http://www.newagegto.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3486

 

Those sneaky DC folks, underrating another SRT motor! Either that or ringer. Time will tell.

-B

 

Some truly incredible numbers for the SRT-8.

HOWEVER. I got a recent R&T and there's an add for DaimlerChrysler. The interesting part? It is advertising (in fine print) an engine, displaced at 6.1L, producing 425 HP and... get this... 490 lbs/ft of torque.

THis is the only way the 4200 lbs will move the 1/4 mi in that time.

 

I'm not that surprised that the SRT-8 out accelerates the GTO, but I'm pretty surprised at how this 4190 lbs 4 door sedan.......handily out handles and out brakes the GTO.

 

They rightly call the magazine's credibility into question on that site's discussion of the tests. MT quoted the GTO as 'seating 5' and having 'an archaic rear end'

 

Too bad it's not a 5 seater, I probably would have bought one already - and including my GM points - at a $10,000 discount.

BTW, that old semi-trailing arm IRS, is pretty archaic. It's one of the reasons the 300 outhandled it.

 

Beat me to the punch on the why archaic part. The 300 and CTS rear suspension are advanced by comparison. However, keep in mind that the BMW M3 has virturally the exact same rear suspension, so although it can be called archaic, that doesn't mean it can't be made very very effective.

As for everyone's surprise that the 300 SRT-8 did as well as it did in handling, let me direct you to my signature. Thunderbird SCs (especially before they dumbed down the sway bars in '93) were curve carvers extrodinair despite a 3800 pound weight and just 225 series tires. As the guys who do engineering as their day jobs will attest, weight to a degree is irrelevent if you are willing to spend big money for top drawer handling.

Coletti and Hernandez had a behind the scenes friendly competition between them with SRT and SVT. Though Colletti spoke the most smack, it seems Hernandez has the most to show for it. Meanwhile Colletti's retiring.

And yes, the 6.1 Hemi IS underated.

 

I had estimated low 13's@ 108 back when they said it'd make 425hp.

425hp is not an underestimate IMO.

The 340hp 300c has the potential to do 14.0@101mph.

Add 85 hp, and that's roughly 8.5mph to the 1/4 mile trap speed. So 108.1mph is within believable limits. (Rough calculations are 10hp = 1mph in the 1/4)

And actually the numbers make more sense since the 10hp=1mph is for a 3800lb vehicle. So adding 85 hp and *only* getting 7mph out of the top end is pretty good.

If I was lined up to buy an SRT-8 and it wasn't pulling 107+ trapspeeds at least, I'd think it wasn't making 425hp.

Also, somebody mentioned gearing on NewAgeGTO (didn't get to read all the replies here or there). . . but the 5spd auto in the 300c has a lower 1st gear than a typicly 4spd auto, so the ratio in the 300C isn't as significant as those in the GTO & CTS-V.

JMO
Mike

 

I can't believe the CTSv trapped 2mph faster then the lighter, torqueier LS2 GTO

6.1L Hemi looks to be a very nice engine

 

The 3.06 ratio paired with it's 1st gear of 3.59 ratio is like having 4.13 gears in the GTO.

The 2nd gear ratio is like the GTO having a 3.76 rear end!

Hear's the 5spd ratios for the SRT-8
3.59
2.19
1.41
1.00
0.83
Final Drive Ratio
3.06

I like the GTO alot. . . more than a basic 300C. But the morons on that board are an embarrasment to GM fans everywhere.

The SRT-8 runs what a 425hp 4200lb car should. It has excellent gearing and great torque to help it along.

The crap coming out of their mouths leads me to believe that they are not exactly car enthusiasts. . . just fools who own GTO's.

Morons. . .

 

I bet the GTO leads in Fuel economy though

 

yeah, I remember having to look up what a semi-trailing arm suspension was when i first heard about the Monaro...I read about Porsche using it for awhile, and then ditching it in the 1950s...I also read somewhere that Holden uses it more for road compliance and ride quality rather than real-world performance...

but ultimately, I'm very shocked that the SRT-8 (barely) outperformed the Caddy...if only the car didn't look like my asscrack

 

Someone feel free to jump in with more specifics.....but I believe that the 3 series has an extremely sophisticated multi-link IRS, far more advanced than the GTO's. It does however, share front MacPherson struts.

The MN12 T-bird sure had a great suspension though. It was a level of sophistication, head and shoulders, above anything that Ford....or any domestic had accomplished before in a passenger car. I seriously considered a new SC in '89, before I bought my IROC.....so I know what you mean.
But as you say Guy, they were heavy. I believe that lots of heads rolled at Ford, over it's weight.

 

The SRT-8 didn't, CTSv was faster in the 1/4mi/ & 0-60, plus pulled better skidpad #'s

 

Mike, remember the adage:
"Horsepower wins sales but TORQUE wins races."

It's all about the when & how much of torque ratings.