Quick: 0-60 times
Cars with bursting accelerations but maxes out at comparatively lower speeds

Or
Fast: make not be as quick off the line but gathers momentum and not only catches up but overtakes somewhere down the line.

Chris Harris video on the Tesla Vs the Porsche actually triggers my question but it’s been on my mind though. I always prefer fast as in Nigeria, I don’t have enough road to be pushing 220kmph.

On the other hand, some cars can be unforgiving when they catch up with you on the freeway and you watch helplessly as they give you space till they become a tiny dot or disappear altogether.

Quick is also good though especially around bends and traffic stops which happen more frequently. Let me hear choices abeg.

Side note: why do some say the 2007 Honda Accord v6 for example is a speed demon. A car with 0-100kmph of 7.3secs

Quick for me

popsy2:
Quick for me

Any reasons?

laivwire:

Any reasons?

Nigerian roads are riddled with potholes making it near impossible for vehicles to ply at cruise speed. You find that you use your break more often than one ought to. The incessant breaks puts vehicles that go "quick" at an advantage since they are able to return to speed in lesser time compared to "fast".

My opinion though.

The 3.0L V6 in the 03 to 07 Accord time is 0-60 in 6.5secs, faster than most Benz V6 in it's era reason why it is said to be a speed demon.

I prefer Acceleration compared to speed cause in real life and games, acceleration tops in uncontrolled environment in car racing.

It's only in a controlled environment that speed tops acceleration.

The Ford GT is a speed demon almost 350km/h for it's topspeed, but it failed woefully in the acceleration aspect so it's a bench warmer now in sports car lineup

Can't I have both?

mejai:
Can't I have both?

Oliver Twist

nurey:
The 3.0L V6 in the 03 to 07 Accord time is 0-60 in 6.5secs, faster than most Benz V6 in it's era reason why it is said to be a speed demon.

I prefer Acceleration compared to speed cause in real life and games, acceleration tops in uncontrolled environment in car racing.

It's only in a controlled environment that speed tops acceleration.

The Ford GT is a speed demon almost 350km/h for it's topspeed, but it failed woefully in the acceleration aspect so it's a bench warmer now in sports car lineup

@Bolded, I just learned that. I also did some comparisons. While The Accord 03- 07 had a top speed of about 209kmph, the BMW 04 - '10 reaches 249kmph. although there's a difference of 0.5 secs in their 0 - 60. Considering that while ignoring other considerations like maintenance and styling, I think I'll still go for the BMW because from takeoff the difference will be bumper to fender but at about 100kph and above, I'll begin to give that honda a lot of space.

Quick anytime anyday. I rarely go over 150km/hr these days but it's the hard acceleration up to that point that makes the car a joy.

nurey:
The 3.0L V6 in the 03 to 07 Accord time is 0-60 in 6.5secs, faster than most Benz V6 in it's era reason why it is said to be a speed demon.

I prefer Acceleration compared to speed cause in real life and games, acceleration tops in uncontrolled environment in car racing.

It's only in a controlled environment that speed tops acceleration.

The Ford GT is a speed demon almost 350km/h for it's topspeed, but it failed woefully in the acceleration aspect so it's a bench warmer now in sports car lineup

Actually, the speed demon is 2006-2007 Honda Accord V6 with a 0-60 of 5.8s. The 2005 has 6.5s while the 2003 has 7.1s. 2003-5 engine is J30A4 while 2006-7 is J30A5.

This car will dust even its own successors.

I agree with you on acceleration over speed. Its not like we have 200km/hr roads so acceleration is king. Once a car gives you a 1km gap with such acceleration, catching up is a suicide attempt in any Nigerian road.

Benz and BMWs of the same class will not keep up. Imagine a 2007 MB
C280 Sport doing 7.1s or a 2007 BMW 328i doing 6.0s. BMW has a chance but not Benz. To beat this accord you need a 330 or 335 BMW or C350 and above Benz.

laivwire:

Oliver Twist


@Bolded, I just learned that. I also did some comparisons. While The Accord 03- 07 had a top speed of about 209kmph, the BMW 04 - '10 reaches 249kmph. although there's a difference of 0.5 secs in their 0 - 60. Considering that while ignoring other considerations like maintenance and styling, I think I'll still go for the BMW because from takeoff the difference will be bumper to fender but at about 100kph and above, I'll begin to give that honda a lot of space.

The bolded speed is for race tracks, how would you get there on the highway. That makes that speed irrelevant on the street if the car cannot boast of a 0-60 time to beat its competition since the car runs out of space before it can unleash its true potential (above the 60km/h).

To catch up and even overtake, a car with a bad acceleration needs a long straight which BM will not get. The second advantage of the BWM (corners) will still be irrelevant since its not a race track where you expect to take on bends at 200km/h and the competition is expected to slow down for safety.

At 60km/h Honda is ahead. At 100km/h, you are starting to close the gap, at 160km/h you are catching up, at 180km/h you have caught up but run out of straight road. Any take off again, the Honda opens the gap again. You keep repeating the same thing but staying behind.

Acceleration is king in real life driving.

adanny01:


Actually, the speed demon is 2006-2007 Honda Accord V6 with a 0-60 of 5.8s. The 2005 has 6.5s while the 2003 has 7.1s. 2003-5 engine is J30A4 while 2006-7 is J30A5.

This car will dust even its own successors.

I agree with you on acceleration over speed. Its not like we have 200km/hr roads so acceleration is king. Once a car gives you a 1km gap with such acceleration, catching up is a suicide attempt in any Nigerian road.

Benz and BMWs of the same class will not keep up. Imagine a 2007 MB
C280 Sport doing 7.1s or a 2007 BMW 328i doing 6.0s. BMW has a chance but not Benz. To beat this accord you need a 330 or 335 BMW or C350 and above Benz.

Too close to call, on the streets? You guys are using magazine time in your analysis, this does not truly work on the streets...you have not factored in-gear acceleration...that 328i you mentioned 'can easily outrun' the accord. I said this because the gearing in that car is very good...tuned for sporty driving. The e46 330i too is a little rocket...I don't know how the Honda picks up speed between gears.
So the point is, all those cars are fast...to say that "Benz and BMWs of the same class will not keep up" is an overstatement.

yungboss:

Too close to call, on the streets? You guys are using magazine time in your analysis, this does not truly work on the streets...you have not factored in-gear acceleration...that 328i you mentioned 'can easily outrun' the accord. I said this because the gearing in that car is very good...tuned for sporty driving. The e46 330i too is a little rocket...I don't know how the Honda picks up speed between gears.
So the point is, all those cars are fast...to say that "Benz and BMWs of the same class will not keep up" is an overstatement.

These are times that professionals have actually test driven these cars and have taken average from different runs while controlling different variables to eliminate errors. These are not brand advertising times. Am sure its your biased mind that will cause you to say magazine time even when the truth is bare.

The reason I used only the 328i in comparison is because it has the same engine size to the Accord. 330i is a 3.5L engine while the accord is a 3.0L engine. Same reason I used the MB C280 instead of C350. Honda has 2 engines a 2.4L straight 4 and a 3.0L V6 while the MB and BM have well over 5 engines on each model. To compare, you need to pick the similar sized engine.

Gear ratio or not, the cars have been time tested outside brand testing facilities so you dont disregard "magazine times" because you feel it goes against your better judgement. Do your own research and find facts to counter the claims.

You can't 'speed' on Nigerian highways. Acceleration makes the difference.

adanny01:


These are times that professionals have actually test driven these cars and have taken average from different runs while controlling different variables to eliminate errors. These are not brand advertising times. Am sure its your biased mind that will cause you to say magazine time even when the truth is bare.

The reason I used only the 328i in comparison is because it has the same engine size to the Accord. 330i is a 3.5L engine while the accord is a 3.0L engine. Same reason I used the MB C280 instead of C350. Honda has 2 engines a 2.4L straight 4 and a 3.0L V6 while the MB and BM have well over 5 engines on each model. To compare, you need to pick the similar sized engine.

Gear ratio or not, the cars have been time tested outside brand testing facilities so you dont disregard "magazine times" because you feel it goes against your better judgement. Do your own research and find facts to counter the claims.

Hey bro,
You 're not correct in certain aspects. The 328 and the 330 both have same 3litre engine displacement; one has more horsepower.
I agree they have all been magazine-tested...
When i stated "on the streets", I meant reference to realistic conditions- what tyres do you have on?how well do you know how to operate the machine? are we picking up speeds at the same time e.t.c.
The 0 to 60 time is not constant, it is only an average (as you stated)..and perhaps will not be the same as what Car and Driver captured (especially)as the cars are over 10 years old...go on YouTube and see what I mean. There's a video where a stock 328i ran with 2006 accord v6 and you will not find such a vast margin in speed as you referenced.
That 328i has only 230hp...the 330i is a 255/268 3litre version of the same engine.
Accord or bmw running 5.8/6.0 Will not be the same everywhere and everytime especially after (over) 10years of operation.

Go on a closed strip, time your accord or bmw and launch, let's see how consistently you hit 5.8s. I'm stating my opinion as objectively as possible.

Quick acceleration through the low speeds is generally preferrable, but i ll prefer top end for cruise on long journeys.

I personally have run with a camry v6 (3.5l) when I had an e36 328i coupe (1996 MY- one of the quickest dated BMWs i have driven/had), I let him get to me at 180ish, punched it and we stayed relatively even with me having the slight advantage by extending the lead...
That car had only 190hp, on paper a 402m time of 14.8s...i also ran with an infiniti m35x...I had been in front, i throttled hard in such a manner that I never let the driver get past me till i arrived port harcourt...talking about driving in the speed range of 140km/h to 200ish.

yungboss:

Hey bro,
You 're not correct in certain aspects. The 328 and the 330 both have same 3litre engine displacement; one has more horsepower.
I agree they have all been magazine-tested...
When i stated "on the streets", I meant reference to realistic conditions- what tyres do you have on?how well do you know how to operate the machine? are we picking up speeds at the same time e.t.c.
The 0 to 60 time is not constant, it is only an average (as you stated)..and perhaps will not be the same as what Car and Driver captured (especially)as the cars are over 10 years old...go on YouTube and see what I mean. There's a video where a stock 328i ran with 2006 accord v6 and you will not find such a vast margin in speed as you referenced.
That 328i has only 230hp...the 330i is a 255/268 3litre version of the same engine.
Accord or bmw running 5.8/6.0 Will not be the same everywhere and everytime especially after (over) 10years of operation.

Go on a closed strip, time your accord or bmw and launch, let's see how consistently you hit 5.8s. I'm stating my opinion as objectively as possible.

My bad.

The 330i is a 3.0L Turbo charged engine. You still should not compare it with a naturally aspirated 2006 Accord. 328i is its mate but produces 215HP while accord produces 244HP. The accord has less weight at 3237 against BM's 3351lbs. This gives the Accord a clear power to weight ratio advantage.

That been said, when you ask what tires the Accord has, driver experience etc, these are variables which you have not even scratch the surface. We can start listing more, eg fuel level, passengers or extra load, tire pressure, wind direction and speed, altitude, atmospheric pressure, atmospheric temperature, humidity, track conditions, other mechanical issues with a specific car etc. If we continue listing these variables, there will never be a point where we will compare one car to another. But we have to, won't we? From the list you seem to believe that the accord will be driving on a low speed rated tires or having an inexperienced driver. That is wrong assumption from you.

"Magazine times" are tested by professionals who try to eliminate the effect of these variables. They take one car, empty the tank put a specific type and quantity of fuel, put their testing equipment in the car drive round the till car gets to operating temperature. Drive the car say 5 laps, take average time. Repeat the same process with same driver making sure all atmospheric conditions are almost equal.

What bewilders me is your insinuation that "magazine times" are unreliable. You just want to stick to a notion that BMW should just be faster than an accord.

When we do street comparison, we should assume all things being equal. Everything being equal, a 2006 Accord V6 should beat a 2006 328i based on facts available. Therefore, unless you have both cars to test yourself, i think you should accept it and not to make excuses.

If you think the accord will not hit 5.8s what makes you think a 328i will hit 6.0s? If you think accord has bad tires, think of the 328i with bad tires too! If you assume a 10yr old accord, assume a 10yr old 328i too!! If you think of a bad or good accord driver, ditto!!!

adanny01:


My bad.

The 330i is a 3.0L Turbo charged engine. You still should not compare it with a naturally aspirated 2006 Accord. 328i is its mate but produces 215HP while accord produces 244HP. The accord has less weight at 3237 against BM's 3351lbs. This gives the Accord a clear power to weight ratio advantage.

That been said, when you ask what tires the Accord has, driver experience etc, these are variables which you have not even scratch the surface. We can start listing more, eg fuel level, passengers or extra load, tire pressure, wind direction and speed, altitude, atmospheric pressure, atmospheric temperature, humidity, track conditions, other mechanical issues with a specific car etc. If we continue listing these variables, there will never be a point where we will compare one car to another. But we have to, won't we? From the list you seem to believe that the accord will be driving on a low speed rated tires or having an inexperienced driver. That is wrong assumption from you.

"Magazine times" are tested by professionals who try to eliminate the effect of these variables. They take one car, empty the tank put a specific type and quantity of fuel, put their testing equipment in the car drive round the till car gets to operating temperature. Drive the car say 5 laps, take average time. Repeat the same process with same driver making sure all atmospheric conditions are almost equal.

What bewilders me is your insinuation that "magazine times" are unreliable. You just want to stick to a notion that BMW should just be faster than an accord.

When we do street comparison, we should assume all things being equal. Everything being equal, a 2006 Accord V6 should beat a 2006 328i based on facts available. Therefore, unless you have both cars to test yourself, i think you should accept it and not to make excuses.

If you think the accord will not hit 5.8s what makes you think a 328i will hit 6.0s? If you think accord has bad tires, think of the 328i with bad tires too! If you assume a 10yr old accord, assume a 10yr old 328i too!! If you think of a bad or good accord driver, ditto!!!

You already have a notion about my comment hence you did not even read/understand my last paragraph...
Corrections:
The 330i has a naturally aspirated engine, the 328i puts out factory numbers of 230hp and 200lb ft of torque..

I do not discredit magazine times and I do not wish to stick to the notion that BMW is faster, rather you stated that the bmw and mercs of that era are no match for the 2006 accord v6- wrong sir.
The 2006 330i is a direct comparison to that car...and going by magazine times, it beats the accord by almost a full second upon completing the 400m stretch...
What I'm simply saying is this-

5.8s or 6.0s, 14.1 or 14.3s (even though most magazine tests put it in the 15s band)...these are close numbers which may not be noticeable in the hands of good drivers...throw in a g37 in the mix then you have that clear cut difference...
It's like comparing a 2010 g35/g37 to an e90 335i and someone goes on to say "the g37 does not match the 335i in performance- False.
They can go toe to toe...for such close numbers, magazine times may not reflect on true practical situations. My position from the beginning.

yungboss:

You already have a notion about my comment hence you did not even read/understand my last paragraph...
Corrections:
The 330i has a naturally aspirated engine, the 328i puts out factory numbers of 230hp and 200lb ft of torque..

I do not discredit magazine times and I do not wish to stick to the notion that BMW is faster, rather you stated that the bmw and mercs of that era are no match for the 2006 accord v6- wrong sir.
The 2006 330i is a direct comparison to that car...and going by magazine times, it beats the accord by almost a full second upon completing the 400m stretch...
What I'm simply saying is this-

5.8s vs 6.0s, 14.1 or 14.3s...these are close numbers which may not be noticeable in the hands of good drivers...throw in a g37 in the mix then you have that clear cut difference...
It's like comparing a 2010 g35/g37 to an e90 335i and someone goes on to say "the g37 does not match the 335i in performance- False.
They can go to to toe...for such close numbers, magazine times may not reflect on true practical situations. My position from the beginning.

My question to the bolded is why? Driver? BMW always has a better driver or what exactly? You emphasize of "a good driver" as if those who drive a Honda cannot drive. Is it that a Honda driver cannot just put the pedal to the meta?

I may be wrong about the 330i mixing it up with the 335i but considering your assertions, i went back to check. The 330i (manual transmission) did the 5.7s while the auto did woefully 6.6s.

Considering that Manual and Automatic of the same car had so much difference (fact), i just wonder why you didn't notice the accord is an Automatic? What is your basis for comparison really, cause I think we use different basis.

That 06-07 accord v6 beats 08-12 accord v6 in terms of speed. I’m guessing the 07 accord could have a better power to weight ratio than 08-12. I was very impressed when i drove it, but it has so much body roll and you have to slow down considerably when you approach a curve on the road. All you comparing c280/c300 and 328i with the accord, the accord will be first to 60mph and by the time they reach 90mph, both benz and bmw will begin to catch up, and its over for the honda if the road has even a single curve on it.

adanny01:


My question to the bolded is why? Driver? BMW always has a better driver or what exactly? You emphasize of "a good driver" as if those who drive a Honda cannot drive. Is it that a Honda driver cannot just put the pedal to the meta?

I may be wrong about the 330i mixing it up with the 335i but considering your assertions, i went back to check. The 330i (manual transmission) did the 5.7s while the auto did woefully 6.6s.

Considering that Manual and Automatic of the same car had so much difference (fact), i just wonder why you didn't notice the accord is an Automatic? What is your basis for comparison really, cause I think we use different basis.

Your answer to the bolded is this:

You don't just pick a bmw f90 m5 and an e63 amgS and think that because there is a 1 or 2 tenths of a sec difference between them (irrespective of which is faster) according to magazine test, the bmw will not match the Merc in speed or vice versa...
Or you pick a lexus is350 and an infiniti g37...you flip the magazine pages, evoke stats and see a 0.3 difference in the 0-60 or quarter mile times, then you have a virtual race winner and may want to relate it to reality...it doesn't always work.
I found a fault in your statement- that the bmw or mercedes of the era is no match for the 2006 v6 accord...this isn't entirely true. You perhaps got the power numbers wrong as evidenced in your earlier comments, Check the stats properly before you make statements...

Note: I never said anything relating specifically to a BMW driver being the better driver. I stated my opinion on a neutral basis

adanny01:


My question to the bolded is why? Driver? BMW always has a better driver or what exactly? You emphasize of "a good driver" as if those who drive a Honda cannot drive. Is it that a Honda driver cannot just put the pedal to the meta?

I may be wrong about the 330i mixing it up with the 335i but considering your assertions, i went back to check. The 330i (manual transmission) did the 5.7s while the auto did woefully 6.6s.

Considering that Manual and Automatic of the same car had so much difference (fact), i just wonder why you didn't notice the accord is an Automatic? What is your basis for comparison really, cause I think we use different basis.

6.6s? It is 6.7 on Edmunds and 6.3 on Motortrend...so it depends on which magazine you checked...this goes to prove what I'm saying...so believe anything you want...

yungboss:


Your answer to the bolded is this:

You don't just pick a bmw f90 m5 and an e63 amgS and think that because there is a 1 or 2 sec difference between them (irrespective of which is faster) according to magazine test, the bmw will not match the Merc or vice versa...
Or you pick a lexus is350 and an infiniti g37...you flip the magazine pages, evoke stats and see a 0.3 difference in the 0-60 or quarter mile times, then you have a virtual race winner and may want to relate it to reality...it doesn't always work.
[b]I found a fault in your statement- that the bmw or mercedes of the era is no match for the 2006 v6 accord...this isn't entirely true. [/b]You perhaps got the power numbers wrong as evidenced in your earlier. Check the stats properly before you make statements...

Note: I never said anything relating specifically to a BMW driver being the better driver. I stated my opinion or a neutral basis

You actually miss quoted me.

Benz and BMWs of the same class will not keep up.

These are my words.

Is a 2006 Accord 2.4L in the same class with a BMW 335i? 328 and 330 yes.

If i did say same "era", that would put the 2006-7 Accord against all BMWs of the 2006-7. Imagine me comparing a 2006 Accord 3.0L V6 with a 2006 BMW M5 5.0 V10.

It is your assumption that has taken you there not my comments which you misunderstood.

Secondly, you don't appreciate the effort the professionals who actually spent time, money and risked their life to give you and I an average time these cars perform on their tracks. You seem to say it is absolutely irrelevant without you being in say 3 or 4 of such cars yourself.

you flip the magazine pages, evoke stats and see a 0.3 difference in the 0-60 or quarter mile times, then you have a virtual race winner

. If you think its a virtual race, can you with facts tell us which car is better if you have never driven them. Why do you choose to dismiss the one who actually drove both cars on a race track and controlled the variables the way you would never ever have done. Do you have a race track to compare? If you dont, you should never compare cars cos you dont believe anyone other than you self believe.

Thirdly, you persistently made mention of a good driver as if that was the only variable thing needed to defeat the accord.

All I have been doing is to get you to logically look at the facts but no, i dont think you believe in facts, you cling to hear says better. A BMW is just a better car so you will never accept a Honda being faster.

I just lectured a friend some days ago who has for years refuse to eat Semolina but eats whole wheat meal saying the wheat meal is meant for people like him who have a family history with diabetes. The question i asked him was what is the Semolina and what is whole wheat meal? They are both the same thing from same plant. Semo is only the endosperm while whole wheat meal is the whole wheat seed. He doesn't like yams and prefers unripe plantain. The nutritional value says unripe plantain has even more carbohydrates than the yams he was running from. I left him in disbelief of the so may myths he had used to limit his diet while not checking the facts himself.

A lot of Nigerians just follow myths and I think you follow such myths.

yungboss:


6.6s? It is 6.7 on Edmunds and 6.3 on Motortrend...so it depends on which magazine you checked...this goes to prove what I'm saying...so believe anything you want...

Which one do you believe?

adanny01:


You actually miss quoted me.

These are my words.

Is a 2006 Accord 2.4L in the same class with a BMW 335i? 328 and 330 yes.

If i did say same "era", that would put the 2006-7 Accord against all BMWs of the 2006-7. Imagine me comparing a 2006 Accord 3.0L V6 with a 2006 BMW M5 5.0 V10.

It is your assumption that has taken you there not my comments which you misunderstood.

Secondly, you don't appreciate the effort the professionals who actually spent time, money and risked their life to give you and I an average time these cars perform on their tracks. You seem to say it is absolutely irrelevant without you being in say 3 or 4 of such cars yourself. . If you think its a virtual race, can you with facts tell us which car is better if you have never driven them. Why do you choose to dismiss the one who actually drove both cars on a race track and controlled the variables the way you would never ever have done. Do you have a race track to compare? If you dont, you should never compare cars cos you dont believe anyone other than you self believe.

Thirdly, you persistently made mention of a good driver as if that was the only variable thing needed to defeat the accord.

All I have been doing is to get you to logically look at the facts but no, i dont think you believe in facts, you cling to hear says better. A BMW is just a better car so you will never accept a Honda being faster.

I just lectured a friend some days ago who has for years refuse to eat Semolina but eats whole wheat meal saying the wheat meal is meant for people like him who have a family history with diabetes. The question i asked him was what is the Semolina and what is whole wheat meal? They are both the same thing from same plant. Semo is only the endosperm while whole wheat meal is the whole wheat seed. He doesn't like yams and prefers unripe plantain. The nutritional value says unripe plantain has even more carbohydrates than the yams he was running from. I left him in disbelief of the so may myths he had used to limit his diet while not checking the facts himself.

A lot of Nigerians just follow myths and I think you follow such myths.

Ok, I'm actually done with this thing goin on...I don't know what you understand by "Myth"...I wonder between the two of us on here who is propagating "Myth". Maybe you should go look at the definition again.
I understood what you stated from the first moment, you just cashed in on the error "era" in my comment to score some points but i had earlier exposed your weak points to explore the core.

The end.

Here you have it

adanny01:


Which one do you believe?

Let it slide, the truth of the matter is the German users don't like it one bit when the Japanese cars are a tad better than theirs. They won't accept by giving flimsy variable excuses from handling to stability to drivability.

They believe the price difference should justify theirs better and faster

nurey:


Let it slide, the truth of the matter is the German users don't like it one bit when the Japanese cars are a tad better than theirs. They won't accept by giving flimsy variable excuses from handling to stability to drivability.

They believe the price difference should justify theirs better and faster

Lol, it's still silly af to compare that Honda to a BMW. Trust me, after 60mph, the 330i will catch up to and completely destroy the Accord.

HeavenlyBang:


Lol, it's still silly af to compare that Honda to a BMW. Trust me, after 60mph, the 330i will catch up to and completely destroy the Accord.

What if it's a drag Race that is just ½ a KM and the BMW can't attain it's too speed? The only thing the BMW would destroy is its own Engine trying to catch-up the competition.

yungboss:


6.6s? It is 6.7 on Edmunds and 6.3 on Motortrend...so it depends on which magazine you checked...this goes to prove what I'm saying...so believe anything you want...

My closing statement.

There are 3 times above, all belong to the BMW.

If you were really interested in fair comparison, you will look at what Edmunds time for the accord is, what Motortrend time for the Accord is, then compare each of them to the BMW. You will even do more research but you are afraid of what you will find. If you criticize those who drove both cars extensively, what makes you sure you have an idea of the 2 cars?

You are just bent on discrediting any report with or without supporting facts that an Accord could perform better to an almighty BMW.

I so submit. Adios amigo.

nurey:


What if it's a drag Race that is just ½ a KM and the BMW can't attain it's too speed? The only thing the BMW would destroy is its own Engine trying to catch-up the competition.

Half a kilometre is 500metre- longer that the standard quarter of a mile.

This journalist shares the same sentiment i have been trying to pass across. My English writing isn't good enough.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.autoblog.com/amp/2016/09/02/zero-0-60-mph-performance-is-overrated/