ORIGINAL: 1971Chall
Thanks for the comments RLHS700. I have been off the board a couple of days. We just had the Autorama here in Detroit over the weekend. Surpisingly we didn't have a new Challenger on display at the Mopar booth. I was hoping we would have had a pilot SRT-8 there just for review. I spoke with one of my guys and he said that was the question everyone was asking. We did have a real nice 1970 Challenger there and a couple of LX cars. If you weren't awware the Autorama is basically a custom/muslecar/streetcar/performance car show. A lot of everything is there and geared strictly to the enthusiast. I will post out a little later under the engine section but check out the June issue of Mopar Action. They tested an SRT-8 Magnum stock and then with some bolt ons. They got it to run 12.92 and one pass a 12.80. Not sure of the 12.8 was a fluke though. They reflashed it with a Predator hand held programmer and some exhaust work. I think they also used a CAI and had the car down to the 12.20s at almost 112mph. Real good article and again highlights why the Challenger won't be a weak sister. Thanks for the comments also. Hey, I'm just a car guy like most everybody that is on these boards. I wish I knew it all but that unfortunately is not the case, lol. I have been fortunate to be able to enjoy this hobby and I want others to do so too. Like most everything else, if there's little support it goes away. It's good there are different choices too as it would be no fun if the world were all one car or another. Anytime I can share anything I will. Jeremiah, to answer your question I say it's harder(super/turbo) on an engine from the aspect that you are asking it to produce a lot more HP from the same displacement. A purpose built motor will last for sure but it's definitely easier on an engine to produce 1hp per cube NA then to ask a smaller motor to make the same power level.
You're welcome!
I hear you about the not seeing the Challenger on display. When I went to the autoshow this year that previously had the Challenger last year, the Challenger was a no show. I really think they need to put in more effort into making it a consistent show-up. I have no doubts that the SRT-8 will be fast, I would just like it to be comfortably faster than the GT500. One reason why I also prefer NA over forced air induction is again the consistency of the power and tq itself. I think I read that the GT500's supercharger was meant for more peak power, which would certainly explain why it fails to blow away its predecessors.
Albeeno, I just remembered something for you to take into consideration. If you remember back in the 90s, the 1995 Mustang Cobra R which like the 2000 Cobra R in lacking an A/C, back seat, and radio produced 300hp & 365ft-lbs of tq only managed to do 0-60 in around 5.4-5.2 secs. In 98, MT managed to match 5.4 secs that with the outgoing 4.6L Cobra that produced 305hp & 300ft-lbs of tq (though they said they thought that was actually overrated) and that had all the normal luxuries as did the Mach 1 which produced 305hp & 320ft-lbs of tq, and the current GT is slightly faster have 300hp & 315ft-lbs of tq despite the weight increase and boxier body. Although the Cobra and Mach 1 models produced 5 more hp supposively, all three of them had significantly less tq, so why then could they manage to get as close let alone match with less tq when the GT500 has way more hp & tq that is completely out of the margin of error range?