Dodge Challenger Forum banner

1/4 mile stock times?

99K views 98 replies 18 participants last post by  CJ 10 SRT 
#1 ·
I just bought a 2010 SRT8 auto. I should be getting it end of next week, and I know they claim 425 hp and 420lbs of torque...but my question is what do this cars usually run in the quarter mile in bone stock form? By the way the car I bought is from a car collector who just had it sitting in his garage with his other toys. It is silver with the black stripe...thanks again.
 
#2 · (Edited)
Depending on your body wt but bone stock if you can get it to hook in +500 to +1500 ft DA it should run in the 1/8 8.50 and in the 1/4 13.30. Now this is with stock tires. Now you can use 100 octane at the pump which is concidered stock and if chrysler has enought timing in the STOCK tune you might pick up .10 overall. If you cant get 100 then get some UNLEDED vp109 RACE GAS as i no they have that in tx as thats where they make it. The added oxygen alone with give you more hp.
 
#3 ·
I did around 20 1/4 mile runs last summer and best run on street tires was 13.22. Most runs averaged 13.4. No idea what the DA was on days I ran. Keeping traction is a *****. Next summer will be different as I now have Drag Radials. Just need a line lock now. I should be high 12s with the DRs. Some folks swear a stock LX/LC 6.1L SRT8 can run 12s on street tires but I have never seen it in person
 
#4 ·
I would think you should be able to get a bone stock SRT8 auto to 12.9 if you can hook it up.
13.0-13.1 should at least be a good starting goal to shoot for...

Remember one of our members SRT8tech ran a pair of "Bone Stock R/T's" to 13.2's...
So you should be able to at least do better than that with a stock SRT8 eventually.
It will just take some seat time... and remember to stay out of the water.
 
#5 ·
High 12s are achievable with a stock SRT.



Sent from my Autoguide iPhone app
 
#7 ·
old thread but I always thought the 6.1 should have been a lot quicker stock. I've owned an 09 RT (Charger) with only transmission mods that also outweighed the 6.1 by nearly 300lbs. and still ran 12.8's consistent, motor untouched. Looking at used 6.1's around my state. Hard to consider it being so close in performance to my 5.7 RT.

Pretty sure I could get the 6.1 to run low 12's with the right combination (stall/tires/shift pressure mods)
 
#9 · (Edited)
Stock 6.1s should be getting 13 flat or 13.1 going about 106mph or so. Should be able to get that on stock tires provided that the track prep is decent.

I definately wouldn't say that stock 6.1s are far superior than stock 5.7s. My 2009 5.7 ran 13.4s stock and I've even out ran some 6.1s at the track when I had it as well during Monster Mopar events. The statement would be more accurate if you said the 392 is far superior than both the 5.7 and the 6.1.
 
#13 ·
If you think about it the 5.7 was made for a truck(so was the 6.4 originally) the 6.1 was made for performance..
I love how the "truck engine" thing is used as a negative. Saying that the 6.4 is a "truck engine" and the 6.1 is a "performance" engine is ridiculous! The 6.4 outperforms the 6.1 in every way and on every part of the curve. Being designed with trucks in mind is a good thing as it is the reason they used active intake runners, etc. and why the 6.4 doesn't bog down off the line like the 6.1 does. The 6.1 also has/had major heat soak issues, the vast majority of which have been solved in the 6.4.

Mike
 
#12 ·
I always thought the 6.1's were 12.6-12.7 cars with the proper tires. My 09 AWD with a 3800 stall and other minor mods ran 12.8's all day long and it out weighed the 6.1's by about 300 lbs. With a 4000 stall, pretty sure it was a 12.5 car, engine still untouched.

My curiosity stems from seeing a few of them pop up from time to time on used car lots. I can justify a stock mid 12 second car but not so much a stock 12.8 car since it's no faster than my 09.

I am actually a fan of the 05-14 body styles over the '15's..
 
#15 ·
I will say, just in my own experience, the first 5.7's were nothing exciting. I'm talking about the 05-08 345hp engines. However, my 6-speed VVT 5.7 with headers and a canned tune would outrun my 6.1 auto stock. Not by much mind you, but .1-.2 in an 1/8 mile.

And while this may be related to my crappy track times, my 6.1 is a dog below 2500 RPM.
 
#16 ·
And while this may be related to my crappy track times, my 6.1 is a dog below 2500 RPM.
I have to say I agree. My 6.1 was the mayor of Lagville below 2500 to 3000 RPM. I never had a 5.7 to compare but I always envied the guys with the 5.7's who could put just an intake and exhaust on and outrun me. The 5.7's just seemed more amenable to mods. The 6.1 just never responded to mods for me and seemed like it was harder to get a good tune. Always seemed like the 5.7 dynos stock were within 10-15 HP of my 6.1 stock too so I always got the impression that the 5.7 was a bit underrated from the factory and the 6.1 was probably right on the numbers.

But that's just the "sense" I got over the years. Now the 392, that's a different story. Step on that and I don't care what RPM you're at, the gates of Hell open up!

Mike
 
#17 ·
In my opinion, the 6.1 needed to be replaced before the VVT 5.7 came out. There's only a 50 hp difference between the VVT 5.7 and 6.1 (and only about 30hp difference at the wheels), and with the wheels, brakes and leather in an SRT vehicle, they weigh more than a base R/T.

I've driven a 6.4 car after owning my 6.1 and what I can say is this...

In the 6.4 car, I really was not impressed. The car doesn't feel considerably faster. Likely due to 6.4 VVT and the active intake. But take it to a track, and the 6.4 car walks all over the 6.1. I have seen personally a 6.4 6 speed car on drag radials go 7.80 with exhaust and a tune. You can't come close to that in a 6.1. Not in Alabama.

The 6.1 is kind of like the new age 426. Its a man's engine. Its raw and brutal and could care less about MPGs. None of that variable this and adjustable that, and a metal intake like an intake should be. But sadly, like the 426, the 6.1 is old news.
 
#18 ·
The 6.4 is a torque beast no doubt.
But I can't complain about me 6.1.

In a six speed car on street tires I was able to run 12.88 with a pretty lousy 2.08 60' time. (On a cool night at the track).
With drag radials cutting even a 1.7-1.8 that's a mid 12 second run on a 6.1 with just a CAI, cat back and a Diablo canned tune.

My buddy has a 6.4 SRT and while its a beast it doesn't "feel" that much faster when I drive it. In all fairness its bone stock.

Both are great engines and can be built to make serious power when done right.





Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 
#19 ·
The 6.4 is a torque beast no doubt.
But I can't complain about me 6.1.

In a six speed car on street tires I was able to run 12.88 with a pretty lousy 2.08 60' time. (On a cool night at the track).
With drag radials cutting even a 1.7-1.8 that's a mid 12 second run on a 6.1 with just a cai, cat back and a diablo canned tune.

My buddy has a 6.4 srt and while its a beast it doesn't "feel" that much faster when I drive it. In all fairness its bone stock.

Both are great engines and can be built to make serious power when done right.http://www.autoguide.com/mobile
The best I could do with my 6.1 stock was 13.3 @ 107. My 60 foot was 2.05. That's with the A5. The track was prepped well and was very sticky so my problem was more "bog limited" than traction limited. Honestly, with the A5 at least, I don't see how you could do much better than maybe a 1.95 stock because the 6.1 just doesn't have enough low end grunt to get you up to the power band quick enough so it ends up lagging for the first 30 feet. The M6 might do a bit better because 1st gear (combined with the axle ratio) lets you spin up and into the power band faster. So I question the logic behind "if I could get a 1.7 60 foot time". I don't think you will, just because the low end torque isn't there. Maybe you'll find a ringer on drag radials that'll come close but I know my 6.1 would never see 1.7 60 foot times even if you replaced the tires with gear teeth and had slots in the track for the gears! Of course, I guess my 6.1 could have been a dud, who knows. It just never did very well for me.

And I think that metal intake manifold did nothing but hurt the 6.1 as it just made the already-present heat soak issues worse. The best 0-60 I ever got out of the 6.1 was 4.95 and that was with a CAI, 180 stat, and Predator tune, preloading the TC to about 2000 RPM and mashing the throttle with traction control off and no wheelspin.

On my own butt-o-meter, the 6.4 feels a lot stronger than the 6.1, and not just on the low end.

Mike
 
#22 · (Edited)
No doubt the 392 is the superior motor. Hands down.

If I had a cam and headers and DR's and only ran 3 tenth's quicker than I did on F1's I think I would run the car off a cliff. Lol.
I'm not going that route. Ill throw the dr's on in the spring and see how much better I can manage than a 12.8 and call it a day until I upgrade.

Its all still pig sh&t slow coming from my 02' WS6 that was an 11.65 car on DR's. I don't miss it though. There a lot more to a car than its straight line ET. I love the SRT and been having a ton of fun with it.
 
#23 ·
Apples to apples - what do you mean by that hpindy???

The 6.1 pulls real close to the way the 392 does above 4k rpms, but below that it's not even close.

You don't see a lot of 6.1 Challengers in the 12s, I don't know why but you just don't. There are more 6.1 Chargers and 300s in the 12s than the Challengers, it makes me wonder if they calibrated it differently or something after 2008.
 
#24 ·
I noticed your running a 180 stat. I did that on my 06 5.7 and it really helped my 1/4 mile times. I have a 2012 Challenger 392 but wasn't sure if the 180 stat would make a big difference in the 6.4 like it did in my 5.7. So would you recommend the 180 stat in the 392.
 
#29 ·
Look at the mph.. thats an indicater .. i have a m6 car and i have ZERO bog in the low end... if i let the clutch out slow and get the car rolling i can hit the gas any in 1st or 2nd and break the tires loose..the 6.1 dead stock is a mid 12 second car all day long... my issue was the factory tr6060 it does not liked to be shifted at high rpms....
"The 6.1 only has 50 more horse power then the vvt 5.7"

The 6.4 only has 45 more horse power then the 6.1...
 
#31 ·
The 6.4 only has 45 more horse power then the 6.1...
How do you figure? 485 - 425 = 60 which is about 15%. Unless you were talking pre-2015. Also keep in mind that HP is a very poor indicator of performance as it is only a measure of the peak power at one point: the top end. You're only going to be at peak HP the instant before a shift. The area under the torque curve is what counts and the difference there is even higher than 15% because the torque curve on the 6.4 is much flatter than the 6.1.

Mike
 
#35 ·
pure stock? show me one ......
 
#42 ·
All good points. But Talking about the OP's topic......

To the OP- did you ever run the car at the track? If so, what did she run?

I can tell you guys ive seen some dogs and screamers in the 5.7 6.1 and 6.4.
I've always thought my 6.1 was about in line with what I thought it should be. I've had a lot of track time in much-much faster cars but none the less, a 6 speed to run 12.8 on an F1 with a lousy 60' time with a cai and diablo seems about right.
I'm very confident with the nittos in the spring ill be running 12.4x-12.5x. We will see. But even a cai and diablo canned tune /DRs certainly isnt stock.

I'm psyched to see some 15s at the track in the spring. Guys are posting some sick times. I haven't seen many low 12 sec runs from 11-14 cars stock. Most mid 12s
Lightly Modded ive seen many low 12:high 11's.
not bad for a heavy breast with looks that kill any American car. Vette included.
These are all sweet cars. 5.7 6.1 6.4.

We are in the 8th model year and Dodge has kept it basically the same with some great improvements. We are very fortunate they haven't f@ucked up a great thing!!
 
#46 ·
Good luck man. Hopefully you can figure out how to launch it after a few passes. Let us know how it went
 
#48 ·
Thanks I'll post my times up late tomorrow sometime. I've got 275s on the rear which I'll probably deflate to 25psi or so. Other than that it's all stock...I don't think the catch can, strut brace or mud flaps are gonna shave any time off for me !


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 
#56 ·
To the OP, the 6.1 is very friendly to throwing a SC on at some point, no need to replace pistons like the 6.4 engines, we have stock engines running high 10's low 11's on 20" DR
 
  • Like
Reactions: hpindy
#59 ·
I hit 1.8 60 fts. on a 3500 FTI torque converter and a 289 weight disadvantage.. on street tires with m 09 RT AWD Charger.. sounds like the 6.1 Challenger just needed a higher stall and sticky tires to cut 1.6 60 fts.

I love the 6.1's and all but there is always room for improvement.

My fat pig hit's 13.2's with all it's 4450lb. AWD glory.. it's NOT light by any means and it's a 5.7 for gods sake...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top