2012 SRT8 392 Charger vs First Gen CTS-V with Headers only
12-25-2016, 11:26 PM
#42
They are sensitive to detonation like the 6g. Never know how good pump gas is. Just makes sure they run top notch. More help mid summer against detonation. He only put a gallon or two in he told me... too much can slow down a stock car. He said it had in the past and I've heard that too.
The car has just what he says I seen it in person. Only thing he could have is a hidden tune but I just don't get that impression.
Like I said can't speak for the older models but the 15+ cars are a very close match to a 6g. According to owners and mopar sites the 470 hp a5 cars are about .2 and 2 mph back apples to apples. Add another tenth for a charger weight penalty. A 14 a5 charger 392 should be a solid mid 12 car 110-112 in good conditions and good 60ft. Just guessing
The car has just what he says I seen it in person. Only thing he could have is a hidden tune but I just don't get that impression.
Like I said can't speak for the older models but the 15+ cars are a very close match to a 6g. According to owners and mopar sites the 470 hp a5 cars are about .2 and 2 mph back apples to apples. Add another tenth for a charger weight penalty. A 14 a5 charger 392 should be a solid mid 12 car 110-112 in good conditions and good 60ft. Just guessing
Last edited by UltraZLS1; 12-25-2016 at 11:32 PM.
12-26-2016, 09:36 AM
#43
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
GTO has the same issue, I couldn't launch mine at all. 392's trap around 110 average, the V traps around 107 average, which means that a V would need around a 112 trap speed to beat a 392 like that. I don't see 5mph being picked up from LT headers. Lets be honest, a lot of LS guys aren't exactly truthful on their mods. I would bet that the V had something else done to it.
GTO was pretty damned bad to launch. 245 series tires didn't help matters.
I find it funny that every time a GM car beats something that it shouldn't, they have a factory freak that runs harder than any other documented car. Couldn't possibly be that they have one of the cheapest, easiest to mod engines on the planet and love to lie about mods.
I'm not talking magazine times either, if you go by magazine times, 392 chargers run 114MPH. I haven't heard of one trapping less than 110.
If you look at the V1 fast lists, 13.5-13.7 is common. Hell a guy has one with a blower on it that went 12.6@112. The fastest h/c/i on the list only went 12.7@112
Look through the thread.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/cadillac-...time-list.html
Judging by the times, a 5.7L charger runs around 13.6@102, which is more than likely what this was in the video.
And yes, a lot of car guys lie about their mods, but I find GM guys to be the absolute worst about it.
He was driving the hell out of it.
I find it funny that every time a GM car beats something that it shouldn't, they have a factory freak that runs harder than any other documented car. Couldn't possibly be that they have one of the cheapest, easiest to mod engines on the planet and love to lie about mods.
I'm not talking magazine times either, if you go by magazine times, 392 chargers run 114MPH. I haven't heard of one trapping less than 110.
If you look at the V1 fast lists, 13.5-13.7 is common. Hell a guy has one with a blower on it that went 12.6@112. The fastest h/c/i on the list only went 12.7@112
Look through the thread.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/cadillac-...time-list.html
Judging by the times, a 5.7L charger runs around 13.6@102, which is more than likely what this was in the video.
And yes, a lot of car guys lie about their mods, but I find GM guys to be the absolute worst about it.
He was driving the hell out of it.
This x 10,000
12-26-2016, 01:19 PM
#44
Oh noes, a narcissistic GM troll thinks I have no clue, whatever will I do? Oh that's right, I will remember that you blatantly hide mods, believe timing errors at the track, and disagree with the majority of LS1 owners when they say that rockers aren't a bolt on.
12-27-2016, 01:05 AM
#48
TECH Resident
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: heading South East on Bakalakadaka street
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Ok so I'm going to take a page out of the book being used here and do this:
https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...92+drag+racing
1st vid 12.66 @ 110 (the hero run)
2nd vid 13.22 @ 109
3rd vid 14.09 @ 100 (can expect either shitty driver or bad DA for this)
4th vid 13.94 @ 101 (^ looks to be same guy from 3rd video)
5th vid 12.70 @ 108
7th vid 13.40 @ 109
11th vid 13.27 @ 109
12th vid 13.44 @ 107
I got tired of watching these 392s but the point is clear. This is about what I've seen in person too... Not 12.2 @ 116 or whatever. I've seen 13.x @ 110ish.
Its fully possible for a V1 with headers to walk a stock 392 that runs 13.44 @ 107, or 13.40 @ 109, or whatever else. How is it not? I've run 13.2 on a V1 with headers/tune with a 2.x 60, and others have gone faster than that for sure. V1 driver looked like he knew what he was doing.
Either way
V1 > 392.
https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...92+drag+racing
1st vid 12.66 @ 110 (the hero run)
2nd vid 13.22 @ 109
3rd vid 14.09 @ 100 (can expect either shitty driver or bad DA for this)
4th vid 13.94 @ 101 (^ looks to be same guy from 3rd video)
5th vid 12.70 @ 108
7th vid 13.40 @ 109
11th vid 13.27 @ 109
12th vid 13.44 @ 107
I got tired of watching these 392s but the point is clear. This is about what I've seen in person too... Not 12.2 @ 116 or whatever. I've seen 13.x @ 110ish.
Its fully possible for a V1 with headers to walk a stock 392 that runs 13.44 @ 107, or 13.40 @ 109, or whatever else. How is it not? I've run 13.2 on a V1 with headers/tune with a 2.x 60, and others have gone faster than that for sure. V1 driver looked like he knew what he was doing.
Either way
V1 > 392.
12-27-2016, 08:29 AM
#49
Those are all older models...the 15+ 392 cars with the A8 run hard...
http://www.challengertalk.com/forums...15-mph-537529/
V1 is not close to a 15+ 392.
http://www.challengertalk.com/forums...15-mph-537529/
V1 is not close to a 15+ 392.
Last edited by kinglt-1; 12-27-2016 at 09:31 AM.
12-27-2016, 09:36 AM
#50
12-27-2016, 11:23 AM
#53
I have seen tire only Hellcats run low 11's, high 10's personally and not in mineshaft air either. Also like mentioned, there is a noticeable difference between a5 470 hp and the a8 485 hp cars. I raced a stock V1 in my stock 15 Gt and also a stock 6m scat pack challenger and the v1 wouldn't have been close to the challenger, not by a long shot.
01-01-2017, 10:12 PM
#54
Banned
iTrader: (1)
!["MAC"'s Avatar](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 50 50'><circle class='avatar-circle-default' fill='%237f3b59' cx='25px' cy='25px' r='20px'></circle><text class='avatar-text-default' x='49%' y='53%' fill='white' text-anchor='middle' alignment-baseline='middle'>"</text></svg>)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Edit: you can also tell the charger isn't a 6.1 from the body of the car as well. They redid the exterior when the 392 came out. That year (iirc) has 475hp and 475 trq.
01-01-2017, 10:26 PM
#55
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They are sensitive to detonation like the 6g. Never know how good pump gas is. Just makes sure they run top notch. More help mid summer against detonation. He only put a gallon or two in he told me... too much can slow down a stock car. He said it had in the past and I've heard that too.
The car has just what he says I seen it in person. Only thing he could have is a hidden tune but I just don't get that impression.
Like I said can't speak for the older models but the 15+ cars are a very close match to a 6g. According to owners and mopar sites the 470 hp a5 cars are about .2 and 2 mph back apples to apples. Add another tenth for a charger weight penalty. A 14 a5 charger 392 should be a solid mid 12 car 110-112 in good conditions and good 60ft. Just guessing
The car has just what he says I seen it in person. Only thing he could have is a hidden tune but I just don't get that impression.
Like I said can't speak for the older models but the 15+ cars are a very close match to a 6g. According to owners and mopar sites the 470 hp a5 cars are about .2 and 2 mph back apples to apples. Add another tenth for a charger weight penalty. A 14 a5 charger 392 should be a solid mid 12 car 110-112 in good conditions and good 60ft. Just guessing
01-01-2017, 10:29 PM
#56
Banned
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok so I'm going to take a page out of the book being used here and do this:
https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...92+drag+racing
1st vid 12.66 @ 110 (the hero run)
2nd vid 13.22 @ 109
3rd vid 14.09 @ 100 (can expect either shitty driver or bad DA for this)
4th vid 13.94 @ 101 (^ looks to be same guy from 3rd video)
5th vid 12.70 @ 108
7th vid 13.40 @ 109
11th vid 13.27 @ 109
12th vid 13.44 @ 107
I got tired of watching these 392s but the point is clear. This is about what I've seen in person too... Not 12.2 @ 116 or whatever. I've seen 13.x @ 110ish.
Its fully possible for a V1 with headers to walk a stock 392 that runs 13.44 @ 107, or 13.40 @ 109, or whatever else. How is it not? I've run 13.2 on a V1 with headers/tune with a 2.x 60, and others have gone faster than that for sure. V1 driver looked like he knew what he was doing.
Either way
V1 > 392.
https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...92+drag+racing
1st vid 12.66 @ 110 (the hero run)
2nd vid 13.22 @ 109
3rd vid 14.09 @ 100 (can expect either shitty driver or bad DA for this)
4th vid 13.94 @ 101 (^ looks to be same guy from 3rd video)
5th vid 12.70 @ 108
7th vid 13.40 @ 109
11th vid 13.27 @ 109
12th vid 13.44 @ 107
I got tired of watching these 392s but the point is clear. This is about what I've seen in person too... Not 12.2 @ 116 or whatever. I've seen 13.x @ 110ish.
Its fully possible for a V1 with headers to walk a stock 392 that runs 13.44 @ 107, or 13.40 @ 109, or whatever else. How is it not? I've run 13.2 on a V1 with headers/tune with a 2.x 60, and others have gone faster than that for sure. V1 driver looked like he knew what he was doing.
Either way
V1 > 392.
01-02-2017, 12:27 AM
#57
https://www.0-60specs.com/cadillac-cts-v-0-60-times/
Best they could get out of a CTS-V was 13.1@109.8, worst was a 13.7@107, and the worst trap was 105.
https://www.0-60specs.com/dodge-charger-0-60-times/
Best they could get out of a 5 speed auto 392 was 12.6@115, worst was a 13.1@110...
So basically it would take a hero run CTS-V vs the worst 392 to have this kind of result. If you want to do law of averages, the V should be a 13.38@108.19. The challenger SRT8 is a 12.8@112.85.
So yeah, like I said, it's possible, but not probable.
01-02-2017, 02:08 AM
#59
