Its On! GT, Challenger, Camaro....
03-08-2009, 12:00 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: TX
Posts: 5
Its On! GT, Challenger, Camaro....
I am a muscle car fan.
Some favorites are 69 Mach I, 69 GTO, 70 Chevelle, 68 442, etc. I also really liked third gen F-bodies, and the current Mustangs.
I cannot stick to any single make!
The retro looking flashback muscle car era is part way here with the Challenger and GTs, and the Camaro is soon to follow.
I currently have the Challenger RT. I know you all think it is slow, but its a low 13s car stock. In my experience stock GTs are mid to high 13s cars and Bullits, Mach Is stock are mid to low 13s cars. Yeah, I know plenty don't believe, but been there done that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CeDd75UJPs
Forgive the GT driver, he spun bad coming out of the hole. He typically runs about a 13.7, thought the Challenger was a 14 second car, and got too excited planning on how bad he was going to make it look. If he had more mods may have been a very different story.
I am hoping like crazy the 2011 GT is going to get that 5L, because I am holding out for it. I am also holding out to see if the Camaro is going to get a Z28 model, although the SS has an awesome drive train as is.
Anyways, the 2010 Mustang has me even more excited than the 2005s when they came out. But is anyone else holding out for a 2011?
Some favorites are 69 Mach I, 69 GTO, 70 Chevelle, 68 442, etc. I also really liked third gen F-bodies, and the current Mustangs.
I cannot stick to any single make!
The retro looking flashback muscle car era is part way here with the Challenger and GTs, and the Camaro is soon to follow.
I currently have the Challenger RT. I know you all think it is slow, but its a low 13s car stock. In my experience stock GTs are mid to high 13s cars and Bullits, Mach Is stock are mid to low 13s cars. Yeah, I know plenty don't believe, but been there done that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CeDd75UJPs
Forgive the GT driver, he spun bad coming out of the hole. He typically runs about a 13.7, thought the Challenger was a 14 second car, and got too excited planning on how bad he was going to make it look. If he had more mods may have been a very different story.
I am hoping like crazy the 2011 GT is going to get that 5L, because I am holding out for it. I am also holding out to see if the Camaro is going to get a Z28 model, although the SS has an awesome drive train as is.
Anyways, the 2010 Mustang has me even more excited than the 2005s when they came out. But is anyone else holding out for a 2011?
03-08-2009, 03:12 PM
#2
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 25
The 2009 Dodge Challenger R/T with its 375-hp 5.7-liter V8 and six-speed manual transmission accelerated to 60 mph in 5.9 seconds (5.5 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip), then reached the quarter-mile in 14.1 seconds at 100.8 mph. In comparison, the 315-hp 2008 Mustang Bullitt we tested late last year with a 4.6-liter V8 and Tremec five-speed manual transmission ran to 60 mph in just 5.2 seconds. The Bullitt also ran a 13.8-second quarter-mile at 102.1 mph.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=130808
you sure it is low 13s stock?
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=130808
you sure it is low 13s stock?
03-08-2009, 03:28 PM
#3
Deputy CatDog - To Purr'tect and Explode
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: NM
Posts: 1,900
Yeah hate to disappoint you but:
2008 Dodge Challenger SRT8 4.7 13.0 (R&T July '08)
2008 Dodge Challenger SRT8 4.8 13.2 (C&D Dec '07)
The SRT Challenger barely doe's low 13's, it's got a great power train, but it's a considerably heavy car.
I'm holding out on buying a car as well, I was going to buy a 03/04 Mach 1 then decided to hold out and see if the 2011 really doe's get that 5.0 4v. If they do get the Coyote engine, I'll buy one, guaranteed. Thats actually the time I'll be graduating from College, so it'll be a perfect present for myself.
2008 Dodge Challenger SRT8 4.7 13.0 (R&T July '08)
2008 Dodge Challenger SRT8 4.8 13.2 (C&D Dec '07)
The SRT Challenger barely doe's low 13's, it's got a great power train, but it's a considerably heavy car.
I'm holding out on buying a car as well, I was going to buy a 03/04 Mach 1 then decided to hold out and see if the 2011 really doe's get that 5.0 4v. If they do get the Coyote engine, I'll buy one, guaranteed. Thats actually the time I'll be graduating from College, so it'll be a perfect present for myself.
03-08-2009, 04:01 PM
#4
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 4,197
FWIW, while we're poking 1/4 mile comparisons out there (and yes, I've heard and seen the slips of these low 13 second RTs), there's been a few stock Bullitts that have run low 13's also (record I believe was a 13.2). This should be pretty much on par with what the 2010 GTs should be capable of. Just remember.........what they are capable of and what you will see them run on average are two different things. Can't compare best times for one car with average runs for another.
And yea, I think if Ford does stick a 400ish hp 5.0 4V into the Stang for 2011/2012 (especially if its with a 6 speed gearbox).....its gonna have a hard to beat performer on its hands. Stock Bullitts running low 13s with only 315 hp........imagine a better breathing motor making an additional 85hp stuffed under the hood.
And yea, I think if Ford does stick a 400ish hp 5.0 4V into the Stang for 2011/2012 (especially if its with a 6 speed gearbox).....its gonna have a hard to beat performer on its hands. Stock Bullitts running low 13s with only 315 hp........imagine a better breathing motor making an additional 85hp stuffed under the hood.
03-08-2009, 05:17 PM
#5
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: TX
Posts: 5
Go drive guys, not read magazines.....
Bullit/mach 1 315hp-ish Mustangs are running about 13.4 completely stock except for maybe a CAI at the track. Some guys may be a touch faster, but the ones faster I have seen have a tune, cat backs, etc. They are awesome.
Don't know what to tell you about the Edmunds times. They are a good half second slower than I saw in some other magazines, 14.1 is a time you can match with one of you kids on your lap "driving".
As for the slow Challengers, I have ran plenty of runs in the 14s breaking it in and seeing how it likes to launch, etc. After break in, zeroing in how it likes to launch on street tires, and getting after it, am running low 13s. Factory Challenger intake, tires, etc. No performance bolt ons. No pulled filter. A slightly low tire pressure of 26 to 28 psi seems to be what it likes.
Thats an RT, with an auto. The SRT is a high 12s stock. Don't mistake a film of a guy breaking in his car, missing a shift, just WOT with ESP on cutting power to the tires,etc. as being typical. Just like that 15 second GT run in the film clip is far from a good time in a stock GT.
Everybody has had a first time to the track, missed a shift, spun halfway down the strip, screwed up the launch, had a new car they were breaking in, etc. For some reason though, when someone does that with a Mustang or a 4th Gen F-body, there is not a crowd posting pictures and films and talking about how slow they are. Its almost like people want them to be slow or a failure. I want fast GTs, SSs, and Challengers. I do not like the non retro looks of the 04-06 GTOs, but they were fast stock and had a great drive train, I wish they were still making them. I WANT the GT to come out with the 5.0, fully knowing it will smoke Challengers. If it looks like classic American muscle and pony cars and is fast, I like it.
Straight up fact- A stock GT is nowhere near as fast as a stock RT. A stock 315HP version is in my opionion is about 2 tenths slower on average.
Also true- although a stock SRT may be in the high 12s, a GT with relatively minor mods like tune, CAI, headers, catless exhaust, and taller gears is pretty damn quick too.
Dead true- Camaros and Challengers have no model coming from the factory that can toe the line with a GT500, let alone a KR. But if they come up with a 500HP plus "Challenger Daytona" and/or Z28, that will be awesome!
Don't know what to tell you about the Edmunds times. They are a good half second slower than I saw in some other magazines, 14.1 is a time you can match with one of you kids on your lap "driving".
As for the slow Challengers, I have ran plenty of runs in the 14s breaking it in and seeing how it likes to launch, etc. After break in, zeroing in how it likes to launch on street tires, and getting after it, am running low 13s. Factory Challenger intake, tires, etc. No performance bolt ons. No pulled filter. A slightly low tire pressure of 26 to 28 psi seems to be what it likes.
Thats an RT, with an auto. The SRT is a high 12s stock. Don't mistake a film of a guy breaking in his car, missing a shift, just WOT with ESP on cutting power to the tires,etc. as being typical. Just like that 15 second GT run in the film clip is far from a good time in a stock GT.
Everybody has had a first time to the track, missed a shift, spun halfway down the strip, screwed up the launch, had a new car they were breaking in, etc. For some reason though, when someone does that with a Mustang or a 4th Gen F-body, there is not a crowd posting pictures and films and talking about how slow they are. Its almost like people want them to be slow or a failure. I want fast GTs, SSs, and Challengers. I do not like the non retro looks of the 04-06 GTOs, but they were fast stock and had a great drive train, I wish they were still making them. I WANT the GT to come out with the 5.0, fully knowing it will smoke Challengers. If it looks like classic American muscle and pony cars and is fast, I like it.
Straight up fact- A stock GT is nowhere near as fast as a stock RT. A stock 315HP version is in my opionion is about 2 tenths slower on average.
Also true- although a stock SRT may be in the high 12s, a GT with relatively minor mods like tune, CAI, headers, catless exhaust, and taller gears is pretty damn quick too.
Dead true- Camaros and Challengers have no model coming from the factory that can toe the line with a GT500, let alone a KR. But if they come up with a 500HP plus "Challenger Daytona" and/or Z28, that will be awesome!
03-08-2009, 05:32 PM
#6
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 4,197
03-08-2009, 05:45 PM
#7
Deputy CatDog - To Purr'tect and Explode
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: NM
Posts: 1,900
Straight up fact- A stock GT is nowhere near as fast as a stock RT. A stock 315HP version is in my opionion is about 2 tenths slower on average.
Also true- although a stock SRT may be in the high 12s, a GT with relatively minor mods like tune, CAI, headers, catless exhaust, and taller gears is pretty damn quick too.
And FYI, all it takes for a S197 GT(the newest body) to get into 12's is a CAI/Tune. It pisses me off that they can do that, I've put easily $1600 into my car and I'm still in the low 13's. >_<
03-08-2009, 06:34 PM
#8
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 4,197
Actually I think the new R/T's have a slight advantage in the power to weight ratio despite their curb weight. But that only tells part of the story......same as 1/4 mile times, 0-60 times, and skidpad numbers. I'm not gonna ring the bell for someone being the champion here....since the 2010 Stangs aren't out yet. But alot of the GM/Mopar diehards' campaign to make the new Mustang GT out to be the redheaded stepchild of the Big 3's pony performers is completely unfounded. With a simple tried and true formula, Ford will keep the new GT plenty competitive. If the rumored powerplants come after 2010 (ecoboost, 4V 5.0)......this 3 way muscle war will get turned on its ear. Unfortunately, I foresee a 4V 5.0 GT costing more out the door than an LS3 SS or Hemi R/T. But at least it will have the guns it needs to do the nameplate proud at the track.
Let's hope this second coming of American muscle is just the beginning........and not the beginning of the end.
Let's hope this second coming of American muscle is just the beginning........and not the beginning of the end.
03-08-2009, 07:10 PM
#9
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: TX
Posts: 5
No need to convince me guys, I like GTs.
My times are based on what I have done and seen at the track. A GT that does nothing but throw on a pair of drag tires is quite a bit faster than the magazines say, I do not think they are slow at all.
Just saying the stock times of a GT are about half a second slower than a stock RT, and the Bullit/Mach1s about a quarter second slower stock. Definately close enough that a bad 60 foot in a stock RT gets owned by a stock GT with a good 60 foot. Stock SRTs run in high 12s, plenty of GTs with some mods running there too.
I do find it very funny that everyone thinks my 69 is way faster than it is (400+ crank HP and 500ish pounds of torque at no better than 10mpg of 93 octane), but its about 4000 pounds of 40 year old engineering on street tires rolling with 60s designed suspension that runs in the 14s and everyone thinks should run a 13.2 like it did new off the showroom with a little less HP and torque stock. And everyone thinks my RT runs in the 14s, but does a 13.2 stock. (yeah, I know it weighs about the same and has less HP and way less torque, but 2009 suspension, etc. counts for something).
The bottom line is, if it is an American muscle car made from 64 to 74, and American pony car made around the same time, a full sized car with plenty of power like an Impala from the same era, or a less than muscle car sized non pony car like a Nova or Duster from that time frame, or a Vette, I love it.
I also loved 3rd Gen F-Bodies, 4th Gen F-Bodies, and the last decade plus of Mustangs (sorry, never liked the box). Not as much as the classics, but still liked them.
But the latest Mustangs, Challengers, and the upcoming Camaro I like neck in neck with the classics.
"Let's hope this second coming of American muscle is just the beginning........and not the beginning of the end."
What he said!
My times are based on what I have done and seen at the track. A GT that does nothing but throw on a pair of drag tires is quite a bit faster than the magazines say, I do not think they are slow at all.
Just saying the stock times of a GT are about half a second slower than a stock RT, and the Bullit/Mach1s about a quarter second slower stock. Definately close enough that a bad 60 foot in a stock RT gets owned by a stock GT with a good 60 foot. Stock SRTs run in high 12s, plenty of GTs with some mods running there too.
I do find it very funny that everyone thinks my 69 is way faster than it is (400+ crank HP and 500ish pounds of torque at no better than 10mpg of 93 octane), but its about 4000 pounds of 40 year old engineering on street tires rolling with 60s designed suspension that runs in the 14s and everyone thinks should run a 13.2 like it did new off the showroom with a little less HP and torque stock. And everyone thinks my RT runs in the 14s, but does a 13.2 stock. (yeah, I know it weighs about the same and has less HP and way less torque, but 2009 suspension, etc. counts for something).
The bottom line is, if it is an American muscle car made from 64 to 74, and American pony car made around the same time, a full sized car with plenty of power like an Impala from the same era, or a less than muscle car sized non pony car like a Nova or Duster from that time frame, or a Vette, I love it.
I also loved 3rd Gen F-Bodies, 4th Gen F-Bodies, and the last decade plus of Mustangs (sorry, never liked the box). Not as much as the classics, but still liked them.
But the latest Mustangs, Challengers, and the upcoming Camaro I like neck in neck with the classics.
"Let's hope this second coming of American muscle is just the beginning........and not the beginning of the end."
What he said!
03-14-2009, 07:12 PM
#10
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: TX
Posts: 5
How accurate do magazine times tend to run for the Mustangs? I saw 13.6, 13.5, and 13.5 for the 2011 GT in Car and Driver, Motor Trend, and Edmunds respectively. I thought for sure it was going to come in at 13.4. That was my guess for a stock time in the quarter.
In the same order for 09 Challenger R/Ts they got 13.6, 13.6, and the Edmunds 14.1 (they also only got 13.8 for an SRT, don't know whats up with their Challenger drivers) I can cough up over half a dozen time slips better than any of those times with no CAI, tune, bolt ons, etc. 13.2 is my best, and I know one guy with a witnessed 13.1. Thats with a 3.06 ratio to boot. Any way you slice it, GTs and RTs are either a set of drag radials or bolt ons away from 12s.
I don't think the 300hp V6 in the Camaro is going to come close to those times, it does not put out that much torque. I think the SS drive trains are going to be impressive. If they had styled it as retro classic as the Mustang, let alone the Challenger, that would have been awesome. If Pontiac can get ahold of the SS frame and drivetrain, I would love to see them put some classic Firebird or GTO type sheetmetal on it. But I don't have my hopes up.
I am seriously looking forward to going to the strip and having same year Mopar, Ford, and Chevy lining up against each other.
In the same order for 09 Challenger R/Ts they got 13.6, 13.6, and the Edmunds 14.1 (they also only got 13.8 for an SRT, don't know whats up with their Challenger drivers) I can cough up over half a dozen time slips better than any of those times with no CAI, tune, bolt ons, etc. 13.2 is my best, and I know one guy with a witnessed 13.1. Thats with a 3.06 ratio to boot. Any way you slice it, GTs and RTs are either a set of drag radials or bolt ons away from 12s.
I don't think the 300hp V6 in the Camaro is going to come close to those times, it does not put out that much torque. I think the SS drive trains are going to be impressive. If they had styled it as retro classic as the Mustang, let alone the Challenger, that would have been awesome. If Pontiac can get ahold of the SS frame and drivetrain, I would love to see them put some classic Firebird or GTO type sheetmetal on it. But I don't have my hopes up.
I am seriously looking forward to going to the strip and having same year Mopar, Ford, and Chevy lining up against each other.
