Dodge Challenger Forum banner

5.0 faster than 5.7?

115K views 215 replies 79 participants last post by  Maxedwell 
#1 ·
Am I reading correctly that the Mustang 5.0 is faster than Challenger R/T 5.7. Is this true and if so how is this possible? Also, if it is true, why wouldn't Dodge make the Challenger faster?
 
#2 ·
Am I reading correctly that the mustang 5.0 is faster than challenger 5.7. Is this true and if so how is this possible? Also if it is true why wouldn't dodge make the challenger faster?
The Mustang is much lighter than our cars. The weight to displacement ratio gives an advantage to the 5.0. If you really want to "wake up" the 5.7 then you'll need to mod out... intake, headers, exhaust, tune. That should help make up the difference against stock 5.0 Mustangs for the 5.7 Hemi.


Our cars are still cooler though!!!
:nerd:
 
#110 ·
The Challenger is heavier and has less power. Of course its slower. That's what the 6.4 is for.

With the weight difference, the 5.7 will have a tough time with a new V6 Camaro, if both are stock.
While the Challenger R/T is indeed heavier. The 5.7 has more "power" than the 5.0.

The 5.0 has 400 lb.ft. of torque, and the 5.7 has 410 lb.ft.. Folks should really learn to read TQ, and not HP. Torque is the measurement not HP, and I really don't give two shits what the mouthy know it all trolls around here have to say about it. Like it, or not torque is what gets the car moving; NOT horsepower! Horsepower is a product of torque, and really only mean something on a dyno.... Luckily if you're seeing this then you can use the internet like a hero, and find this out for yourself. Use Google, or something; I'm sure that's probably where you get all of your info anyway.

The weight to power ratio is what allows the Mustang to walk by the Challenger R/T(NON-Scat Pack). The Mustang GT weighs 3700lbs. while the Challenger R/T weighs 4300lbs.. With pretty close enough to call it the same torque. Of course the Mustang GT is gonna walk the Challenger R/T....

I'm sure all of this has been established already being this thread has 5,000,000 pages already. But I had to get my post count in!

Have a great day. :)
 
#4 ·
Like others have said, its all about power-to-weight.

For the much heavier Challenger to beat a 5.0 Mustang GT in a drag race, it needs more power than the 5.7 provides. That's why Dodge offers the 6.4 and Hellcat engines, and the new 2019 Challenger will, supposedly, be based on FCA's substantially lighter Alfa Giulia chassis.

Plug in the weights and horsepower of both cars into this 1/4 ET calculator and you will see what I mean.

https://robrobinette.com/et.htm
 
#6 ·
Yes sir, the 6.4 will undoubtedly decimate a 5.0 stock for stock but unfortunately the 5.7 doesn't have the power for the 4,200 lb. car to get the Mustang.


I was spanking the 5.7 boys with my 370Z at the drag strip stock for stock, so be careful who you decide to line up with out there. HP to weight ratios is what will get you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CraashnBurn
#31 · (Edited)
Yes sir, the 6.4 will undoubtedly decimate a 5.0 stock for stock but unfortunately the 5.7 doesnt have the power for the 4200lb car to get the mustang.


I was spanking the 5.7 boys with my 370Z at the drag strip stock for stock so be careful who you decide to line up with out there. HP to weight ratios is what will get you.
Guess it depends on driver. I used to have a 370z and my friends still have them. But I slowly creep on them as speeds increase. Challenger / 370z even G37 is driver race most of time especially from a dig. But Challenger at least manual is faster on a roll than a 370z.

Also a lot of cars are geared for 0-60 mph because that is a benchmark in peoples minds. Trust me those same cars from highway speeds will not be able to keep up with a 5.7.
 
#7 ·
The 5.7 isn't all that fast at all. It's not slow, especially for what it is, but I had V6s 10 years ago that were in the same realm as this car. It's a VERY heavy car, hence why its so comfortable, and for its weight, it holds its own...but it ends there.
 
#10 · (Edited)
Mid 5 second 0 to 60 is a fast car.Lower ET 0 to 60 cars are just faster.And I doubt any v 6 from 10 years ago would keep up with a 5.7l unless modified.
Um...my 05 m3 that's actually 15 year technology because it was released in 01 will keep up with and or beat my RT every single day. My 07 G37 that I got in 06 will also keep right up with the Challenger. Both talking bone stock.


Mid 5 second 0-60's WAS a fast car. Now you have V6 family sedan Honda Accords running mid to high 5 second 0-60's
 
#9 ·
Yeah, engine displacement is not the only thing that determines power, so it is not like the 5.0 in the Mustang is a direct correlation to the Hemi...I mean the Hemi is a single cam, overhead valve 2 valve per cylinder, vs the Mustang is a dual overhead cam 4 valve per cylinder (some are 180 degree crank). Not a direct comparison.

Plus the weight of our car is higher, we are closer to a touring car? just heavy, heavier than my old Lincoln.
 
#13 ·
If my situation wasn't specific needing a 24 month lease so I can roll up my 6k negative equity and get out of it in 2 years in a car I still like, there isn't a chance I wouldn't have gotten the SRT. The day my lease ends I'm either getting an SRT Charger, or possibly a hellcat depending on the market situation with those.
 
#14 · (Edited)
The 5.0 Mustangs are fast cars. I think a good driver can get them into the 12s. I was avoiding an R/T on purpose because I wanted a 13 second car and the R/Ts needed quite good drivers to get them into the high 13s.

The R/T is an oddball in the Chevy Ford Dodge grouping as is the new Mustang's turbo 4, meaning Dodge never intended the R/T to go up against the SS or 5.0.

But, that's why Mustangs are as common as they are; they're cheaper, faster and there is one on the lot you can take home today.

Dodges are slower and harder to get but worth the wait.
 
#142 ·
The 5.0 mustangs are fast cars. I think a good driver can get them into the 12s. I was avoiding an RT on purpose because I wanted a 13 second car and the RTs needed quite good drivers to get them into the high 13s.

The RT is an oddball in the Chevy Ford Dodge grouping as is the new mustang's turbo 4, meaning dodge never intended the RT to go up against the SS or 5.0.

But, that's why mustangs are as common as they are; they're cheaper, faster and there is one on the lot you can take home today.

Dodges are slower and harder to get but worth the wait.

Tons of 100% stock auto 5.7 R/T's have been running low to mid 13's since their introduction in 2009.
 
#15 ·
My old Lexus weighed as much as more than a Challenger. It had a 4.6L engine, naturally aspirated. I am all but sure it would beat a 5.7L Challenger.....and I am really sure it would have in anything but an all-out drag race where 'out of the hole' matters so much.
 
#21 ·
What did you have, an LS460? I have a hard time believing you could beat a 5.7 Challenger with one of those...
 
  • Like
Reactions: labarre06
#17 ·
My nephew went in the 12.70s stock right down to the tires, 2015 GT has the 3.73 gears, or something like that, at around 2800DA.It's a 6spd but he can drive.

He's been playing the game for years. No Mustang fan here by any stretch of the imagination.
Oh yeah I might add he wiped out something in the Trans on the 4th run and took 4 wks at the dealer to get it fixed. The car was about a month old at the time.
 
#23 ·
Thank you, but it was more of a case of being a realest than responsible. SRTs and Scat Packs have no lease program. So burying 5k on a 24 month lease on those was a no go. I worked the SRT for laughs, it was like $1,700 a month, lmao. Obviously those are cars you buy, but I'm not starting my buy $5k behind.

I'm a sales manager at a Dodge store, I got this planned out to the T lol.
 
#125 ·
Thank you, but it was more of a case of being a realest than responsible. A srt's and scat packs have no lease program. So burying 5k on a 24 month lease on those was a no go. I worked the SRT for laughs, it was like 1700 a month lmao. Obviously those are cars you buy, but I'm not starting my buy 5k behind.

I'm a sales manager at a dodge store, I got this planned out to the T lol.
Well you definitely have the upper hand :thumbsup:
 
#24 ·
To further illustrate my point about power-to-weight, consider the Zolfe GTC. This custom sports car only has a puny inline 4 that makes 170 hp. Not fast, right?

You would be wrong. The car only weighs 1,500 lbs. That almost 3,000 lbs. less than a Challenger. Because of this it can turn the quarter in 12.0 sec. (Note- It is for sale for $32,900 on E-Bay).

 
#25 ·
I've been thinking about this too, the R/T Challenger is for a person who wants a V8 in a comfortable car. The base Mustang GT starts at $32k, and at the price you aren't getting much. Tiny display and back up camera (smaller then 5 in. uConnect), and just generally cheap looking interior. For another $2k you can get the killer performance package. So now we are at $34k for truly fast, but not nice to be in car. Kicked it up to the premium and its a $42k car, at least that's all the dealers around me had to show. My R/T with sound group, 8.4 radio, WRT wheels, and STP stickered at $33k. Subtract $2k in incentives, and I've got a very comfortable car with a V8 for about $10k cheaper then a GT or SS. So the real competitor for the GT and SS are the Scat Packs.
 
#26 ·
I've been thinking about this too, the RT Challenger is for a person who wants a V8 in a comfortable car. The base Mustang GT starts at 32k, and at the price you aren't getting much. Tiny display and back up camera (smaller then 5in uConnect), and just generally cheap looking interior. For another 2k you can get the killer performance package. So now we are at 34k for truly fast, but not nice to be in car. Kicked it up to the premium and its a $42k car, at least that's all the dealers around me had to show. My RT with sound group, 8.4 radio, WRT wheels, and STP stickered at $33k. Subtract $2k in incentives, and I've got a very comfortable car with a V8 for about $10k cheaper then a GT or SS. So the real competitor for the GT and SS are the Scat Packs.
Then use that 10k for a supercharger
 
#27 ·
The R/T is a great car to cruise around town, make a little noise, spin some tires, go 0 to 100 getting on the interstate and having some fun running against other R/Ts and V6 whatevers. If you seriously want to Track Race or line up on the street against 5.0s, SS's and the like, a Scat or SRT are definitly for you. It's like watching NHRA, sportsman class don't line up against Pro Mods so no reason to get butt hurt when a lighter or more expensive car kills you.

It Costs $$$$ to go fast. How much are you willing to spend to beat a 5.0 on the way home? Besides, no matter what you build or buy, there is always someone faster out there.
I enjoy my R/T Shaker for its looks, performance and how happy it makes me feel to drive it. I got no intentions to go Funny Car Fast.
 
#28 ·
The RT is a Great car to cruise around town, make a little noise, spin some tires, go 0 to 100 getting on the interstate and having some fun Running against other RT's and V6 whatever's. If you seriously want to Track Race or line up on the street against 5.0s, SS's and the like, a scat or SRT Is definetly for you. It's like watching NHRA, sportsman class don't line up against Pro Mods so no reason to get butt hurt when a lighter or more expensive car kills you. It Costs $$$$ to go fast. How much are you willing to spend to beat a 5.0 on the way home? Besides, no matter what you build or buy, there is always someone faster out there.
I enjoy my RT Shaker for its looks, performance and how happy it makes me feel to drive it. I got no intentions to go Funny Car Fast.
Spot on.
 
#32 ·
Point being is a 3.7 liter at 337hp with about 240 ft lbs of torque beating a 5.7 quarter mile times consistently. Z weighs 3200lbs and the Challenger weighs 4,200lbs. Horsepower to weight ratio proves it again. Once you get the heft and mass going you will eventually run them down and really ain't much to brag about.

My best time with my Z was a 13.38 bone stock and I have yet to see the 5.7 boys run those times yet. I aint hating on them but the weight kills them.
 
#35 · (Edited)
Point being is a 3.7 liter at 337hp with about 240 ft lbs of torque beating a 5.7 quarter mile times consistently. Z weighs 3200lbs and the Challenger weighs 4200lbs. Horsepower to weight ratio proves it again. Once you get the heft and mass going you will eventually run them down and really aint much to brag about.
My best time with my Z was a 13.38 bone stock and I have yet to see the 5.7 boys run those times yet. I aint hating on them but the weight kills them.
Not saying' you're wrong, but I know some guys have dipped into the 13.3s to mid 13 sec range with 5.7 R/Ts. I'm sure most are in the 14s though. 410 ft pounds of torque helps. Dodge even advertises 13 sec 1/4 mile times with an A8 5.7. That being said, I traded my 5.7 for a 6.4...
 
#33 ·
Got to agree, those 5.7 R/T s on the open highway have heart and stamina if you have the kahoonas to maintain a high speed for an extended period of time without worrying about the cops!
 
#34 ·
Throw about 4-5k at the 5.7, and you'll easily best the 5.0 cars. The RT was made to be a DD with muscle, not a race car. As been said these cars have a lot of heft and even the 6.4 isn't doing much in one of these in comparison to the smaller lighter, much higher HP to weight ratio cars you will find at race events. I've seen a lot of narsasistic SRT and even hellcat owners put in their place at the tracks here. It's pretty funny to see. Keep your car on the street where it can realistically compete.
 
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