http://www.dodgeforum.com/tm.asp?m=70828

 

bah, I saw this at Lime Rock when I saw the CTS-V race. I got some pics of it too, just didtn think it was all to new? Looked like the race vipers.

 

I've always preferred the coupe version of the Viper over the open air version. It looks decent, but 4 MPG Still, I'd take one if you gave it to me I'm surprised no one here has complained about the big ricer wing on the back I guess it only matters if it's on a Mustang

 

And people say the C5 has a big ***.

Rear end is too long (I believe it is longer than the roadster's).

 

That looks IDENTICAL to the GTS-R Concept a couple years ago...In fact i think DC may have been giving us a sneek peak at it then...

 

Nice viper

 

cool, look at the rear end. it has those fins that pull the car down (they are under that car) just like the racing versions you see in scca. nice car, but why would you buy a race car like that and not just get the one they use for scca? the only difference i see is the interior.

 

It's beautiful. I remember when it was just a tad over $100k when it first came out last spring.

In regards to the large rear overhangs and big wing, remember, it IS a race car. All that body work is done for aero purposes, not cosmetics. The car was deemed too competetive last year and given a 100lbs weight penalty.
This year it won the GT Portland race. This race car works.

It's definitely cool that Dodge builds a race ready car for their competitors.

 

4MPG to get 1/4 mile=11.2@131 ??

Thats beyond horrible...

Would still make a neice peice, but I'd take a GT over that thing anyday.

 

That fuel economy HAS to be what is expected in a race. Freaking F1 cars and Indy cars and the high dollar prototype Le Mans cars get into the 3 to 4 mpg range in a race...

No way that thing actually would get only 4 mpg on a real FTP cycle. No way. Think about it. Note that the sticker just has one number, not an official city/highway rating. I don't even think that car is street legal, so it wouldn't be certified to emissions standards, and it wouldn't be rated for fuel economy. It is probably something they just put on the sticker to make it look more like a "real" window sticker, partially to be funny but also to inform of likely race mileage?? I guarantee it could get in the 8 to 12 mpg range on an FTP cycle... (unless it has a 9.73:1 rear axle or something!! )

EDIT: Just looked at the sticker again, and under the fuel economy it says 520 hp/540 lb-ft. That is only 20 more than the street car. And the window sticker is not a "real" Dodge window sticker; it is just an informative sticker the competition group drew up to show off the car. I feel better now. 4 mpg in a race; do not confuse that with 4 mpg on a real CAFE-weighted window sticker.

 

4mpg is at WOT. not 55mph @ 1300rpm

 

That makes sense then...

4 MPG at constant WOT doesn't sound too bad actually...

 

Yes.. especially if you try to imageine how much money and custom work Caddy used to get the CTS to be competative, which is not necssarily a bad thing...

But kudos to Dodge!