02 Z28 vs 13 R/T
#3
Ha! My slow LT1 with a CAI and full exhaust stayed side-by-side with a friend's dad's 2008 Challenger SRT8, and I'm still running with a stock tune! I do like Challengers though. I'd definitely consider buying a new Scat Pack.
#4
Ive wanted to run an srt8, Almost got a kid with a 300 to race but he backed out. Nice cars tho
#7
Teching In
Nice run. You got him out of the hole pretty good. Did you try to run him from a roll?
About three weeks ago, I had a random encounter on the highway with a 2016 Challenger RT. I was a car back when he took the hit at about 50 mph. I not only made up that car on him but put another one on him by about 110 and pulling hard. I thought it would have had a little more than it did.
About three weeks ago, I had a random encounter on the highway with a 2016 Challenger RT. I was a car back when he took the hit at about 50 mph. I not only made up that car on him but put another one on him by about 110 and pulling hard. I thought it would have had a little more than it did.
Last edited by MACHXLR8; 01-21-2017 at 05:33 PM.
Trending Topics
#9
Teching In
That was all, man. Sorry to disappoint. We did start at about 50 mph and stopped a little past 100. We were not next to each other. I was in the far right lane lane on a three lane road and then I switched to the center lane to get next to him. As soon as I started my lane change to the center, he hit it. He was already in it hard before I finally layed into it. I am not sure why he would not line up with me but at least I gave him chase. The way I was pulling though, I belive it would have got worse for him.
#10
TECH Enthusiast
No disappoint. Pardon if it sounded that way.
You did indicate and pulling away. Reminds me when I was stock and raced my neighbors bolt-on CTS-V1 from about the same. Freight-trained.
VVT Hemi Challengers dyno about 350rwhp stock. Engine is underrated. Supposedly 395 flywheel hp is more accurate instead of 375fhp.
You did indicate and pulling away. Reminds me when I was stock and raced my neighbors bolt-on CTS-V1 from about the same. Freight-trained.
VVT Hemi Challengers dyno about 350rwhp stock. Engine is underrated. Supposedly 395 flywheel hp is more accurate instead of 375fhp.
#11
Teching In
No disappoint. Pardon if it sounded that way.
You did indicate and pulling away. Reminds me when I was stock and raced my neighbors bolt-on CTS-V1 from about the same. Freight-trained.
VVT Hemi Challengers dyno about 350rwhp stock. Engine is underrated. Supposedly 395 flywheel hp is more accurate instead of 375fhp.
You did indicate and pulling away. Reminds me when I was stock and raced my neighbors bolt-on CTS-V1 from about the same. Freight-trained.
VVT Hemi Challengers dyno about 350rwhp stock. Engine is underrated. Supposedly 395 flywheel hp is more accurate instead of 375fhp.
In all honesty, if these Mopars would shed a little weight, they would be stout competition on the street. I recently saw an add for a new Dodge Demon. Supposed to be a much lighter car. A 392 in this thing might give a GM and Ford a good run for their money.
#13
#14
#18
TECH Enthusiast
Depends on what year as they varied quite a bit since 2008. It really has been nine years now of Challenger models. Amazing.
The early Hemis were about 345hp. Then the 5.7 got the deep breathing 6.1 heads and VVT. And since 2015 the 8speed auto which is like having a 4.70 rear axle compared to previous.
Have improved from low 14s to low 13s stock. Not including hero runs.
The 392 is a different topic. Always been mid to low 12s.
The early Hemis were about 345hp. Then the 5.7 got the deep breathing 6.1 heads and VVT. And since 2015 the 8speed auto which is like having a 4.70 rear axle compared to previous.
Have improved from low 14s to low 13s stock. Not including hero runs.
The 392 is a different topic. Always been mid to low 12s.
Last edited by Felix C; 01-23-2017 at 12:30 PM.
#19
TECH Resident
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: heading South East on Bakalakadaka street
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
No disappoint. Pardon if it sounded that way.
You did indicate and pulling away. Reminds me when I was stock and raced my neighbors bolt-on CTS-V1 from about the same. Freight-trained.
VVT Hemi Challengers dyno about 350rwhp stock. Engine is underrated. Supposedly 395 flywheel hp is more accurate instead of 375fhp.
You did indicate and pulling away. Reminds me when I was stock and raced my neighbors bolt-on CTS-V1 from about the same. Freight-trained.
VVT Hemi Challengers dyno about 350rwhp stock. Engine is underrated. Supposedly 395 flywheel hp is more accurate instead of 375fhp.
Not impressed with these RT cars tbh. Expect more out of them and haven't seen it. Saw a guy with an auto '15 one run 14.8 @ sub 100. He ran quite a few times (I want to say around 6-7 times), never got out of the 14.5+ range and never got over 100mph. This was ~2 years ago in about 2k DA and idk if it was 8spd or not. I don't follow them like that to know when they got an 8spd. My friend has managed a 14.3 in a 2005 Dodge Magnum RT though... so maybe there's some kind of hope around there.
I'd rather take an SRT Jeep over any of the others, just because they seem to run better and more consistent. Same time frame, saw a guy hop in one with paper plates and run 13.5 @ 105 or something, consistently... right on target with what magazine times said it'd run.
OP: As expected. Not surprised to see a 13s car gap a 14s car.
#20
On The Tree
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Utah
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends on what year as they varied quite a bit since 2008. It really has been nine years now of Challenger models. Amazing.
The early Hemis were about 345hp. Then the 5.7 got the deep breathing 6.1 heads and VVT. And since 2015 the 8speed auto which is like having a 4.70 rear axle compared to previous.
Have improved from low 14s to low 13s stock. Not including hero runs.
The 392 is a different topic. Always been mid to low 12s.
The early Hemis were about 345hp. Then the 5.7 got the deep breathing 6.1 heads and VVT. And since 2015 the 8speed auto which is like having a 4.70 rear axle compared to previous.
Have improved from low 14s to low 13s stock. Not including hero runs.
The 392 is a different topic. Always been mid to low 12s.
Yup, I think you got all the perfects covered. Thanks for breaking it down so well.