Dodge forums why all the hate on the 5.0
05-20-2011, 12:19 PM
#41
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: LA
Posts: 1,201
what are your expereinced with Dodge guys and even chevy guys in general?
I am on my second viper, but not loyal to Dodge. Had the mustang since new in 06, but not loyal to Ford. Had several vettes, but not loyal to Chevrolet. I go to a viper forum quite a bit and turns out that the mustang is a very respected and popular car with Viper owners. Many have a stang as a more sensible/comfortable/ practical daily driver. The viper is none of these things.
I am on my second viper, but not loyal to Dodge. Had the mustang since new in 06, but not loyal to Ford. Had several vettes, but not loyal to Chevrolet. I go to a viper forum quite a bit and turns out that the mustang is a very respected and popular car with Viper owners. Many have a stang as a more sensible/comfortable/ practical daily driver. The viper is none of these things.
05-20-2011, 12:24 PM
#42
Is the tide gonna reach my chair?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nor'east
Posts: 4,389
Been on a couple of Challenger forums since i am at a cross roads and Im not sure wich one I like better. What I am noticing is most of the challenger guys constanly are say ing how there cars are better than mustangs in being faster and more unique on the road. What really shocked me though is all the 5.0 hate and straight ford hate that was being spewed. My verdidct is this even if i gotta a challenger RT I would still chill with the mustang crowd for the most part. That being said there are a handfull of guys on the challanger forum that are just car guys and are cool to hang around with. what are your expereinced with Dodge guys and even chevy guys in general?
The hate is cause they have no answers for the 5.0. In the new muscle car contest, Ford has won.
05-20-2011, 03:46 PM
#44
1st Gear Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Indiana
Posts: 72
Forum drama-battles are the very reason I keep away except for technical issues. Brand loyalty is a disaster waiting to happen. I like vehicles from many companies. My 2011 5.0 is a toy for me, the first new car I could own without it being a daily driver, but I would be just as happy with a new 4-door Jeep JK with 35" tires and a 6" lift.
05-21-2011, 04:23 AM
#45
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Henry County, Georgia
Posts: 1,636
Are the 'Mopar guys' that are being referred to usually drive LX cars? Because if so, I think those 'guys' are similar to the guys that bought a Mustang after the S197 came out and might claim themselves as 'Mustang guys', yet their are oblivious to anything about a mustang prior to their generation & hold a 'nose in the sky' attitude towards owners of older mustangs....make sense?
dodge is just jealous that the 5.0 kicks *** and doesnt way as much as a boat.
05-21-2011, 08:01 AM
#46
Please don't shoot me for saying this, but out of the pony cars of the big three today, the Challenger is the best looking one. Well, if the Challenger could be considered a pony car; it is more of a full-sized car.
I chose the Mustang over the Challenger and the Camaro because the 5.0L Coyote is multivalve and overhead cams. TiVCT to boot!
And to be honest, even if the 2011 and 2012 line-up still used the 4.6L, I would have chosen that over the pushrod Challenger and Camaro because the 4.6L is still OHC and 3valves per cylinder.
Dont get me wrong: pushrods are still awesome in some engines, but DOHC and variable independent cam phasing and multi-valves per cylinder hold so much more advantage. Direct valve actuation mean for higher RPM operation of the valvetrain, well, if the valve train is designed properly.
And the variable cam phasing for variable LSA smooth out the torque curve and allow you to get increases in low and high RPM. You are not forced to have to choose between a low RPM DD cam or a high RPM performance cam. Phasing the cams for variable LSA allows you get great breathing at low and high RPMs.
Variable LSA also improves fuel economy believe it or not. Look at the 5.0L Coyote; around 26MPG straight highway where the L99 of the Camaro has to rely on cylinder deactivation to match that. And the Coyote does not even deactivate any cylinders!
And DOHC allows for something that even domestic cars will one day have: variable valve lift! Some Beemers already have this and this further increases more power throughout the RPM bandwidth as well as further improves fuel economy as well.
Now, pushrods are awesome in some engines. All big blocks are pushrods, at least, I have yet to see and current big blocks that are production OHC. The only production non-pushrod engine I can think of is Ford's own 427 SOHC side-oiler.
I remember Chrysler made a prototype 426 Hemi DOHC, but they dropped the project when NASCAR banned the Hemi and Chrysler dropped out in protest. The 426 Hemi DOHC never even made it into any of their NASCAR race cars.
And lets face it: DOHC with variable timing and multivalves would do for big blocks that this technologies do now for small blocks. They will take a 400BHP rated big block and make that same engine push towards 1000BHP. Hell, DOHC and variable timing as well as better fuel injection and great head designs are making small blocks pump out power and even torque that outdo big blocks of the 60s and 70s.
Anyway, tying this back to why I chose Mustang over Camaro or Challenger, yes, I disdain pushrods when the OHC technologies of Mustangs allow my car to keep up with the pushrod Camaro and Challenger, even though the Mustang engine is significantly SMALLER than the engines in these other cars!
Granted, the Challenger is a damn beautiful car, but unfortunately, Chrysler has not put any valvetrain technology into it to unlock massive more amounts of power.
I chose the Mustang over the Challenger and the Camaro because the 5.0L Coyote is multivalve and overhead cams. TiVCT to boot!
And to be honest, even if the 2011 and 2012 line-up still used the 4.6L, I would have chosen that over the pushrod Challenger and Camaro because the 4.6L is still OHC and 3valves per cylinder.
Dont get me wrong: pushrods are still awesome in some engines, but DOHC and variable independent cam phasing and multi-valves per cylinder hold so much more advantage. Direct valve actuation mean for higher RPM operation of the valvetrain, well, if the valve train is designed properly.
And the variable cam phasing for variable LSA smooth out the torque curve and allow you to get increases in low and high RPM. You are not forced to have to choose between a low RPM DD cam or a high RPM performance cam. Phasing the cams for variable LSA allows you get great breathing at low and high RPMs.
Variable LSA also improves fuel economy believe it or not. Look at the 5.0L Coyote; around 26MPG straight highway where the L99 of the Camaro has to rely on cylinder deactivation to match that. And the Coyote does not even deactivate any cylinders!
And DOHC allows for something that even domestic cars will one day have: variable valve lift! Some Beemers already have this and this further increases more power throughout the RPM bandwidth as well as further improves fuel economy as well.
Now, pushrods are awesome in some engines. All big blocks are pushrods, at least, I have yet to see and current big blocks that are production OHC. The only production non-pushrod engine I can think of is Ford's own 427 SOHC side-oiler.
I remember Chrysler made a prototype 426 Hemi DOHC, but they dropped the project when NASCAR banned the Hemi and Chrysler dropped out in protest. The 426 Hemi DOHC never even made it into any of their NASCAR race cars.
And lets face it: DOHC with variable timing and multivalves would do for big blocks that this technologies do now for small blocks. They will take a 400BHP rated big block and make that same engine push towards 1000BHP. Hell, DOHC and variable timing as well as better fuel injection and great head designs are making small blocks pump out power and even torque that outdo big blocks of the 60s and 70s.
Anyway, tying this back to why I chose Mustang over Camaro or Challenger, yes, I disdain pushrods when the OHC technologies of Mustangs allow my car to keep up with the pushrod Camaro and Challenger, even though the Mustang engine is significantly SMALLER than the engines in these other cars!
Granted, the Challenger is a damn beautiful car, but unfortunately, Chrysler has not put any valvetrain technology into it to unlock massive more amounts of power.
05-21-2011, 08:51 AM
#47
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 879
Or perhaps the people who bought s197 and got into mustangs alot thought that the older mustangs were straight fugly and wanted something that reminded them of the true classics? Foxes are fast and all but god they look terrible. Ill take a 60s/early 70s or a s197 and thats about it (or a termi of course)
dodge is just jealous that the 5.0 kicks *** and doesnt way as much as a boat.
dodge is just jealous that the 5.0 kicks *** and doesnt way as much as a boat.
Something else I have always thought about is the fact that the Mustang has always been there and never taken a leave of absence from the market. If the GTO, Challanger, Camaro, Firebird, Trans AM, and Charger were all so great they wouldn't have these long gaps of time when they were not being produced.
Last edited by REDBOSS1; 05-21-2011 at 09:25 AM.
05-21-2011, 10:04 AM
#48
Speaking of Dodge and Chrysler products, by far, the most beautiful muscle car for me is the '71-74 Chargers, the next for me would be the 68-70 Chargers (the General Lee!)
I criticize Chrysler for destroying the Charger name by renaming a Chrysler 300 into a Charger and putting the Dodge cross grill on the 300.
When I heard the Charger was being revived, I so hoped that they would bring back the coke bottle style of the Charger of the late 60s early 70s. If they would have done this, I would have bought one of these. The 68-70 and 71-74 Chargers were my first dream muscle car. Of course, a very close second were the original 60s 'Stangs and the Mach I of the 70s.
But they took an ugly Chrysler 300 are crushed my dreams. And this was another reason why I wound up buying Mustang instead of Dodge.
I criticize Chrysler for destroying the Charger name by renaming a Chrysler 300 into a Charger and putting the Dodge cross grill on the 300.
When I heard the Charger was being revived, I so hoped that they would bring back the coke bottle style of the Charger of the late 60s early 70s. If they would have done this, I would have bought one of these. The 68-70 and 71-74 Chargers were my first dream muscle car. Of course, a very close second were the original 60s 'Stangs and the Mach I of the 70s.
But they took an ugly Chrysler 300 are crushed my dreams. And this was another reason why I wound up buying Mustang instead of Dodge.
05-21-2011, 10:14 AM
#49
Or perhaps the people who bought s197 and got into mustangs alot thought that the older mustangs were straight fugly and wanted something that reminded them of the true classics? Foxes are fast and all but god they look terrible. Ill take a 60s/early 70s or a s197 and thats about it (or a termi of course)
dodge is just jealous that the 5.0 kicks *** and doesnt way as much as a boat.
dodge is just jealous that the 5.0 kicks *** and doesnt way as much as a boat.
05-23-2011, 01:29 AM
#50
I love the mustang and I am leanin more towards getting one of those than the challanger.I used to think the subaru STI was dollar for dollar the best performance value. Now that the 2011s were out (and the STI price is expensive now)the mustang GT is the best performance value there is)that being said I personally if I wanted mopar it would have had to be the clasic plymouth baracuda with a 440 six pack but thats for another thread and another day.