In case anyone missed it, the COTY-P (Car of the Year Philippines) group has recently released performance figures for new cars launched in 2012 by way of Kotse.com: http://www.kotse.com/home/index.php/...13-performance
![]()
For the most part, I find the results believable, if a tad slow. However, Niky has posted in a thread somewhere here that the tests were done with 2 people on board, and an additional 50-100 kg could definitely bog down performance numbers a bit. Overall, it seems more realistic than C!'s figures (as noted in their car guide at the end of their issues), as those numbers seem to be all over the place.
That said, there are a few things I wanna clarify. First and foremost, is the Ranger 2.2L really faster from 0-100 than a BT-50 3.2? The numbers show 11.8s for the Ranger and 12.4 for the BT-50. I've been reading a lot about people being unsatisfied with the Ranger's 2.2L performance and are thus waiting for the Wildtrak which shares the same 200 hp 3.2 as the BT-50, but these figures seem to be disheartening.
Second, the automatic version of the Toyota 86 posted a 9.5-sec 0-100 time, which is over a second slower than what international motoring bodies have tested for the same car. What gives?
Third, and this is really more of an inquiry, is the FB Civic really that much slower than the FD? I've read before that a 1.8S FD AT can do 100 kph in ~11s from a standstill, and I've tried this personally with a crude stopwatch and a flat stretch of empty road and I did get similar numbers. The FB on the other hand now takes over 12s to achieve the same feat, which is kinda sad, to say the least. I've driven both models (though not back-to-back), and while the newer FB does feel more comfy, I didn't expect that this much of a performance deduction was the tradeoff.
Again, I made this thread not to discredit the COTY-P results, because I do believe that the people behind it share my desire for accurate and objective results. These questions are simply to appease my curiosity. :)
For the most part, I find the results believable, if a tad slow. However, Niky has posted in a thread somewhere here that the tests were done with 2 people on board, and an additional 50-100 kg could definitely bog down performance numbers a bit. Overall, it seems more realistic than C!'s figures (as noted in their car guide at the end of their issues), as those numbers seem to be all over the place.
That said, there are a few things I wanna clarify. First and foremost, is the Ranger 2.2L really faster from 0-100 than a BT-50 3.2? The numbers show 11.8s for the Ranger and 12.4 for the BT-50. I've been reading a lot about people being unsatisfied with the Ranger's 2.2L performance and are thus waiting for the Wildtrak which shares the same 200 hp 3.2 as the BT-50, but these figures seem to be disheartening.
Second, the automatic version of the Toyota 86 posted a 9.5-sec 0-100 time, which is over a second slower than what international motoring bodies have tested for the same car. What gives?
Third, and this is really more of an inquiry, is the FB Civic really that much slower than the FD? I've read before that a 1.8S FD AT can do 100 kph in ~11s from a standstill, and I've tried this personally with a crude stopwatch and a flat stretch of empty road and I did get similar numbers. The FB on the other hand now takes over 12s to achieve the same feat, which is kinda sad, to say the least. I've driven both models (though not back-to-back), and while the newer FB does feel more comfy, I didn't expect that this much of a performance deduction was the tradeoff.
Again, I made this thread not to discredit the COTY-P results, because I do believe that the people behind it share my desire for accurate and objective results. These questions are simply to appease my curiosity. :)