Kill of a brand new 5.0 tang
11-29-2011, 06:30 PM
#121
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He's a very talented driver, but he still requires practice. Hell, going by memory...it took Ranger Armstrong over 50 passes to get his best time from the Z06 that he owned. And he is no less talented than Evan Smith.
11-29-2011, 06:31 PM
#122
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's this?? Rational people posting up real times about the 5.0?? Has ohio's head exploded and he is unable to actually educate us? I have a vid on my phone of a 5.0 running 13.3's at my local track. Best I have witnessed around here is a 12.7, fast for a stock car but not the low 12's people claim. (Notice all mustang nut swingers, I did not mention the 5th gen once in any of my posts 
).
).
Is anyone here really so thick-headed that they think the quickest new GT is only ONE TENTH of a second faster than the quickest LS1 F-body?
11-29-2011, 06:41 PM
#123
TECH Enthusiast
ok fellas, trolling aside. i own one.
1. 392 .......12.4
2. 5.0...... 12.5-12.6
3. 2010 SS 12.6-12.7
here is another obsevation so far. DR's help a 5.0 way more than a 392. i feel its a tie a 12.1-12.2 for both cars. the SS is left behind, sorry. we are talking stock here.
i dont buy the 428rwhp dyno numbers for the 392,
or the 390rwhp for the 5.0
or the 390 for the LS3...happy dynos.
i believe the 475bhp 392, 412bhp 5.0 and 426bhp ls3 are what they are. the cars are all running expected miles per hour at the track with the 392 having a mph or so on the coyote and SS.
that 12.4 was at:
Cecil County Dragway, Md 11/12/2010 7:00pm
Track Elevation: 325 feet above sea level
Air Temperature: 51.8 degrees F
Barometric Pressure: 30.34 inches Hg
Relative Humidty: 30%
Density Altitude: -503 feet
Relative Density: 101.48 %
\/ \/ \/ not accusing you:
1. 392 .......12.4
2. 5.0...... 12.5-12.6
3. 2010 SS 12.6-12.7
here is another obsevation so far. DR's help a 5.0 way more than a 392. i feel its a tie a 12.1-12.2 for both cars. the SS is left behind, sorry. we are talking stock here.
i dont buy the 428rwhp dyno numbers for the 392,
or the 390rwhp for the 5.0
or the 390 for the LS3...happy dynos.
i believe the 475bhp 392, 412bhp 5.0 and 426bhp ls3 are what they are. the cars are all running expected miles per hour at the track with the 392 having a mph or so on the coyote and SS.
that 12.4 was at:
Cecil County Dragway, Md 11/12/2010 7:00pm
Track Elevation: 325 feet above sea level
Air Temperature: 51.8 degrees F
Barometric Pressure: 30.34 inches Hg
Relative Humidty: 30%
Density Altitude: -503 feet
Relative Density: 101.48 %
\/ \/ \/ not accusing you:
Last edited by assasinator; 11-29-2011 at 06:47 PM.
11-29-2011, 06:51 PM
#125
11 Second Club
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: E-town raceway
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i see. at 650DA, car(x) will run slower at your track than at any other track with the exact same traction, driver, car, engine temps, tire temps, clutch slip, etc.
that makes perfect sense to me.
there is ZERO chance you missed a pass by ANYONE with ANY other car. i take your words as gospel.
please continue your absolutisms sir.
you know i was just picking at you. your time seems very good. your driving that time seems to be very good also. i just had to get the discusion 'I' was after. sorry man.
Also...i fully believe your car will pull slowly on a stock 2011GT. CARS? not against MY driving, maybe against your buddy. but if i was stock you would win no doubt.
that makes perfect sense to me.
there is ZERO chance you missed a pass by ANYONE with ANY other car. i take your words as gospel.
please continue your absolutisms sir.
you know i was just picking at you. your time seems very good. your driving that time seems to be very good also. i just had to get the discusion 'I' was after. sorry man.
Also...i fully believe your car will pull slowly on a stock 2011GT. CARS? not against MY driving, maybe against your buddy. but if i was stock you would win no doubt.
11-29-2011, 07:09 PM
#126
What's this?? Rational people posting up real times about the 5.0?? Has ohio's head exploded and he is unable to actually educate us? I have a vid on my phone of a 5.0 running 13.3's at my local track. Best I have witnessed around here is a 12.7, fast for a stock car but not the low 12's people claim. (Notice all mustang nut swingers, I did not mention the 5th gen once in any of my posts ).
).More rational/real stuff: I never saw a 12 second 5th gen, stock or modded at our local track.
11-29-2011, 07:15 PM
#127
Good thing I'm not some 65 year old man thinking back to "them days when I cruised around in my Hemi quad four with a double stacker tripple decker", need to heat my *** hemroids, wash down my viagra with some hot chocolate, and need navigation to make it home because of my altimers.
Last edited by 99peweterls1; 11-29-2011 at 07:27 PM.
11-29-2011, 07:25 PM
#128
Good thing I'm not some 65 year old man thinking back to "them days when I cruised around in my Hemi quad four with a double stacker tripple decker", need to heat my *** hemroids, wash down my viagra with some hot chocolate, and need navigation to make it home because of my altimers.
Missed this post before but...**Alzheimer's
11-29-2011, 07:29 PM
#129
ok fellas, trolling aside. i own one.
1. 392 .......12.4
2. 5.0...... 12.5-12.6
3. 2010 SS 12.6-12.7
here is another obsevation so far. DR's help a 5.0 way more than a 392. i feel its a tie a 12.1-12.2 for both cars. the SS is left behind, sorry. we are talking stock here.
i dont buy the 428rwhp dyno numbers for the 392,
or the 390rwhp for the 5.0
or the 390 for the LS3...happy dynos.
i believe the 475bhp 392, 412bhp 5.0 and 426bhp ls3 are what they are. the cars are all running expected miles per hour at the track with the 392 having a mph or so on the coyote and SS.
that 12.4 was at:
Cecil County Dragway, Md 11/12/2010 7:00pm
Track Elevation: 325 feet above sea level
Air Temperature: 51.8 degrees F
Barometric Pressure: 30.34 inches Hg
Relative Humidty: 30%
Density Altitude: -503 feet
Relative Density: 101.48 %
\/ \/ \/ not accusing you:
1. 392 .......12.4
2. 5.0...... 12.5-12.6
3. 2010 SS 12.6-12.7
here is another obsevation so far. DR's help a 5.0 way more than a 392. i feel its a tie a 12.1-12.2 for both cars. the SS is left behind, sorry. we are talking stock here.
i dont buy the 428rwhp dyno numbers for the 392,
or the 390rwhp for the 5.0
or the 390 for the LS3...happy dynos.
i believe the 475bhp 392, 412bhp 5.0 and 426bhp ls3 are what they are. the cars are all running expected miles per hour at the track with the 392 having a mph or so on the coyote and SS.
that 12.4 was at:
Cecil County Dragway, Md 11/12/2010 7:00pm
Track Elevation: 325 feet above sea level
Air Temperature: 51.8 degrees F
Barometric Pressure: 30.34 inches Hg
Relative Humidty: 30%
Density Altitude: -503 feet
Relative Density: 101.48 %
\/ \/ \/ not accusing you:
11-29-2011, 07:32 PM
#130
11-29-2011, 07:33 PM
#131
Teching In
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In reality, these "fastest" stock 5.0 times you are quoting most won't see in their lifetime. That's because they don't normally run those times where as the 392's are dipping into the mid-low 12's left and right. Guys are going 12.4-50's on their first night out with less than 200 miles on the odometer. There is footage all over the net with novice drivers accomplishing this. It's becoming very common as more of these cars are hitting the strip. You won't find the same for the 5.0's because in reality they are a couple tenths off. Those 12.3-4 passes are far and few between.
Since were posting anonomous timeslips why not add in this one from a bone-stock 392 Challenger automatic.
http://www.dragtimes.com/2011-Dodge-...ecs-22764.html
11-29-2011, 07:43 PM
#133
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The SRT8 is 15 grand more than the 5.0l. It's literally one and a half times the price.
If anything, compare the srt8 to the Boss 302, which trounces the SRT8 in every way, while still costing 5 grand less.
The Challenger is overpriced and overweight.
/thread
If anything, compare the srt8 to the Boss 302, which trounces the SRT8 in every way, while still costing 5 grand less.
The Challenger is overpriced and overweight.
/thread
11-29-2011, 07:57 PM
#135
Originally Posted by Hiho
But that's a race car!!!!! 
11-29-2011, 07:58 PM
#136
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What proof did you provide really? You said the fastest 5.0 wen't 12.2 and you still haven't shown proof.
In reality, these "fastest" stock 5.0 times you are quoting most won't see in their lifetime. That's because they don't normally run those times where as the 392's are dipping into the mid-low 12's left and right. Guys are going 12.4-50's on their first night out with less than 200 miles on the odometer. There is footage all over the net with novice drivers accomplishing this. It's becoming very common as more of these cars are hitting the strip. You won't find the same for the 5.0's because in reality they are a couple tenths off. Those 12.3-4 passes are far and few between.
Since were posting anonomous timeslips why not add in this one from a bone-stock 392 Challenger automatic.
http://www.dragtimes.com/2011-Dodge-...ecs-22764.html
In reality, these "fastest" stock 5.0 times you are quoting most won't see in their lifetime. That's because they don't normally run those times where as the 392's are dipping into the mid-low 12's left and right. Guys are going 12.4-50's on their first night out with less than 200 miles on the odometer. There is footage all over the net with novice drivers accomplishing this. It's becoming very common as more of these cars are hitting the strip. You won't find the same for the 5.0's because in reality they are a couple tenths off. Those 12.3-4 passes are far and few between.
Since were posting anonomous timeslips why not add in this one from a bone-stock 392 Challenger automatic.
http://www.dragtimes.com/2011-Dodge-...ecs-22764.html
11-29-2011, 07:59 PM
#137
Now the srt8 is a luxury sports car and is priced accordingly. It has a 13 speaker boston acoustic system in it for christ sakes, of course it's heavy and the interior is nice and the ride very comfortable.
The mustang is in no way shape or form a luxury car. The cars are in two diffrent categories in price but also in design. The srt8 is a luxury car with some go, and it goes faster than ford's pony car get over it.
11-29-2011, 08:02 PM
#139
11-29-2011, 08:07 PM
#140
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have not only sat in one, but I drove it.
The Challenger is by no means a luxury car.
The interior is not that of a luxury car at all. Cheap materials and average fit and finish.
Look at this amazing interior. All plastics and look at the tiny gaps. That must be only an inch between the door and the dash... lol
You need to drive a few real modern luxury cars if you think the Challenger is luxurious (no offense intended).
And btw, a fully loaded RT has the same exact interior as the SRT8 and costs 32 grand.
So no, it is anything but a luxury car. It is a 32k dollar pony car that costs 13 grand more for a motor and minor suspension work...
The Challenger is by no means a luxury car.
The interior is not that of a luxury car at all. Cheap materials and average fit and finish.
Look at this amazing interior. All plastics and look at the tiny gaps. That must be only an inch between the door and the dash... lol
You need to drive a few real modern luxury cars if you think the Challenger is luxurious (no offense intended).
And btw, a fully loaded RT has the same exact interior as the SRT8 and costs 32 grand.
So no, it is anything but a luxury car. It is a 32k dollar pony car that costs 13 grand more for a motor and minor suspension work...