Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 31 of 31

Challenger SRT8..disappointed

This is a discussion on Challenger SRT8..disappointed within the Firebird / WS6 forums, part of the Vehicle Specific category; true about our cars getting more looks. and about the srt8 jeep...i seriously doubt he could run a 12 unless ...

  1. #21
    Senior Member Ramairgod84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    peoria, az
    Posts
    1,017

    Black
    2001 WS6

    true about our cars getting more looks. and about the srt8 jeep...i seriously doubt he could run a 12 unless he did ALOT of modding. And even so, would you really want to drive something that powerful and unstable on the road? being an suv

  2. #22
    Member ronnie tadlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Hickory, NC
    Posts
    158

    Pewter
    2001 Trans Am WS-6

    Just how much more do the new Challengers weigh than our cars? I have a copy of the build sheet from my 2001 WS6 and it lists a Gross Weight Rating of 4258 lbs. but doesn't list actual weight of the car. What do these things weigh in at?

  3. #23
    now greybat66
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    bloomfield nj
    Posts
    481

    navy blue metalic
    1998 trans am conv

    a trans am weights anywhere from 3400 pounds to 3600 pounds the charger a tade over 4 thousand pounds

  4. #24
    I see Yello and I like it 02cetransam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    2,066

    yellow
    02 Collector Trans Am


  5. #25
    Still The Junior Member RedVertTA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Orlando FL
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,045

    Red+White Top and Stripes
    2000TransAmConvertible A4

    Quote Originally Posted by clg82 View Post
    I don't think anyone was questioning the safety features of these cars....who cares if they are safer then ours......i guarantee that my car will get more looks any day then those cars........ and mine is 8 years old
    No I'm not saying anyone is questioning the safety of these cars, forgive me if I made any of you think otherwise, I'm merely pointing out the fact that the extra weight is there for something, that its not dead weight.

    Your right about the looks though, our cars do look much better than any of these.
    FAST 90/90, SLP Lid, Kooks JetHot Coated LT's, American Racing Y-Pipe+Magnaflow Cats, DHM Electric Cutout, Flowmaster American Thunder Catback, HP Tuners Software, 343 rwhp.

    BMR Convertible Subframe Connectors, Hotchkis Strut Tower Brace, BMR Driveshaft Safety Loop.

  6. #26
    Still The Junior Member RedVertTA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Orlando FL
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,045

    Red+White Top and Stripes
    2000TransAmConvertible A4

    SRT Jeep

    I believe those SRT Jeeps are supercharged hemi, I could be wrong though.

  7. #27
    about tree fiddy Shammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Mansfield, Texas
    Posts
    155

    Pewter
    2001 M6

    I killed a srt8 last night about 4 or 5 times from a roll of about 30 and from a stop.

  8. #28
    about tree fiddy Shammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Mansfield, Texas
    Posts
    155

    Pewter
    2001 M6

    All i have done is LTs and a 3in y pipe going to a stock catback (just got cutouts put in today)

  9. #29
    Member c5z28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    8,120

    On your ass flashing
    my highbeams

    Quote Originally Posted by RedVertTA View Post
    I wouldn't necessarily be so quick to bash these cars for the extra weight, they're heavier because of the new safety components. Cars are being produced with more and more safety components each year. It's a deterrent on performance yes, but there is a trade-off to the weight, its not like it's there for nothing.

    Our 4th gens really can't compare in the safety area. As far as weight, its not heavy because its a MOPAR, even the 5th gen Camaro has the same problem, the Zeta is known for being heavy, correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the 5th gen weights about 4000 pounds as well.

    What must really suck for both of these cars is the mileage, more power, less aerodynamics thanks to flat, squared off front ends, and heavier bodies.

    What is surprising to me from reading this thread is the fact that the Challengers have trouble hooking traction. I figured with all that extra weight on the rear wheel it should have excellent traction. In addition, the tires on the Challenger are quite large, 20 inch rims I believe, and the tubs can fit even bigger, with those kinds of tires traction should improve.

    Does anyone have the weight distribution specs for this car? If its very nose heavy it could be putting lots of weight on the front and not enough on the back and that would explain the traction issue.
    When someone buys a vette, cobra or dare I say lambo or ferrari the first thing on our minds isn't, "what kind of side impact rating does it have" Strip the shit off and go faster
    factory tires suck on most cars

  10. #30
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Severna Park, MD
    Posts
    65

    The doors weigh as much as 2 elephants

    Those tall ugly doors on the new Challengers probably weigh 600lbs. The car is too tall. The '70-'74 Challenger/'Cuda was sooooo much cooler and sleeker of a vehicle and they were much shorter. Chrysler is building the new Challenger on the same frame as the 300 and R/T? And probably sharing the same f*cking doors on all the models.
    I look forward to delivering 6500rpm of stroked small block in the "eye" of a new Challenger owner. Or even better at a stop light just yell "go when you want to", knowing there is no challenge in stomping a new Challenger.

  11. #31
    Detailing + Design third_shift|studios's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Age
    36
    Posts
    21,719

    My life is a
    Ben Stiller movie.

    Quote Originally Posted by ronnie tadlock View Post
    Just how much more do the new Challengers weigh than our cars? I have a copy of the build sheet from my 2001 WS6 and it lists a Gross Weight Rating of 4258 lbs. but doesn't list actual weight of the car. What do these things weigh in at?
    i believe "gross weight" is actually how much the car would way with 4 average passengers in it. But as mentioned, they are only about 3600 lb cars + your weight

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Challenger srt8
    By Justin93 in forum Kill Stories
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 01-31-2009, 02:14 PM
  2. Challenger SRT-8...disappointed
    By Ramairgod84 in forum Kill Stories
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 12-10-2008, 10:43 AM
  3. Srt8 challenger
    By dpinson in forum Kill Stories
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 09-21-2008, 07:14 PM
  4. SRT8 Challenger
    By FasstChevys in forum Almost Anything Goes
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-09-2008, 09:21 AM
  5. 2008 Dodge Challenger SRT8 - '08 Challenger SRT8
    By Ed Blown Vert in forum Almost Anything Goes
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 04-13-2008, 11:19 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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