C/D First Drive - 2011 Dodge Challenger SRT8 392 HEMI
11-21-2010, 11:38 AM
#1
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C/D First Drive - 2011 Dodge Challenger SRT8 392 HEMI Dodge mines historic Mopar gold with the latest Challenger SRT8
BY AARON ROBINSON
November 2010
The whole 392 thing was a total coincidence. So says Dodge Challenger chief engineer Tom McCarthy. In 2009, McCarthy and his team were discussing a punch-out of the Challenger SRT8’s rather peaky 6.1-liter V-8 for more midrange torque.
“I always thought that engine was tuned to the horsepower number,” says McCarthy, meaning that to reach the 425-hp benchmark engineers tuned the engine for revs to the detriment of usable torque. McCarthy and his team settled on giving the big-block a 0.9-mm increase in bore to 103.9 and a 3.6-mm stretch to the stroke to 94.5, for a total of 6410 cc.
Close Counts in Engine Displacement, Too
These days, engineers work strictly in metric units, even at U.S. car companies. “I had no idea what the displacement worked out to in cubic inches,” claims McCarthy, until Dodge brand president and CEO Ralph Gilles casually asked in a meeting. Okay, math whizzes, it actually works out to 391.15 cubic inches, but that’s close enough for Chrysler to roll out the marketing war wagons. Way back in the late 1950s, hemi-head 392s powered the so-called forward-look Chryslers, including the fabulous 300 letter series, although it never was installed in a Dodge Challenger.
The 2011 Challenger SRT8 391.15 makes 470 hp at 6000 rpm and, perhaps more important, 470 lb-ft of torque, a gain of 50 lb-ft. The torque peak is lower, too, at 4200 rpm versus 4800 in the old 6.1. And, yes, the engine is still painted Hemi Orange.
Under the 2011 Challenger’s hood, plastic panels over the rocker covers scream the 392 moniker. While you’re poking around, you might notice that the intake rams are now plastic, too, instead of painted aluminum, as on the old 6.1. Cost was definitely a factor, says McCarthy, as was “tunability.” The plastic intake is a two-stage plenum with air flaps that effectively vary the intake ram length based on engine speed. In the block, the camshaft timing is now variable, stretching out the duration of the intake-valve opening for better cylinder filling. (No, it’s not the Viper’s fancy cam-within-a-cam system, so exhaust timing also changes during cam phasing.) The two systems work together to give the 6.4 much greater punch in the 2000-to-4000-rpm range where the 6.1 was somewhat wheezy.
Other engine enhancements include cylinder deactivation on automatic-equipped cars, a fuel-saving feature not offered on the old 6.1, and a rerouted intake that was heavily worked over by computational fluid dynamics software to be straighter and more efficient. Also, the compression ratio changes from 10.3:1 to 10.9:1. A straighter dual-exhaust system that ends in quad tips “just barely passes” the legal noise-level limit, says McCarthy.
Save the Manuals!
Shockingly for a nation addicted to automatics, fully 50 percent of Challenger SRT8s are sold as manuals, according to McCarthy. The twin-disc clutch in front of the Tremec TR-6060 six-speed has been changed to accept the greater power, and the pistol-grip shifter’s throws are shorter. The rear differential internals are now shot-peened for extra strength.
Other changes for 2011 include new hydroelastic engine mounts—they suppress idle shake and better control the engine’s mass during cornering—stiffer suspension bushings complemented by larger front and rear anti-roll bars, a steering ratio quickened from 16.1:1 to 14.4:1, and an increase in the front negative camber from 0.8 degree to 1.4 degrees.
Inside, the steering wheel is one inch smaller in diameter than the old Challenger’s wagon wheel, and small detail enhancements such as a brushed-metal-look center console make the ambience less austere.
During some brief track work, the 6.4 roared lustily and pulled the big heavy Challenger up hills and out of corners strongly in third or fourth gear. The 6.4’s power still lives largest closer to the top end, but there’s more excitement in the midrange than ever before. And now the steering feels much more natural and lively, with a quicker turn-in.
In less than a week, we’ll be able to report instrumented test numbers on an Inaugural Edition 392, which includes an appearance package of stripes, different wheels, interior upgrades, and a body-color grille insert, and represents the first 1492 units of the 2011 production run. Look for the 392 to hit dealerships in late December.
BY AARON ROBINSON
November 2010
The whole 392 thing was a total coincidence. So says Dodge Challenger chief engineer Tom McCarthy. In 2009, McCarthy and his team were discussing a punch-out of the Challenger SRT8’s rather peaky 6.1-liter V-8 for more midrange torque.
“I always thought that engine was tuned to the horsepower number,” says McCarthy, meaning that to reach the 425-hp benchmark engineers tuned the engine for revs to the detriment of usable torque. McCarthy and his team settled on giving the big-block a 0.9-mm increase in bore to 103.9 and a 3.6-mm stretch to the stroke to 94.5, for a total of 6410 cc.
Close Counts in Engine Displacement, Too
These days, engineers work strictly in metric units, even at U.S. car companies. “I had no idea what the displacement worked out to in cubic inches,” claims McCarthy, until Dodge brand president and CEO Ralph Gilles casually asked in a meeting. Okay, math whizzes, it actually works out to 391.15 cubic inches, but that’s close enough for Chrysler to roll out the marketing war wagons. Way back in the late 1950s, hemi-head 392s powered the so-called forward-look Chryslers, including the fabulous 300 letter series, although it never was installed in a Dodge Challenger.
The 2011 Challenger SRT8 391.15 makes 470 hp at 6000 rpm and, perhaps more important, 470 lb-ft of torque, a gain of 50 lb-ft. The torque peak is lower, too, at 4200 rpm versus 4800 in the old 6.1. And, yes, the engine is still painted Hemi Orange.
Under the 2011 Challenger’s hood, plastic panels over the rocker covers scream the 392 moniker. While you’re poking around, you might notice that the intake rams are now plastic, too, instead of painted aluminum, as on the old 6.1. Cost was definitely a factor, says McCarthy, as was “tunability.” The plastic intake is a two-stage plenum with air flaps that effectively vary the intake ram length based on engine speed. In the block, the camshaft timing is now variable, stretching out the duration of the intake-valve opening for better cylinder filling. (No, it’s not the Viper’s fancy cam-within-a-cam system, so exhaust timing also changes during cam phasing.) The two systems work together to give the 6.4 much greater punch in the 2000-to-4000-rpm range where the 6.1 was somewhat wheezy.
Other engine enhancements include cylinder deactivation on automatic-equipped cars, a fuel-saving feature not offered on the old 6.1, and a rerouted intake that was heavily worked over by computational fluid dynamics software to be straighter and more efficient. Also, the compression ratio changes from 10.3:1 to 10.9:1. A straighter dual-exhaust system that ends in quad tips “just barely passes” the legal noise-level limit, says McCarthy.
Save the Manuals!
Shockingly for a nation addicted to automatics, fully 50 percent of Challenger SRT8s are sold as manuals, according to McCarthy. The twin-disc clutch in front of the Tremec TR-6060 six-speed has been changed to accept the greater power, and the pistol-grip shifter’s throws are shorter. The rear differential internals are now shot-peened for extra strength.
Other changes for 2011 include new hydroelastic engine mounts—they suppress idle shake and better control the engine’s mass during cornering—stiffer suspension bushings complemented by larger front and rear anti-roll bars, a steering ratio quickened from 16.1:1 to 14.4:1, and an increase in the front negative camber from 0.8 degree to 1.4 degrees.
Inside, the steering wheel is one inch smaller in diameter than the old Challenger’s wagon wheel, and small detail enhancements such as a brushed-metal-look center console make the ambience less austere.
During some brief track work, the 6.4 roared lustily and pulled the big heavy Challenger up hills and out of corners strongly in third or fourth gear. The 6.4’s power still lives largest closer to the top end, but there’s more excitement in the midrange than ever before. And now the steering feels much more natural and lively, with a quicker turn-in.
In less than a week, we’ll be able to report instrumented test numbers on an Inaugural Edition 392, which includes an appearance package of stripes, different wheels, interior upgrades, and a body-color grille insert, and represents the first 1492 units of the 2011 production run. Look for the 392 to hit dealerships in late December.
12-07-2010, 06:39 PM
#7
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2 different road tests: 392 Challenger SRT8 http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 2-door coupe
BASE PRICE: $45,080
ENGINE TYPE: pushrod 16-valve V-8, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 391 cu in, 6410 cc
Power (SAE net): 470 bhp @ 6000 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 470 lb-ft @ 4200 rpm
TRANSMISSIONS: 6-speed manual
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 116.0 in Length: 197.7 in
Width: 75.7 in Height: 57.1 in
Curb weight: 4203 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.2 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 16.3 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 24.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.9 sec @ 114 mph ON 91 OCTANE
Top speed (drag limited, est.): 170 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 160 ft
Roadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.88 g
FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 14/23 mpg
C/D observed: 17 mpg
This is a quote for the ppl that doesnt want to read the article.
"Even quicker times might be possible outside of California, where the pumps only serve premium rated at 91 octane."
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...est/index.html
Base price $45,430
Price as tested $47,540
Vehicle layout Front-engine, RWD, Engine 6.4L/470-hp/470-lb-ft OHV 16-valve V-8
Transmission 6-speed manual
Curb weight (f/r dist) 4260 lb (54/46%) Wheelbase 116.0 in Length x width x height 197.7 x 75.7 x 57.1 in
0-60 mph 4.6 sec
Quarter mile 13.0 sec @ 111.3 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph 117 ft
Lateral acceleration 0.89 g (avg) MT Figure Eight 25.6 sec @ 0.70 g (avg)
EPA city/hwy fuel econ 14/22 mpg (est) CO2 emissions 1.16 lb/mile (est) On sale in U.S. December 2010
114mph trap speed in the car and driver test
Car is sweet but pretty expensive. Give me the 2011 shelby GT500 anyday over this!
VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 2-door coupe
BASE PRICE: $45,080
ENGINE TYPE: pushrod 16-valve V-8, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 391 cu in, 6410 cc
Power (SAE net): 470 bhp @ 6000 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 470 lb-ft @ 4200 rpm
TRANSMISSIONS: 6-speed manual
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 116.0 in Length: 197.7 in
Width: 75.7 in Height: 57.1 in
Curb weight: 4203 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.2 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 16.3 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 24.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.9 sec @ 114 mph ON 91 OCTANE
Top speed (drag limited, est.): 170 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 160 ft
Roadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.88 g
FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 14/23 mpg
C/D observed: 17 mpg
This is a quote for the ppl that doesnt want to read the article.
"Even quicker times might be possible outside of California, where the pumps only serve premium rated at 91 octane."
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...est/index.html
Base price $45,430
Price as tested $47,540
Vehicle layout Front-engine, RWD, Engine 6.4L/470-hp/470-lb-ft OHV 16-valve V-8
Transmission 6-speed manual
Curb weight (f/r dist) 4260 lb (54/46%) Wheelbase 116.0 in Length x width x height 197.7 x 75.7 x 57.1 in
0-60 mph 4.6 sec
Quarter mile 13.0 sec @ 111.3 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph 117 ft
Lateral acceleration 0.89 g (avg) MT Figure Eight 25.6 sec @ 0.70 g (avg)
EPA city/hwy fuel econ 14/22 mpg (est) CO2 emissions 1.16 lb/mile (est) On sale in U.S. December 2010
114mph trap speed in the car and driver test
Car is sweet but pretty expensive. Give me the 2011 shelby GT500 anyday over this! Last edited by demarco313; 12-08-2010 at 05:55 AM.
Trending Topics
12-07-2010, 11:04 PM
#18
TECH Resident
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Eau Claire-ish, WI
Posts: 853
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like I said before, probably the best time you are going to see. It was a way negative DA with a 1.8xx 60', not a great run to go by if you are looking for what they really run.
This wouldn't be a bad car if it went on a diet or was cheaper, but they are asking GT500 money for a car that's ~500lbs heavier, a little less power and doesn't come with a supercharger.
This wouldn't be a bad car if it went on a diet or was cheaper, but they are asking GT500 money for a car that's ~500lbs heavier, a little less power and doesn't come with a supercharger.
12-07-2010, 11:43 PM
#19
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like I said before, probably the best time you are going to see. It was a way negative DA with a 1.8xx 60', not a great run to go by if you are looking for what they really run.
This wouldn't be a bad car if it went on a diet or was cheaper, but they are asking GT500 money for a car that's ~500lbs heavier, a little less power and doesn't come with a supercharger.
This wouldn't be a bad car if it went on a diet or was cheaper, but they are asking GT500 money for a car that's ~500lbs heavier, a little less power and doesn't come with a supercharger.
