http://www.thepassinglane.ca/2010/10...nger-srt8.html

 

1. 1966 Cobra 427 (2 seater) 12.20 @ 118mph....Car and Driver 11/65
2. 1966 Corvette 427 (2 seater) 12.80 @ 112 mph....Car and Driver 11/65
3. 1969 Road Runner 440 6 pack (sedan) 12.91 @ 111.8....Super Stock 6/69
4. 1970 Cuda 426 hemi (pony car) 13.10 @ 107.12....Car Craft 11/69
5. 1970 Chevelle SS 454 (sedan) 13.12 @ 107.01....Car Craft 11/69
6. 1969 Camaro ZL1 (pony car) 13.16 @ 110.21....Hi Perf Cars 6/69
7. 1968 Corvette 427 (2 seater) 13.30 @ 108....Hi Perf Cars 5/68
8. 1970 Road Runner 426 hemi (sedan) 13.34 @ 107.5....Super Stock 12/69
9. 1970 Buick GS Stage 1 455 (sedan) 13.38 @ 105.5....Motor Trend 1/70
10. 1969 Charger 500 426 hemi (sedan) 13.48 @ 109....Hot Rod 2/69

These 2010+ pony cars are completely underwhelming.

 

I don't see 45hp dropping a second off of the Challenger's 1/4 mile time.

 

I'm pretty sure the current SRT8 is hitting low-mid 13s.

 

Why are they mimicking the Shelby color scheme? Is there a heritage for Mopar with those colors that I'm not aware of?

 

Ah yeah, you're right. I must have been thinking about the older SRT8 Chargers. They were running mid/high 13's.

 

I guess your 2002 must be complete dogmeat compared to the cars you listed then.

Not to mention most other cars on the road today. You have to spend some serious coin to do better than low 13s right now.

And by the way, it wasn't unheard of back then for the OEMs to supply the magazines with cars that were tuned up a bit, if you will. I would suspect that some of those times came from cars that received such treatments.

 

I think they should offer the SRT-10 package in the Challenger. That would even things out. They built one, it was pretty sick.

 

Can't agree with you on that...

I know of a few tuned 7000lb Diesels that would out-run almost everything on that list.

While I like the classics of the past, I can't ignore what technology has given us.

 

Yep, I posted about one of my encounters with a tuned diesel in my Cobalt a while back. As for the list of older cars they were one trick ponies, try going around a corner or stopping one and most will agree they'd rather have the newer stuff. You might actually survive a wreck in them.

 

This information isn't new. Dodge confirmed this a while back and I posted it in the automotive news section. Anyway, the HP increase is still underwhelming given the price of the SRT-8 vehicles. The dealers by me are still charging a markup for the SRT-8 Challenger. For the price, I would MUCH rather have a GT500 or even a Corvette.

 

The 4th Gen was at least a progression of the generation instead of this whole retro themed styling going on with the Camaro, Challenger, and Mustang.

Not to mention the rumors flying around about a retro themed C7.

I'll admit that I'm biased against the pony cars, which is why I'm looking at foreign cars for my next car purchase.

Also mentioned in the thread is that older cars were one trick ponies, when the only 2010+ car that competes well in the handling category is the Mustang IMO looking at the numbers. If I wanted a 60s styled car, I'd buy one and get one of them thar disc brake kit conversions with a nice suspension setup.

Yes, my 2002 is down on power compared to any of the 2010 cars, but I'll be selling it soon enough to become a REAL member of The Lounge

 

Considering older muscle cars handled about as well as the wife's minivan I would say the new cars can outhandle them. Take any SRT vehicle or Camaro SS and show me how the older cars on the list could "outhandle them"

 

:yawn:

 

If you really want to jump into the handling category, excluding the Mustang GT, what new sporty cars do the RT/SRT Challenger and Camaro SS outhandle?