If you stop and think about it, 60 mph is pretty damn fast, at least at human scales. I’m not talking like interstellar travel here, I mean real, day-to-day, sandwiches-and-soap life. It’s a nice speed to think about because it lines up so nicely with how we measure time: 60 minutes to an hour, so 60 miles per hour means that you’re moving at a mile-a-minute, which is easy to understand; every minute, a mile!
We live in an era where cars can go from stationary to 60 mph in shockingly short spans of time, and I think it’s starting to affect our minds. I say this because a recent review of the 2025 Ram 1500 Big Horn V6 that appeared in Motor Trend spends much of its time trying to convince everyone that a truck that takes 8.1 seconds to get from stopped to 60 mph is somehow unacceptable. That, I think, is nuts. Getting from 0-60 in 8.1 seconds is just fine.
I realize this is a drum I’ve banged before, but seeing as how articles like this are still appearing in big-time outlets like Motor Trend, I think that drum still needs some further spanking. I’m not even sure if this is a pervasive way that people now think or if this is just a symptom of the weird, distorted ways that we auto-journos can think, but the general concept that somehow anything that takes longer than, say, six seconds to get to 60 mph is slow seems to be part of the general discussion, and, again, it’s ridiculous.
Let’s look at some of what was said in this review so you can see what I mean. First, though, let’s go over the specs on this truck so we know what we’re talking about. The version reviewed here has a mild hybrid setup (basically an integrated starter/motor in place of the alternator that helps with stop/start and provides a bit of extra power at lower speeds), with a 3.5-liter V6 making 305 horsepower and 269 pound-feet of torque. This engine is bolted to an 8-speed auto. Nothing amazing, but those numbers are just fine.
The truck is a chonker, with a curb weight of 5,082 pounds, giving a not-that-unreasonable 16.6 pounds per horsepower. That’s nearly the exact same power-to-weight ratio as a 2010 Ford Mustang V6, which used 210 horses to motivate its approximately 3,400 pounds of heft, for a ratio of 16.2 pounds per horsepower. That wasn’t the fastest Mustang, but I don’t recall anyone praying they wouldn’t get stuck behind one on the freeway.
Anyway, let’s get into some quotes from the article:
“Paying the extra $2,695 for the 2025 Ram 1500’s next-level-up (and all-new) twin-turbo Hurricane I-6 engine and its 420 hp is therefore nearly a requirement, not a consideration, for anyone keen on their truck not being a rolling roadblock.”
The part that gets me here is, of course, describing a truck that goes to 60 in 8.1 seconds as a “rolling roadblock.” No, man, just no. What about this is a roadblock? Where the fuck are you driving this? Is this what you picked for a track car?
Maybe he’s having some fun with hyperbole, which I get, because being hyperbolic is more fun than playing video games while having sex on a roller coaster with a mouthful of cake, sure, but at the same time, this concept is at the core of the review: this truck is too slow.
Here’s another quote:
“In the Ram, when you step on the gas, you’ll watch the tach needle twist and hear the engine snarl through its powerband. Acceleration follows tepidly, even as the V-6 revs to its high-rpm power peak. A stoplight drag against a 30-year-old Miata is effectively a draw; by the time the Ram gets to the speed limit, the Miata is still on its quarter panel. Reaching 60 mph takes a long 8.1 seconds, well beyond base-engine-equipped competitors; even Chevy’s four-cylinder Silverado is a full second quicker to 60 mph.”
First, a draw with a Miata is impressive! The truck is like five times the size and weight of the Miata, and it’s still managing to race it to a draw? That’s incredible! And, it’s not like anyone was thinking about Miatas, even with their little 116 hp engines, as “roadblocks.” Because they’re not.
The review says getting to 60 takes “a long 8.1 seconds,” but I just can’t abide this. In reality, out of the weird bizarro world of car reviews, 8.1 seconds is not “long.” In fact, for a long, long time, 8.1 seconds was fast! You know what took about 8 seconds to get to 60 mph? One of these:
A Ferrari! A Ferrari Dino GTS! Nobody thinks of this thing as a “roadblock,” do they? Sure, it’s from 1973, but who cares? Has the length of a mile changed since 1973? Have we re-constructed and dramatically shortened all of our on- and off-ramps to our highways since the 1970s? Did we switch to metric time and seconds mean something different? The answer is no, to all of these silly questions, of course.
Yes, traffic was a bit slower in the past, but not that much slower; and, more importantly, modern traffic just isn’t so blindingly fast that a car that accelerates to 60 in just over 8 seconds would be a liability, anywhere.
I guarantee you that nobody driving the V6 Ram 1500 is going to cause massive traffic slowdowns, anywhere. I can say this confidently because I drive a 52 horsepower car that takes about twice as long to get to 60, and I have yet to have a line of angry cars behind me, honking horns and screaming threats as I merge onto a highway. Somehow, I can merge on almost any on-ramp I’ve ever encountered at about the same general pace as everyone else, because most normal human drivers don’t bother driving at a full 10/10 of their cars’ performance envelopes when they’re just commuting to work.
Sure, there may be some hyper-intense motherfuckers who white-knuckle every on-ramp, foot-pinning that gas pedal into the carpet until it either yields or moans in pleasure, and maybe those tightly-wound velocity junkies may find eight seconds too glacial. They probably exist. But I’ve never impeded the progress of one, even in my 0.9-liter, 52 hp gumdrop.
You know what accelerates way, way slower than 8.1 seconds to 60? Trucks. Big trucks. Fully leaden, the average 18-wheeler semi requires about a minute to reach 60mph. Considering the weight they’re hauling, that’s incredible. And, even with those slow speeds, millions of them are on the roads at any moment, and somehow everything keeps running smoothly.
Fast cars are fun. There’s no question about that! Stomping on the gas and finding you’re at that magic mile-a-minute in less than a handful of seconds is of course a thrill. It’s great. It’s also not how people drive, day-to-day, and the implication that a truck that goes from 0 to 60 in 8.1 seconds is somehow inadequate or even has the potential to impede other drivers is, frankly, ridiculous.
I don’t know what kind of collective madness we’re all saturated by when it comes to how we see 0-60 speeds, but enough already. If your main criteria in buying a new car is acceleration, then I suspect maybe you already know that a huge pickup truck shaped like a shipping container possibly isn’t your ideal option. I also suspect that deep down, you also know that an 8-second-to-60 vehicle is going to be absolutely, totally fine for daily driving in almost every situation, and you will never have to bear the stigma of being a “rolling roadblock.”
What’s wrong with us? We’re such absurd creatures, sometimes.
Any 0-60 Time Under, Say, 7 Seconds Is Good Enough For Most Of Us: Prove Me Wrong
You Only Need 50 HP To Get By Even In Modern Traffic
The Tesla Roadster Getting To 60 In One Second With Rockets May Be Possible But What The Hell Will You Do With It
So what you’re saying is it’s lighter than an M5. Hmm.
My issue is that everyone says that they need quick acceleration, but nobody uses it. “0-60 in 8 is too slow,” and yet the average driver never uses more than half-throttle. The number of times I’ve been stuck behind a very high-powered car on an otherwise empty on-ramp merging onto an interstate at 35 mph, it seems like the average driver’s comfortable 0-60 time is about 15 seconds, even if their car will do it in 4. 8 seconds is perfectly fine.
Yeah there are times I am the first at a light next to someone and will get up to speed faster in my 1st gen cummins then someone in a brand new car.
The same thing often happens to me in my 50hp Beetle. And it’s not like I’m wringing it out or anything. Putting the pedal to the floor in that car creates a lot of noise, but very little in the way of acceleration.
Right, its not like we always just floor it on the onramp and blast the horn at anyone in a slower vehicle. My car will do 0-60 in 5.5 seconds but only once in a blue moon do I ever put that to the test. Even if the onramp is wide open, I’d guess I normally take 8-10 seconds to get up to 60 to avoid the stress on the engine and gas mileage hit.
Toyota knows about the half throttle thing. That’s why my Rav4 4 cylinder feels like a V6 at half throttle. At full throttle, it feels like the very slow car that it actually is.
My old 1.8 Matrix had a similar power delivery.
I had a V6 RAV4 for a short time. If you launched from 0, then it felt like the pretty fast SUV it was. Anything else and the transmission seemed to eat all the power.
My car has a worse power-to-weight ratio of 18.5lb/hp (3500lb, 189hp) and a 0-60 time that’s even slower. And yet I’ve never encountered any issues daily driving it, even in the summer where my AC is robbing a solid 20% of the power.
Is your car also intended to be able to tow 7000 lbs? This thing is meant to be able to tow more than its own weight, so if it’s even kinda slow empty, it’s going to be a problem fully loaded.
Supposedly BMW rated the E34 5-series for like 4000lbs of towing capacity. It would not be fast at all. That being said, I imagine there are not many people who would be buying a V6 truck with the intent to do serious towing with it.
6 days ago I saw a previous generation prius towing a trailer with jet skis haha, don’t underestimate the ability of people to try to do more than they should with their vehicles.
Good thing it’s not even kinda slow empty. I don’t know how fast it slow this 300hp Ran tows, but I know it tows faster than my 150hp F150. Which doesn’t block traffic even when towing except on the steepest and fastest highway grades.
It’s also bizarre to me as a Pacifica owner that he seems to think the same Pentastar V6 is fine there. We have a non-hybrid model, and a quick Google search reveals it gets to 60 in….7.7 seconds.
So it’s hardly blowing the truck away, and you know what, it’s fine. It actually feels a bit sprightly for what it is (though the nine-speed shifts with all the grace of a newborn giraffe who’s just had a five gallon bucket of White Claw, but that’s a different matter).
I have a ’21 Pacifica, and it’s plenty quick. You’re so right about the transmission, too – it is wild how jerky it is sometimes.
Yeah, I noticed that. I mean, I’m glad we live in a world where fast trucks are a thing, but I’m not glad we live in a world where such vehicles are on par with Porsche 911 prices in terms of TCO.
You’ll need a calendar to record the 0-60 time on my 2022 Tacoma 2.7-4 cylinder with 6-speed auto.
my neighbor has the ’08 2.7 4 speed auto; i have borrowed it a number of times – bring *two* calenders…
good reliable truck though, just molasses slow.
Any time I read or watch one of these pieces of nonsense calling reasonable 0-60 times slow, I think of a youtube clip I saw of an ’80s Motorweek.
They tested a VW Jetta GLI, and a Peugeot 505 turbo automatic.
Both were meant, and received, as genuinely sporty sedans.
Both took about 12 seconds to 60.
And Motorweek felt that was a perfectly acceptable time for a sporty car.
….and no, the 505 turbo was not a turbodiesel, before anyone asks.
My little Colorado diesel has a 0-60 time of somewhere in the 9 second range, and I have never had an issue merging into traffic. Of course, that’s assuming there’s not the typical MN ’35mph down the whole on ramp’ driver is in front of me..
I looked at the source material. If Lieberman had said that an 8.1-second 0-60 time was uncompetitively slow for a truck with a sticker price of just under $65,000, I could see that. {And to be fair, he says that the Big Horn model is “almost” a good value at its $46,000 base price and configuration, which makes me think that I need my internal truck pricing gauge recalibrated.) If he’d said that it doesn’t offer much in the way of a margin for payloads and towing at that price, I could kinda get there. (Again, for full disclosure, he does recommend buyers skip the “Black Option” appearance package and spend that money and another $200 for the Hurricane upgrade.) But the main thrust (heh, heh) of the piece is that this heap of a pickup endangers its driver, any passengers and innocent bits of cargo, and the rest of the motoring public. That’s just objectively not true at all.
So I heartily concur, Torch. Keep on spanking that drum. And kudos for avoiding the temptation to drive additional clicks by spanking something else. On this site, at least.
Except you need to remember even a base truck is presumably meant to be able to some level of hauling gear or towing. A base ram is rated to tow 7k lbs. If it’s already inconveniently slow empty, imagine once it has some stuff loaded in the bed and/or a trailer. Good luck merging your 50 foot truck+ trailer combo onto a highway with any sort of incline with a truck that had an 8 second 0-60 7k pounds ago.
It’ll still be quicker than an 18-wheeler, which do it all the time.
Well to be fair, 18 wheelers have the benefit of a trained/certified driver who does this maneuvering daily. Not exactly apples to apples to say “Well a guy who literally drives a big vehicle for a living can do it, so Joe Truckbuyer shouldn’t have any concerns doing it with a little faster rig”
And I don’t know what 0-60’s look like on a semi, but if this thing is taking 8 seconds to 60 when empty, it’s probably not going to be too far off from 18 wheeler acceleration if its total weight is more than doubled when towing at capacity (not to mention the potential additional aero drag of the trailer).
Is it dangerously slow? Probably not in most cases. But at the same time, anyone buying a Ram who plans on doing a a decent amount of towing/hauling would be a fool to not spend the extra 2,600 or ~3-5% total vehicle price to get the bigger engine with almost double the torque.
Jason literally said this in the article. A semi truck loaded usually takes like 40-60 seconds to hit 60mph.
A 300hp Ram 1500, even loaded to max GVWR, is several times faster than literally any semi truck in the road.
It is not even a little bit close to being unsafely slow, in any possible situation.
Sure, somebody who does plenty of towing might do better getting the better towing engine.
The majority of truck owners never tow anything, though.
Except it’s not inconveniently slow, unloaded or otherwise. It’s perfectly average, for the perfectly average driver, who probably isn’t capable of maintaining control of a vehicle with lightning fast acceleration (See most EV drivers.) This idea that we need to accelerate like our asses are on fire, perpetuated by EV manufacturers (Tesla) pushing the notion that 0-60 times are the most important technical specification of a vehicle, is going to lead to increased numbers of accidents, higher insurance premiums, and higher numbers of injuries and deaths on our highways.
Already there
The top 15 slowest cars Motor Trend tested in 2021 had 0-60’s in the range of 8.4-10 seconds. None of them are vehicles meant for carrying/towing significant weight.
You’re fighting an uphill battle to say that a truck intended to be able to carry/tow more than its own weight isn’t at least “inconveniently” slow when loaded if it’s unloaded speed would put it as one of the top ~15 slowest cars on the market.
Being “the slowest” doesn’t mean being “too slow.” Let’s say that a fully laden Ram takes 12 seconds to 60. It might be slow relative to other new cars, but it wasn’t that long ago that this was just what a regular, boring car would do. You’re also not jamming it to the floor every time you set off from a stoplight. You’ve got enough punch to happily keep up with traffic, you’re not inconvenienced in any way.
Eh, it’s not that bad in real life driving. My old Mercedes-Benz 240D had a 60 mph acceleration time of over 20 seconds. That was unloaded with just me in the car. I’ve never once had an issue merging into traffic. When you drive slow cars you know how to time your launches. It’s the same deal driving my bus, which isn’t any faster than that old Benz was. I’m not going to pull out into traffic I know is too close.
I guess what I’m getting at is that it’s one thing if a car buff wants to drive a unique 30 year old car or a bus and are willing to deal with the hassle of every on-ramp being a predicament that requires careful timing and absolutely flooring it.
But it’s kind of like we’re saying “well a few people in the comments on a car site managed to live with the inconveniences of being crazy slow in exchange for being able to pursue their passion and drive a unique 30 year old car. So it’s totally fine/normal to expect Joe Truckbuyer to accept the same inconvenience when he’s just trying to buy a garden variety brand new truck for 40-60k”
90s pickups had half the horsepower and were rated to tow the same weight. 2000s V8 trucks were making the same power and were rated to tow the same weight.
Shoot, 8 second 0-60 times were pretty typical for trucks in the 2010-2014 era.
8 seconds is not “inconveniently slow” for a truck, or any car. It’s completely normal.
Sure, if you apply standards from 30-40 years ago, it’s pretty decent, but standards of what is reasonable/convenient/acceptable change.
It’s like if you were shopping for a new WiFi router and I said “Hey I make one that operates at 100KB/Second, That’s 10x what the average internet speeds were in the 90’s so that should be fine right?”
No, this isn’t “standards of 30-40 years ago”. 8-second 0 60 is still pretty normal for a full-size pickup sold in the past decade.
You’re literally trying to argue that a 0-60 time of 8 seconds is “crazy slow” vs the 6.5-7-ish seconds the higher trim trucks do. Or that a 0-60 time of 8 seconds is somehow going to cause you to need to think carefully about how you accelerate and merge into traffic.
I have a 142HP Tacoma that barely manages a 10.5 second 0-60 time. I have never a single time needed to do a full-throttle-red-line-shift sprint to 60 MPH to merge onto a highway, and we have plenty of highways with short on ramps.
You’re being completely and utterly ridiculous that an 8-second 0 60 time is inconveniently slow. It’s literally perfectly acceptable.
Please feel free to cite your sources and tell me some other vehicles that cost $64000 and still take 8 seconds to get to 60. I’m talking RELEVANT comparable vehicles. Don’t tell me about what trucks 10 or 40 years ago did or talk about how some current $19K bare bones economy car has a similar 0-60.
We can go back and forth all day about the subjective line of how slow becomes “inconvenient” and continue to disagree if it’s inconvenient or not and neither of us be incorrect in our own subjective measure of inconvenience. But the bottom line is among current, relevant, comparable vehicles, this thing’s acceleration is objectively bad.
You’re talking as if acceleration is the only metric that matters in a truck, and whichever truck offers the most acceleration per dollar, is best. There have been very expensive, and very slow luxury cars. There have been very cheap, and very fast economy cars.
The argument was whether or not the acceleration was inconveniently slow, not “comparatively slower” compared to other trucks. You can’t say the acceleration is “objectively bad”, you could say it’s “objectively worse” than a competitor’s base model truck.
The reality is, it has not been until the past decade that pickup trucks routinely dripped into the <7.5 second 0-60 times, and probably not until the past 5 years or so that the base model trucks got that quick.
You’d have trucks with 10 second 0-60 times being rated to tow 16,000 pounds.
You’re whining about a truck with the base model economy engine, taking 8 seconds to hit 60, that’s only rated to tow 7,000 pounds. It’s fine unloaded, it’ll be fine loaded.
You’re speaking as if you’ve never actually used a truck to tow or haul. You very rarely ever need to go full throttle, even towing.
Just to reiterate and sum things up here
My Take: acceleration is an important characteristic that matters to many buyers. This particular truck is worse in that metric than basically any comparable vehicle on the market these days, so its acceleration ability is an objectively bad characteristic in today’s market.
Your take: Well ___ years ago it would have been competitive and in my personal opinion it seems fast enough to me, so let’s just give dodge a pass and pretend this thing isn’t blatantly worse than the competition in a very important and very measurable characteristic that buyers care about.
Again, nobody is saying the whole truck is objectively all around bad, but the characteristic of the truck being discussed in this article certainly is bad by current standards and that anyone buying this truck for 60K would be silly not to throw in another 2K for an engine that’s up to market standards.
But please, feel free to carry on grasping at straws with your “Well it’s measurably worse than anything it competes with BUUUTTTT….”
My issue is you keep throwing the word “bad” around like it’s an objective fact that an 8-second 0-60 time for a truck is “bad”. You keep calling it “inconveniently slow”.
It has marginally slower acceleration than competitive base-model engine trucks from GM and Ford. 8 second 0 60 times are not objectively bad in the context of cars at all, and certainly not for trucks.
Only extremely recently (like within the past 5-6 years) have the “turbo wars” made truck 0-60 times plummet. So because that most pickups are now legitimately fast, magically all of the trucks made for the past 80 years (including many within the past 5 years) are now “inconveniently slow” and will require “careful planning” to drive?
It’s an absurd argument. Go drive a truck and let me know how often you genuinely need a full-throttle merge into traffic.
I will try to make this as simple and objective as possible for clarity.
We agree that acceleration is something buyers care about.
We agree that acceleration is easily measurable and this thing accelerates worse than any comparable vehicle for sale today.
Yet somehow you diverge when it comes to describing as the aforementioned acceleration as “bad” despite it being worst in class? If being the worst in class isn’t enough to label its acceleration as “bad” then inform me what is the objective measurement at which you would say “yeah, that’s not just worst in class, you can call it “bad” now”
Your argument is kind of like if we were talking about mortgage rates around ~2019/2020. If one bank was offering 4% while all of the others are offering 2-3%. Applying our same logic as this conversation:
I would look at that situation and say “that bank’s rate is bad because it’s worse than all of the other options on the market”
And you would apparently respond “Well rates have been coming down and 4% was actually pretty competitive a few years ago. And even though it’s worse than 3% everyone else offers, it’s still a manageable monthly payment so even though it’s worse than everyone else, don’t you dare call that rate “bad” or I will argue endlessly”
I wanted to update my comment, I do agree with them that 271 lb/ft of torque is pretty meager for a modern truck, especially one that heavy.
Torque numbers are more meaningless than most people think. Remember that actual motive force at the wheels is determined by engine torque output, transmission gear reduction(which depends on what gear it’s in), transmission torque loss, differential gearing, and tire size. All of these are basically equally important. So engine torque is only telling about 1/5 of the story.
Even after all that, the torque at the wheels is still not what gets a heavy load up to speed or what drags you up a steep grade.
I’m glad you wrote this as I wondered how it was slow. My 06 Tundra does 60 in over 9 seconds and I can’t think of a time when that was slow. I owned a 3rd gen Prius and 2nd gen insight too and never ran into issues getting up to speed.
“Paying the extra $2,695 for the 2025 Ram 1500’s next-level-up (and all-new) twin-turbo Hurricane I-6 engine and its 420 hp is therefore nearly a requirement, not a consideration, for anyone keen on their truck not being a rolling roadblock.
/s”
Fixed it!
Motor Trenz, Rote & Crack, Carb and Drivel are all infotainment like CNN, MSNBC, and any other thing on cable. They are talking heads trying to come up with the print equivalent of click bait. There is no objective facts it is all gloss and crap now. Suddenly every truck has to be capable of running Baja and every car has to be a hellcat powered monster. In reality, a basic truck that can do basic truck things is the backbone of the sales fleet. Let’s not even talk about the outrage of a vehicle not being connected or having huge touchscreens.
Maybe I was just young and naive, but my memory from childhood was we all got pretty much the same news. You picked which channel to get it from based on which anchor you liked best, and occasionally one network would scoop something first, but even so the next day the other networks typically picked up the same story. ABC, CBS, NBC… it didn’t really affect the content much, and if you wanted more depth PBS had the Macneil Lehrer News Hour.
Today I heard “over on fake news CNN” spoken by one of the Fox News talking heads. My how journalism has fallen.
Now the world you live in depends entirely upon which network you get your news from. Nobody has the same basic set of facts anymore.
So zero to sixty in 8.1 seconds is officially slow now, huh? I guess all my cars are trash.
I have the same issue with my vehicle.
My car (2016 Mazda6) was bamboozled online when new for being “slow.” Constantly, in all reviews and commentary, it was called “underpowered.” I never understood why. It does 0-60 in 7.0 seconds and tops out at 130 MPH. The 184 HP rating seems meager on paper, but that doesn’t always translate to the real world.
The car isn’t a BMW 3-Series, but it wasn’t meant to be. I use it to get good fuel economy and to take my kids to school. I’ll occasionally wander a twisty backroad in a more fun way than a similar-year Camry could do, but that’s it. Simple. I guess most people were mad that the 6 didn’t have an optional engine like the Camry did with its V6, but I never feel that my car is “slow” even on the interstate. I often find myself speeding without even realizing it. And they did give the car an optional turbo in its final years, but even that was called not enough.
I remember a commenter at the old site giving me a hard time because I had a GMC Canyon with the Duramax saying the 180hp wasn’t enough to move a mid-size truck on the highway.
People have absolutely warped ideas of how much power a car really needs.
Any car that doesn’t accelerate fast enough that I arrive before I left is just too damn slow. The only speed limit I recognize is C, and I damn well better be able to break that as I see fit. Get your shit together, the whole lot of you carmakers.
“The only speed limit I recognize is C”
c (lower case) varies depending on the refractive index of the material. That can make a big difference. For example, if a pulse of light happens to be passing through a Bose Einstein condensate (coherent matter) you could walk next to that pulse of light, stop for lunch and casually stroll to the finish line and still win the race:
https://groups.seas.harvard.edu/haulab/slow_light_project/ultra_slow_light/ultra_slow_light.htm
What I think you want is c0 (0 in subscript) for the speed of light in vacuum.
Damnit. I’ve been thinking of calculus lately and adding that stupid, necessary constant (“+ C”) on to the end of integrals. I also thought about specifying further about the medium, given that Cherenkov effect/radiation is a thing, but didn’t want to spoil my joke. I was already having more fun than playing video games while having sex with a mouthful of cake while on a roller coaster, you know?
Still, needlessly hoisted by my pedantic petard.
No worries. Cherenkov radiation done right would make for great ground effect lighting.
Still hasn’t been proven that c0 (in subscript) truly is a limit in the first place…just a limit in our understanding of physics so far. I mean, by definition, we wouldn’t be able to see anything faster than light/energy that goes >c0 (in subscript) and therefore could not formulate a hypothesis. c0 (in subscript) is simply a limit in our perceptive and physical abilities in 3+1 dimensions…
The sheer absurdity of stating that 8.1 seconds to 60 is too slow is breaking my brain. That’s about what a Camry from 5 years ago is pulling, and, honestly, again, no line of angry people.
On top of that, since US infrastructure is so old overall, almost all on-ramps are set for a time to 55 of 12-15 seconds, since that was the old speed limit and the average time to 60 “back in the day.” This is the only time you should be pulling so heavily legally, so…go away Motor Trend. They are trying to get on the alarmist media tip at this point. Read this because we’re taking a hot take kind of journalism. I miss competing and honest media outlets at this point.
When most of the interstate system was built, most cars were not easily capable of 0-55 in 15 seconds. And I’m used to on ramps being longer than that anyways.
The super OG one of the 50s…you are right. Maybe I’m giving more benefit of the doubt than I should…
It is these days.
Is it actually slow? No.
Does the HO 3.0T in the Ram need to do 0-60 in 4.4 seconds like it does? Absolutely not.
But these be the times, so…
Yeah, that is really absurd…that is not “slow” at all…all these stats for a car don’t matter to me…I care about the personality, design, uniqueness, and history of a car and how mechanical components work.
Now to the jokes; some of them I’ve heard on here:
0-60 in 5-7 business days…
0-60…on a good day…
0-60…eventually… (VW Bus sticker)
0-60…Yes (VW New Beetle ad)
https://www.autoweek.com/car-life/a1877791/introduction-volkswagen-diesel-misery-driver-training-class-1982/
My truck is measured in calendars
So is that the lunisolar, solar, lunar or seasonal calendar?
Solar sadly enough actually /s
*laughs in stock 12v Cummins* The hell would mine be considered then? Glacier pace?
Wait, 8.1 0-60 is slow? Well shit, I don’t think any car I’ve ever owned has been capable of that kind of acceleration. Sorry everyone, I didn’t realize I was holding you all up! Motor Trend has shown me the error of my ways!
I read this review yesterday and the same thing jumped out at me. Such a bizarre trend.
One way they could be correct: the morons who buy a vehicle and then proudly proclaim ‘I’ve never revved it over 3k to [insert longevity justification here]’. That motor, in that truck, kept way out of its power band – yup that’ll be slow.
Probably trying to drive clicks. The Ram 1500 is too heavy (as is the Tundra), which maybe should be the emphasis since Ford’s entry powertrain puts out similar numbers.
Hear, hear. Full size truck drivers are enough of a menace already. Lately in the past few years everyone, not just trucks, stomps the pedal at a green light and, if you don’t drive like it’s a drag strip to 20 over the limit, god help you, because the person behind you will be so far up your ass they can tickle your tonsils. Even if you are clearly behind a school bus or 18-wheeler that can’t accellerate like that, it’s not going to stop some dumb-ass tailgater.
Funny thing about tailgaters most of the whiners never consider: if you get out of the way, they are gone. They may even get a ticket a bit down the road, if you let them by. I can and do routinely get out of the way with my RV, why can’t anyone else? The old: if it bothers you, do something about it – and the simplest solution that has the least negative effect on you is usually the best one – cause you can’t control other ppl.
Or you know, you could get a bunch of bumper stickers and whine about tailgaters like so many others instead of a. accelerating when possible and b. stop impeding traffic (you did say it’s everyone)…
Ok enabler.
If I’m in the right lane in full traffic or behind, as I just said and you ignored, a school bus or tractor trailer, I’m not getting out of the way for whatever moron is fingering my tailpipe.