• Sign Up! To view all forums and unlock additional cool features

    Welcome to the #1 Fiesta ST Forum and Fiesta ST community dedicated to Fiesta ST owners and enthusiasts. Register for an account, it's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the Fiesta ST Forum today!


Modified Ford Fiesta ST 0-60 Times

Messages
153
Likes
20
Location
Chicago
#1
Curious to see what 0-60 times have gotten to with the aftermarket finally shaping up for us owners.


Post times and supporting mods (if not in your sig) below.
 


Messages
15
Likes
0
Location
Stuarts Draft
#2
I'm curious too. I haven't read any track times about the Cobb Tuning Stages (1,2, and 3). I read all about HP and TRQ improvements but nothing on 0-60, 1/4 mile times, etc...
 


Messages
177
Likes
8
Location
Broomfield
#3
6 seconds with downpipe, Intercooler, intake on custom mountune e50mix. Mile above sealevel. Should be seeing mid 5's with my same mods at sealevel
 


ryst

Member
Messages
295
Likes
29
Location
Grand Rapids
#4
6.9 sec, stock with Cobb Stage 1

Haven't found a place with nice pavement (go figure, Michigan), but I think I could do a tiny bit better with some more traction in 1st.
 


Messages
27
Likes
0
Location
florence
#6
real torque and horsepower numbers and 0-60 times stock and modifided

6 seconds with downpipe, Intercooler, intake on custom mountune e50mix. Mile above sealevel. Should be seeing mid 5's with my same mods at sealevel
I read where an article did a stock 2014 Fiesta ST dynamometer test, and got 184 HP @ 5200 rpm at the wheels and 221 Ft. Lb.'s Torque at 2700 rpm's. The wheel torque they dynode was more than Ford advertised at the flywheel. And using 14% add on for the 184 wheel HP you get 209.76 HP totally stock. Mountune clams to have a 215 HP kit available, I bet that is rated at the wheels and not corrected HP numbers Either. 215 + 14% = 245.1 Horsepower at the crankshaft. Or maybe I went off my trailly on this Horsepower and torque thing?

Go figure 209 is about right where the stock turbocharged eco-boost 1.6 liter engine is running, So... Mountune is ratting the HP & torque numbers at the wheels and not at the flywheel. Maybe that is a good thing to not advertise all the numbers and say nothing at all about the 20 seconds of 22 psi of over boost with a heat thermostat sensor to protect the turbocharger from expiring from way to much time spent at over boost. 20 seconds is a long time for the 22 psi of over boost to stay in Well past a quarter mile time. Even stock Ford claims 0-60 @ 6.8 seconds and 15.0 flat at 97 mph? Mid fives is going to haul buggy in such a small light sports car as the Fiesta ST.
 


dyn085

2000 Post Club
Messages
2,434
Likes
820
Location
Vancouver
#7
I read where an article did a stock 2014 Fiesta ST dynamometer test, and got 184 HP @ 5200 rpm at the wheels and 221 Ft. Lb.'s Torque at 2700 rpm's. The wheel torque they dynode was more than Ford advertised at the flywheel. And using 14% add on for the 184 wheel HP you get 209.76 HP totally stock. Mountune clams to have a 215 HP kit available, I bet that is rated at the wheels and not corrected HP numbers Either. 215 + 14% = 245.1 Horsepower at the crankshaft. Or maybe I went off my trailly on this Horsepower and torque thing?

Go figure 209 is about right where the stock turbocharged eco-boost 1.6 liter engine is running, So... Mountune is ratting the HP & torque numbers at the wheels and not at the flywheel. Maybe that is a good thing to not advertise all the numbers and say nothing at all about the 20 seconds of 22 psi of over boost with a heat thermostat sensor to protect the turbocharger from expiring from way to much time spent at over boost. 20 seconds is a long time for the 22 psi of over boost to stay in Well past a quarter mile time. Even stock Ford claims 0-60 @ 6.8 seconds and 15.0 flat at 97 mph? Mid fives is going to haul buggy in such a small light sports car as the Fiesta ST.
Where you went wrong is in trying to assume a certain percentage of drivetrain loss. There is loss through a drivetrain, but never as a specific percentage. By saying that there is 14% loss you're assuming the drivetrain will consume power from non-drivetrain upgrades-and that just doesn't happen. It's a fixed amount unless you change drivetrain components/fluids.

Personally, I only care about numbers measured at the wheels and could care less about what an engine produces alone as I've never seen an engine win a race without the rest of the car. A dynamometer is a testing tool and really shouldn't be used for comparison of cars that didn't use that exact machine, preferably on the same day under the same or similar conditions. The exact same car can pull a variety of numbers on different dyno's or even the same dyno under different conditions.
 


Messages
27
Likes
0
Location
florence
#8
Before I purchase a upgrade kit I want to know which formula was used, flywheel or wheel? I call there business and the person on the other end says they do not know. That's why I wont to know, when the numbers advertised are higher than most or all the rest of the kit's I want to know. When I run the numbers & use common percentages to try to arrive at there numbers? and cannot, I want to know. The places that sell and are well known to the racing comity will show a chart use sea level for correction. I have no problem.
 


Messages
27
Likes
0
Location
florence
#10
Mountune & Cobb is where I will go for all my performance need's: These two seem to be the most respected names in rally cross and all form's of sub-compact racing.
 


Messages
27
Likes
0
Location
florence
#12
6.9 sec, stock with Cobb Stage 1

Haven't found a place with nice pavement (go figure, Michigan), but I think I could do a tiny bit better with some more traction in 1st.
That's what I do not get 6.9 with Cobb stage 1?? "Motor trend got 0-60 in 6.4 and 1/4th mile time of 14.9 @ 93 mph. The test was with a 2014 Fiesta ST new off the show room floor. Absolutely no modifications done. Now if your run times were not corrected to sea level, I apologies for my hasty reply. Do you know your stock 0-60 and 1/4th mile time? Or at least something to compare your time too? The 2014 Fiesta ST. actually has two HP and two torque reading's. 184 in none over boost mode and 197 in over boost mode. 14.5 psi is normal and 21 psi in over boost.

According to Ford there is no recovery time when in over boost mode, said as soon as you let off the gas you get the 20 seconds of over boost again. In a drag race when you would not let off the gas, there is 5 seconds or so left in over boost. Just in case you want to run it out the back door. The only time I have ever lift off the gas is when the tires loose traction, and even then I never let off totally, just
enough to regain traction.

Let me know your thought's. All the best Arless
 


Messages
90
Likes
8
Location
*
#13
In a 1/4 mike drag race you'll change gear thus resetting the 20 seconds with each change.
The Fiesta ST has torque limiters in 1st and 2nd gear so you're not gonna gain much in the 0-60 sprint.
 


Messages
295
Likes
29
Location
Grand Rapids
#14
IMO, I'm still very traction limited. I wish they published their 60 foot times. I can't even get mine under 2.7 seconds.

Launching FWD cars is hard, and I'm new at doing it, plus motortrend does 0-60 tests in totally ideal conditions, with perfect pavement. We still have sand on the roads (in michigan) from the winter when they salt/sand the roads.
 


Messages
90
Likes
8
Location
*
#15
I've made 3 runs here in the UK.

Run1 60ft = 2.6581 with a 1/4 = 14.8842@96.31
Run2 60ft = 2.6083 with a 1/4 = 14.6709@95.70
Run3 60ft = 2.4045 with a 1/4 = 14.4726@93.71

On all 3 runs i shallow staged.
 


Messages
27
Likes
0
Location
florence
#16
All three run's very impressive to say the least, your RT was brilliant on the third pass, did they correct to sea level? If they were not, then your actual time would be much better than the actual times suggest. Plus at times the dynamiter numbers are not corrected, hopefully they were not corrected, for your benefit of even greater bragging rights.

Forgive me, I get carried a way with reply's and go off topic, let me know your thoughts please
 


razorlab

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,207
Likes
127
Location
Bay Area
#17
All three run's very impressive to say the least, your RT was brilliant on the third pass, did they correct to sea level? If they were not, then your actual time would be much better than the actual times suggest. Plus at times the dynamiter numbers are not corrected, hopefully they were not corrected, for your benefit of even greater bragging rights.

Forgive me, I get carried a way with reply's and go off topic, let me know your thoughts please
RT? Where are you seeing reaction times. Also, FYI. Reaction times have ZERO to do with any 0-60, 1/8th mile 1/4mile, etc performance stats. ZERO.
 


Messages
90
Likes
8
Location
*
#18
The whole post is confusing to be honest. I've never heard of 1/4 mile times being corrected for altitude either and I'm a big NHRA drag racing fan and have visited the U.S from the U.K about 10 times to watch it at various locations.
 


JPGC

2000 Post Club
Messages
2,011
Likes
214
Location
Middleburg
#19
The whole post is confusing to be honest. I've never heard of 1/4 mile times being corrected for altitude either and I'm a big NHRA drag racing fan and have visited the U.S from the U.K about 10 times to watch it at various locations.
The reason you see correction for altitude or a density altitude correction on forums is because you will typically run slower at high altitude. At places like Colorado where you may have an altitude of 5000 ft above sea level, it can really make a difference in your time. This only really matters on forums, etc., where people are comparing times at different drag strips or locations. If you were watching a NHRA race, you will not see this correction because the racers are at the same location.
 


JPGC

2000 Post Club
Messages
2,011
Likes
214
Location
Middleburg
#20
All three run's very impressive to say the least, your RT was brilliant on the third pass, did they correct to sea level? If they were not, then your actual time would be much better than the actual times suggest. Plus at times the dynamiter numbers are not corrected, hopefully they were not corrected, for your benefit of even greater bragging rights.

Forgive me, I get carried a way with reply's and go off topic, let me know your thoughts please
Are you referring to his 60 ft times? As razorlab said, the RT or reaction time, has nothing to do with the times and speeds that he ran.
 




Top