Challenger SRT-8...disappointed

**Cayenne97** · 11-22-2008, 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by 95camaroZNC

Im just saying, all you have to be able to do is launch it well, after that the tranny does the work, you dont have to shift at all.

That's the point i'm making. Just because it's an auto doesn't mean it's just 'stab and go'. You can F up a launch in an A4 car too.

Originally Posted by 95camaroZNC

I dont know why youd buy a manual SRT-8 considering road and track as well as car and driver both said the Autos were faster.

That's probably just the magazines. I bet a good driver will go 12's bone-stock in an M6 SRT-8.

**wooddaniel** · 11-22-2008, 07:20 PM

Originally Posted by 95camaroZNC

Im just saying, all you have to be able to do is launch it well, after that the tranny does the work, you dont have to shift at all. I dont know why youd buy a manual SRT-8 considering road and track as well as car and driver both said the Autos were faster.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...t8_manual.html

They both ran the exact same time. The manual was slightly faster in the traps. Magazines rarely ever get it right anyways.

**Cayenne97** · 11-22-2008, 07:47 PM

If it ran a faster trap then there you go. More potential in the M6.

**Too Fast** · 11-22-2008, 09:21 PM

Originally Posted by Cayenne97

If it ran a faster trap then there you go. More potential in the M6.

Wow the automatics transmissions have finally caught up to the manual trans cars. The trap speed in the 1/4 was only 1 tenth of a MPH better, that is a wash in anyone's book. These new Challengers are great looking cars, but gas hogs and they weigh too much. Both trapped just over 108 MPH.

**slims00ls1z28** · 11-22-2008, 09:58 PM

Originally Posted by Cayenne97

I know what you mean. I use to leave the line full throttle in my old 2.73-geared stock Z.

Mine would smoke the tires off the line on anything over idle launch with 2.73's and 315 tires with nothing but a lid and free mods.

I was beside one not too long ago (08 SRT Chally according to special tag that said 08HEMI). He didn't wanna play though waved me on.

**Cayenne97** · 11-23-2008, 07:52 AM

Originally Posted by Too Fast

Wow the automatics transmissions have finally caught up to the manual trans cars. The trap speed in the 1/4 was only 1 tenth of a MPH better, that is a wash in anyone's book. These new Challengers are great looking cars, but gas hogs and they weigh too much. Both trapped just over 108 MPH.

We'll have to wait and see what other kind of times are out there once there are more of them on the road. The fact that a factory automatic transmission (no matter how beefed up it is) is limited by a low stall converter always leads me to believe an M6 will go quicker. 99.9% of the time that's the case. I bet someone will launch the crap out of an '09 M6 and go somewhere in the 12's. It's only a matter of time.

**Too Fast** · 11-23-2008, 01:04 PM

Originally Posted by Cayenne97

We'll have to wait and see what other kind of times are out there once there are more of them on the road. The fact that a factory automatic transmission (no matter how beefed up it is) is limited by a low stall converter always leads me to believe an M6 will go quicker. 99.9% of the time that's the case. I bet someone will launch the crap out of an '09 M6 and go somewhere in the 12's. It's only a matter of time.

Agreed. That is why I love my M6 car. I've always driven a manual trans car, and the short time I did not have one I got one as fast as I could! I like to control the car, not be controlled by it lol.

**wooddaniel** · 11-23-2008, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by Cayenne97

We'll have to wait and see what other kind of times are out there once there are more of them on the road. The fact that a factory automatic transmission (no matter how beefed up it is) is limited by a low stall converter always leads me to believe an M6 will go quicker. 99.9% of the time that's the case. I bet someone will launch the crap out of an '09 M6 and go somewhere in the 12's. It's only a matter of time.

It will be interesting to see. I am betting they will go at least 12.8-12.9.

**Cayenne97** · 11-23-2008, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by wooddaniel

It will be interesting to see. I am betting they will go at least 12.8-12.9.

Yup.

**95camaroZNC** · 11-23-2008, 02:56 PM

Yeah but MOST of the people you run across arent going to be able to drive it and are gonna run those 14s lol.

**slowgtp** · 11-23-2008, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by 99 Kobra

They weigh about 4,000 lbs.!!!!

Weight doesn't play as big of a role racing at speed. I think all of the new safety reqirements have added weight. Safety is nice especially in a fast car.

**95camaroZNC** · 11-23-2008, 03:33 PM

I thought weight always played a role because it affects how fast the car can go. Quickness wise at least. I mean a 3300 pound car with the same HP would me MUCH quicker.

**slowgtp** · 11-23-2008, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by 95camaroZNC

I thought weight always played a role because it affects how fast the car can go. Quickness wise at least. I mean a 3300 pound car with the same HP would me MUCH quicker.

From a dead stop it takes more to get a heavy car moving but once they are moving it really comes down to HP and aerodynamics.

**fox1x** · 11-23-2008, 09:18 PM

Weight, I believe in today's cars, is a good thing. I mean look, you have the "beastly" weighted GT 500 with 500 ponies, you have the Charger and Challenger SRT models with well over 400. If these cars weighed 3,000 pounds, I think they would be slower (as in quarter mile)because they probably would have a hard time hooking. When you start getting into the 400 - 500 HP range, you are going to start needing some weight to plant that power.(as in, I don't think a 550 HP Miata would do good in the quarter; high trap though) I see that the new 2010 Mustang now has two factory supercharger options to mate along with the base 315HP GT. One is the $3500 option that makes 400HP, and the other is a $4500 option that makes 500HP. I'm guessing that the quarter mile difference between the 400 and 500 HP options is close to identical; but the 500HP car probably traps higher. We'll see when they finally test the car.

(oh, if you're wondering, here is one link that talks about the new factory supercharged mustangs: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ook/index.html ) I guess the base V8 model will be $24k and with supercharger options, you can have a 500HP GT for under $30k... I'm curious to see how this pans out.

**Speedy_Gonzales** · 11-23-2008, 10:11 PM

Originally Posted by wooddaniel

And if you dont launch properly in an auto you can run a shitty time. It's not all about "pegging it."

+1 gotta have good reaction time

**99 Kobra** · 11-24-2008, 11:23 AM

You guys that think weight doesn't slow cars down are nuts! How fast do you think a C6 Z06 would be if it weighed 3,900 lbs. instead of 3,150 lbs? Some of us need to turn and brake when we open track. The more the car weighs, the slower the lap times.

**Too Fast** · 11-24-2008, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by SpeedAddict38

+1 gotta have good reaction time

Reaction time does not affect ET's. Reaction time is only a factor when you are racing someone at the drag strip and are in elimination rounds.

Weight affects ET's and 1/4 MPH (the more weight, slower). Weight does not affect top speed (maybe barely) but does affect how long it takes to get there. Drag and gearing are the top speed limiters.

**fox1x** · 11-24-2008, 08:23 PM

You guys that think weight doesn't slow cars down are nuts! How fast do you think a C6 Z06 would be if it weighed 3,900 lbs. instead of 3,150 lbs? Some of us need to turn and brake when we open track. The more the car weighs, the slower the lap times.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that weight doesn't slow down cars; I'm saying that with massive power some weight is needed. A C6 Z06 Vette that weighed 900 lbs would not be as fast in the quarter mile as a C6 Z06 that weighed 3000 lbs. The 3000 pound car would hook and not have to worry about breaking the tires loose during every shift. I'm saying with big power.

**karpetcm** · 11-24-2008, 09:14 PM

Id say its important to have weight but were that weight is would be a better and more specific question. For a RWD car having more weight in the rear will help out big time in traction, lots of porshes due to having the engine out back, take off very clean. Also were your car makes TQ is also big when it comes to traction. My M3 hardly pulled any TQ but it would take off clean and once i got up top it would pull hard even though it was a heavy car. So there are many factors and lots that i havent even gone into there are people here way more knowledgable then me to answer those questions. Im only talking about straight line speed not taking corners even though weight is major in that area as well. Forgot to Mention i dont mean were the weight should be meaning if the other car weighs 1000lbs more then you just stating if 2 cars weighed equal and you want that car to serve one purpose to drag race having more weight out back on a RWD car helps.

**95camaroZNC** · 11-24-2008, 10:26 PM

So i raced a TT 3000gt vr4 he was faster on the high way and i was faster taking off from a dead stop, aka the race was MUCH closer, but thats a heavier car with 4WD which means it should have been closer to the same on the high way....sooooo.

Also doesnt a good rear suspension and such and the right tires make up for a car so that it hooks better and not have to have all that weight. I mean how does a vette not shoot the whole thing in the foot, i bet a vette would still murder a challenger from a roll even though their HP is close. Thats weight isnt it?

Actually its math too isnt it, it takes this much work and this much force to move this much weight?