Close

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    1,454
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No

    6.4L Challenger Stock Dyno: 452rwhp/443rwtq


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    927
    Rep Points
    591.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Pretty impressive. Im really liking that car. I think it weights about 3840 lbs. Not bad for $45k.
    Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    1,454
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0



    Yes Reputation No
    Definitely improved (haven't seen the interior yet but it's been a weak spot for SRT8s for a while), but I was hoping for the ZF 8 speed vs the WA5A. Love the output stock however. That being said I'd still take a Boss 302 or GT500 over one of these.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    927
    Rep Points
    591.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by MHP LLC Click here to enlarge
    Definitely improved (haven't seen the interior yet but it's been a weak spot for SRT8s for a while), but I was hoping for the ZF 8 speed vs the WA5A. Love the output stock however. That being said I'd still take a Boss 302 or GT500 over one of these.
    Why? Tune-ability potential? Im not too familiar with any of these...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    1,454
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0



    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by GT3 Click here to enlarge
    Why? Tune-ability potential? Im not too familiar with any of these...
    Overall they are better cars, interior, exterior styling and materials. Mod potential is high with any of them but Ford's still got the advantage with factory FI with the GT500. Slap a KB 2.8L Mammoth on there and you've got an instant 700rwhp on 93 octane. GT500 and GT are both significantly lighter and better handling cars as well. Basically out of all the domestic pony/muscle cars the GT/Boss/GT500 at this moment in time have the best of everything.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Hanover, MD
    Posts
    1,247
    Rep Points
    697.1
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Yes Reputation No
    ^ Well said and nice find
    Click here to enlarge

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,185
    Rep Points
    2,132.0
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    22


    Yes Reputation No
    sick engine and love the looks.
    Current:
    14 Viper TA
    Wsir - 1:28:9
    Buttonwillow C13 - 1:54:1

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,829
    Rep Points
    31,808.7
    Mentioned
    2088 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by GT3 Click here to enlarge
    The car looks really good!

    Now if they can stick the V10 under the hood...

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    1,454
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    The car looks really good!

    Now if they can stick the V10 under the hood...
    Not in a time when the MT COTY is a Chevy Volt my friend.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    CA and AZ
    Posts
    237
    Rep Points
    148.7
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by GT3 Click here to enlarge
    Pretty impressive. Im really liking that car. I think it weights about 3840 lbs. Not bad for $45k.
    Did they go on a diet? The old one weighed in at 4140lbs.

    The mustang gt is hitting 430rwhp with basic bolts and weighs 3600lbs. And starts at $31k!
    The gt500 can hit 550rwhp without much trouble(stock blower) and now weighs 3750lbs.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    1,454
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0



    Yes Reputation No
    I think it gained weight if anything, the 5.7L model gained 100lbs+ I believe.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,185
    Rep Points
    2,132.0
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    22


    Yes Reputation No
    Road and track panel archive lists this for the 08 Challenger SRT-8

    Curb weight: 4145
    Test weight: 4315 (assuming this is with driver)

    http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/data-panel-archive
    Current:
    14 Viper TA
    Wsir - 1:28:9
    Buttonwillow C13 - 1:54:1

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    le Paris
    Posts
    6,655
    Rep Points
    -198.0
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    this car is all about charisma , not handling.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    612
    Rep Points
    420.1
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Mike@MHP Click here to enlarge
    Did they go on a diet? The old one weighed in at 4140lbs.

    The mustang gt is hitting 430rwhp with basic bolts and weighs 3600lbs. And starts at $31k!
    The gt500 can hit 550rwhp without much trouble(stock blower) and now weighs 3750lbs.
    True... but this is a stock dyno. Not apples to apples. For example, I think it's a fair assumption that this 6.4L will also make more rear wheel power/torque than 450/440 with some basic bolt-ons.

    EDIT: I don't own any of these, but if I were in the market, I'd lean toward the Ford products as well, FWIW.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    CA and AZ
    Posts
    237
    Rep Points
    148.7
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by c32AMG-DTM Click here to enlarge
    True... but this is a stock dyno. Not apples to apples. For example, I think it's a fair assumption that this 6.4L will also make more rear wheel power/torque than 450/440 with some basic bolt-ons.

    EDIT: I don't own any of these, but if I were in the market, I'd lean toward the Ford products as well, FWIW.
    True...It could very well hit 500rwhp. That does not change the fact that its still heavy!
    The mustang gt has a similar power to weight when compared to the new 6.4l challenger and is 15k cheaper. Not many in this crowd know this.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,185
    Rep Points
    2,132.0
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    22


    Yes Reputation No
    The new boss mustang with 440 hp would be the way to go. Similar power, much less weight, better handling. Although i think this new challenger just has a style the mustang cant touch. The blue with white stripes is gorgeous. And I would think you could get a lot of hp out of a tune on this car, no? And it produces alot of low end torque now. 350 trq at 2200 rpm to the wheels and almost 450 trq at 4300 at the wheels
    Current:
    14 Viper TA
    Wsir - 1:28:9
    Buttonwillow C13 - 1:54:1

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,829
    Rep Points
    31,808.7
    Mentioned
    2088 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by MHP LLC Click here to enlarge
    Not in a time when the MT COTY is a Chevy Volt my friend.
    Can you name a time where the MotorTrend car of the year was something to be taken seriously?

    Check out this list of "winners" :

    2011 Chevrolet Volt
    2010 Ford Fusion
    2009 Nissan GT-R
    2008 Cadillac CTS
    2007 Toyota Camry
    2006 Honda Civic
    2005 Chrysler 300
    2004 Toyota Prius
    2003 Infiniti G35
    2002 Ford Thunderbird
    2001 Chrysler PT Cruiser
    2000 Lincoln LS
    1999 Chrysler 300M
    1998 Chevrolet Corvette
    1997 Chevrolet Malibu
    1996 Dodge Caravan
    1995 Chrysler Cirrus
    1994 Ford Mustang
    1993 Ford Probe GT
    1992 Cadillac Seville Touring Sedan
    1991 Chevrolet Caprice Classic LTZ
    1990 Lincoln Town Car

    Everything except for the GTR is a joke.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    1,454
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0



    Yes Reputation No
    True, but at least they weren't electric cars. I'd rather push my cars and truck than drive an electric. It's like they're trying to push the green agenda instead of catering to the automotive enthusiasts that form the meat of their subscribers. I guess chalk up another joke, the first ejoke though. Click here to enlarge

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,106
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Yes Reputation No
    Motor Trend should rename some of those "Joke of the Year".

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,829
    Rep Points
    31,808.7
    Mentioned
    2088 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319


    Yes Reputation No
    Here are the test results:

    Track Test Results
    Acceleration, 0-30 mph (sec.) 2.0
    0-45 mph (sec.) 3.0
    0-60 mph (sec.) 4.5
    0-75 mph (sec.) 6.2
    1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 12.6 @ 112.1
    0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 4.2
    0-30 mph, trac ON (sec.) 2.4
    0-45 mph, trac ON (sec.) 3.5
    0-60 mph, trac ON (sec.) 5.2
    0-75 mph, trac ON (sec.) 6.9

    And people say the M3 is weak? It matches this thing with only a 4.0 liter...

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    le Paris
    Posts
    6,655
    Rep Points
    -198.0
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    People say many things ,But who cares?

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,829
    Rep Points
    31,808.7
    Mentioned
    2088 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by HeroSina Click here to enlarge
    People say many things ,But who cares?
    Well true, I just like to point out their inaccuracies.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,106
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Here are the test results:

    Track Test Results
    Acceleration, 0-30 mph (sec.) 2.0
    0-45 mph (sec.) 3.0
    0-60 mph (sec.) 4.5
    0-75 mph (sec.) 6.2
    1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 12.6 @ 112.1
    0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 4.2
    0-30 mph, trac ON (sec.) 2.4
    0-45 mph, trac ON (sec.) 3.5
    0-60 mph, trac ON (sec.) 5.2
    0-75 mph, trac ON (sec.) 6.9

    And people say the M3 is weak? It matches this thing with only a 4.0 liter...
    It's faster than I expected.


    Displacement doesn't matter Sticky. Mainly it is cost. I'm sure BMW could match that with a turbo 2.0L as well.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    CA and AZ
    Posts
    237
    Rep Points
    148.7
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Here are the test results:


    1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 12.6 @ 112.1
    Not bad for 4300/4400lbs of rolling american steel. What did the mags put down for the e92 m3?

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,829
    Rep Points
    31,808.7
    Mentioned
    2088 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    It's faster than I expected.


    Displacement doesn't matter Sticky. Mainly it is cost. I'm sure BMW could match that with a turbo 2.0L as well.
    I'm not talking about the displacement really although I do think displacement matters.

    What I am saying it goes to show how efficient the M3 is and that it is pretty quick. Don't know why people talk down, these days if you aren't running 11's @ 130+ people call cars slow.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •