Why is it deeply flawed? It’s a measurement of results, and not the ingredients (hp, torque, etc) that get you there. If what we care about are the results then it’s likely a better measurement than horsepower, torque, etc, as 0-60 is a measurement of the system working together. Would you rather buy a 400hp car with…

0-60 is the best way to say “when you put it all together, this is what you get.”

I disagree. It’s archaic, but it’s a relatable metric. I know what 10 seconds is like, 5, etc and I can get a feel for a vehicle while browsing marketing material. Is it the most important thing? Absolutely not, but if I’m comparing a couple of econo cars, and all being similar one gets to 60 in 12 seconds, and the…

Irrelevant for armchair arguing, sure. Very relevant for onramp onboarding, a real-world-scenario.

Right, but 0-60 is a universal measurement now. Even the average Joe who sees cars as toasters to drive to work will check that out, but probably won’t base his purchase on it. It’s just the standard metric for acceleration now, and I don’t see any problem with it. Those who know/care about cars enough (you me and…

0-60 times are very relevant, when you are comparing production vehicles. Because, the reality of the automobile market is such that, no one is going to manufacture a car that is only good at fast 0-60 times, and nothing else. Modern cars have to be well rounded, even at the highest levels of performance exotica. So,…

Now, it should be noted that you could gear a riding lawn mower low enough to get a “good” 0-60 time

It’s just a measurement for comparison now. Kind of like horsepower. Last I checked I didn’t see 485 stallions under my hood.