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
Bought a Corolla Cross Hybrid this year. I wanted a comfortable, AWD, hybrid commuter that could fit a little stuff and I got it. Although it was the only hybrid choice in the segment here in the US, I read reviews and stuff anyway- the old school automotive media (you know- printed guys) constantly derided it for stuff like not being playful enough in the corners or whatever. Anyway, the point is, there’s more to life than 0-60, which I think my ‘Cross does in like, 7.9. I live in Chicagoland- there are days when I’m lucky to average 20 mph on my ride home. It’s time we start judging non-“sports” cats by the comfort, safety, and efficiency they bring to the table.
Preach it!
The original 258 in my Jeep YJ made an eye-watering 112 HP and I had 35s on it for a while. Now THAT was a rolling roadblock!
Yeah, in high school, I had a 1983 Rabbit diesel. And that thing only took 4.5 seconds… to get to 30 mph. I think 60 came along much later at around 16 or 18 seconds. It also lacked sound insulation of any kind. It was SO LOUD. It also leaked, got moldy, got the stereo stolen every two weeks, and let’s not forget, it was effing slow. (48 hp is just not a lot.)
But, it had an extended tank where the spare would normally go and the thing got like 45+ mpg. I could drive it for like 900 miles between fill ups. Wasn’t a bad car, just slow.
My observation is 90% of all drivers don’t use 50% of their car’s capabilities-acceleration, cornering, stopping. And are petrified to do so.
Our Wartburg 353’s manual didn’t list a 0-100km/h number. It generously listed a 0-80km/h (0-50mph) in 14 seconds.
It was the fastest thing we had ever driven, for a very long time. It was snappy and zippy. It got us everywhere. It even managed to get us through a sandstorm, a rainstorm AND a snowstorm in one single day.
Years later in the US we test drove a used (very used, mileage and condition unknown) 1st gen very, very basic Taurus (advertised by the sleazy lot salesman as “perfect”), which accelerated worse. I believe that was the one test drive that cemented the idea that we’ll either buy new, some day, or not at all.
This article is spot on – and I am one of those hyper-intense motherfuckers. Sure, I love hitting the top of that ramp at full highway speed, and not needing to use even one inch of the merging lane. And that’s why I didn’t buy a “huge pickup truck shaped like a shipping container.” I drive a car that can carve around a tight on-ramp at pretty high speed.
Of course, if there’s traffic on the ramp, I’ll chill the fuck out and merge like a normal person. I have cursed people in front of me on on-ramps plenty of times, and I guarantee it wasn’t because their vehicles weren’t sufficiently powerful. It’s the driver that makes (or breaks) the merge.
Same here. 0-60 on my car is 6.7 seconds (which I had to Google) and I love to be at 65 when I merge onto the highway… but if I’m not, it’s always because someone else is driving well below that at the top of the ramp, because they chose to, not because their car can’t. In fact, that’s part of the reason I started doing work to my car, so I could jump over a lane and floor it, rather than risk being rear-ended… which has almost happened several times from people being slower than shit covered in molasses on a winter day because they choose to be.
To generalize, we have a weird obsession with 0-60 times as a society. Most people I interact with just want something safe, comfortable, and reliable to get from Point A to Point B and most of them prefer it be slower. Whoever wrote that Motor Trend article is off their fucking rocker.
My 2006 Matrix AWD… well it says 9.1 seconds but a few ponies have left the barn after 248k. But you know what? My car has taught me a ton about keeping a good gap between you and the car ahead, for the main reason to maintain momentum (speed). Can’t slow down too much, so be smooth and try not to put yourself into a position where you have to brake hard!
I was taught early on, “drive like you don’t have brakes and you won’t need them.” Now I don’t take this totally to heart, but more times than not in traffic, I find myself behind a semi and it really doesn’t bother me. They usually are more smooth in stop and go traffic which saves me from having to slam on brakes then slam on the gas. Maybe I won’t get there as fast the morons bobbing and weaving in and out of every lane, but I tend to find that I end up not very far behind
I agree with you that 8 seconds is fine. Even if your car is capable of half that, doing it all the time will be murder on your fuel and repair bills. Still, comparing technology from 50-years ago to today is far from your strongest argument. Technology does advance, and in fact has. Would you use the same argument when comparing the performance of a car from 1969 to one from 1919?
My old Audi A3 makes it 0-100 km/h aka 0-62 mph (or at least made when new) in exactly 8.1 seconds and while I don’t consider my car fast I think it is at least borderline quickish, sure not slow in any means. With 150 hp in light small car I feel I get decent acceleration for all the real life situations that matter.
Of course more is more and fast is nice etc, but one can still have some sense of proportion.
Give this man a Pulitzer already!
I had a two liter six cylinder 1971 Triumph GT6 that was plenty fast. It went 0-60 in about 11.5 seconds.
Thanks Torch! I fucking love this take.
The author of that Motor Trend article is terminally car reviewer pilled.
After daily driving a slow vehicle, I realized it’s not that big a deal. You start accelerating a bit earlier and it’s fine.
Mine was a 1994 f150 with the glorious 300 I6. It was rated with a thundering 145hp when new. My 260k mile example was likely making less.
I towed landscape trailers weekly for the few years I owned it. It was fine. Going to WOT on the on ramp, I’d be at 60mph in plenty of time to merge onto the highway. It would eventually get to 70 if I really wanted to.
I had no issues with power using it for a landscaping job I had.
I timed my Ford Ranger at 28 seconds to reach 60. My 2000 Honda Insight is about 10 seconds and it feels plenty peppy. Listing the Hurricane motor as a “requirement” seems especially tone deaf when every mopar dealer mechanic I know describes that engine with the seething hatred of a thousand suns.
Absolutely out of touch ghouls.
2.3 auto that happens to be misfiring on 3 cylinders and has a severely slipping transmission? A Ranger should be in the mid teens, not the high twenties.
Yeah 28 seconds seems like some things aren’t working correctly. That sounds more like the timing for an overloaded older RV towing a car into a headwind up a slight grade.
When I started driving, it was in the middle of the malaise era. We would have celebrated wildly to have a car that fast. My 80 Mustang 4 banger couldn’t do 0 to 30 in 8 seconds.
Yep, drove a Chevy Celebrity with a 0-60 time around 16 seconds in the mid-80s.
8.1 is not too slow. What’s too slow is the Nissan SUV that’s always in front of me on the onramp, takes 30 seconds to accelerate to 50 mph, merges into the 75 mph traffic, then later passes me a minute later doing 85.
Does that nissan have a paper plate? Because I think I see the same one every morning.
I mean even as a high schooler I recognized Motor Trend as the most sensationalist puff content of any of the big car mags. But this is utter BS even for them. Based on personal experience and observation of friends and family for whom cars are appliances-anything less than 9 seconds 0-60 especially if 0-30 is decent feels pleasantly adequate (esp a torquey pickup), less than 8 seconds feels zippy/sporty, less than 7 starts to feel fast, less than 6 will never be used by anyone but enthusiasts, and less than 5 is borderline nauseating and semi-pointless anywhere but a track and rare instances of an open freeway on ramp.
I had a few friends in high school who drove their parents XJ cherokees (and later in college I’d buy one) iirc clocked by car and driver at 8.9 sec. 0-60 and we all thought that was fantastically quick. I’ve since had my internal speedo reset some by faster vehicles but even my wife’s semi-anemic 2005 pontiac vibe (130 hp 1.8L 4) is more than fast enough for everything but mountain passes and passing folks on 2 lane county highways.
“…even my wife’s semi-anemic 2005 pontiac vibe (130 hp 1.8L 4) is more than fast enough for everything but mountain passes and passing folks on 2 lane county highways.”
A friend had an AWD first-generation Vibe – I think hers was an ’06? – and indeed, it was somewhere around non-turbo Volvo 240 speed, only sketchily slow on short New England onramps (along MA Route 2 in Fitchburg/Leominster/Lancaster, say) – perfectly fine in general. The blueberry in my profile picture’s barely quicker and I rarely feel it lacks for power.
So weird fact iirc the AWD vibe had 10 less hp than the fwd version for some reason and with added weight of AWD I can imagine that’s edging into being pretty slow. But yeah with the short gearing most economy cars have 0-45 mph is pretty solid which is most of what you’ll ever use on surface streets. Honestly if they’d come out with 6-8 speed autos sooner you’d never need more HP the irony of modern econo cars. If the vibe had even 2 more gears I think it would solve most of it’s issues with it feeling like a turd in the mountains-3rd is too low and 4th too high when going up a pass.
I have a 2000 Ram 1500 with the “Magnum” (lol) 3.9L v6, a 4spd auto, and I believe 3.08 highway gears (no tow package- single cab, short box fleet spec). A prior owner also put slightly oversize tires on it (the speedo reads a couple mph slow vs GPS on the highway), which doesn’t help.
That engine was only advertised for 175hp new, and after 240k miles, I’m sure more than a few of those horses have gone to pasture. That said, it does run well, doesn’t smoke or use oil, and shockingly has no CEL and all monitors are in the green. It does seem to be a fairly well looked after truck (and rust free, because Texas).
It’s a pretty slow vehicle. For shits and grins I timed the 0-60 at about 16 seconds. It’s over-geared given it’s limited power. 70mph (indicated- so like 75 in reality), is only spinning about 1800rpm in top gear. As such, there is almost zero acceleration in fourth. It can just barely maintain 70 on flat ground. Stock tires and a taller rear end would probably help a lot, but considering I only paid $1200 for the truck, I’m not putting a dime into it, considering it gets maybe 500 miles a year.
Honestly on the rare cases I drive it- purely if I need “truck stuff”- to move my boat or otherwise use the bed- I just immediately punch the OD Off button and treat it as a 3spd, since whenever it goes into 4th it just bogs the engine and you have to mash your foot down to kick it back to 3rd for even the most casual acceleration.
Still, I don’t feel like a liability in normal traffic. It keeps up just fine in town and on the highway. I’m not doing 90 in the left lane because it has the loosey goosey front end that every high miles 2nd gen does and smack a pothole at 80 and you’re rolling the dice with the death wobble. Speed limit, right lane, the habitat for 2nd gen dodges.
I owned the previous gen with the same powertrain sans the mild Hybrid and it was a perfectly adequate vehicle on a day to day basis over the 4 years I owned it.
Mine did about half a second quicker than MT’s sample because it was a quad cab 2WD with less options and 250 lbs lighter but it never left me wanting for more.
0-60 in 8 sec. is what it took V8 trucks from 20 years ago to reach 60 MPH, think about a crew cab truck with the 5.4 3V, or a 5.3 Vortec and ahead of a 4.7 Magnum.
Those trucks were not race cars but I can’t recall people complaining about being slow and they are still a common sight in North American roads up until recently
“0-60 in 8 sec. is what it took V8 trucks from 20 years ago to reach 60 MPH”
I was thinking the same thing. My main vehicle is a 2002 f150 with the 5.4l V8. It’s apparently rated for about a 9.5s 0-60 time.
It feels plenty quick for a truck. I have no problem getting up to 75mph with a small trailer.
Right. And when you consider the Pentastar has been the base powertrain in Rams for 11 years then you realize it was a very nice performing engine for its era. That is of course as long as you don’t plan on towing over 5K lbs