Dodge Challenger Forum banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,641 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,308 Posts
Good read. The driver was able to hit 4.9 sec 0-60 times (with practice) in a PCP RT.
The 2013 Dodge Challenger R/T Classic: Reminding Us What Muscle Cars are All About | Torque News
Thanks for sharing! Happy to see that a sub 5 sec 60 time is obtainable as well. Not trying to start a transmission battle but it also shows that the straight drive Challengers are indeed very quick. That article sums up exactly why I baught an R/T 6 spd. PCP Challengers with white stripes look great too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,308 Posts
rt is more represnitive of what the average persons muscle car was in the old days hemis were seldom seen in my area
I was thinking the same thing. Most guys that baught MOPAR muscle cars didn't get the top engine, the 426 HEMI. You were lucky if you had a 440 six barrel ( or six pack for Plymouth). There were a lot of satisfied 383 and 340 muscle car owners out on the streets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,539 Posts
I've been seeing these results for ages, sub 5 for the R/T isn't news, it's just rare. I'd be interested on how it would perform if you dropped the stock temps, I mean I can get anywhere between 4.8-5.8 with my SRT stock temp wise (as right after it sky rockets temp wise which kills performance and boy our HEMIS run hot just to beat emissions which Chevrolet\Ford don't even do with their super-charged cars...a bit weird) but if you get on your HEMI (I assume even the 5.7) when you hit about 180-190 on the temp gauge when it is warming up (I've hit 4.2-4.7 consistently when the engine actually maintains those temps), you will def feel a HELL of a lot more power. At 220f and when the HS comes on at 226f I'm pretty much scared to even race a CIVIC. I know my buds M/// BMW 215F is the high-speed trigger, to prevent heat-soak which is so common on our motors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
I have a 2013 R/T Classic, the article states that it has a braking distance timer, an eighth mile timer and a quarter mile timer? Am I missing something, I have the 0-60 timer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,652 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,272 Posts
finally a favorable article?
Is there some sort of plethora of unfavorable articles regarding the R/T?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,677 Posts
While I am also pleased it is a positive article on an R/T; I have to say, most reviews I have seen are positive, for the most part. Most say it's a better driver's car; and it only gets the negatives when it comes to top of the line performance. I think those performance stats are also skewed because these are no longer all three pony cars as they were in the 70's. A Challenger is based on a mid to full size platform, the others are not. Further, even in the 70's, the Challenger was the most overweight of the 3 and also the largest (along with the Cuda).

Having said all that, I personally could give a a rat's a** about what a review says, I buy on my own feelings after a test drive. Of the last 5 new cars, I have bought, Consumers Reports had all negative reviews on them, and I thought they were all fine cars, for what they were purchased for.

To the OP, I think you have number envy, when I read some of your posts. I have had both a Challenger RT and a Charger SRT (392), both new. The R/T is really a more fun car to drive, and the reason for that is probably because it's a manual. But, there's another part of that; and, that that it (the R/T) captures what I felt in the 70's when I was cruising the strip. Is the SRT a better car? Sure is, but will the R/T do as it is advertised-by 110%!!! It is 100% pure American muscle!! JMHO Tom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,293 Posts
While I am also pleased it is a positive article on an R/T; I have to say, most reviews I have seen are positive, for the most part. Most say it's a better driver's car; and it only gets the negatives when it comes to top of the line performance. I think those performance stats are also skewed because these are no longer all three pony cars as they were in the 70's. A Challenger is based on a mid to full size platform, the others are not. Further, even in the 70's, the Challenger was the most overweight of the 3 and also the largest (along with the Cuda).

Having said all that, I personally could give a a rat's a** about what a review says, I buy on my own feelings after a test drive. Of the last 5 new cars, I have bought, Consumers Reports had all negative reviews on them, and I thought they were all fine cars, for what they were purchased for.

To the OP, I think you have number envy, when I read some of your posts. I have had both a Challenger RT and a Charger SRT (392), both new. The R/T is really a more fun car to drive, and the reason for that is probably because it's a manual. But, there's another part of that; and, that that it (the R/T) captures what I felt in the 70's when I was cruising the strip. Is the SRT a better car? Sure is, but will the R/T do as it is advertised-by 110%!!! It is 100% pure American muscle!! JMHO Tom
I LOVE LOVE LOVE driving my 6-speed Hemi!!! I don't care if I'm giving up a few tenths to an auto in the 1/4 :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,272 Posts
While I am also pleased it is a positive article on an R/T; I have to say, most reviews I have seen are positive, for the most part. Most say it's a better driver's car; and it only gets the negatives when it comes to top of the line performance. I think those performance stats are also skewed because these are no longer all three pony cars as they were in the 70's. A Challenger is based on a mid to full size platform, the others are not. Further, even in the 70's, the Challenger was the most overweight of the 3 and also the largest (along with the Cuda).

Having said all that, I personally could give a a rat's a** about what a review says, I buy on my own feelings after a test drive. Of the last 5 new cars, I have bought, Consumers Reports had all negative reviews on them, and I thought they were all fine cars, for what they were purchased for.

To the OP, I think you have number envy, when I read some of your posts. I have had both a Challenger RT and a Charger SRT (392), both new. The R/T is really a more fun car to drive, and the reason for that is probably because it's a manual. But, there's another part of that; and, that that it (the R/T) captures what I felt in the 70's when I was cruising the strip. Is the SRT a better car? Sure is, but will the R/T do as it is advertised-by 110%!!! It is 100% pure American muscle!! JMHO Tom
pretty much this...If you love the car you're driving why care what someone else thinks?
Beyond that I have not seen a bunch of articles on challengers or R/T's in general that gave them a "raw deal" so to speak.
up to the current model year, stock for stock vs the closest competitors, the R/T's are basically the slowest in straight line performance...that's not dogging the car but it is the truth.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,652 Posts
Show pony
The 2013 Dodge Challenger SRT8 392 is really a show car, something to roll out of the garage on a nice summer day and take around to a barbecue to impress all your friends. Its level of fuel economy and general drivability make it unsuitable to use as your daily wheels, unless you are a wealthy masochist. To really enjoy its performance character, you will need to bring it to a track day, and spend a lot of time learning how to modulate its power.

This a Cnet review theres more to it but to the point he gave it an overall rating of 2.5 out of 5
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,641 Posts
Discussion Starter #16 (Edited)
Yes, and no....

Q: "To the OP, I think you have number envy, when I read some of your posts. I have had both a Challenger RT and a Charger SRT (392), both new. The R/T is really a more fun car to drive, and the reason for that is probably because it's a manual. But, there's another part of that; and, that that it (the R/T) captures what I felt in the 70's when I was cruising the strip. Is the SRT a better car? Sure is, but will the R/T do as it is advertised-by 110%!!! It is 100% pure American muscle!! JMHO Tom"


Yes.... I have number envy: Because I expect the car to keep pace with the times. 3 years ago, Dodge was keeping up with the times as far as HP is concerned. There is no reason why the RT shouldn't have 425 HP right now. Is it a good driving car?... Yes. Do I want more for what I paid.?...Yes.


As far as 0-60 times go....my beef with many articles is that the driver/journalists are often biased, and make no real attempt to get good 0-60 times (or they suck as drivers). Put them in a BMW, Mustang or ricer and they always show favoritism (and I bet their track times reflect it).


Q: "The SRT is a show car...."

Not to me. I ordered the SRT to be a 6 speed (1/2in heavy traffic-1/2 Freeway to/from work-45 mile round trip) daily driver. These cars are made to be driven. I will garage it at night, keep it maintained, but I do not fear high mileage. This will be a keeper. When the engine gets tired...it will be rebuilt stronger. When the paint fades--it will get re-sprayed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,380 Posts
in 2011 Dodge should have given the 392 525hp and the 5.7 425hp and Dodge would be the King

they could have done it....Dodge decided to drop the 392's hp and keep the 5.7 the same......but then Dodge says the RT is comparable to the SS and 5.0.....which it isn't

the 525hp they could have done would have come close to matching the 2011 GT500's 550hp

now for 2015 Dodge is finally talking about raising the 392's hp and also the 5.7's....but for 2015 they should have a new engine to replace the 5.7......instead they will once again be behind the times.......the only + they have for 2015 is the 8speed...which I hear Ford/GM has a 9 speed coming some time in the future

cant wait to see how the 2015 RT compares to the 5.0/SS anyways
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,293 Posts
Show pony
The 2013 Dodge Challenger SRT8 392 is really a show car, something to roll out of the garage on a nice summer day and take around to a barbecue to impress all your friends. Its level of fuel economy and general drivability make it unsuitable to use as your daily wheels, unless you are a wealthy masochist. To really enjoy its performance character, you will need to bring it to a track day, and spend a lot of time learning how to modulate its power.

This a Cnet review theres more to it but to the point he gave it an overall rating of 2.5 out of 5


I daily drive my SRT8(Got it for $43k!) and I love every second of it! I am 37(not wealthy but my wife and I both work)and my 7-year old daughter loves it, my wife is so/so towards the car LOL, but she understands my connection to it so she willingly tolerates, and we have a little boy on the way(5 weeks!) that I can't wait to share it with. I'll drive it until I can afford another car, then we will build this thing up and go play when he is old enough :)

in 2011 Dodge should have given the 392 525hp and the 5.7 425hp and Dodge would be the King

they could have done it....Dodge decided to drop the 392's hp and keep the 5.7 the same......but then Dodge says the RT is comparable to the SS and 5.0.....which it isn't

the 525hp they could have done would have come close to matching the 2011 GT500's 550hp

now for 2015 Dodge is finally talking about raising the 392's hp and also the 5.7's....but for 2015 they should have a new engine to replace the 5.7......instead they will once again be behind the times.......the only + they have for 2015 is the 8speed...which I hear Ford/GM has a 9 speed coming some time in the future

cant wait to see how the 2015 RT compares to the 5.0/SS anyways
I think the SRT engineers said they could have hit 500+hp easily with the 392, they went for the area under the curve cam, and when you think about, there aren't many N/A V8s out there that make more power than the current 392 except the Chevy 427 and those 6.2 Mercedes AMG V8s that they don't make anymore. The 392 feels like it makes 500 hp on a good day even with my basic mods, and I did give a C6 Z06 some good roll races 20-80 mph the other day - although he did slowly pull on me. The torque curve on the current 392 is about as good as they get!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,303 Posts
the dude writing the article must have used the specs from a 2014 R/T because he mentions
leather and suede seats, and timers I haven't found on my 2013.. the pics show the seats
are not suede and leather.. I like mine but if I wanted faster, hotter I'd have bought an SRT8.

good looking test subject either way. :)
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top