2010 Challenger SRT getting the big bad 392ci
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 574
From: Richmond, TX
2010 Challenger SRT getting the big bad 392ci
http://www.challengertalk.com/forums...-thread-21739/
The 425hp 6.1L SRT was becoming something of a joke. Even among Challenger RT owners. It appears from quarter mile times that there was no more than 30hp between the 5.7 and the 6.1.
But the 6.4 should make for a true mid 12 car.
The 425hp 6.1L SRT was becoming something of a joke. Even among Challenger RT owners. It appears from quarter mile times that there was no more than 30hp between the 5.7 and the 6.1.
But the 6.4 should make for a true mid 12 car.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,463
From: SoCal
I never thought the SRT8 was a joke. Their biggest problem in the beginning was the auto trans and we know what weight can do to performance. But due to their price and HP they were put up against relatively lighter GT500 and SS both also packing more power. But the manual trans SRT8's were gaining some of that respect back.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Agree with 99SilverSS. Current manual SRT8s are no doubt quick, notably more so than the automatics, which a regular R/T with a manual can do a good job keeping up with... in a straight line.... till over 80-100.
As a side note, and I brought this up a long time ago. Horsepower is getting to the point of diminishing returns.
Mustang GTs have a 116 horse deficit to a Camaro SS, but an SS can't get cleanly away till both are approaching 100 mph.
Last year's GT500 is packing well in excess of 500, and the new one well over 550. Yet the old one barely edged out a '93 Cobra and the new one barely edges out the Camaro SS despite each having a minimum of a clear 100 horse advantage.
Sure, there aren't any street tires known to man that can stand up to the new GT500's torque (and therefore no real traction to launch), and weight does play a big factor. But more power a car packs, the heaver it has to be to keep from grinding itself to pieces (or blowing itself apart, or twisting the body in half, etc...).
I know this probabally goes counter to the normal train of thinking here, but I'd say the Ford Mustang GT (and even the previous Ford Mustang Cobra) was the optimum performance vehicles in striking a balence between weight, power, and performance. Yes, there's cars out with 100, 200, or even 250 horsepower (and torque) more than the Mustang GT. But those cars tend to be much heavier, and none seem to show their power difference over a 300 horse Mustang GT or a 400 horse Cobra.
As a side note, and I brought this up a long time ago. Horsepower is getting to the point of diminishing returns.
Mustang GTs have a 116 horse deficit to a Camaro SS, but an SS can't get cleanly away till both are approaching 100 mph.
Last year's GT500 is packing well in excess of 500, and the new one well over 550. Yet the old one barely edged out a '93 Cobra and the new one barely edges out the Camaro SS despite each having a minimum of a clear 100 horse advantage.
Sure, there aren't any street tires known to man that can stand up to the new GT500's torque (and therefore no real traction to launch), and weight does play a big factor. But more power a car packs, the heaver it has to be to keep from grinding itself to pieces (or blowing itself apart, or twisting the body in half, etc...).
I know this probabally goes counter to the normal train of thinking here, but I'd say the Ford Mustang GT (and even the previous Ford Mustang Cobra) was the optimum performance vehicles in striking a balence between weight, power, and performance. Yes, there's cars out with 100, 200, or even 250 horsepower (and torque) more than the Mustang GT. But those cars tend to be much heavier, and none seem to show their power difference over a 300 horse Mustang GT or a 400 horse Cobra.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
I know this probabally goes counter to the normal train of thinking here, but I'd say the Ford Mustang GT (and even the previous Ford Mustang Cobra) was the optimum performance vehicles in striking a balence between weight, power, and performance. Yes, there's cars out with 100, 200, or even 250 horsepower (and torque) more than the Mustang GT. But those cars tend to be much heavier, and none seem to show their power difference over a 300 horse Mustang GT or a 400 horse Cobra.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 3,252
From: Knoxville, TN
I'm not a big fan of the GT500, but come on. I think you've gone well off the deep end of this one, Guy. There is NO comparison (performance wise) between a 2009 GT500 and a 1993 Cobra. Not even sort of close.
And the current GT....uh....no comment.
And the current GT....uh....no comment.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,449
From: Bentonville, AR
EDIT: Looks like Bob beat me to it...
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 3,252
From: Knoxville, TN
Wait a sec.....let me give him the benefit of the doubt, and assume he meant 2003 Cobra vice 1993 Cobra.
Assuming that is the case, then there is indeed a case to be made.
But I'm still not impressed with the current GT. Not at all. Its the pinnacle of performance mediocracy (have fun with that one, Jake).
Assuming that is the case, then there is indeed a case to be made.
But I'm still not impressed with the current GT. Not at all. Its the pinnacle of performance mediocracy (have fun with that one, Jake).
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,463
From: SoCal
I'm thinking he had to mean 2003 Cobra as there is no way a 1993 Cobra is staying within 10 mph of a GT500 at the track.
If we are talking best performing pony car power/weight and handling then the LS1 F-body in 1LE, SS or Firebird WS6 still stands as very good performance in all areas. They are plenty capable of taking on a 2010 Mustang GT or 2003-04 Cobra and 2010 Camaro SS all measurable performance areas.
It might be better to say we've yet to see the best.
If we are talking best performing pony car power/weight and handling then the LS1 F-body in 1LE, SS or Firebird WS6 still stands as very good performance in all areas. They are plenty capable of taking on a 2010 Mustang GT or 2003-04 Cobra and 2010 Camaro SS all measurable performance areas.
It might be better to say we've yet to see the best.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 69
From: Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,600
From: Pewee Valley, KY
That would be a great move. Actually if Chrysler could take the LX/LY suspension and hang it on a lightweight/mid cost, low 2 seat coupe/vert with a 426 Hemi it would make a very reasonable replacement for the Viper.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY