Chrysler 300C 0-60: 5.3secs!
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,313
Originally posted by guionM
If the 5.7 liter "semi" Hemi pumps out 390 lbs/ft of torque, and can make the 2 ton 300C scoot along right around 6 seconds to 60 (conservatively), one can only imagine what 440 lbs/ft of torque will do with the slightly shorter and lighter Dodge Charger!
If the 5.7 liter "semi" Hemi pumps out 390 lbs/ft of torque, and can make the 2 ton 300C scoot along right around 6 seconds to 60 (conservatively), one can only imagine what 440 lbs/ft of torque will do with the slightly shorter and lighter Dodge Charger!
Btw: There used to be talks of a 6.1L Hemi. Will we see it anytime soon?
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,472
From: South Bend, Indiana
Originally posted by guionM
If the 5.7 liter "semi" Hemi pumps out 390 lbs/ft of torque, and can make the 2 ton 300C scoot along right around 6 seconds to 60 (conservatively), one can only imagine what 440 lbs/ft of torque will do with the slightly shorter and lighter Dodge Charger!
If the 5.7 liter "semi" Hemi pumps out 390 lbs/ft of torque, and can make the 2 ton 300C scoot along right around 6 seconds to 60 (conservatively), one can only imagine what 440 lbs/ft of torque will do with the slightly shorter and lighter Dodge Charger!
How did they get so much torque out of it while keeping the EPA happy? Must have DOD... (or whatever DCx's name for it is...)
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Motor Trend got 5.8 from the car (my son bought the mag yesterday).
BTW: Seems Car & Driver (May issue) got a 5.3 0-60 run and a 14 flat quarter at just over 100 out of the 300C.
If this is true (I'm going on 2nd hand info on the C&D article) that's puts it right on the CTSv's rear bumper for $20,000 LESS!!
Imagine, taking just a couple grand to make a 300C outperform a CTSv and have enough left over to pay insurence on it for the next 15 to 20 years, or insurence and regular maintence for at least the next 10!
BTW: Seems Car & Driver (May issue) got a 5.3 0-60 run and a 14 flat quarter at just over 100 out of the 300C.
If this is true (I'm going on 2nd hand info on the C&D article) that's puts it right on the CTSv's rear bumper for $20,000 LESS!!
Imagine, taking just a couple grand to make a 300C outperform a CTSv and have enough left over to pay insurence on it for the next 15 to 20 years, or insurence and regular maintence for at least the next 10!
Last edited by guionM; Apr 7, 2004 at 10:45 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,313
Originally posted by Stealth 86 LSC
thats the engine hes reffering to, the 6.1 hemi.
thats the engine hes reffering to, the 6.1 hemi.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Yes I was refering to the new 6.1 "Super Hemi" Charlie brought to our attention some time ago.
Here's a picture of the 6.1 "Super Hemi" engine again, for anyone who hasn't seen it yet:
http://www.dodgeforum.com/upfiles/1408/Om337927228.jpg
BTW: here's an article on the engineering aspects of the 300C.
http://www.autofieldguide.com/articles/040402.html
Here's a picture of the 6.1 "Super Hemi" engine again, for anyone who hasn't seen it yet:
http://www.dodgeforum.com/upfiles/1408/Om337927228.jpg
BTW: here's an article on the engineering aspects of the 300C.
http://www.autofieldguide.com/articles/040402.html
Last edited by guionM; Apr 7, 2004 at 10:32 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Originally posted by guionM
If this is true (I'm going on 2nd hand info on the C&D article) that's puts it right on the CTSv's rear bumper for $20,000 LESS!!
If this is true (I'm going on 2nd hand info on the C&D article) that's puts it right on the CTSv's rear bumper for $20,000 LESS!!
I'd like to see some real-world results, but somehow prospective 300C buyers don't strike me as drag strip kinda guys....
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Originally posted by Z28Wilson
Consider me unconvinced. I can't see how a car that is several hundred pounds heavier, down ~60 HP and a few foot-pounds of torque, AND has the aerodynamics of a victorian-style house could be knocking on the CTS-V's door...
Consider me unconvinced. I can't see how a car that is several hundred pounds heavier, down ~60 HP and a few foot-pounds of torque, AND has the aerodynamics of a victorian-style house could be knocking on the CTS-V's door...
Remember how all those auto journalists said the same thing about the LS1 Camaros when they 1st came out and Chevy claimed only 305 horsepower?
Cobra, Lightning, and SRT-4's numbers don't add up either.
Last edited by guionM; Apr 7, 2004 at 01:47 PM.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,817
From: O-Town
I finally saw one today. They do look a lot better in person then in the photos. Not as big as I thought they would be. Didn't get a real good look, he was going the other way. The car didn't look like it was bigger then a new Impala or Crown Vic.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
PFYC
Supporting Vendor Group Purchases and Sales
0
Aug 7, 2015 01:26 PM
PFYC
Supporting Vendor Group Purchases and Sales
0
Jul 17, 2015 02:47 PM
1990 Turbo Grand Prix
Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion
4
Oct 31, 2003 06:21 PM
Z284ever
Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion
15
Oct 2, 2003 09:43 AM
johnsocal
Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion
7
Jun 27, 2003 10:58 AM
