I was reading the latest artical of Mopar Action last night. And saw that they spent some time with a 2011 challenger 392. I believe thay said that they were able to make 7 pass on a track with the stock tires. And averaged 12.38 in the 1/4 mile. Their fastest time was 12.29. This was a 6speed also. Very impressive numbers from this thing. It is going to be a beast.
Mopar Action Mag. Test 2011 challenger
1 - 20 of 84 Posts
Joined
·
3,380 Posts
http://www.moparaction.com/Next/next.html
i ordered a copy...first time ive seen the IE392 on a mag cover...i find that very strange....the public doesnt know this car exists and they will be delivered within 2 weeks...typically isnt a car on mag. covers 4 months before the release?
the mag's dont consider this car important i guess
i ordered a copy...first time ive seen the IE392 on a mag cover...i find that very strange....the public doesnt know this car exists and they will be delivered within 2 weeks...typically isnt a car on mag. covers 4 months before the release?
the mag's dont consider this car important i guess
12.29.......Wow, that's impressive!! What was the highest trap speed?
Joined
·
3,380 Posts
just call them up....i ordered just this months edition for like $7...you can buy it in a store, but is it worth driving all over town to save $4Does anybody know if it's sold it stores? I want the article but not a years subscription to it.
just order it
Joined
·
483 Posts
Was this in the February issue???
Joined
·
863 Posts
392
A little logic is needed here . The car is going to weight in around a CTS-V cadillac , if not more , horsepower is around 480'ish with torque around 460 maybe . Cadillac is 556 horsepower and 551 torque . The cadillac's 1/4 times are around 12.5 - 12.4 6speed manual . the automatic is 12.2 although some guys have got 12.0 even on stock tires (high 11.'s in 40-50 degree temps on stock tires )
How does a 392 with obviously lower hp and torque come even if not better than a cts-v in a 1/4 mile in a 6speed manual ?
Can someone "logically" answer this please ?
A little logic is needed here . The car is going to weight in around a CTS-V cadillac , if not more , horsepower is around 480'ish with torque around 460 maybe . Cadillac is 556 horsepower and 551 torque . The cadillac's 1/4 times are around 12.5 - 12.4 6speed manual . the automatic is 12.2 although some guys have got 12.0 even on stock tires (high 11.'s in 40-50 degree temps on stock tires )
How does a 392 with obviously lower hp and torque come even if not better than a cts-v in a 1/4 mile in a 6speed manual ?
Can someone "logically" answer this please ?
Joined
·
2,102 Posts
So, the magazine lied? They cheated or something and said it was stock? We know that an auto ran 12.44, right? 12.29 would mean it was a ringer. They averaged 12.38, very close to the 12.40s they were running that night at Infineon. The weather could have been perfect, track was well prepped, practice etc. This test may prove that 12.40s is very reasonable. This is along the lines of the GT-R - how the hell does a car with 120 less HP than a Viper and weighing 3800lbs., run similar times as the Viper? Heck, it ran a 7:26 around the 'Ring - beating cars that are more powerful and weigh less. It shows that peak HP is not the whole truth.
I think 12.4s and 12.5s will be had by owners in autos if the DA is close to 0 and they have a good launch. 12.44 at infineon was achieved with a 1.8 60', so to me things add up. I don't know why people doubt even the 12.4s, the car has way more power than mine but I'm running in the 12.4s as well...so to me its not hard to believe the 392 will be a 12.4 car
Only way I could see these cars hitting a 12.2 on stock tires is awesome track prep and great great weather. (and being an auto, don't buy the car being a stick like they said)
Only way I could see these cars hitting a 12.2 on stock tires is awesome track prep and great great weather. (and being an auto, don't buy the car being a stick like they said)
Joined
·
2,102 Posts
I presume no one could present an argument that would convince you that the magazine actually did run a 12.29. Your only option is, that they are misrepresenting the facts in some way. I sure hope they have not! IMO, like I said, the 12.29 was a ringer, where all the factors - track, driver skill, weather - came together for the perfect run. It's funny, my stock Dakota R/T ONCE ran a [email protected] - my average was 15.20s.
When you quote your paper race stats you are presenting *peak* HP and TQ numbers. (BTW, you are off for the 392, it's peaks are an equal 470 HP and 470 TQ, which may even be underrated as well).
Have you seen the 392's torque curve?? It puts out 90%+ of peak torque from around 3000 rpm all the way through redline.
What does the CTS-V's curve look like?
A whole lot of bottom-end torque can make a *huge* difference.
Have you seen the 392's torque curve?? It puts out 90%+ of peak torque from around 3000 rpm all the way through redline.
What does the CTS-V's curve look like?
A whole lot of bottom-end torque can make a *huge* difference.
I am just quoting what was said in the article, I was there to see the passes. But I know those guys had 7 pass down the track and they said they ave. 12.38. and had a best of 12.29. They stated the the car hook very well with the F1's on. They were even launching the car at around 3500rpms. I did not see it, and I know seeing is believing, just quoting an article. I would like to believe the car is going to be a beast, wether or not it runs 12.29's or 12.5's still impressive for a big car.
Joined
·
638 Posts
It's already been written that perhaps the 392's HP is WAY underrated. Nothing any different than what they did with the 426.
1 - 20 of 84 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!