Skip to main content

Why 0 to 60 times don’t mean as much as you might think

Whether you read the review of the latest sports car or an argument in a car forum, you are likely to find 0 to 60 times prominently discussed. That’s because, along with horsepower, 0 to 60 has become the gold standard of car performance; it’s a convenient measure of acceleration and a seemingly good way to judge and compare cars from afar.

Unfortunately, 0 to 60 is about as relevant to the actual experience of driving performance cars as fuel economy. That’s because, not only is 0 to 60 a misleading measurement of performance, it does very little to describe the subjective experience of driving. And just because a car is quick to 60 doesn’t mean it’s a good car to drive.

Recommended Videos

The problem

How often does the average driver go from 0 to 60? I would wager almost never — and for good reason. In regular road driving, the only occasion where it is both legal and — more importantly – safe (and maybe not even then) to do this kind of hard acceleration is merging onto a freeway from a metered onramp.

If acceleration from a full stop is not relevant on the road, surprisingly, it is even less relevant to track driving.

If acceleration from a full stop is not relevant on the road, surprisingly, it is even less relevant to track driving. Instead — both on-road and on-track, acceleration from moderate speeds is far more significant. This is the type of acceleration used when passing another car on the highway or exiting a corner on the track. In actual driving, it’s one of the very few times that most drivers will actually use 100 percent of the throttle. On the track, specifically, this is where power really matters.

Importantly, this kind of acceleration requires very different qualities than acceleration from a dead stop. Take for example the Dodge Challenger Hellcat. This monster boasts a relatively slow 3.9 second 0 to 60 time in its manual form, in no small part because it is a heavy vehicle that struggles to put down all 707 horsepower through the rear wheels. Once at speed, weight and traction matter less than power and gearing, and there the Hellcat accelerates like few other cars can. In practice, this also feels much, much more fun, as we can explain by looking at a little parable.

The sensation

The Nissan GT-R and the Aston Martin V8 Vantage GT, both cars claim to be entry-level supercars, and both cost around $100,000. So it seems like we should be able to compare them on numbers.

2015 Nissan GT-R
2015 Nissan GT-R
2015 Nissan GT-R

On paper, there would seem to be no competition: the Nissan lists among its impressive fleet of performance specs a 0-to-60 time of just 3.0 seconds. That is frankly insane time, likely accomplished by rubbing the transmission down with cheetah blood. The GT-R’s time looks even more impressive compared to the Aston’s relatively anemic 4.6-second slog. I mean why even get out of bed for that?

If 0 to 60 times are ever helpful, they should be here. The difference between these cars isn’t a few fleeting tenths of a second. In fact, the gap between these two to 60 is so large that you don’t even have to be Commander Data to feel the difference. Here is the thing, though; when it comes to driving the two, the Aston feels faster.

It feels this way because the Vantage has been engineered as much for fun as outright speed. The engine noise, the vibration, and even the feel of the steering make the Aston’s acceleration more exciting. This is because, in the Aston, the driver is involved in the process.

2015 Aston Martin V8 Vantage GT
2015 Aston Martin V8 Vantage GT
2015 Aston Martin V8 Vantage GT

As impressive as the GT-R is, and it is a tremendous technical achievement, driving it is antiseptic. The car’s onboard systems do so much that all the driver has to do is point it and hit the gas pedal. Driving it in real life is not that different from driving the digital version in Gran Turismo.

That doesn’t mean what you think it means

All of this aside, there is still the question of — shall we say — manhood measuring. Part of the appeal of 0 to 60 times is that they seem fixed and objective, perfect for shooting someone down in a car argument. After all, we can look at the times and say that a Corvette Z06 is faster than a Porsche 911, and is therefore better. It seems so clear cut.

Here is the problem, though; not only are the 0-to-60 measurements not regulated in any way, a single car might post very different times under different conditions.

First, the question of regulation. Most critical car statistics are the product of a single set of regulations. For example, fuel economy is measured by a set of rules laid down by a governing body, like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or European Union. In theory, this means consumers get objective, and equivalent measurements from all automakers. However, as Ford has shown with its fuel economy controversy, even regulations are no guarantee equality.

When it comes to manufacturer-tested 0 to 60 times, there are even more issues. It’s not that they lie, but only that each company’s test is likely to be a bit different. For starters, there are the procedures themselves. Decisions on how many runs to perform, whether or not to runs in multiple directions, and who’s in the driver’s seat can all have a big impact on final times … even before other factors are considered.

2015 Porsche 911 Carrera GTS
2015 Porsche 911 Carrera GTS
2015 Porsche 911 Carrera GTS

Environmental conditions like traction of test tracks, air pressure, and air temperature can have large effects on performance. For example, engineers who worked on the last-generation Cadillac CTS-V told me that on a chilly 45-degree day, the engine would be putting out about 30 more horsepower than it was officially rated. The result of all of these factors could be major distortions in listed 0 to 60 times.

Those distortions don’t even take into account real-world conditions. Take that Corvette Z06, a fantastic car, but a challenging one to launch off the line thanks to its rear-wheel drive powertrain. Average drivers will struggle to approach its listed 0 to 60 time of 3.1 seconds, even under perfect conditions with fresh tires. Those same drivers might be able to actually go faster in supposedly slower all-wheel drive cars like the Audi R8.

Adding it all up

So just what does all of this mean, are 0 to 60 times useless? Well, not quite. They remain and industry standard. And, while they can be misleading, they say a little bit about important factors like power-to-weight ratio. Moreover, they are far more accessible than more significant measurements like 40 to 70 mph acceleration figures. In that regard, we are probably stuck with them. However, the numbers shouldn’t be substitutes for the more nuanced evaluation of the car’s complete driving experience.

The aforementioned Aston Martin V8 Vantage GT is the perfect example of this point. By supercar standards it’s slow. Heck, it is only two tenths of a second faster to 60 than a $36,000 Subaru WRX STI. But we think it is one of the best driver’s cars on the market. The Aston’s greatness can be explained in part in numbers, but, mostly, the devil is in the details.

Peter Braun
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Peter is a freelance contributor to Digital Trends and almost a lawyer. He has loved thinking, writing and talking about cars…
Jeep Compass EV breaks cover—but will it come to the U.S.?
jeep compass ev us newjeepcompassfirsteditionhawaii  4

Jeep just pulled the wraps off the all-new Compass EV, and while it’s an exciting leap into the electric future, there's a catch—it might not make it to the U.S. anytime soon.
This is a brand new electric version of the Jeep Compass, and being built on Stellantis' STLA platform—the same architecture underpinning models like the Peugeot E-3008 and E-5008—it looks much slicker and packs a lot more inside than previous versions of the Compass.
Let’s start with what’s cool: the new Compass EV is packing up to 404 miles of range on a single charge, a 74 kWh battery, and fast-charging that gets you from 20% to 80% in about 30 minutes. Not bad for a compact SUV with Jeep's badge on the nose.
There are two versions: a front-wheel-drive model with 213 horsepower and a beefier all-wheel-drive version with 375 horsepower. That AWD setup isn’t just for looks—it can handle 20% inclines even without front traction, and comes with extra ground clearance and better off-road angles. In short, it’s still a Jeep.
The design's been refreshed too, and inside you’ll find the kind of tech and comfort you’d expect in a modern EV—sleek, smart, and ready for both city streets and dirt trails.
But here’s the thing: even though production starts soon in Italy, Jeep hasn’t said whether the Compass EV is coming to America. And the signs aren’t promising.
Plans to build it in Canada were recently put on hold, with production now delayed until at least early 2026. Some of that might have to do with possible U.S. tariffs on Canadian and Mexican vehicles—adding a layer of uncertainty to the whole rollout.
According to Kelley Blue Book, a Stellantis spokesperson confirmed that the company has “temporarily paused work on the next-generation Jeep Compass, including activities at” the Canadian plant that was originally meant to build the model. They added that Stellantis is “reassessing its product strategy in North America” to better match customer needs and demand for different powertrain options.
So while Europe and other markets are gearing up to get the Compass EV soon, American drivers might be left waiting—or miss out entirely.
That’s a shame, because on paper, this electric Jeep hits a lot of sweet spots. Let’s just hope it finds a way over here.

Read more
Tesla just scrapped the Cybertruck range extender
Tesla CEO Elon Musk behind the wheel of a Cybertruck.

The writing was pretty much on the wall for the Cybertruck range extender last month when Tesla removed the option from its website. Now, it’s officially scrapped it and is refunding the $2,000 deposits that customers put down for the $16,000 battery pack. 

“We are no longer planning to sell the range extender for Cybertruck," Tesla said in a message to customers on Wednesday, adding, "As a result, we will be refunding your deposit in full.”

Read more
Zoox recalls robotaxis after Las Vegas crash, citing software fix
zoox recall crash 1739252352 robotaxi side profile in dark mode

Amazon's self-driving vehicle unit, Zoox, has issued a voluntary safety recall after one of its autonomous vehicles was involved in a minor collision in Las Vegas. The incident, which occurred in April 2025, led the company to investigate and identify a software issue affecting how the robotaxi anticipates another vehicle’s path.
The recall, affecting 270 Zoox-built vehicles, was formally filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Zoox said the issue has already been addressed through a software update that was remotely deployed to its fleet.
Zoox’s robotaxis, which operate without driving controls like a steering wheel or pedals, are part of Amazon’s entry into the autonomous driving space. According to Zoox’s safety recall report, the vehicle failed to yield to oncoming traffic while making an unprotected left turn, leading to a low-speed collision with a regular passenger car. While damage was minor, the event raised flags about the system’s behavior in complex urban scenarios.
Establishing safety and reliability remain key factors in the deployment of the relatively new autonomous ride-hailing technology. Alphabet-owned Waymo continues to lead the sector in both safety and operational scale, with services active in multiple cities including Phoenix and San Francisco. But GM’s Cruise and Ford/VW-backed Argo AI were forced to abandon operations over the past few years.
Tesla is also expected to enter the robotaxi race with the launch of its own service in June 2025, leveraging its Full Self-Driving (FSD) software. While FSD has faced heavy regulatory scrutiny through last year, safety regulations are expected to loosen under the Trump administration.
Zoox, which Amazon acquired in 2020, says it issued the recall voluntarily as part of its commitment to safety. “It’s essential that we remain transparent about our processes and the collective decisions we make,” the company said in a statement.

Read more