different since it was based off the F1 GTR. i believe 2.9 seconds is reasonable.

I agree - it sounds reasonable, however I don't believe it's actually a test result as such. I could be wrong, and if I am I would appreciate it a lot if someone found the source, however from my research I believe it is just misquoted data mixed with a little estimation :)

Yep, 2.9 for LM and 3.1 for the regular F1

The lower numbers are correct. Officially the LM can do 2.9sec 0-60 and the roadcar is normally accepted as 3.2sec 0-60, but I have seen tests at 3.1sec.

Good, i didn't think those sites were lying.

Originally posted by XOTech
The lower numbers are correct. Officially the LM can do 2.9sec 0-60 and the roadcar is normally accepted as 3.2sec 0-60, but I have seen tests at 3.1sec.

Out of interest, who did the testing for the 2.9? Is it a magazine or online where I can read up on it?

Thanks.

Online, http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/frame.mv?file=car.mv&num=351

The problem with 0-60 times is that it is a measure of traction. The limit of street tires is aroun 4.0 sec. Doesn't matter if you have 1000hp. So you have to test it in racing slicks to get a real time. This is why almost all "super" cars have a 0-60 around 4 sec. With slicks the times change alot.

I agree, although I think the figure is a little lower than 4 seconds, as the Mc F1 does 3.2, the Lambo Murcielago 3.6, etc.

I think 3.2 is _almost_ unheard of for RWD on street tyres, which is why the Mc F1 is so amazining (anything under 3.5s is AMAZING IMO), and sub 3 seconds _is_ unheard of.

I am not convinced that anyone has ever tested the LM at 2.9 seconds 0-60mph.

Originally posted by cujo_s13


I am not convinced that anyone has ever tested the LM at 2.9 seconds 0-60mph.


You should be, IMO XOtech is more reliable for F1 info than Mclaren themselves.

Well, the british Autocar magazine has tested a regular F1 with regular tyres and everything back in 93/94 (I have it somewhere I'm sure) and managed 3.2 seconds. The LM with a better weight/power ratio is probably even faster until they reach very high speeds when the wing slows it down.

Also remember that the F1 LM has straight-cut gears for faster shifting.