The Racers Bench Is the track just too much for you? Want to know what will beat what? Talk about it here!!

I'll see your 5.0 and raise you a 6.4

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-06-2010, 10:51 AM
  #11  
1.5LofFury
4th Gear Member
 
1.5LofFury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 1,278
Default

quick question, is the 6.4 using the old 6.1's block??? because if it's a bored and stroked 6.1 it could actually be lighter than the old 6.1.
1.5LofFury is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 11:07 AM
  #12  
Riptide
6th Gear Member
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montaner
Posts: 6,193
Default

Stone:

GM? These are Fysler cars now. They are Italian.
Riptide is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 11:49 AM
  #13  
USMCrebel
Mach I Section Moderator
 
USMCrebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: round abouts these parts
Posts: 7,140
Default

hopefuilly Fiat can show them the light of their errors. If fiat/ Ferrari cuts the weight out of the chargers and puts a high revving (8500rpm) v8 in their cars i might consider swapping from blue. If they put a v10 that revs to the stratosphere in the viper and keep the price about the same i would lean even more in that direction. i mean BMW has a 5.0 v10 with a 8250 redline 500hp torque suffers though, but a lightly modified M5 will keep pace with a Z over 120. HELL deleting the cats on them a few are putting 470rwhp down.
Fiat needs to put the pig on a diet first and foremost!
USMCrebel is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 11:59 AM
  #14  
Riptide
6th Gear Member
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montaner
Posts: 6,193
Default

IIRC. They designed those cars off an already existing platform (from Mercedes?) to save money. If they could've easily cut weight off they probably already would've done so.

The newer mustangs are no featherweights at 3500 lbs. either btw. Yah yah I know they are lighter than the 4000lb. dodge but the mustang is not a light car by any stretch. Hasn't been in a while actually.
Riptide is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 12:08 PM
  #15  
USMCrebel
Mach I Section Moderator
 
USMCrebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: round abouts these parts
Posts: 7,140
Default

Originally Posted by Riptide
IIRC. They designed those cars off an already existing platform (from Mercedes?) to save money. If they could've easily cut weight off they probably already would've done so.

The newer mustangs are no featherweights at 3500 lbs. either btw. Yah yah I know they are lighter than the 4000lb. dodge but the mustang is not a light car by any stretch. Hasn't been in a while actually.
yeah the C class platform IIRC. they should've put the merc engine in it too and it would've been a BALLIN car ESP a 300C with the 5.4 S/C version!!!
USMCrebel is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 12:46 PM
  #16  
98LS1
6th Gear Member
 
98LS1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: North Cackilacky
Posts: 8,635
Default

If Dodge is still using OHV motors in these cars, then the motor isn't what's weighing it down and just upping the cubes a bit isn't gonna be a problem. I bet the OHC 4.6L is bigger and heavier than an OHV 6.4L.
98LS1 is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 12:55 PM
  #17  
67mustang302
6th Gear Member
 
67mustang302's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California
Posts: 10,468
Default

The car is just too freakin heavy. The 2011 GT will still be faster, with less power and a smaller engine. With a big engine they can make it go fast, sure, but what's it take to slow it down or make it turn? The problem with most of the American cars is the engineers don't seem to realize there's more to performance that raw power. With 480hp it will probably be slower on average still than a 412hp Mustang, but on a road course against the Mustang it would be like racing a school bus.

For the fanbase faithful sure, it's a decent car, tons of power, pin you back in the seat. The Challenger is definitely one of the better looking cars out there too. But not everyone wants to drive a tank.
67mustang302 is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 01:00 PM
  #18  
USMCrebel
Mach I Section Moderator
 
USMCrebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: round abouts these parts
Posts: 7,140
Default

485 lbs for the 5.7 and the 3v is around 420lbs IIRC
USMCrebel is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 01:17 PM
  #19  
Morbid Intentions
Wash Rinse Repeat
 
Morbid Intentions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 6,312
Default

Originally Posted by USMCrebel
485 lbs for the 5.7 and the 3v is around 420lbs IIRC
because dodge was kind if stupid and said "WE NEED AN IRON BLOCK!"

the 6.2L LS3 is 415lbs... and that is including 30lbs for the shipping crate... so call it less than 400lbs

such is life when you are smart and use an aluminum block
Morbid Intentions is offline  
Old 07-06-2010, 01:19 PM
  #20  
USMCrebel
Mach I Section Moderator
 
USMCrebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: round abouts these parts
Posts: 7,140
Default

Originally Posted by Morbid Intentions
because dodge was kind if stupid and said "WE NEED AN IRON BLOCK!"

the 6.2L LS3 is 415lbs... and that is including 30lbs for the shipping crate... so call it less than 400lbs

such is life when you are smart and use an aluminum block
^ this Aluminum is just as strong esp for a street application.
USMCrebel is offline  


Quick Reply: I'll see your 5.0 and raise you a 6.4



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:50 PM.