R/T 1/4 mile & 0-60 times
08-11-2008, 08:08 AM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New Milford, Ct.
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: R/T 1/4 mile & 0-60 times
no big. I actually was seriously thining about the Camaro until I went to the Chicago Auto Show back about 2 years ago when they unveiled the Camaro and the Challenger. Seeing them almost side by side was a no brainer in making my decision to go with the SRT8. I do keep tabs though hoping that may be they will change it some as it is butt ugly in my opinion however my oldest son really wants one and so far no amount of talking has changed his mind. I think one he rides in the Challenger it might sway his mind.
08-11-2008, 08:24 AM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: South Miami
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: R/T 1/4 mile & 0-60 times
I am satisfied with the R/T performance numbers. What's more satisfying is the MPG numbers for a muscle car.
IMO, the interior of the new Camaro is weird. I think the straightforward layout of the new Challenger is far more pleasing to the eye.
IMO, the interior of the new Camaro is weird. I think the straightforward layout of the new Challenger is far more pleasing to the eye.
08-11-2008, 09:32 AM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location:
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: R/T 1/4 mile & 0-60 times
I would think that the R T would do a little closer to 5 sec.
Doesnt the GT do the 0-60 in about 5.1 or 5.2??? I was thinking or hoping at least the R T would get there in 5.3.
I remember that we were discussing this before on a thread and someone did the math about how the R T had more horsepower to weight than the GT so to me this is more of a dissapointment. Although 5.5 isnt bad im just kinda hoping this is more of a Ballpark number like they did with the SRT when we heard the 4.9 #
Doesnt the GT do the 0-60 in about 5.1 or 5.2??? I was thinking or hoping at least the R T would get there in 5.3.
I remember that we were discussing this before on a thread and someone did the math about how the R T had more horsepower to weight than the GT so to me this is more of a dissapointment. Although 5.5 isnt bad im just kinda hoping this is more of a Ballpark number like they did with the SRT when we heard the 4.9 #
08-11-2008, 09:53 AM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: R/T 1/4 mile & 0-60 times
Motor Trend has their charger r/t at 5.5 for the 340 hp engine and the charger weighs more than the challys 375 hp car i think. Common sense told me 5.2 or 5.3 for the Chally r/t. I dont think the final number is in.
08-11-2008, 06:17 PM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Gabriel Valley, CA
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: R/T 1/4 mile & 0-60 times
I totally agree. If the vehicle does 350HP or more and gives me 17 MPG or better I am a totally happy speed monster. 
I too think the interior of the Camaro is weird looking. The Challenger is the way to go.
I too think the interior of the Camaro is weird looking. The Challenger is the way to go.
ORIGINAL: 73Challenger
I am satisfied with the R/T performance numbers. What's more satisfying is the MPG numbers for a muscle car.
IMO, the interior of the new Camaro is weird. I think the straightforward layout of the new Challenger is far more pleasing to the eye.
I am satisfied with the R/T performance numbers. What's more satisfying is the MPG numbers for a muscle car.
IMO, the interior of the new Camaro is weird. I think the straightforward layout of the new Challenger is far more pleasing to the eye.
08-12-2008, 07:58 AM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location:
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: R/T 1/4 mile & 0-60 times
ORIGINAL: JJMPB
that stinks since the R/T will be compared to the GT looks like it beats us they gotta trim some punds off this car
that stinks since the R/T will be compared to the GT looks like it beats us they gotta trim some punds off this car