[paulhewitt04]

Today (2/7/2024) I took our Bolt out to measure the horsepower and 0-60 time.

I have a G-Tech meter that I bought years ago, which measures 0-60 time and horsepower using an accelerometer and the car weight that is entered.

The weight of our Bolt with tools, spare, jack, and myself was 3797 lbs. Temperautre was 57 F. The roads were dry and there was no wheel-spin in Sport Mode with iMove Gen 2 tires on the front.

There was east-blowing headwind, so I made a run both east and west on the same section of road.

The test confirmed my suspicion that the car is pretty **** fast.

0-60 mph with a tailwind was in 5.90 seconds. In the opposite direction it was 5.94 seconds.

Measured horsepower with the G-Tech averaged 213 HP. I trust the 0-60 times, but I’m not sure what to make of the horsepower readings. In this car there is no loss for a direction change in the power output, and the gearbox is obviously highly efficient.

Maybe the larger recall battery improved the power output? Attached are screen-shots of the G-tech meter for the slower run.

The high speed runs really lowered the estimated range remaining, from 250 to 211. Total round trip was about 12 miles.

Hope you enjoy!

View attachment 64123
View attachment 64122
View attachment 64121

This is cool. I’ve been looking for a real world unbiased test. I hate to admit it but I’m not a good enough driver to get the maximum from the car. I get a lot of peeling out and the steering is a little squirrelly. A rear wheel drive might be easier for me to control. Plus the acceleration takes weight off the front resulting in wheel spin. So, thanks for defining how fast my Bolt really is.

 

[SHLBHRRS]

Today (2/7/2024) I took our Bolt out to measure the horsepower and 0-60 time.

I have a G-Tech meter that I bought years ago, which measures 0-60 time and horsepower using an accelerometer and the car weight that is entered.

The weight of our Bolt with tools, spare, jack, and myself was 3797 lbs. Temperautre was 57 F. The roads were dry and there was no wheel-spin in Sport Mode with iMove Gen 2 tires on the front.

There was east-blowing headwind, so I made a run both east and west on the same section of road.

The test confirmed my suspicion that the car is pretty **** fast.

0-60 mph with a tailwind was in 5.90 seconds. In the opposite direction it was 5.94 seconds.

Measured horsepower with the G-Tech averaged 213 HP. I trust the 0-60 times, but I’m not sure what to make of the horsepower readings. In this car there is no loss for a direction change in the power output, and the gearbox is obviously highly efficient.

Maybe the larger recall battery improved the power output? Attached are screen-shots of the G-tech meter for the slower run.

The high speed runs really lowered the estimated range remaining, from 250 to 211. Total round trip was about 12 miles.

Hope you enjoy!

View attachment 64123
View attachment 64122
View attachment 64121

First new car , '64 Mustang , 289 K engine ... 0 to 60 in 6 seconds , MPG city ? About 12 .... King of the road !

 

[BoltOutOfHell]

This is cool. I’ve been looking for a real world unbiased test. I hate to admit it but I’m not a good enough driver to get the maximum from the car. I get a lot of peeling out and the steering is a little squirrelly. A rear wheel drive might be easier for me to control. Plus the acceleration takes weight off the front resulting in wheel spin. So, thanks for defining how fast my Bolt really is.

Thanks for the reply, I'm glad it was useful. It's very fast, and considering that in an ICE you would have 10% drivetrain losses, the Bolt is probably +25% or more horsepower than advertised, using a conventional expectation. For example, my G-tech meter measured a 2003 Cummins diesel at about 215 road HP, although the engine was rated at 250. And our 2010 Golf TDI was rated at 140, but measured 121 road HP very consistently.

When the weather is warmer I might run another few trials. Cheers.

 

[BoltOutOfHell]

First new car , '64 Mustang , 289 K engine ... 0 to 60 in 6 seconds , MPG city ? About 12 .... King of the road !

Wow, 6 seconds was very fast with those old tires and a stick shift? I love those older Mustangs. I had a '70 Mach 1. About 9 mpg in the winter, hard on tires, and I always wished I had bought a pickup instead. I raced a few cars, was never beat. It was a pain to set dwell and timing. Cheers.

 

[Bolt drvr]

Interesting that your car weighs 3797 and my 2022 Bolt EUV weighs 4638. (841 lbs difference!) I’m guessing mine is a little slower

 

[v-pilot]

Thanks for the reply, I'm glad it was useful. It's very fast, and considering that in an ICE you would have 10% drivetrain losses, the Bolt is probably +25% or more horsepower than advertised, using a conventional expectation. For example, my G-tech meter measured a 2003 Cummins diesel at about 215 road HP, although the engine was rated at 250. And our 2010 Golf TDI was rated at 140, but measured 121 road HP very consistently.

When the weather is warmer I might run another few trials. Cheers.

Yes, I think most, if not all, manufacturer HP numbers come from the crankshaft not the wheels which is why dyno numbers are higher. Sometimes numbers are under rated so as to not attract the attention of the insurance industry.

 

[NY-Rob]

Sometimes numbers are under rated so as to not attract the attention of the insurance industry.

There is at least on Ins Co. that will not insure vehicles over 700hp. Our R1T is 835hp and a few Ins Co's have refused to offer coverage based on it's high hp rating.

 

[SHLBHRRS]

Wow, 6 seconds was very fast with those old tires and a stick shift? I love those older Mustangs. I had a '70 Mach 1. About 9 mpg in the winter, hard on tires, and I always wished I had bought a pickup instead. I raced a few cars, was never beat. It was a pain to set dwell and timing. Cheers.

Right ! Those things were big fun , brainless kids , squandered youth .... can still hear the sounds ...

 

[BoltOutOfHell]

Interesting that your car weighs 3797 and my 2022 Bolt EUV weighs 4638. (841 lbs difference!) I’m guessing mine is a little slower

Wow, 4638 is quite a bit heavier than the listed curb weight of the EUV. If you're including driver and cargo then I'd be curious about those weights. I weigh 145 lbs., and my tools and spare added about 90 lbs. I'll bet the EUV doesn't seem slow though! Cheers.

 

[BoltOutOfHell]

Interesting that your car weighs 3797 and my 2022 Bolt EUV weighs 4638. (841 lbs difference!) I’m guessing mine is a little slower

Wow, 4638 is quite a bit heavier than the listed curb weight of the EUV. If you're including driver and cargo then I'd be curious about those weights. I weigh 145 lbs., and my tools and spare added about 90 lbs. I'll bet the EUV doesn't seem slow though! Cheers.

 

[jmcbrew]

Mashing the go pedal never gets old in my opinion, its just as much fun now as it was when I was 16.

Lol... I mashed the go pedal just as the light turned green this morning. I left the Ford SUV behind me in the dust. I got up to about 5 MPH over the speed limit, and a moment later, the Ford passed me and then got into my lane. Then the hidden red and blue light flicked on for a few seconds... then they turned off into a U-turn lane. I'm not sure if that cop was impressed or insulted.

 

[BoltOutOfHell]

First new car , '64 Mustang , 289 K engine ... 0 to 60 in 6 seconds , MPG city ? About 12 .... King of the road !

I was looking at the road tests for the 1964 Mustang 289 HiPo, 4-speed, and they found a 0-60 time of 7.5 seconds. How did yours manage to go so much faster? I see a dyno test of a stock 1965 HiPo Mustang with automatic, had 141 rear wheel horsepower. That's 80 or 90 hp less than the Bolt.

 

[2020 Bolter]

Lol... I mashed the go pedal just as the light turned green this morning. I left the Ford SUV behind me in the dust. I got up to about 5 MPH over the speed limit, and a moment later, the Ford passed me and then got into my lane. Then the hidden red and blue light flicked on for a few seconds... then they turned off into a U-turn lane. I'm not sure if that cop was impressed or insulted.

Haha that's funny, always good to back off at the limit!

 

[Bolt drvr]

Wow, 4638 is quite a bit heavier than the listed curb weight of the EUV. If you're including driver and cargo then I'd be curious about those weights. I weigh 145 lbs., and my tools and spare added about 90 lbs. I'll bet the EUV doesn't seem slow though! Cheers.

I got that number from the little sticker inside the door. But I see now that it is GVWR so that is the max weight the car weigh.

 

[bdw1957]

Today (2/7/2024) I took our Bolt out to measure the horsepower and 0-60 time.

I have a G-Tech meter that I bought years ago, which measures 0-60 time and horsepower using an accelerometer and the car weight that is entered.

The weight of our Bolt with tools, spare, jack, and myself was 3797 lbs. Temperautre was 57 F. The roads were dry and there was no wheel-spin in Sport Mode with iMove Gen 2 tires on the front.

There was east-blowing headwind, so I made a run both east and west on the same section of road.

The test confirmed my suspicion that the car is pretty **** fast.

0-60 mph with a tailwind was in 5.90 seconds. In the opposite direction it was 5.94 seconds.

Measured horsepower with the G-Tech averaged 213 HP. I trust the 0-60 times, but I’m not sure what to make of the horsepower readings. In this car there is no loss for a direction change in the power output, and the gearbox is obviously highly efficient.

Maybe the larger recall battery improved the power output? Attached are screen-shots of the G-tech meter for the slower run.

The high speed runs really lowered the estimated range remaining, from 250 to 211. Total round trip was about 12 miles.

Hope you enjoy!

View attachment 64123
View attachment 64122
View attachment 64121

well the Bolt like most EVS has instant torque, not a lot of HP (though some certainly do!). and its torque is higher than most small car, but it also weighs more. but it does pretty good at accelerating !

 

[SteveWilson1983]

I was looking at the road tests for the 1964 Mustang 289 HiPo, 4-speed, and they found a 0-60 time of 7.5 seconds. How did yours manage to go so much faster? I see a dyno test of a stock 1965 HiPo Mustang with automatic, had 141 rear wheel horsepower. That's 80 or 90 hp less than the Bolt.

Ah, you are forgetting the "good ol' days multiplier". For every few years that goes by, the sweet vehicles we had when we were younger drop a tenth on their 0-60.

(yes I know that's not technically a 'mulitplier', but the term sounded better)

 

[BoltOutOfHell]

Ah, you are forgetting the "good ol' days multiplier". For every few years that goes by, the sweet vehicles we had when we were younger drop a tenth on their 0-60.

(yes I know that's not technically a 'mulitplier', but the term sounded better)

Well...yes. Those were sweet machines back then, when they weren't killing us. And there were some cars that would do 0-60 in 6 seconds. I think the Vette's would do that with the right engine. The 390 Javelin was supposedly 5.7 seconds! But by 1973 it was 7.6 seconds. I wish I had my meter back then! Cheers.

 

[BoltOutOfHell]

I got that number from the little sticker inside the door. But I see now that it is GVWR so that is the max weight the car weigh.

Ok, I see. Thanks.

 

[shrox]

...instant JATO power!

Excellent.

 

[SteveWilson1983]

Well...yes. Those were sweet machines back then, when they weren't killing us. And there were some cars that would do 0-60 in 6 seconds. I think the Vette's would do that with the right engine. The 390 Javelin was supposedly 5.7 seconds! But by 1973 it was 7.6 seconds. I wish I had my meter back then! Cheers.

I recall my one truck that I sunk a lot of money into (back around '04 or so) getting a 3.8, but in retrospect, that seems a touch unlikely. 4.2 is probably more realistic, especially since it was n.a. Also, oddly enough, when I bought it, I briefly considered a Javelin I looked at instead, though I forget the year.
Btw if you're ever looking for stock times, 0-60specs.com has quite an extensive list of what magazines tested cars at, and the time you quoted for the '64 mustang is bang on what they show as well.