How fast will the Charger run stock? [Archive] - Dodge Charger Forums

: How fast will the Charger run stock?


ekool
01-21-2005, 11:30 PM
What do you think a 'freak' factory Charger will be able to run stock?

Pablo
01-22-2005, 09:57 AM
My guess would be around a 13.6 for a factory freak with most of them in the 13.8-13.9 range.

GLHS837
01-22-2005, 12:14 PM
Sorry guys, I don't buy "freaks". I attribute the myth of freaks to variations in drivers and timing systems and dynos. I fail to believe that modern manufacturing allows enough tolerance for freaks.

Given that, I see well driven (Hemi, of course) Chargers going around 13.8ish on average.

Now, how about a poll for the only Charger that matters, the SRT:) 13 flat gets my vote:) I also recommend a poll showing DCX support for "Stages" :)

ekool
01-22-2005, 02:23 PM
Hrmm, I believe in factory freaks...

But, altitude, track prep, weather conditions make a huge difference as well.

Also, that one "perfect" launch etc.

hemidakota
01-22-2005, 04:48 PM
Thanks for the great site.

I will moving some stuff over on Monday.

Let me drop some news on the up coming SRT version. It will do the 1/4 mile in the 12s.

GLHS837
01-22-2005, 07:12 PM
Thanks Hemi :D

Mike Palumbo
01-23-2005, 02:31 PM
I'm hoping that the Charger will run the 1/4 mile in anything under 14 flat. 13.9 would be awesome & then if Mopar came out with some performance parts for the 5.7 liter Hemi that would be great as well.

I mean, with all the 300C's, Magnums, & soon to be Chargers out on the road, you would think there would be some performance parts out there from Mopar. They have a ton of stuff for the SRT-4's (stages 1,2, & 3), so why not for the 5.7 liter Hemi's!?

By the way, the Metallic Black color for the Dodge Charger shown at the Detroit North American International Auto Show looked absolutely great.



- Mike - :)

agpneon
01-27-2005, 10:09 PM
I don't believe in "freaks" :P

lethal429
02-13-2005, 05:26 PM
Hopefully it will run better than 14 flat :D

Killer_Mopar
02-13-2005, 08:40 PM
If Chrysler gives the charger some decent gears, then it should have no problem getting in the 13s. The 300c runs 14.1 and it has ****ty gears, weighs more, and looks less aerodynamic. If chrysler put in somethin like 3.55s than I'm thinking 13.7s, but chrysler probably wont, so it doesnt matter anyhow.

hemidakota
02-14-2005, 07:07 AM
It will run in the 13s and 12s for the SRT version.

chargershed
02-14-2005, 08:27 AM
from R/T summary...hemi 300 c... 0-60 5.6 sec. 1/4 mile 14.1 @ 101.1 the Charger is slightly lighter, so a 13.9 isn't out of the question...The rumor I've heard is that there won't be a srt-8 version untill next year due to average fuel economy standards...( the magnum is classified as a truck to avoid those standards) also the Daytona is said to have the 3.06 rear gear of the srt-8.....

BabyVpr
02-16-2005, 01:51 PM
Im hoping it can run at least mid 14's with that hemi in it.

First300COwner
02-16-2005, 07:10 PM
I wouldn't doubt Car and Driver will get it to run 14.2. Maybe 5.6 to 60.

Mike Palumbo
02-16-2005, 10:34 PM
The 300C does not run 14.1 stock.

14.2's - 14.4, but not faster, I would need to see slips.

GLHS837
02-17-2005, 03:55 AM
"Indeed, its 14.1-sec. clocking at 101.1 mph would make a Porsche Boxster S driver leery about racing for pink slips."

Road and Track, May 2004

http://roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=1295&page_number=2

Still need a slip? :)

hemidakota
02-17-2005, 07:38 AM
The 300C does not run 14.1 stock.

14.2's - 14.4, but not faster, I would need to see slips.

Mike, check with E55 (user name) on those time slips. He pretty much knows the owners of the 300c sedans on the www.300cforum.com (http://www.300cforum.com)

GLHS837
02-17-2005, 08:28 AM
(psst, hemi, that needs an "s" to work)

300cforums.com

maneval69
05-26-2005, 09:17 AM
The best I could get out of my stock Magnum RT is a 14.69 1/4 mile.
After driving my brothers Charger I can see another 2 tenth cut from the time because the trans shifts are crisper. You can also shift at different rpm levels (at WOT), which can't be done on the magnum. It is possible that shifting at 4800 instead of 5400 could save some time, then again it may hurt.
I would bet on 14.0-14.5
I do know some magnums have claimed 14.1 stock. This is a stretch for my imagination but it has been claimed.

If the dealer gets one I like this weekend, I will let you know next week.
________
Colorado Medical Marijuana Dispensary (http://colorado.dispensaries.org/)

jim383
05-26-2005, 12:42 PM
the shipping weight on the chrysler 300c is 3980 and the shipping weight on the charger r/t is 3995 so they should run the same in 1/4 mile.

GLHS837
05-26-2005, 01:21 PM
I think the rear gearing might be a hair different, Jim, but I'm not sure on that. I know the SRT gets 3.??, but I'm not sure about the R/T or the regular Chargers.

jim383
05-26-2005, 05:40 PM
the srt8 get a 3.06 gear and the r/t and daytona get the 2.82. so the shipping weight is almost the same on the reg 300c and charger r/t. we havnt gotton any invioces in yet on the srt-8 300c .

manimal
05-27-2005, 02:51 PM
so will the SRT-8 Charger lay waste to the Cadillac CTSv?

GLHS837
05-27-2005, 02:56 PM
"Lay waste", no. At least match it, yes. Equal drivers, should be a draw, IMHO.

maneval69
05-29-2005, 10:10 PM
According to the Dodge site, the only available rear gear for the Daytona is still the 2.82 that comes in all the rear drive R/T's.

I believe the SRT is the one that may have a different gear.

But 3.06 gears would be enough to get the charger under 14 seconds. I still think at best the charger will get 14.2 to 14.4
________
Live sex webshows (http://livesexwebshows.com/)

jim383
05-30-2005, 07:26 AM
the diff between 2.82 and 3.06 may help 5 hundreds thats about it.you have to jump 1/2 ratio to make a diff. like 3.23 to 3.73. i would love to see a track pak axel package on the srt-8 with 3.92 gears.

maneval69
05-30-2005, 10:49 AM
I would agree that 3.23-3.73 would be great. But I think 3.92 would be over kill because the 5 speed trans gives you 3 gears below 1:1 4th. The same as the tremic 6 speed. The ls1 crowd did allot of testing in this area. The automatic cars ran best 1/4 mile times with 4.11 gears. The manual cars ran best with 3.73 gears. (Only cars with mild modifications considered)
I believe the reason is the time you spend shifting is lost acceleration. And the lower gear you use the more shifting you do at the slow end of the track.
The lX cars may benefit more form 3.92's than would a lighter car like the Cameron. SO, everything I just explained may be mute.
The only problem is I don't see gears coming from anyone other than the dealer. So, if 3.06 are the best I can get, then that's what I'll get. I think the 3.06's will be worth at least 2 tenths at the track. Hell, a higher stall converter would probably get 2 tenths.
________
Volcano vaporizers (http://volcanovaporizer.net/)

jim383
05-30-2005, 01:34 PM
going from 2.82 to 3.06 may get you .05 hundreds doubt if you would get a .10 tenth i have changed to may gears in the past to see the changes. the gears ratios in the 5 speed tranny are 1st =3.59 2nd =2.19 3rd = 1.41 4th = 1-1 5th =0.83. so you only got 1 overdrive gear. from past exspearence you wont see 2 tenths going from 2.82 to 3.06.

maneval69
05-30-2005, 06:36 PM
I just hope to have a chance find out.
I know there is only one overdrive my point is you have smaller steps between gears because you have 4 gears from 3.59:1 to 1:1. Like the tremec 6 speed.
The tremec gear ratios are 1st=2.92, 2nd=2.07, 3rd=1.43, 4th=1

The stock LX R/T 5 speed actually has a lower final drive ratio in 1st (2.82x3.59=10.12) than the 6 speed Camaro?s that have 3.42 rear gear. (3.42x2.92=9.98)
But I forgot one thing Tire Diameter. The LX has a 28.6 inch tire and the F body has 25.7 which works out to a 0.116:1 reduction in gear ratio for the LX making it a 10.004 for comparison. (please check my math)
True not much of a difference but a lot of people think the stock R/T gear is way too high for a street performance car, when in fact they hit the nail on the head. See quote.

Because transmissions are comprised of several gear choices, the transmission allows the vehicle to accelerate quickly with lower gears and to maintain a cruising rpm using higher gears. In the '60s and '70s, most transmissions offered three or four gears with a 1:1 high gear. Using a TH400 as an example, First gear is 2.48:1, Second gear is 1.48:1, and Third gear is 1:1. Multiplying the 2.48 First gear by the 4.10 rear axle results in a final drive ratio of 10.16:1 (2.48 x 4.10 = 10.16). For most street performance applications, a 10:1 final First gear ratio is usually considered optimal. The disadvantage of operating a 4.10:1 axle ratio on the street with a 1:1 high gear is excessive freeway engine speed

Reference site http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/148_0208_gear/

My only experience is running a best 14.560 @ 95 mph in my 72 Cutlass with 2.73 rear gears, changes to 3.43 and ran 14.003 @98.94mph. That?s a change of 7 tenths in gear and a gain of 5.6 tenths in the ? mile. So, I?m pretty confident that 2 tenths is a good number for gains. OK maybe 1.92 tenths, but a far cry from the 0.1 tenths you would believe.

Don?t get me wrong I would like 3.23 or 3.43 but nothing higher. The lower the gear the bigger a 2 tenths change in ratio makes. For instance you will see a bigger gain going from a 3.0 to a 3.25 (using round numbers for ease of calculation) than you will from a 4.0 to a 4.25.
.25/3,0=8.33% change
.25/4.0=6.25% change

If this is wrong please give me the correct calculations. It cost a lot less to figure it out on a calculator than swapping parts.
________
Web shows (http://livesexwebshows.com/)

maneval69
05-30-2005, 08:01 PM
Here is another way to look at it.
Here are the shift points in mph for each rear-end gear ratio for both R/T and SRT.

R/T shift rpm 5400
-----------2.82------3.06-----3.42------3.73-------3.92

1st gear---45.8------42.2-----37.8------34.6-------32.9
2nd gear---74.4------68.6-----61.4------56.3-------53.5
3rd gear---115.6----106.5-----95.3------87.4-------83.2
4th gear---------------------134.0-----123.2------117.3

SRT-8 shift rpm 6000
-----------2.82------3.06-----3.42------3.73-------3.92

1st gear---50.9------46.9-----41.9------38.5-------36.6
2nd gear---82.7------76.2-----68.2------62.5-------59.5
3rd gear---128.4----118.4----105.9------97.1-------92.4
4th gear--------------------------------136.9------130.3

Looks like 3.06 would be good for the R/T and 3.42 for the SRT8.

what do you think?
________
Latina Webcams (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/webcam/latin-girls/)

maneval69
05-31-2005, 09:36 AM
What I am saying is 3.06 for the RT's because of shift points. 2.82 works but you?re only using 2 gears. 3.42s don't work because you run out of 3rd gear right at the end of the 1/4. So, you take the lost time of the shift and don't get to use 4th long enough to make up for it.
3.06 gears allow you to use third gear through the highest part of the torque curve. This is why I want to take my brothers charger to the track. I thing these 5.7 lx cars would run faster E.T.'s if you could shift at 5000 rpm rather than 5400. The only lx capable of this is the Charger RT. (because DCX lied about the autostick feature in my Magnum)

It also looks like 3.92 would work out for an RT. Traction would make a big problem if you used 3.92. If you could hook up out of the hole and firm up the shifts then 3.92s would be worth having for ? mile times. But 2700 rpm at 71 mph would be hard for me to live with.
________
Laguna Beach Resort Jomtien (http://pattayaluxurycondos.com)

hemidakota
05-31-2005, 09:40 AM
What happens if you used Dodge's 4.10:1 gearing?

maneval69
05-31-2005, 11:05 AM
4.10 gears shift points (5400 rpm)
1st---31.52 mph
2nd--51.24
3rd--79.59
4th--112.23
5th--136.86

That looks better than the 3.92 gears but still has the same problem 2800 rpm at 70 mph.
I am using the following site to calculate these numbers.
http://fatboyraceworks.com/gears/
________
HEAD SHOP (http://headshop.net/)

jim383
05-31-2005, 11:10 AM
dont no if dodge got 4.10 gears 4 this rear end but if they had i order it.rite now there epa is getting kinda low with the srt-8. 14 and 19 . reg hemi is 17 and 25.so 4.10 would gut into that big time if ya no what i mean.3.06 to 4.10 you be tacking 1000 more rpm at 60 mph epa would go way down . rite now the overdrive ratio with 3.06 is 2.54 and with 4.10 it would be 3.40. at 60 mph the rpms be 1800 with 3.06 and 2800 with 4.10 in 5th gear.

maneval69
05-31-2005, 11:16 AM
I just checked and the 300c SRT-8 does come with 3.06 gears.
I wonder if the 2.82 and 3.06 are interchangeable. Does anyone have a clue?
If it will then we have a total of 2 ratios available for the R/Ts.
________
LIVE SEX WEBSHOWS (http://livesexwebshows.com/)

GLHS837
05-31-2005, 11:27 AM
Hmmm, not sure, since the SRT comes with "upgraded differential AND axles" it would depend on how different the axles are. You might end up buying the whole SRT rear end.
Even if the stock and SRT axles are the same fitwise, it might just be that the 2.82 cant take the higher loads.

jim383
05-31-2005, 03:38 PM
going from 2.82 to 3.06 be a waste of money .if the 3.73 and 3.92 gears will fit then that would be worth the money.but now theres the speed sensor, you probley would have to change the speed sensor to match the gear ratio, or there would be a code thrown. now is the speed sensor interchanable that be the question.

maneval69
06-01-2005, 07:58 AM
In my opinion 3.92 gears in a magnum is a waste of money. Yes it will make a bigger difference in 1/4 mile times but you loose everywhere else.(top speed would be 123mph-redline)
If your building a drag car 3.92s would be good.
You would have to reprogram the computer if you changed the gear to anything other than stock. The sensors are the same for all the cars.

Seeing as the 2.82 and the 3.06 gears are the only gears available it's a mute point.
We don't even know if there interchangeable.
________
Volcano Vaporizer Review (http://vaporizers.tv/)

T/A Rumbler
06-01-2005, 10:18 AM
The first mod should be a high stall torque converter, that would take a half a second off the 1/4 mile time, probably put in the high 12's

maneval69
06-01-2005, 11:29 AM
I agree that a high stall converter would improve the launch. I don't think you'll get close to 1/2 second gain. Probably more like 1/4 second.
Tires would have to be upgraded as well. Does anyone know what the stock stall is?
________
LIVE SEX WEBSHOWS (http://livesexwebshows.com/)

Phantomcobra
07-01-2005, 12:41 PM
The question needs to be more specific. Are we talking a 426 Hemi? A 383 4 speed? A new Coronet (aka Charger)?

maneval69
07-01-2005, 01:38 PM
If you where reading the post you would know what we are talking about.
Get over it, Dude!
________
Keisy (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/cam/Keisy/)

GLHS837
07-01-2005, 04:58 PM
Just two posts, and already I'm putting you on the ignore list. Or maybe you can join my 1968 XR-7 390 Cougar owning self over at the new style Cougar site, where I love to tell them their car aren't real Cougars.

Oh, wait, I forgot, I don't do that, becuase I have not one care about it. Mercury can do any damn thing they please with that name, just becuase I own a car that shares the name, I don't get a say.

If you don't like the car in it's current configuration, or hate the fact that they put the Charger name on it, too freaking bad. You whining does nothing but annoy folks.

Or even better, I own a Charger too (it's a 1987, my GLHS), so my vote for a Charger to carry my kids cancels yours out. Bye now.

Phantomcobra
07-02-2005, 06:19 AM
Yes, I know which "Charger" you all are talking about but it seems a little silly to me that with the 40 year history of the Charger, one would not include the original cars in a survey question. GLHS837 is welcome to ignore me. This forum is for opinions and info and everyone is free to say their own. Just like no one would find a 4 door Mustang, having 4 doors on a Charger is just plain WRONG! The 4 door version of the Charger was the Coronet so that is what they should have named this car (by the way, the Coronet was an excellent car). Then they could have come out with a sportier version with better handling and performance and TWO doors and called it a Charger. I still wouldn't like the styling but could definitely back it as a Charger. It might cancel the bad image the Charger got in the 80s when it copied the Chevy Vega and tried to claim it was a Charger. Dodge just can't seem to "get it" like Ford does. When you bring back a name, be at least somewhat faithful to the name and original designs. Ford made the Mustang smaller and sportier with the Mustang II, then better handling in the next version and now a better car yet in the retro car. Each time, somewhat faithful to the original Mustang name and intent. But Dodge puts a Charger name on a modified 300 and claims they have brought back the Charger? I think Charger and GTO may be very short lived unless they change. As for GLHS837, since you have never owned a real Charger, I can see why you are so defensive of what you have.

CO-Charger
07-02-2005, 10:56 PM
I have owned an 'original' (or in your words 'real') Charger before and I can say with a smile that I am elated (giddy even) with the new Charger and have one on order. As for why the original Charger is not in the poll question it is quite obvious. If you look at the name of this forum it is "2006 Dodge Charger Forums" and therefore the question is not about any of the previous versions of the Charger, only the new version.

You are free to have your opinion about the new Charger, but all the wining in the world is not going to change the fact that Dodge owns the rights to call whatever vehicle they produce a Charger. The fact that it doesn't look like the classic ones seems to have stuck in the craw of a lot "purist's" and for that it is getting the cold shoulder.

I also disagree that the Charger has a 40 year history. The original Charger may be 40 years old, but since Dodge quit selling Chargers in the late 80's there is a BIG almost 20 year gap between then and now. And since most who don't like this new Charger also disclaim the 80's version it has been nearly 30 years. I don't see any history there, only a large gap of time where there wasn't a Charger being offered by Dodge.

To maybe satisfy the purists or just because they planned it that way, it has already been announced that they will have a 2-door shorter wheelbase LX version in the comming years and it will be called the 'Challenger'. So stop the wining, come of age and rejoice that there are choices out there that have power, handling and grace no matter what the name.

vsop
07-07-2005, 02:37 PM
From my experiance.. I would say the SRT will do a low 13 stock.. and depending on what the TQ Converts stalls at with some D/R's and a good launch you might break into the 12's.

The R/T on the otherhand I would say high to mid 13's. Now this all depends on the tranny and what kind of launchs you can get from the Stock TQ converter.

GLHS837
07-07-2005, 03:38 PM
vsop, we already have seen 12s from a bone stock 300C SRT-8, so I'm pretty sure D/Rs won't be required.

Killer_Mopar
07-07-2005, 10:28 PM
Yes, I know which "Charger" you all are talking about but it seems a little silly to me that with the 40 year history of the Charger,

Well since you are so quick to point out the error of Chryslers ways, I will just point out that the first production year of the Charger was 1966 and we are in 2005, so thats really only 39 years. But wait you say, what about the Dart Charger concept!!! Ohhh you probably didnt know about that so let me keep my mouth shut. But even if you wanted to throw that into the arguement, co-charger has already pointed out that it wasnt a 40-year-long streak....so it really doesnt have a 40 year history.


GLHS837 is welcome to ignore me.

Ohh please can I have your permission too??!!!??!!??


This forum is for opinions and info and everyone is free to say their own.

Your right, but why do you even come to this forum if you dont respect the car? It seems to me that you have a very boring life or have been rejected by the "real" charger community. Why dont you go to dodge-charger.com? I am sure everyone will like your bias views.

The 4 door version of the Charger was the Coronet

No, the regular coronet was the 4 door version of the Superbee (and coronet R/T) and even that isnt true. The coronet was out LONG before any performance version was made, so it should be said that the superbee and R/T were the 2 door version of the coronet.


I still wouldn't like the styling but could definitely back it as a Charger.

Who are we trying to fool, you and I both know you STILL would have bitched.

When you bring back a name, be at least somewhat faithful to the name and original designs.

The original charger was just a 2 door family car. It wasnt built with only one thing in mind....for if it was, than the standard engine wouldn't have been a 230hp 318. The R/T was the muscle side of the charger, just like the R/T of today. Let's see, family car with a performance version, thats pretty faithful to its' name. The problem you have is that the car has four doors, get over it.

As for GLHS837, since you have never owned a real Charger, I can see why you are so defensive of what you have.

I own a 70 Challenger R/T and even if DC puts the challenger name on the next generation Neon, I will not go to a forum devoted to it and complain for these two reasons:
1) I would just sound like an idiot
2) I wouldn't waste my time complaining about the present when I could be cruising around in the past.

So basically if you dont like the new charger, quit wasting your time here. Go find what you imagine as a "real" charger and start driving it.

vsop
07-10-2005, 04:39 PM
vsop, we already have seen 12s from a bone stock 300C SRT-8, so I'm pretty sure D/Rs won't be required.


Wow, I heard of one guy running 12.8 in a srt8 300c, but did not know if it was a factory freak or in race trim.

If they are running 12's in factory form not stripped down then that is amazing.. I can't wait to see what soem modded ones can run..

Love to see a 4 door breaking into the 11's once people start modding the engines.

GLHS837
07-10-2005, 05:42 PM
While a "factory freak" may be possible, and personally, I am not a huge believer in such, I do know the 12.9 car was bone stock, air filter, tire pressure, of course the spare is not a factor, since SRT-8s don't have one.

Not stripped, not a racer. witnessed by multiple corvettte forum members who have known the owner for some rime, and also a known membr of SVTperformance.com.

I would venture that by August, we'll have a good enough sample to be more sure of saying that well driven -8s are a good bet for 12s.

Not all, maybe even not most, but at least as many as SRT-4s hit 13s stock.

vsop
07-10-2005, 05:52 PM
While a "factory freak" may be possible, and personally, I am not a huge believer in such, I do know the 12.9 car was bone stock, air filter, tire pressure, of course the spare is not a factor, since SRT-8s don't have one.

Not stripped, not a racer. witnessed by multiple corvettte forum members who have known the owner for some rime, and also a known membr of SVTperformance.com.

I would venture that by August, we'll have a good enough sample to be more sure of saying that well driven -8s are a good bet for 12s.

Not all, maybe even not most, but at least as many as SRT-4s hit 13s stock.

Wow. 12.9 in showroom condition thats amazing.. I'm really stoked to see what the charger 8's can do..

Stonebreaker
07-13-2005, 09:10 AM
While a "factory freak" may be possible, and personally, I am not a huge believer in such, I do know the 12.9 car was bone stock, air filter, tire pressure, of course the spare is not a factor, since SRT-8s don't have one.

Not stripped, not a racer. witnessed by multiple corvettte forum members who have known the owner for some rime, and also a known membr of SVTperformance.com.

I would venture that by August, we'll have a good enough sample to be more sure of saying that well driven -8s are a good bet for 12s.

Not all, maybe even not most, but at least as many as SRT-4s hit 13s stock.
Not "Factory Freak" as such, just one in which all the tolerances came out right. We've noted on the 94-96 impalas and caprices that about 1 in 20 cars was extremely fast from the factory, 16 were about average, and 3 were dog slow. In the impala's case, this was usually due to the valve springs, although sometimes the torque converters were at fault. GM put the lightest springs they could in the engine for mileage purposes, and they got tired really quick. The good news was that you weren't going to be stuck with a dog even if your car was slow from the factory. I'm sorry for my constant references back to the impy, but these cars are so similar that doing the same mod on the charger as the impy (torque converter, for example) should yield similar results.

These motors are new so it will take some time to figure out what the strong and weak points are, but I see no reason why even the RT's can't run 12's on the stock motor with the right mods, and in a year or two we'll have a mod formula for putting a stock longblock SRT in the 11's.

SoL_93GT
07-15-2005, 02:21 PM
Thats sad that a $30k 5.7L Hemi Charger RT won't be able to run 13's. Gonna be awful embarrassing to get beat by a $25k Mustang with 50 less hp. I guess it's gonna take an SRT8 to keep up with a Mustang GT. How much more is that gonna cost over a Mustang?

Briane

RadarmagneT
07-15-2005, 02:53 PM
Thats sad that a $30k 5.7L Hemi Charger RT won't be able to run 13's. Gonna be awful embarrassing to get beat by a $25k Mustang with 50 less hp. I guess it's gonna take an SRT8 to keep up with a Mustang GT. How much more is that gonna cost over a Mustang?

Briane

troll troll troll troll

rocky
07-15-2005, 02:59 PM
Keep in mind ford has had the stang in production a lot longer than the charger. Dodge will get to 375 400 horse after getting the bugs out of the new charger. Just about the time the GT500 comes out with 450 H.P. 2007 car.

maneval69
07-15-2005, 03:01 PM
Thats sad that a $30k 5.7L Hemi Charger RT won't be able to run 13's. Gonna be awful embarrassing to get beat by a $25k Mustang with 50 less hp. I guess it's gonna take an SRT8 to keep up with a Mustang GT. How much more is that gonna cost over a Mustang?

Briane

Not as embarrassing as it will be to be beat by a Subaru in a mustang.
________
Marijuana card (http://medicalmarijuanacard.info)

GLHS837
07-15-2005, 03:06 PM
Thats sad that a $30k 5.7L Hemi Charger RT won't be able to run 13's. Gonna be awful embarrassing to get beat by a $25k Mustang with 50 less hp. I guess it's gonna take an SRT8 to keep up with a Mustang GT. How much more is that gonna cost over a Mustang?

Briane

about enough to add 2 usable back seats:)

maneval69
07-15-2005, 03:08 PM
From my post on the other thread.

As far as the price difference.
$1000 for each rear door ($500 each)
$1000 for leg room for 5 200lb people
$500 for more trunk space
$500 for a better ride quality
$1000 for the fastest four doors for the Money
$1500 so owners of little two door coupes compare their cars performance to a 4 door family car.
That equals $5500.
Look at that, the Charger is a better bargain by $500
________
VAPORIZER WIKI (http://vaporizerwiki.com)

SoL_93GT
07-16-2005, 08:38 AM
Not as embarrassing as it will be to be beat by a Subaru in a mustang.


Yeah it might be a whole 2 tenths faster than a Mustang but it is $8k more. I'll take that $8k and make that Mustang run 10's. There isn't any car sold for $25k that can run mid 13's like the Mustang can.

Briane

GLHS837
07-16-2005, 10:29 AM
Dont' go there:) Hows about an SRT-4 with Stage 2 from the dealer:) mid-low 13s for less than 24K:)

vsop
07-16-2005, 10:59 AM
Yeah it might be a whole 2 tenths faster than a Mustang but it is $8k more. I'll take that $8k and make that Mustang run 10's. There isn't any car sold for $25k that can run mid 13's like the Mustang can.

Briane

Buddy.. I own a mustang vert and well you need to get off your not so high Horse.. (Pun intended) The stang has its own issues. While that are very nice cars by no means are they perfect.

Not to mention a 05 Vert GT is 30K plus options and dealer markup..
And if you feel so special in your mustang GT how about the fact that in a 00 v6 stang vert I ran 13.3 on street tires. Or that I have a friend that does tuning that has a 00 stang v6 auto with a turbo setup he built on a stcok block running low 11's in the 1/4th. So for less than you 25K your getting your ass handed to your GT by a v6..

So think before yoru troll ass posts here. There is always something faster or better. Those of us that post here do not do so to bash other cars or to say the charger is the worlds greatest or fastest car. We are here because we have a common intrest in the car, that is all.

RT-DAYTONA-RT
07-16-2005, 01:27 PM
Hey all, new to this sight. I am surprised that only 6.8% voted for 14.5-15. Car & driver got 14.2 @ 101. Keep in mind this is a professional driver, and probably at sea level. The higher the altitude the slower the ET. I live in Colorado and vote that my (in comming) Daytona will probably run a 14.5 +. Hope for better, but probably not.

amcguru
07-16-2005, 01:43 PM
With 390 lb/tq on tap, the car will feel faster than it really is...one of my friends had a '98 integra type-R that stock ran a 14.5 but felt slower than my 15.8 sec. durango! Torque is what you feel.

vsop
07-16-2005, 01:45 PM
Hey all, new to this sight. I am surprised that only 6.8% voted for 14.5-15. Car & driver got 14.2 @ 101. Keep in mind this is a professional driver, and probably at sea level. The higher the altitude the slower the ET. I live in Colorado and vote that my (in comming) Daytona will probably run a 14.5 +. Hope for better, but probably not.


The fact that C&D got a 14.2 and that 13.5 to 14.0 and 14.1 - 14.5 are the two most popular make perfect sense. I bet that we will see a few R/T's hitting low 14's & high 13's real soon.

a 14.7-14.8 is pretty slow, alot of v6's out there will run that stock.
as for C&D having a pro driver, well when it comes to the drag strip that means nothing with a stock car. The cars an auto so long as you power brake there is nothing to it. Its when you are bracket racing that a driver will matter.

RT-DAYTONA-RT
07-16-2005, 02:59 PM
Remember that you loose 3% for every 1000 feet, meaning that if a 340 HP car was tested at sea level by the time you test it in Colorado, the same car is actually only around 289HP. That is a big difference, and will effect an ET.

vsop
07-16-2005, 05:06 PM
Remember that you loose 3% for every 1000 feet, meaning that if a 340 HP car was tested at sea level by the time you test it in Colorado, the same car is actually only around 289HP. That is a big difference, and will effect an ET.



People do not care about what it will do above sea level... They just care about what each will do on an even scale.

So if the stang runs 13.6 at sea level and the srt runs 12.8 at sea level, then its safe to assume that the charger will still be around 8tenths faster if both are above sea level at the same alt.

Just how dyno's are SAE corrected so that there is a way to measure them against each other, since conditions change.

Only thing is if you have a power adder like S/Cer or turbo, they normally don't loose as much HP in higher alts as a N/A engine

RT-DAYTONA-RT
07-16-2005, 05:28 PM
I understand what you are saying, but if lets say my Daytona runs a 14.5 in CO. it will be quicker in CA. That's all I am saying.

CO-Charger
07-16-2005, 09:07 PM
I understand what you are saying, but if lets say my Daytona runs a 14.5 in CO. it will be quicker in CA. That's all I am saying.The answer is obviously yes. But probably not as much as you would think. When I go to Illinois/Indiana/Michigan to visit family, I can tell I get a little better "umph" to the petal of all my cars that have done the trip. I've never done a high strip/low strip test, just seat of the pants "feel".

BTW, welcome to the board, I am also from Colorado. Drop a note in the "Great Plains" Regional Forum/Threads and say hi.

RadarmagneT
07-17-2005, 12:33 AM
not fast, considering its heavy turd

troll troll troll..
all your posts this evening are pitiful.

RadarmagneT
07-17-2005, 02:37 AM
just like new magnum sedan aww :sad:

somebody is pissed his car is 30yrs old.

pd171
07-17-2005, 09:39 PM
Even with an automatic transmission a good launch verses a bad launch can make a difference of several tenths in the quarter. I did a lot of street drag racing (at least 100) in my youth with my 69 Roadrunner with a automatic, 383, posi-traction and traction bars. I won a lot of races not because my car was faster but because of poor launch's by the other guys. My car was not that fast but the traction bars made the car very quick and consistent out of the hole. My point is that with a really good launch the R/T should be able to get a high 13. At least one poster I recall from the 300 forums got a 14.0 from his stock 300C. I don't street race any more and will never take my 300C to the track (my wife thinks it's her car). If I can handle the finances I plan to get a Charger R/T next year. I can tell you the 5.7 has a great seat of the pants feeling of power and is a welcome change from the cars I have been driving for the past few years.

RT-DAYTONA-RT
07-22-2005, 08:53 AM
Hi all, my neighbor came to visit yesterday, and told me that there was a 05 GTO automatic at Bandemier Speedway (a 1/4 mile track here in CO) that made 3 passes while he was there and they were a 15.1, 15.0, 15.2; the temp was 97 degrees. Now I don't know how many miles were on it, could have been that the engine was still real tight too, but it kind of has me worried about my Daytona, because isn't the Dodge slower?

maneval69
07-22-2005, 09:23 AM
Hi all, my neighbor came to visit yesterday, and told me that there was a 05 GTO automatic at Bandemier Speedway (a 1/4 mile track here in CO) that made 3 passes while he was there and they were a 15.1, 15.0, 15.2; the temp was 97 degrees. Now I don't know how many miles were on it, could have been that the engine was still real tight too, but it kind of has me worried about my Daytona, because isn't the Dodge slower?

He must have misunderstood or said it wrong.
You would have to try to run slow to get to 14.1, 14.0, and 14.2.
Actually it should run close to 13.5.
(if the engine was that tight I don't know if it would have made 3 runs with out losing the engine)
________
CHEAP GLASS PIPES (http://glasspipes.net/)

RT-DAYTONA-RT
07-22-2005, 09:35 AM
I don't know, but he said that is what the timing board displayed

Stonebreaker
07-22-2005, 02:36 PM
Bandimere didn't have their elevation listed on their website, but as they were listed as being "on the west side of Denver", I assume their elevation is AT LEAST a mile high. Using a density altitude calculator online, 5280 ft elevation plus 97 deg at 50% humidity and 29.45 inches standard barometric pressure, the density altitude works out to 9700 feet. 15.0 sounds fairly reasonable for such miserable weather conditions.

CO-Charger
07-22-2005, 10:34 PM
Bandimere didn't have their elevation listed on their website, but as they were listed as being "on the west side of Denver", I assume their elevation is AT LEAST a mile high. Using a density altitude calculator online, 5280 ft elevation plus 97 deg at 50% humidity and 29.45 inches standard barometric pressure, the density altitude works out to 9700 feet. 15.0 sounds fairly reasonable for such miserable weather conditions.Stonebreaker, you are correct-a-mundo. Bandimere sits dug into the side of the foothills west of Denver. The state capitol (downtown) is down in the bowl that Denver sits in and it has a step which marks the 5280 foot altitude. Bandimere's actual altitude is somewhere in the range of 6000 to 6500 feet.

Gawd forbid if we ever had 97 degrees and 50% humidity, we'd die of suffication here in Colorado!! I would estimate that it was probably closer to high teens (go with 18% to be conservative). Wow... I just found a density altitude calculator and I plugged in 6250 ft, 97d @ 29.45p with 18% humidity and it gave me, 10,643 ft. That is drastic!

Bottom line though, up here in the thin air, cars just don't go as fast as they can down in lower altitudes. Low 15's is probably acurate and not very surprising.

Stonebreaker
07-23-2005, 10:29 AM
Yeah, we've learned to watch the density altitude very closely when we're going for a personal best. When I used to live on the east coast, the impala club would hit Cecil County and Atco dragstrips in December in an annual attempt for personal bests. If the weather coperated, we often got NEGATIVE altitude - sometimes the density altitude will hit minus 2000 feet, and a car that normally runs low 13's will hit mid 12's.

So both my hobbies - fishing and drag racing - depend on the weather for best results!

Phantomcobra
08-01-2005, 10:22 PM
Excuse me folks. Since "Killer_Mopar" decided to personally attack me, I felt it necessary to reply. Surprising how many people talk about the old cars weren't even alive then.

Well since you are so quick to point out the error of Chryslers ways, I will just point out that the first production year of the Charger was 1966 and we are in 2005, so thats really only 39 years. But wait you say, what about the Dart Charger concept!!! Ohhh you probably didnt know about that so let me keep my mouth shut. But even if you wanted to throw that into the arguement, co-charger has already pointed out that it wasnt a 40-year-long streak....so it really doesnt have a 40 year history.

Usually when an immature person can't find a logical arguement, they resort to nit-picking. The new cars are usually introduced in September (or were in the past). I think my post was close enough to 40 years to round it off but if you insist, I can look up the exact day of the first Charger. What an idiot! Anyone who was alive back then knew about the Dart. I didn't mention it because it wasn't relavent. Kinda like you. But what you are telling me is that since the dinosaur hasn't been alive for millions of years, if one was born today it wouldn't be a dinosaur? What would it be? A kangaroo? Even if the Charger wasn't made for 50 years, if production started again, it would still be a Charger. And if the car doesn't have a 40 year history, then my car is what? 2 years old (like YOU)?


Ohh please can I have your permission too??!!!??!!??
Most definitely. PLEASE ignore me until you have some facts to back up your arguements.


Your right, but why do you even come to this forum if you dont respect the car? It seems to me that you have a very boring life or have been rejected by the "real" charger community. Why dont you go to dodge-charger.com? I am sure everyone will like your bias views.
I have been there and often go there. But I wanted to find out what pro-new Charger people had to say about the new car, give my views, get some intelligent feedback (which I can't get from you) and argue some points.


No, the regular coronet was the 4 door version of the Superbee (and coronet R/T) and even that isnt true. The coronet was out LONG before any performance version was made, so it should be said that the superbee and R/T were the 2 door version of the coronet.
If you had been alive back then, you would know the Coronet was the mother to the Charger. Any half blind person could look at the front clip of the 66 or 67 Coronet and see the entire thing is nearly identical to the Charger. If you check the part numbers you will see the fenders and hood are the same. And your second sentence is correct. The Superbee, R/T and Charger all came after the Coronet. The Coronet was first produced in the 40s or 50s. I was a bit young then so I don't remember exactly. By the way. In 66 and 67 ther was no R/T so your comment doesn't hold water.


Who are we trying to fool, you and I both know you STILL would have bitched.
You are the fool. If the new Charger had been a 2 door, I would have said I don't like the style but would not have complained about the lack of faithfulness to the name. I was going to put mine on the show room floor of the local Dodge dealer when the new one came out but I refused when I found out it was a 4 door. If it had been a 2 door, like the style or not, I still would have let them borrow mine.


The original charger was just a 2 door family car. It wasnt built with only one thing in mind....for if it was, than the standard engine wouldn't have been a 230hp 318. The R/T was the muscle side of the charger, just like the R/T of today. Let's see, family car with a performance version, thats pretty faithful to its' name. The problem you have is that the car has four doors, get over it.
The original charger was a family car. FINALLY something that was correct. But it was billed as the family MUSCLE car. If you check the production numbers you will find there were more 383 than 318 cars made. The 318 was also in the Fury and the Duster because they were good strong engines. The Ford 400 put out less horses than the 318. And if it wasn't intended to be a muscle car, why did it come with a 150 mph speedo instead of the 120 the Coronet had? I have several original sales brochures if you'd like to see where they introduce the car as the family muscle car. It was billed as the first car to run rings around a Mustang but still have room for the family. Ever try to sit in the back seat of an old Mustang? Great place if you happen to be a midget. Besides, the 318 was "available" but the 383 and the Hemi were advertised.


I own a 70 Challenger R/T and even if DC puts the challenger name on the next generation Neon, I will not go to a forum devoted to it and complain for these two reasons:
1) I would just sound like an idiot - that wouldn't be hard no matter where you went
2) I wouldn't waste my time complaining about the present when I could be cruising around in the past. I do both since I have more aptitude than you.

So basically if you dont like the new charger, quit wasting your time here. Go find what you imagine as a "real" charger and start driving it.

I'm guessing you are rebuilding your R/T with a 225 slant 6? I have a real Charger and enjoy it every time I can. Too bad you don't have one. Then you might understand. The so called die hard Charger fans aren't that way out of spite, they are that way because they grew up with the Charger and love the car and what the name stood for. But then the fact that Dodge is no longer Dodge but a European with an American name, explains why the failure to stay faithful to an original. Ever notice how the Volvo and Jag are looking more and more like a Ford? Dodge and Plymouth will continue to look more like a European car than an American icon. Did you know the Chevy Malibu is produced on a Toyota factory line? Chrysler is no longer American so it doesn't hold to the American traditions. Europeans don't feel any loyalty to an American brand. They would have made the new Mustang look like a Porsche or a Saab. Like Ford or not, at least they know their cars.

To the rest of the posters, thanks for the insight into the new car. Still don't like the way they did the name and I hope the 4 door flops. But I'd like to see a 2 door version become hugely successful.

CO-Charger
08-02-2005, 01:36 AM
To the rest of the posters, thanks for the insight into the new car. Still don't like the way they did the name and I hope the 4 door flops. But I'd like to see a 2 door version become hugely successful.Just to add to this insane and still continuing argument. Phantom, it would probably be in your best interest if you want to see a 2-door version, to pray that the 4-door is a success. Its more likely that if the 4-door succeeds, they will continue with their plans for a 2-door (rumor has it in 2010). But if the 4-door flops as you desire so much, I would suspect that they would just scrap the whole platform and start with something else entirely.

maneval69
08-02-2005, 10:37 AM
I can't believe that some people have had chargers for over 2 months and still no one has posted a 1/4 mile time. This is a performance car isn't it?
________
WELLBUTRIN SICKNESS (http://www.classactionsettlements.org/lawsuit/wellbutrin/)

elcapitan87
08-03-2005, 10:31 AM
Too hot. Performance car or not, nothing is going to turn great times in the summer. I won't have mine to the strip until fall, when the Detroit area is no longer using summer formulated gas and the temp and humidity have gone down.

maneval69
08-03-2005, 11:31 AM
Too hot. Performance car or not, nothing is going to turn great times in the summer. I won't have mine to the strip until fall, when the Detroit area is no longer using summer formulated gas and the temp and humidity have gone down.
Too Hot for Great times?
How will you know you are running great times in the winter if you don't have summer times to compare to? That's why you post the temp and altitude when you post times. It's all about seeing what it will do (in any conditions)
I do most of my stupid driving in the summer anyway.
I thought going to the track was support to be fun, not a quest for the Holy Grail.

I was afraid this was the reason that no one had posted times. I?ll bet some one has run the ? mile and was disappointed in the times so there not sharing.
________
UNIQUE GLASS PIPES (http://glassgallery.tumblr.com)

DAYTONA_R/T
08-03-2005, 11:54 AM
Too Hot for Great times?
How will you know you are running great times in the winter if you don't have summer times to compare to? That's why you post the temp and altitude when you post times. It's all about seeing what it will do (in any conditions)
I do most of my stupid driving in the summer anyway.
I thought going to the track was support to be fun, not a quest for the Holy Grail.

I was afraid this was the reason that no one had posted times. Ill bet some one has run the mile and was disappointed in the times so there not sharing.


when it is 110+ here in the summer (arizona) you are wasting money going to the track in the summer... the local LX club is planning a GTG at the track, but not until Oct when temps come down.... (I will keep local area charger members aware of this as time gets closer, right now nothing is posted online, just in talks)

06DayRT
08-03-2005, 01:11 PM
Thought I would add a link here to clear up a couple a points about the "original" or "real" charger.
http://www.allpar.com/model/charger.html

For you guys who are still waiting for your Daytonas........It is worth the wait!!!!Finally got mine last Thursday after it gathered dust at the railyard
in Massachusetts for what seemed like an eternity. It is one sweet looking
ride. Heads have been turning ever since I started driving it home from the
dealer. This car has a set of the things squirrels gather. #86 of 4000 :rockon:

elcapitan87
08-03-2005, 01:39 PM
Too Hot for Great times?
How will you know you are running great times in the winter if you don't have summer times to compare to?
...
I was afraid this was the reason that no one had posted times. Ill bet some one has run the mile and was disappointed in the times so there not sharing.

I guess my thoughts are that if I'm going to bother running the car at the track, I want to get the best times possible. Temp, Barometric Pressure (more than altitude), and even gasoline formulation will play a factor. No, it will not be 55 and sunny with 30" baro and low humidity every day I run the car, but those conditions will produce better results than today's 92 and 85% humidity.
Being Wednesday night, Milan (local track) has T&T tonight. I could take the car and get a 14.5x @ 96mph slip and post it with nothing to be ashamed of. I've been a member of the National Taurus SHO club for many years and last week they had their annual convention in Indy. Every car there was near a half second off of its best times (which aren't necessarily impressive times, but thats a different issue). Being a owners club for a dead car, many members have a different vehicle that they now use as their daily driver. In 95 heat even the more impressive cars there (Viper, Evo, STi, modified Legacy GT, etc) weren't running anything great on the dragstrip, relative to what those cars should be capable of. The conditions just aren't good for good times and honestly, I'd venture a guess that it really won't be all that exciting to pilot these cars down the quarter mile anyway. Mash gas, keep wheel straight, enjoy the ride.
Unless you're bracket racing on the hot days (which these cars should be good for), I don't understand why you'd go to the track other than to get the best time possible.

maneval69
08-03-2005, 09:00 PM
I guess my thoughts are that if I'm going to bother running the car at the track,

I guess if it's a bother going to the track, you have a point.

But I like to do it.
As far as it being a waste of money, 15 bucks to legally ring my car out as many time as I want. Sounds like a bargain to me.
________
VAPE INFO (http://johan-luis.tumblr.com/)

elcapitan87
08-04-2005, 06:21 AM
Don't get me wrong, I'll be running the car at the track many times, as I too enjoy a day at the dragstrip. Before the end of the year, my Charger will likely have near 50 dragstrip runs on it, more depending upon how many stages the mods end up coming in. However, when I go out, I'm definitely going out to get the best time that the car is capable of and will do my best to run the car on days with similar conditions.

maneval69
08-04-2005, 09:20 AM
I guess I'm also looking to experiment with the launch.
I don't really care about conditions other than rain. My Magnum launched very inconsistently. My times varied by 4 tenths. (14.67-14.95) I don't have my slips at work, but the 60 ft times is where it showed the most inconsistency.

I may take my brothers Charger to the track tomorrow. Get a few times to compare the RT to my performance group equipped car. (my car is in paint today)
Hope to get it next week.
________
Ecigarette forum (http://www.ecigarettes123.com/)

jdustu
08-05-2005, 10:04 AM
I live about an hour away from Milan(in michigan), and this summer i kept waiting to take my camaro to the track cuz i wanted it to get cooler.....

last year i ran a 13.1 when i first got it, and a 12.5 at the end of the summer with after a couple mods;both days it was 85+ degrees and humidity %(the last day everyone there was 2 tenths slower than usual

so i was hoping for 11s this summer with my stall converter, but i wanted the temps to cool down.......then i spun a bearing and i'll be building a new engine

so i never got to see what it would do, and i'm kicking myself........if you have the chance and the temps are below 90, go for it.....especially if you're making baseline runs, are just wanna have fun....besides that, the more you drive the better you get, right?

anyways, at least somebody get some charger times posted!!

radguy
08-06-2005, 06:22 AM
If the rain holds out I will have 1/8 and 1000' times tonight at my local track.

maneval69
08-06-2005, 10:40 AM
I took RadarmagneT's Charger to the track last night.
Was not a good experience.
The track was packed and they had electrical problems with the time tracker system. so everyone waited an hour and a half before they started letting people run.
First run left the car in 1st and let it shift by it self. No idea what time I ran because the track could not print the time slips. (Starting to get mad)
the tower said they thought it would be fixed soon.
second run 1 hour later.(after sitting in line waiting for several rounds of cycles and race car to run.
on this run I shifted manually. Trying to shift at 5200. The shifts seemed to have a pause when I let it shift on its own. But I prematurely shifted into third at about 4900. Still no time slip but I did have my brother?s wife write down the times. 14.60 @ 95 mph.

I don't know if they ever got the time slips printing that night because after sitting in line for another hour. I decided to go home. They had a couple of race cars throw-up on the track and it took for ever to clean it up.
________
NAUGHTYSCHOOLTEEN (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/cam/NAUGHTYSCHOOLTEEN/)

radguy
08-06-2005, 07:10 PM
Well made one pass as soon as I pulled though the gate. It was in the low 90's with high humidity. It was thundering and lightning when we got there. The charger had 528 miles on it. I staged with out doing a burnout and pulled a horrible 60'. Hopefully I will get some better passes next week.
Here is the slip.
http://img45.imageshack.us/img45/726/chargerslip7jv.th.jpg (http://img45.imageshack.us/my.php?image=chargerslip7jv.jpg)
Click Picture
Is there anyone that can host a video for me? If so I have one of my lone pass.

srt4_me_2004
08-07-2005, 11:51 AM
Below is my time slip. I was in the right lane. I let the Charger shift itself and I did have on the traction controll system.

Read it and weap...

http://tinypic.com/a40by0.jpg

elcapitan87
08-08-2005, 07:40 AM
Now that people are going to the strip and posting times/timeslips, can we set protocol for how we post this stuff? I don't think that we should be correcting our numbers and all of that garbage, but to help put the times into perspective, please post some of the pertinent info:


Temperature
Humidity
Barometer
Altitude

jdustu
08-08-2005, 11:21 AM
Is there anyone that can host a video for me? If so I have one of my lone pass.

i can host it if you email it to me at jdustu@yahoo.com

radguy
08-09-2005, 10:29 AM
Thanks, I will send it to you when I get home.

maneval69
08-09-2005, 11:02 AM
=srt4_me_2004]Below is my time slip. I was in the right lane. I let the Charger shift itself and I did have on the traction controll system.

Read it and weap...


Was that the only run you did?
That 60ft time realt blows. Thats where the time was lost. Did you just punch the gas or did you build on the converter some?
Compare to my Magnum times below.
I took RadarmagneT's charger to the track last Friday.
But they could not print time slips. My brothers wife wrote down the times off the tower on my second and final pass. 14.61 @ 95.?? MPH.
I launch with traction control off and built rpm to right at 2000 rpm.
Temp was around 87-90
Elevation not much over sea level

------------Run 1------Run 2--------Run 3-------Run 4
reaction----0.9987-----1.0393-------0.8324------1.1824
60 ft-------2.2854-----2.2793-------2.1886------2.2301
330 ft------6.3543-----6.3607-------6.2096------6.3204
1/8 ET-----9.6356------9.6485------9.4755------9.6269
1/8 MPH---75.05--------74.9--------75.36-------74.57
1/4 ET----14.884------14.9028----14.6951-----14.9069
1/4 MPH---93.98--------94.36------94.86-------93.73
________
Vaporizer wiki (http://vaporizerwiki.com)

jdustu
08-09-2005, 05:59 PM
Thanks, I will send it to you when I get home.

here it is...was the track still wet?!?!

http://detroitwheeliedog.com/camaro/chargerfirstrun.wmv

srt4_me_2004
08-10-2005, 09:04 AM
Was that the only run you did?
That 60ft time realt blows. Thats where the time was lost. Did you just punch the gas or did you build on the converter some?
Compare to my Magnum times below.
I took RadarmagneT's charger to the track last Friday.
But they could not print time slips. My brothers wife wrote down the times off the tower on my second and final pass. 14.61 @ 95.?? MPH.


I did only make one pass with the Charger. I was there with my SRT-4 that night with 5 other SRT-4's so I spent most of my time with that car. To address your questions; I agree 60'ft time blows. Your average 60' was 2.2458 while mine was 2.3998. I did NOT build on the converter just punched it. I paid attention to the launch and did not get any noticable wheel spin off the line. I consider my pass very average for the way I describe it. Before I got the car I voted in the 'How fast will the Charger run' poll that the car would run 14.1 - 14.5 Knowing what I know now the car is CLEARLY in the 14.6 - 15.0 catagory. Do you agree with me?

maneval69
08-10-2005, 09:23 AM
I did only make one pass with the Charger. I was there with my SRT-4 that night with 5 other SRT-4's so I spent most of my time with that car. To address your questions; I agree 60'ft time blows. Your average 60' was 2.2458 while mine was 2.3998. I did NOT build on the converter just punched it. I paid attention to the launch and did not get any noticable wheel spin off the line. I consider my pass very average for the way I describe it. Before I got the car I voted in the 'How fast will the Charger run' poll that the car would run 14.1 - 14.5 Knowing what I know now the car is CLEARLY in the 14.6 - 15.0 catagory. Do you agree with me?

I think the average will fall between 14.3-14.6 . I know I lost some time shifting on the one run I got times for, but I doubt it was more than a tenth.
RadarmagneT's car only has 4500 miles on it. I was using regular fuel and the weather was not good for fast times. I don't know if gas will make a difference but it would not hurt.

I did not experience any wheel spin with the charger. Based on power braking to dry the tires after trying to miss the water box (which was imposable), I had to be vary close to spinning but I did not feel any.
________
Live Sex (http://livesexwebshows.com/)

radguy
08-10-2005, 11:14 AM
Well I will have more times this weekend and they will be better than the one pass I made this last weekend. Anyway lets do a little comparison.
Radguy - SRT4 ME 2004 - Maneval69
60'- 2.2348 - 2.3998 - 2.1886
330'-6.1119 - 6.5618 - 6.2096
1/8 -9.3731@77.33 - 9.9163@74.27 - 9.4755@75.36

So lets see I was 0.0977 faster in the 330' than Maneval69 and 0.4499 faster than SRT4ME2004. Then in the 1/8 I was 0.1024 faster than Maneval69 and 0.5432 faster than SRT4ME2004. So if my charger continued at the same pace through the 1/4 (i.e., I take the difference between the 330' and 1/8 ets then add it to the difference at the 1/8 and subtract the difference from you 1/4 ets) should have yielded me a 14.5 in the 1/4. Now consider my 60' (which I think is bad) I see no problem in picking up another 3 tenths at a minimum in the 1/4. Most likely more as I get used to running the car and the motor gets broken in.
The more I read this, the more I feel it may make absolutely no since to anyone but me. Guess I will shut up now.

maneval69
08-10-2005, 11:55 AM
It makes sense to me. Looking at the time you made up between 60' and 330', I would thing your 1/4 would have been around 14.4 even with that 60' time.
I didn't notice until now how much better your 1/8 trap speed and how much you made up in 330'.
Your times inspire some confidence in an as advertised 14.2.
________
Live sex (http://livesexwebshows.com/)

radguy
08-10-2005, 12:30 PM
I think with some more miles on the car and a little more seat time high 13's might be obtainable in stock form. I am going to run at my local 1000' track this weekend and then go to Tulsa in two weeks for some 1/4 times. No matter what it runs, I like the Charger.

maneval69
08-10-2005, 02:15 PM
No matter what it runs, I like the Charger.

Amen!

The only problem with getting in the 13's is the launch. I just don't see how we will get under the 2 second 60' mark with out programmer help.
________
Web shows (http://livesexwebshows.com/)

GLHS837
08-10-2005, 02:32 PM
Tires, tires. The 300C SRT guys are right at 2.0 with the F1 supercar tires, which are not even really that kind of tire.

radguy
08-10-2005, 02:44 PM
If track prep is good this weekend it will be my mission to get at least one 1.9 60'. I may have to lower the tire pressure down to 24-26 psi and stage real shallow but I feel it can be done.

Lunger
08-11-2005, 05:18 AM
I had this info, thought someone might like it. As far as i know all cars are stock, that means stock tires. I am sure most times would be much better if they had the tires we have today.



1. 1966 COBRA 427
ENGINE / 425 HORSEPOWER 427 2x4 BARREL
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.54 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 12.20 @ 118
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR AND DRIVER 11/65

2. 1966 CORVETTE 427
ENGINE / 425 HORSEPOWER 427 4 BARREL
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.36 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 12.80@112
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR AND DRIVER 11/65

3. 1969 ROAD RUNNER 440 SIX PACK
ENGINE / 390 HORSEPOWER 440 SIX-PACK
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 4.10 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 12.91 @ 111.8
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPER STOCK MAGAZINE 6/69

4. 1970 HEMI 'CUDA
ENGINE / 425 HORSEPOWER 426 HEMI 2x4 BARREL
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.54 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.10 @ 107
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR CRAFT 11/69

5. 1970 SS454 CHEVELLE
ENGINE / 450 HORSEPOWER LS-6 454
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.55 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.12 @ 107.01
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR CRAFT MAGAZINE 11/69

6. 1969 ZL-1 CAMARO
ENGINE / 430 HORSEPOWER 427 ZL-1
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 4.10 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.16 @ 110.21
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HI-PERFORMANCE CARS 6/69

7. 1968 CORVETTE 427
ENGINE / 435 HORSEPOWER 427 3x2 BARREL
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.70 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.30 @ 108
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HI-PERFORMANCE CARS 5/68

8. 1970 ROAD RUNNER 426 HEMI
ENGINE / 425 HORSEPOWER 426 HEMII 2x4 BARREL
AS TESTED / TORQUEFLIGHT TRANSMISSION AND 4.10 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.34 @ 107.5
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPER STOCK MAGAZINE 12/69

9. 1970 BUICK GS STAGE 1
ENGINE / 360 HORSEPOWER 455 STAGE 1
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.64 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.38 @ 105
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / MOTOR TREND 1/70

10. 1969 CHARGER 500
ENGINE / 425 HORSEPOWER 426 HEMI 2x4 BARREL
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 4.10 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.48 @ 109
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HOT ROD MAGAZINE 2/69

11. 1973 TRANS AM 455 SD
ENGINE / 310 * HORSEPOWER 455 4 BARREL
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.42 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.54 @ 104.2
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HOT ROD MAGAZINE 6/73
* DENOTES NET HORSEPOWER

12. 1969 CORVETTE L-88
ENGINE / 430 HORSEPOWER 427 L-88
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.36 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.56 @ 111
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HOT ROD MAGAZINE 4/69

13. 1969 SUPER BEE 440 SIX PACK
ENGINE / 390 HORSEPOWER 440 SIX-PACK
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 4.10 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.56 @ 105.6
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HOT ROD MAGAZINE 8/69

14. 1969 BOSS 429 MUSTANG
ENGINE / 375 HORSEPOWER BOSS429
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.91 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.60 @ 106
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HI PERFORMANCE CARS 11/69

15. 1970 CHALLENGER R/T
ENGINE / 390 HORSEPOWER 440 3x2 BARREL
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.23 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.62 @ 104.3
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR CRAFT MAGAZINE 11/69

16. 1970 TORINO COBRA
ENGINE / 370 HORSEPOWER 429 SCJ
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.91 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.62 @ 105.9
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPER STOCK MAGAZINE 3/70

17. 1968 BISCAYNE 427
ENGINE / 425 HORSEPOWER 427 4 BARREL
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 4.56 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.65 @ 105
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPER STOCK MAGAZINE 4/68

18. 1964 POLARA 500
ENGINE / 365 HORSEPOWER 426 4 BARREL
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.23 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.70 @ 107.3
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HI PERFORMANCE CARS 4/64

19. 1969 GTX
ENGINE / 375 HORSEPOWER 440 4 BARREL
AS TESTED / TORQUEFLIGHT TRANSMISSION AND 4.10 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.70 @ 102.8
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / MOTOR TREND 1/69

20. 1969 DART 440
ENGINE / 375 HORSEPOWER 440 4 BARREL
AS TESTED / TORQUEFLIGHT TRANSMISSION AND 3.55 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.71 @ 105
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR CRAFT MAGAZINE 5/69

21. 1971 ROAD RUNNER
ENGINE / 390 HORSEPOWER 440 SIX PACK
AS TESTED / TORQUEFLIGHT TRANSMISSION AND 4.10 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.71 @ 101.2
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR CRAFT MAGAZINE 1/71

22. 1971 'CUDA
ENGINE / 390 HORSEPOWER 440 SIX PACK
AS TESTED / TORQUEFLIGHT TRANSMISSION AND 4.10 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.72 @ 106
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPER STOCK MAGAZINE 4/71

23. 1971 CORVETTE
ENGINE / 425 HORSEPOWER LS-6 454
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.36 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.72 @ 102.4
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR LIFE 8/71

24. 1971 SUPER BEE
ENGINE / 425 HORSEPOWER 426 HEMI
AS TESTED / TORQUEFLIGHT TRANSMISSION AND 4.10 REAR
PERFORMANCE / 13.73 @ 104
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / MOTOR TREND 12/70

25. 1968 HURST OLDS
ENGINE / 390 HORSEPOWER 455 W-30
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.91 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPERSTOCK MAGAZINE 8/68
PERFORMANCE / 13.77 @ 103.91

26. 1968 FIREBIRD H.O.
ENGINE / 335 HORSEPOWER 400 H.O.
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HOT ROD 3/68
PERFORMANCE / 13.79 @ 106

27. 1967 CORVETTE
ENGINE / 435 HORSEPOWER 427 3x2 BARREL
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.55 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HOT ROD MAGAZINE 5/67
PERFORMANCE / 13.80 @ 108

28. 1971 BOSS 351 MUSTANG
ENGINE / 330 HORSEPOWER BOSS 351
AS TESTED /4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.91 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / MOTOR TREND MAGAZINE 1/71
PERFORMANCE / 13.80 @ 104

29. 1966 SATELLITE
ENGINE / 425 HORSEPOWER 426 HEMI
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.54 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR AND DRIVER MAGAZINE 4/66
PERFORMANCE / 13.81 @ 104

30. 1968 CORONET R/T
ENGINE / 375 HORSEPOWER 440 4 BARREL
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 4.10 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPERSTOCK MAGAZINE 4/69
PERFORMANCE / 13.83 @ 102.27

31. 1968 CYCLONE GT
ENGINE / 335 HORSEPOWER 428 COBRA JET
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 4.11 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / MOTOR TREND MAGAZINE 8/68
PERFORMANCE / 13.86 @ 101.69

32. 1969 NOVA SS396
ENGINE / 375 HORSEPOWER 396 4 BARREL
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.55 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HOT ROD MAGAZINE 7/69
PERFORMANCE / 13.87 @ 105.1

33. 1969 SHELBY GT-500
ENGINE / 335 HORSEPOWER 428 COBRA JET
AS TESTED / 4 SPEEDTRANSMISSION AND 3.91 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPERSTOCK MAGAZINE 9/69
PERFORMANCE / 13.87 @ 104.52

34. 1970 4-4-2 W30
ENGINE / 370 HORSEPOWER 455 W-30
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.42 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR CRAFT MAGAZINE 11/69
PERFORMANCE / 13.88 @ 95.84

35. 1962 CORVETTE
ENGINE / 360 HORSEPOWER 327 FUEL INJECTION
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 4.10 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HOT ROD MAGAZINE 1/62
PERFORMANCE / 13.89 @ 105.14

36. 1969 BARRACUDA
ENGINE / 375 HORSEPOWER 440 4 BARREL
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 4.10 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPERSTOCK MAGAZINE 8/69
PERFORMANCE / 13.89 @ 103.21

37. 1969 MACH 1
ENGINE / 335 HORSEPOWER 428 COBRA JET
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.50 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR LIFE MAGAZINE 3/69
PERFORMANCE / 13.90 @ 103.32

38. 1967 GTO
ENGINE / 360 HORSEPOWER 400 RAM AIR
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 4.33 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR LIFE MAGAZINE 10/67
PERFORMANCE / 13.90 @ 102.8

39. 1970 TRANS AM
ENGINE / 345 HORSEPOWER 400 RAM AIR IV
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.91 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HOT ROD MAGAZINE 2/70
PERFORMANCE / 13.90 @ 102

40. 1969 CHARGER R/T
ENGINE / 375 HORSEPOWER 440 4 BARREL
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.55 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / MOTOR TREND MAGAZINE 1/69
PERFORMANCE / 13.90 @ 101.4

41. 1969 COUGAR ELIMINATOR
ENGINE / 335 HORSEPOWER 428 COBRA JET
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.50 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPERSTOCK MAGAZINE 9/69
PERFORMANCE / 13.91 @ 103.9 42. 1972 CORVETTE LT-1
ENGINE / 255* HORSEPOWER LT-1 350
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 4.11 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / HOT ROD MAGAZINE 8/72
PERFORMANCE / 13.92 @ 104.01
* DENOTES NET HORSEPOWER

43. 1970 CHARGER R/T
ENGINE / 390 HORSEPOWER 440 SIX PACK
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.54 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPERSTOCK MAGAZINE 8/68
PERFORMANCE / 13.77 @ 103.91

44. 1968 GTX
ENGINE / 425 HORSEPOWER 426 HEMII
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.23 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / CAR LIFE MAGAZINE 2/68
PERFORMANCE / 13.97 @ 103.5

45. 1971 MUSTANG MACH 1
ENGINE / 370 HORSEPOWER 429 COBRA JET
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.50 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPERSTOCK MAGAZINE 2/71
PERFORMANCE / 13.97 @ 100.22

46. 1970 CYCLONE SPOILER
ENGINE / 370 HORSEPOWER 429 COBRA JET
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.50 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPERSTOCK MAGAZINE 2/70
PERFORMANCE / 13.97 @ 100


47. 1967 4-4-2 W30
ENGINE / 350 HORSEPOWER 400 W-30
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 4.33 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / SUPERSTOCK MAGAZINE 8/67
PERFORMANCE / 13.99 @ 102.4

48. 1970 CHALLENGER
ENGINE / 425 HORSEPOWER 426 HEMII
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.23 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / ROAD AND TRACK MAGAZINE 8/70
PERFORMANCE / 14.00 @ 104

49. 1966 SHELBY GT-350 S
ENGINE / 440* HORSEPOWER 289 HI PERF
AS TESTED / AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION AND 3.89 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED / MOTOR TREND MAGAZINE 8/66
PERFORMANCE / 14.00 @ 102
* ESTIMATED HORSEPOWER WITH PAXTON SUPERCHARGER


50. 1964 COBRA 289
ENGINE / 271 HORSEPOWER 289 HI PERF
AS TESTED / 4 SPEED TRANSMISSION AND 3.77 REAR
DRAG TEST PUBLISHED /CAR LIFE MAGAZINE 8/64
PERFORMANCE / 14.00 @ 98

jdustu
08-11-2005, 07:25 AM
shoot, half those cars were basically stripped down factory racers.....and they only had ***whisper*** two doors :wink:

speaking of tires, you would be suprised how quick the f.a.s.t. (factory appearing, stock tire) cars are running on bias-ply tires......60fters into the 1.6s...greg gessler's gsx had one that series a few years in a row(11.03 in factory appearing car), but it looks like this year a couple aluminum engine/fiberglass body cars are into the tens.....

GLHS837
08-11-2005, 07:29 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldnt the old bias plys in one way at least help 60s? I'm refferring to sidewall strength. If the tire wrinkles, isn't that a good thing?

radguy
08-11-2005, 08:06 AM
The old street bias ply tires were hard compound tires. So traction would have been limited.

GLHS837
08-11-2005, 08:24 AM
Oh, I know the old rubber sucked, but how about new Bias plys, like Coker sells? I'm sure they use new rubber formulations.

radguy
08-11-2005, 08:49 AM
Hoosier Quick Time Tires and ET streets would be better suited for the dragstrip than the Coker tires. I Coker side walls would be about as stiff as newer radials.

Lunger
08-11-2005, 09:03 AM
I have a set of the Hoosier quick time DOT's at the moment on my old charger. 295 60 15's . They didnt hook up as well as i hoped. last run i made at the track , It was a few years back but i boiled the hides off them , 2.3 60 foot,running 15 pounds of pressure. But no one ever said i was light off the line with the pedal.

The next go around i think i try the M & H street slicks

Now if i put on those wonderful old red lines r78's or what ever they where. I can smoke them from a 25 mph roll.

DodgeThis
08-11-2005, 09:18 AM
I agree that a high stall converter would improve the launch. I don't think you'll get close to 1/2 second gain. Probably more like 1/4 second.
Tires would have to be upgraded as well. Does anyone know what the stock stall is?

A few of you mentioned high stall torque converters, Rezlo who is known on the stratus forums (both 1g & 2g) and the eclipse/dsm forums sells high stall torque converters at a very good price. He will give the first couple people a really good discount (i think he sells them at cost) if you help him spread the word and write a product review on the board. He has one of these in his car, check out his website for more info www.rezlo.com or email him at ian@rezlo.com

maneval69
08-11-2005, 09:43 AM
A few of you mentioned high stall torque converters, Rezlo who is known on the stratus forums (both 1g & 2g) and the eclipse/dsm forums sells high stall torque converters at a very good price. He will give the first couple people a really good discount (i think he sells them at cost) if you help him spread the word and write a product review on the board. He has one of these in his car, check out his website for more info www.rezlo.com or email him at ian@rezlo.com
DCX seems real funny about this transmission. I can find no information on the stock stall and nothing on the AMG torque converter (which locks up in all forward gears).
As I said before increasing the stall would help the launch tremendously but the cost of development is going to be extremely high. Keep in mind this is a Mercedes trans. The only place that has improvement parts is AMG and AMG will only sell replacement parts based on VIN numbers.

If your guy has a line on a torque converter that will fit these transmissions and can either work with the stock TCM program or has TCM reprogramming equipment, he?s sitting on a GOLD Mine.
________
MARIJUANA MEDICINE EVALUATION CENTERS (http://www.dispensaries.org/)

DodgeThis
08-11-2005, 09:53 AM
DCX seems real funny about this transmission. I can find no information on the stock stall and nothing on the AMG torque converter (which locks up in all forward gears).
As I said before increasing the stall would help the launch tremendously but the cost of development is going to be extremely high. Keep in mind this is a Mercedes trans. The only place that has improvement parts is AMG and AMG will only sell replacement parts based on VIN numbers.

If your guy has a line on a torque converter that will fit these transmissions and can either work with the stock TCM program or has TCM reprogramming equipment, hes sitting on a GOLD Mine.

It would definitely help if you knew the stock stall. It's a shame they're making it so difficult to modify these cars, I will speak with him and get back to you. He'll probably need time to do some research but maybe he can get around it.

Lunger
08-11-2005, 12:14 PM
High stall torque converters, big sticky tires. I have not had a close look at the underside of the new charger. One thing you better look close at is can this trans. (that no one can get the stall speed even) handle the additional shock for any amout of time. Torque box's on the rear suspention , i doubt there stong enough , and last the rear end. All that new found power has to go someplace. As someone who as snapped 2 rear yokes in half at launch, and lost a driveshaft at 115 MPH. Just a warning is all

maneval69
08-11-2005, 01:03 PM
High stall torque converters, big sticky tires. I have not had a close look at the underside of the new charger. One thing you better look close at is can this trans. (that no one can get the stall speed even) handle the additional shock for any amout of time. Torque box's on the rear suspention , i doubt there stong enough , and last the rear end. All that new found power has to go someplace. As someone who as snapped 2 rear yokes in half at launch, and lost a driveshaft at 115 MPH. Just a warning is all
The limits of the drive train has been discussed with much vigor.
A lot feel the LX drive train is a good as the AMG drive trains after all they are the same design. Some amg cars with this design are over 500 HP.
I feel the AMG parts are manufactured with better components/materials and therefore stronger.
The bottom line is we will not know until we start breaking things.
I am not worried about 22-2500 stall with a stock engine. I?m sure it will shorten the life of the transmission (due to heat) but not break anything. I am not sure what if any extra shock this would cause to the trans. The engine holds a flat torque curve from 2000-3000 then increases quickly. (I have only seen one dyno that started at 2000rpm)
I think the supercharged cars will give us a good idea of what these things will take.
________
BUY VOLCANO VAPORIZER (http://www.vaporshop.com/volcano-vaporizer.html)

radguy
08-11-2005, 01:12 PM
There is no more weak parts on this car than any other. If I break it I will fix it. My last car was a subaru foresterXT. I made over 200 low 13 second passes in it. Did I break some things? Yes I did. Did I repair them out of my own pocked? Yes I did. Will the charger be any different? No. I do miss leaving the line at 5000 rpm.

jdustu
08-12-2005, 02:49 PM
Oh, I know the old rubber sucked, but how about new Bias plys, like Coker sells? I'm sure they use new rubber formulations.

this is in the rules for f.a.s.t. racing:

Original equipment reproduction bias-ply tires only. No soft compound tires of any kind are allowed. Retread tires are not allowed.

it will be interesting to see how much the charger's stock irs will take once stall/gears/tires are added.....

Lunger
08-13-2005, 01:47 PM
this is in the rules for f.a.s.t. racing:



it will be interesting to see how much the charger's stock irs will take once stall/gears/tires are added.....


no worries old deep pockets above can pay for it all himself.


Sorry, but i could not help myself on this.

2005 charger 35,000
aftermarket parts 10,000

the look on his face when his ring gear pass's his car priceless.

Rezlo
09-20-2005, 02:39 PM
I am the converter guy,

Ive done a few Merc converters, they are a bit tricky but not to much of a prob, most of the later mopars also use all forward lock up btw, isnt a problem, normaly a mild increase will let the trans ecu do its job pretty well and you only realy notice the added stall at 1/2 to W/O throttle,

Is there anyone here that has toasted a trans or destroyed their SRT8 that could either send me some exact mesurments and pics or better yet a converter out of one?

If not you are welcome to send me your unit with a return lable in the box and ill stall it to anything up to 2400rpm for $350 which includes full ballancing and furnace braizing, upgraded needel bearings, strengthed sprag and so on, if you want higher than 2400rpm youll need to look into have the ECU changed a bit and I charge $10 more per 100rpm higher than 2400 you go. If you want a to do it like this I will only require it for 2 days my side so youll get it back FAST,,, all units garanteed for 12 months

My converters now power most of the most powerful 604's and mitsu 3G V6 turbo and charged eclipses in the country not to mention many others, I have alot more info on my site www.rezlo.com

If you want more info please email me ian@rezlo.com and ill be happy to help

janedoe
10-04-2005, 08:49 PM
im not sure what my daytona would do, its unlikley i will ever find out because it would be my luck something bad would happen if i were to try and find out. i do know thats its a heck of a lot faster than my pt cruiser, but then again the pt is equiped with two squirrels on a exercise wheel.