2015 Challenger Hellcat 707 HP

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by URBAN LEGEND

I'm with you on 2 and 3. But no on 1. P1, 918, and LaFerrari do it all day. It's more on the TC/LC calibration of things. Motor Trend just got 0-60 in 2.4 in the 918. Fastest time ever.

Traction control isn't hooking 700+ hp to the ground, its limiting the power available so that the tires don't break traction. There is a couple hundred hp difference between the two despite the end result in either case being no spin.

And the 325mm tire, plus the low curb weight, plus the rear biased weight distribution, plus the all wheel drive system all probably had a bit of an effect in getting the Porsche to 60 mph in 2.4s. Traction control made it easier for them to get that time in a reasonable number of attempts, but given enough practice & experience, a person could match the system. On the other hand, give it a wheel & tire package thats 2" narrower & it won't matter how good of a driver (or TC system) you've got, you're not going to hit those times (all other things being equal).

[4VFTW]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Traction control isn't hooking 700+ hp to the ground, its limiting the power available so that the tires don't break traction. There is a couple hundred hp difference between the two despite the end result in either case being no spin.

And the 325mm tire, plus the low curb weight, plus the rear biased weight distribution, plus the all wheel drive system all probably had a bit of an effect in getting the Porsche to 60 mph in 2.4s. Traction control made it easier for them to get that time in a reasonable number of attempts, but given enough practice & experience, a person could match the system. On the other hand, give it a wheel & tire package thats 2" narrower & it won't matter how good of a driver (or TC system) you've got, you're not going to hit those times (all other things being equal).

He just said that! (I just don't know why he said it)

[AEP11]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

It must be tough when facts and data stand in the way of your misconceptions. Professional reviews are not perfect, but they do provide a platform for comparison using standardized methodology. Just how different are magazines times vs actual owners? Would you be surprised to see the top 25 fast list posted on ChallengerTalk for the 392 are in line with magazine times?

SRT8Tech 12.253@113.86 1.907 60' 392 A5 stock
Capo 12.395@12.395 1.906 60' 392 A5 Stock
newmoon 12.464@112.00 1.929 60' 392 A5 stock (Error on MPH on time slip)
KyHemiRT 12.517@110.84 1.849 60' 392 A5 stock
SparkChicken 12.566@111.76 1.913 60' 392 A5 stock
Kakdiesel1 12.593@113.71 2.070 60' 392 A5 stock
Flying Dutchman 12.630@111.92 2.033 60' A5 stock
bskylerj 12.650@110.44 1.904 60' 392 A5 stock
555ss 12.685@109.16 1.878 60' 392 M6 Stock
DonP 12.696@110.06 1.912 60' 392 A5 stock
Red Barron 12.744@109.92 2.021 60' M6 Stock
hemi420 12.769@113.35 1.933 60' 392 M6 stock
MrBohica 12.789@115.09 2.1011 60' 392 stock
CrankCase 12.805@109.05 2.007 60' M6 stock
rayzazoo 12.847@109.89 1.976 60' 392 A5 stock
GodsRodsHEMI 12.911@110.33 2.059 60' 392 A5 stock
Hoopester 12.974@112.09 2.059 60' 392 M6 stock
Madcoder 13.013@107.22 2.174 60' 392 A5 stock
Whisky Tango Foxtrot! 13.093@109.31 2.121 60' 392 M6 Stock
Mayra 13.220@107.30 2.161 60' 392 A5 stock
Litos 13.268@106.58 2.119 60' 392 A5 stock
rmeaux 13.320@108.56 2.228 60' 392 M6 stock
SRT8PWR 13.393@108.47 2.272 60' 392 M6 Stock
kwoolums67 13.709@102.79 2.079 60' 392 Stock
AZZKIKR 13.730@102.62 2.146 60' M6 382 Stock
B5Classic 14.350@102.00 2.454 60' 392 M6 Stock

Owners: 12.98 @ 109.4mph
Reviews: 12.85 @ 112.1mph

So. The top 10 of this list is as fast or faster than the fastest time of all the mag tests? (12.6) Id say thats pretty damn good.

18 of 25 are as fast or faster than the slowest mag result. (13.0?)

Notice the #1 is a 12.25. Pretty astounding for a car that puts down 410ish rwhp. More on that further down.

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

So the cars Dodge drops off to Road&Track, MotorTrend and Car&Driver for performance testing aren't real? Not every ZL1 runs 11.7 and not every 392 runs 12.2. This is why we look at averages from professional reviews to see what the car is capable of running in the hands of someone with experience.

Average from professional reviews:
ZL1: 0-60, 4.0 sec; 1/4mile 12.20 @ 118mph
392: 0-60, 4.6 sec; 1/4mile 12.85 @ 112mph
Diff: 0-60, 0.6 sec; 1/4mile 0.65 @ 6mph

Will some owners best these times? Absolutely. Will some cars run stronger than others? Of course. Will some be dogs for some unknown reason. You bet. This is why we look at multiple reviews for an average.

Can you do a average of the top 25 ZL1 list vs 392? Im more interested in seeing that comparison.

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

This is where you've gone wrong. You're taking marketed horsepower to compare these cars. Let's look at what these cars are actually putting down.

Edmunds Dyno
392: 452hp/443lb-ft Link
ZL1: 497hp/497lb-ft Link

In reality less than 50hp separate them. 392 is a great motor, no two ways about it. The cars are the same weight, the 50hp difference explains the 0.6 sec difference to 60; 0.65 difference in the quarter and 6mph difference in trap speed.

No actually this is where you've got it all wrong. As im sure you know the dyno Edmunds uses is known to be very HAPPY.

Here are some REAL WORLD results. Another reason to put down mag crap.

393 -

6pd 410-

416-

427rwhp 1 7/8 Kooks long tube headers w/ hi flow cats, Borla xr1 resonators and rear muffler deletes.jmb cold air intake-

418-

405-

408-

408-

I could go on and on. Now there will be happy dynos out there just like the one Edmunds uses. Sure you'll find the bs 440rwhp dyno results but those may very well be the cars that go out there and run 13.3's@106. How would one explain that even @ 4200lbs. Also watch out for results like that from companies like HPE and RDP. Shady at best. Dodge may have underrated the engine some but at most it may be 500hp imo. Thats still 80 less than the ZL1. Thats being really generous to the ZL1.

Now if the LSA is rated at 580 and is only putting down 470rwhp on avg that only means Chevy has some explaining to do. Not me. A loss of 110hp is horrible imo.

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

Given the price differential, I certainly hope so. There is no shame in losing to a car that costs $20,000 more. Around a road course, I hope you're right. Dodge has never taken handling seriously in the Challenger. While the Boss 302/1LE and ZL1/GT500 have gone toe-to-toe on the track, Dodge has been noticeably absent. For years, Dodge has had no answer to the high HP offerings from Chevrolet and Ford. Better late than never I suppose.

I agree.

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

I don't think people are making fun of SRT8 weight vs ZL1. It's in relation to the GT, both the SRT and SS look overweight.

GT: 3,618lbs
SS: 3,908lbs
SRT: 4,170lbs

If the Hellcat really does weigh 4440lbs, that is 300lbs more than the ZL1 and 500lbs more than the GT500. Yes it's a roomy car but that's a lot of weight to throw around. Did you buy a Challenger because it can accommodate 5 people?

I dont own a challenger. I know plenty of ppl that do, and yes seating 5 was a selling point.

Also i thought the ZL1 was 4200.

Oh and thanks for the awesome response. At no point was i offended or felt the need to be defensive. Keep up the good work! LOL

[evh5150vanhalen]

I've run 13.6 with my 6.1 on a hot day 90F, I really need to work on launching it, All she wantes to do is sit there and spin.
I can outrun a stock 6.1 pretty easily, a friend of mine just bought a stock 2010 last month and we were playing on the highway and I easily pulled away from her every time.

[AEP11]

I went ahead and did the avg of the top 19 of both.

ET
ZL1-12.137
392-12.704
Diff-0.567

MPH
ZL1-117.55
392-111.10
Diff-6.44

Again. Right back to the .6 + 6mph advantage. I was a bit surprised at how many 120+mph were on that list. I expected maybe one. Those 4 def helped out the end num. Where as im also surprised at how many sub 110's was on the 392's list.

Imo that just isnt enough given the power advantage the ZL1 has. I think it should be close to a 1 sec advantage on avg.

Also note that the fastest 392 would be #15 on the ZL1's list. To me if it would have came in at #19 it would have been impressive. We're talking about a car with 110 less hp, almost the same weight, and im assuming its 5 speed isnt as good as the zl1's a6.

The thing that has me thinking that is the fact that dodge is now marketing the 8spd 392 as an LOW 12sec car vs HIGH 12sec they said it was with the 5spd. That thing must have really been crap.

Overall the .6 advantage is worth it if spending $54k on a loaded 392. Id pay a little more and get the great handling, faster ZL1.

Id take the core 392 (40k) over the ZL1 and just throw a blower on it with the money saved. Not comparing those two as its stock vs modded. Just stating what i would do.

Bench racing. Gotta love it. (sarcasm)

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by AEP11

Id take the core 392 (40k) over the ZL1 and just throw a blower on it with the money saved. Not comparing those two as its stock vs modded. Just stating what i would do.

Bench racing. Gotta love it. (sarcasm)

I saw a guy that did just that run 12.09 with DR when I went to the track. It was a pretty nice car

[AEP11]

Originally Posted by hotlapZL1

I saw a guy that did just that run 12.09 with DR when I went to the track. It was a pretty nice car

Damn. Pretty quick for a pig.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by AEP11

Damn. Pretty quick for a pig.

It was a nice car as was the owner.

[URBAN LEGEND]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Traction control isn't hooking 700+ hp to the ground, its limiting the power available so that the tires don't break traction. There is a couple hundred hp difference between the two despite the end result in either case being no spin.

And the 325mm tire, plus the low curb weight, plus the rear biased weight distribution, plus the all wheel drive system all probably had a bit of an effect in getting the Porsche to 60 mph in 2.4s. Traction control made it easier for them to get that time in a reasonable number of attempts, but given enough practice & experience, a person could match the system. On the other hand, give it a wheel & tire package thats 2" narrower & it won't matter how good of a driver (or TC system) you've got, you're not going to hit those times (all other things being equal).

Thanks for confirming what I knew 13 years ago. From F1. Thanks!

[DarkneSS]

Originally Posted by AEP11

I went ahead and did the avg of the top 19 of both.

ET
ZL1-12.137
392-12.704
Diff-0.567

MPH
ZL1-117.55
392-111.10
Diff-6.44

Again. Right back to the .6 + 6mph advantage. I was a bit surprised at how many 120+mph were on that list. I expected maybe one. Those 4 def helped out the end num. Where as im also surprised at how many sub 110's was on the 392's list.

Imo that just isnt enough given the power advantage the ZL1 has. I think it should be close to a 1 sec advantage on avg.

Also note that the fastest 392 would be #15 on the ZL1's list. To me if it would have came in at #19 it would have been impressive. We're talking about a car with 110 less hp, almost the same weight, and im assuming its 5 speed isnt as good as the zl1's a6.

The thing that has me thinking that is the fact that dodge is now marketing the 8spd 392 as an LOW 12sec car vs HIGH 12sec they said it was with the 5spd. That thing must have really been crap.

Overall the .6 advantage is worth it if spending $54k on a loaded 392. Id pay a little more and get the great handling, faster ZL1.

Id take the core 392 (40k) over the ZL1 and just throw a blower on it with the money saved. Not comparing those two as its stock vs modded. Just stating what i would do.

Bench racing. Gotta love it. (sarcasm)

The 392 is 100 pounds lighter no? And it's likely making closer to 500 HP for sure. I do agree that on paper the ZL1 should be more than .6 on avg. My guess is that the 392 makes more and perhaps some owners were not honest about their mods.

[AEP11]

Originally Posted by DarkneSS

The 392 is 100 pounds lighter no? And it's likely making closer to 500 HP for sure. I do agree that on paper the ZL1 should be more than .6 on avg. My guess is that the 392 makes more and perhaps some owners were not honest about their mods.

392-4160
ZL1-4120

I agree but no more than 500. As far as honesty, that could go both ways. Those 11sec and 120+ mph passes by the ZL1 could have lied about mods.

Like i said id damn sure pay $56k for a ZL1 before id pay $54k for a loaded 392. Even then id personally be pretty upset if i lined up next to a 392 at the track and i ran a 11.9 to his 12.3. First thing id say it how in the hell was that car that close to me while i have it out gunnned by 110hp.

I think its safe to say if someone threw nothing more than a 100hp power adder on the 392 it would be capable of mid 11's or lower. We'll soon find out with the Hell Cat having 237 hp piled on top.

[PYROLYSIS]

[DarkneSS]

Originally Posted by AEP11

392-4160
ZL1-4120

I agree but no more than 500. As far as honesty, that could go both ways. Those 11sec and 120+ mph passes by the ZL1 could have lied about mods.

Like i said id damn sure pay $56k for a ZL1 before id pay $54k for a loaded 392. Even then id personally be pretty upset if i lined up next to a 392 at the track and i ran a 11.9 to his 12.3. First thing id say it how in the hell was that car that close to me while i have it out gunnned by 110hp.

I think its safe to say if someone threw nothing more than a 100hp power adder on the 392 it would be capable of mid 11's or lower. We'll soon find out with the Hell Cat having 237 hp piled on top.

It also could be the law of diminishing returns. Its easier to make a 14 second car run 13s than it is to make a 13 second car run 12s etc. I do remember though that when the ZL1 came out it was running a lot slower than people had predicted. It was really disappointing and imo still is that a bolt on + DR + tuned SS can run the same times or better just on average. I'd actually like to see the same pro driver take a ZL1 around a track and then a bolt on/tuned/geared SS with a high quality set of coil overs, both cars running the exact same wheel/tire set up. Honestly my money would be on the SS.
I think GM did a fine job with both vehicles but I think Ford and Dodge went in the better direction. The ZL1 is sick but when I can afford a 50k+ car, probably in the next 5-6 years, I wouldn't buy anything like that and I've owned 2 5th gens so far. If I wanted a handling car at that price range there are so many better choices, like you know, the Vette, various Porsches, even used exotics like an Aston.
The Z28 should have just been a SS with some boss ass GM designed coil overs, a great wheel tire set up like the 1LE, slightly upgraded Brembos, and some factory approved bolt ons + a tune. Basically take the 1LE and add about $5-8,000 worth of upgrades.
The ZL1 should have been all out HP like the Gt500 and Hellcat are. That should have been the 65-70k car, not the Z. Instead now we have two cars that handle great but get spanked on the street where 90% of drivers have their fun. If someone wanted a 50k+ Chevy that handles great, that is what the Vette is for. The Camaro is supposed to be the muscle car, all out straight line performance. Thats why Ford and Dodge don't put nearly as much focus on handling.
Just kinda seems like after the 30-40k price tag range the Camaro gets left behind by the Chally and Stang.

[102SS]

Originally Posted by DarkneSS

It also could be the law of diminishing returns. Its easier to make a 14 second car run 13s than it is to make a 13 second car run 12s etc. I do remember though that when the ZL1 came out it was running a lot slower than people had predicted. It was really disappointing and imo still is that a bolt on + DR + tuned SS can run the same times or better just on average. I'd actually like to see the same pro driver take a ZL1 around a track and then a bolt on/tuned/geared SS with a high quality set of coil overs, both cars running the exact same wheel/tire set up. Honestly my money would be on the SS.
I think GM did a fine job with both vehicles but I think Ford and Dodge went in the better direction. The ZL1 is sick but when I can afford a 50k+ car, probably in the next 5-6 years, I wouldn't buy anything like that and I've owned 2 5th gens so far. If I wanted a handling car at that price range there are so many better choices, like you know, the Vette, various Porsches, even used exotics like an Aston.
The Z28 should have just been a SS with some boss ass GM designed coil overs, a great wheel tire set up like the 1LE, slightly upgraded Brembos, and some factory approved bolt ons + a tune. Basically take the 1LE and add about $5-8,000 worth of upgrades.
The ZL1 should have been all out HP like the Gt500 and Hellcat are. That should have been the 65-70k car, not the Z. Instead now we have two cars that handle great but get spanked on the street where 90% of drivers have their fun. If someone wanted a 50k+ Chevy that handles great, that is what the Vette is for. The Camaro is supposed to be the muscle car, all out straight line performance. Thats why Ford and Dodge don't put nearly as much focus on handling.
Just kinda seems like after the 30-40k price tag range the Camaro gets left behind by the Chally and Stang.

I hear what your saying but the real world isn't all straight lines.

Being able to challenge on and off ramps is what makes a car fun. JMHO

Besides the fact that the Camaro can never be #1 on the speed charts with Corvette in the stable and the C5/C6 team have their hands tied.