http://www.allpar.com/cars/dodge/challenger.html

 

3.92 with the 6.1? Say goodbye to the gas mileage and hello to insane acceleration.

 

I was thinking the same thing.

 

In town driving might be bad, but i have 4.30s in my Trans Am and can cruise along at less than 2000 rpms at 70 on the highway. I think it spins less rpms in 6th gear than my wife's Mazda 6 in 5th gear. Not sure if Dodge is using the same kind of double overdrive setup the Fcars did though.

Also, looks like the SRT-8s will get the 20s so its gonna have a taller tire on it as well. I think that tire size will be almost 29 inches tall. I think a stock Fbody is 26. Dont get me wrong, the SOP feeling should be great and i'm sure the car wont come across a gas station it doesnt like.

 

245s on the back? lol

 

Okay, so I figured out that HS is Hurst Shifter... but what's TP?

 

What I take away from that chart is that the manual-trans R/Ts (the 5.7 cars), with 380-400 hp and aggressively-geared limited-slips, are going to be a lot of fun -- especially in convertible form, which will follow in MY2010. (There won't be any SRT verts, insiders say.)

 

The Charger SRT8 comes with only a 3.06 yet manages a mid 13 quarter at just over 105. 3.92s and a 6 speed manual should put the Challenger (which will be slightly lighter than the Charger) in the 12s methinks.

For reference, stock LS1s were and current stock Mustang GTs best times are right in the upper-mid 13s & current stock Corvettes are in the upper 12s.

 

I saw the Challenger in person for the first time at the SFIAS. All I can say is that it is ****ing gorgeous, but man, that car is HUGE!

It still would make for a nice daily driver. If nothing comes of a large RWD V8 coupe from Pontiac in a coming, I just may join the darkside.

 

I'm under the impression that most stock LS1s were in the low 13s.

 

Yep, it's a big beast. The production Challengers may be a little shorter -- front and rear overhangs appear to have been cut some -- but they'll probably be pretty close to the concept in width and height.

 

215/65/17's aren't those light truck tires? Dodge Dakotas with 17 wheels also come with 65 series tires

 

Credible times in the low 13 second range from a stock LS1 have never been achived & published in any media.... And I've searched.

The key word here is: STOCK.

A reflashed chip or refinements to both the intake and exhaust are enough to dip it into the low 13s. Running a stock LS1 in 20 degree tempreatures might also get it down that low, but even so, all cars are affected by these. Picking the numbers of cars run under these conditions with these changes are often preached as godspell especially other cars run under normal conditions in stock setup.

There's no shame whatsoever in mid-upper 13s, and only to the .0000001% of the carbuying public actually are obsessive of that .5 second difference independent of the times of a competitor. However, if there's any times from the media of any showroom stock, regular production line LS1 achieving low 13s using credible equptment and not their buddy's stopwatch or a racetrack where they have no idea of what minor mods were made to the car, it hasn't made it into any media I know of.

You know, those numbers along with just 245 tires means tiresmoke. Lots of it. Probally will be like a bigger version of the Fox Mustangs smoke-makers.

Another concern is that I suspect these things will be as undertired as the current Chargers and 300s. Doesn't bode well for roadholding.

 

Yeah most LS1's i saw ran low to mid 13s stock. A friend ran a 12.8@110 on the stock goodyears on a 38 degree night in his brand new stock 01 SS.

A 20" tire with 3.92's isnt going to be a much lower gear ratio than a 6spd Fbody with 17s and 3.42s. Still fun to drive tho

 

Mine is. 13.2's all day on 2.0 60 foots @ 108 mph.