Dodge Challenger Forum banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,139 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The February 2011 issue of Motor Trend did a brief comparison of the performance of a 2010 SRT (with 6.1) vs, a 2011 SRT (with 6.4). Here are the results:

0-60 mph- 4.4 sec.- 6.1; 4.6 sec. 6.4
1/4- 13.3 [email protected] mph- 6.1; 13.0 [email protected] mph
Figure 8: 25.7 sec.- 6.1; 25.6 sec.- 6.4
lateral accel: 0.87g- 6.1; 0.89g- 6.4
60-0 braking: 117 ft.- 6.1; 117 ft.- 6.4

Their summation of the 2011 Challenger SRT8:

"This is a monster of a muscle machine that feels more like an oversized sports car. What Ford has managed to do with the Mustang GT- tighten this and button down that- Dodge has masterfully accomplished in the new Challenger SRT8.:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
432 Posts
I think the test results from the 6.1 was from a test they made a year ago. I wish they'd compare the 2 cars at the same track on the same day to offer a more accurate comparison between the two.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
348 Posts
Two other more "mopar oriented" magazines got a 12.2 and a 12.4 out of their 392 Challengers. Wonder who is more on target.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,152 Posts
Two other more "mopar oriented" magazines got a 12.2 and a 12.4 out of their 392 Challengers. Wonder who is more on target.....
13.0 is awesome for Motortrend. They are more interested in consistency in testing from one car to the other so individual cars can be compared from year to year.

With an automatic they pull up and when the light turns green they mash the throttle and hang on. With a manual they never powershift, again they want to do the same with every car from year to year because they are not interested in the lowest possible times but they are interested in consistency.

A Mopar orientated magazine or for that matter any performance magazine is aiming for the lowest possible ET that they can get for bragging rights.

They are going to mess with air pressure, ice the intakes, try different rpms at launch to see what works best, powershift with manuals, side step the clutch on launch, etc... That's why you see such discrepancies.
 

·
Registered
2009 Challenger R/T
Joined
·
2,991 Posts
Yeah its hard comparing two cars on different days..but still shows the 392 has a nice advantage over the 6.1. Going 5mph quicker in the traps shows it easily has the potential for low to mid 12s.

Oh and Cuda340, when did motor trend run a 4.4 0-60? Did you mean 4.8?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,658 Posts
Yeah its hard comparing two cars on different days..but still shows the 392 has a nice advantage over the 6.1. Going 5mph quicker in the traps shows it easily has the potential for low to mid 12s.

Oh and Cuda340, when did motor trend run a 4.4 0-60? Did you mean 4.8?
My magazine shows a 4.6 sec 0-60 for the IE SRT. The other times they quote (4.8 for the 6.1L SRT8/4.7 for the Camaro SS/4.4 for the 5.0 Mustang) were taken from a July 2010 MT comparison test...
 

·
Registered
2009 Challenger R/T
Joined
·
2,991 Posts
Saw a motortrend magazine at Hastings today and it has the 2011 R/T stopping 5ft shorter than the 2011 SRT8 (R/T-112;SRT-117). Something about that isn't right..lol Just further evidence that MT isn't too reliable haha

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
656 Posts
The February 2011 issue of Motor Trend did a brief comparison of the performance of a 2010 SRT (with 6.1) vs, a 2011 SRT (with 6.4). Here are the results:

0-60 mph- 4.4 sec.- 6.1; 4.6 sec. 6.4
1/4- 13.3 [email protected] mph- 6.1; 13.0 [email protected] mph
Figure 8: 25.7 sec.- 6.1; 25.6 sec.- 6.4
lateral accel: 0.87g- 6.1; 0.89g- 6.4
60-0 braking: 117 ft.- 6.1; 117 ft.- 6.4

Their summation of the 2011 Challenger SRT8:

"This is a monster of a muscle machine that feels more like an oversized sports car. What Ford has managed to do with the Mustang GT- tighten this and button down that- Dodge has masterfully accomplished in the new Challenger SRT8.:
Not worth the money MPO to spend on the 6.4 L. Chrysler is good for just lureing people along. What will it be next a 6.7L, 7.2L. etc. I'm satisfied with my 6.1L. It's fast enough and for 45 more HP, who needs a higher bank bank payment.:browsmiley:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
me! :)

If I was in your shoes, I would probably stick with the 6.1 and save the bones.

I am coming from no Challenger and debated heavily between the 2010 (and todays good discount) and 2011 and opted to wait a few months to get the 2011. The suspension changes and possible fuel economy increases intrigued me as well...

Wish they had the hemi orange color tho :( If its not one thing, its another....
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
348 Posts
I'm interested in the sublime (GWE) and I'll dump my '08 SRT8 Charger for it. I have read in the power info that that 6.4 is 70 or 100 hp more at 2900 rpms, can't remember which. And with those #'s, it'll be more fun around town. Driving one will be the tale tale on that though
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,658 Posts
I'm interested in the sublime (GWE) and I'll dump my '08 SRT8 Charger for it. I have read in the power info that that 6.4 is 70 or 100 hp more at 2900 rpms, can't remember which. And with those #'s, it'll be more fun around town. Driving one will be the tale tale on that though
I think what you're referring to is the torque difference. You know, the stuff that REALLY matters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
I was going to wait for the 2011 but the upgrades while awesome is not worth it IMHO especially if I drop a 440 into my 2010 :)
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top