Performance Tested - A Deep Dive Into the Numbers - 2016 Chevrolet Volt


We take our long-term 2016 Chevrolet Volt to the track.
Tagged:
0
We take our long-term 2016 Chevrolet Volt to the track.
Comments
As far as the numbers go, a Smokey and the Bandit era T/A 6.6 wouldn't have been much (if any) faster to 60mph, pulled less on the skidpad (C&D used to wax rhapsodical about 0.81g's), and took far longer to stop than this fuel economy special.
It's not fast by modern standards, but it is definitely fast enough given its mission.
The author makes mention that Charge Sustaining Mode(Gas Only) is quicker but I don't see any numbers to back up the claim.
To put the Volt performance into perspective, lets compare the results against the 1998 Ford Contour SVT.
A stock SVT would run around 15.5 @90-91 mph in the quarter. With BFGoodrich performance tires (for the dry) it would hit .90g on the skid pad. The economy minded Volt almost matches those numbers running on Eco tires. LOL
This is EXCELLENT performance out of an Efficiently-minded car. EXCELLENT!
"If the Trans-Am can claim an advantage in terms of lateral acceleration [0.81g], then the Z/28 is a winner in straight-ahead performance. It ran the quarter-mile in 16.3 seconds (83.1 mph), which was clearly superior to the Trans-Am's 16.9 seconds at 82.0 mph. Moreover, our Z/28 produced a top speed of 105 mph (limited by the redline and the 3.73 rear axle), while the Trans-Am with a 3.23 final-drive ratio was no faster than 110 mph."
"Steering feel is almost completely numb and a floaty suspension wouldn't be very confidence-inspiring driving at speed"
THIS is NOT excellent. My 2012 Passat had excellent objective numbers but with suspension like a waterbed it was the worst car I have ever owned. Driving feel is everything.