2015 Challenger Hellcat 707 HP

[rocket403]

Here are some possible Hellcat numbers I did not work these out but I would think a good guide

"The actual numbers have not been released but Dodge has stated 600+ horsepower.

On one of the videos, 11.6 psi kind of slipped out. That seems a bit high to
me.

So going over some calculated, very rough #'s. Peak HP at 6,000rpms, peak TQ
around 3,500-3,800rpms

571hp/541tq - 5-6psi (current 8HP70 8-speed on 392 engines durability limit
516/ft tq)

583hp/552tq - 6psi

594hp/564tq - 6-7psi

606hp/576tq - 7 psi (May 20, 2014 initial #'s; 600+hp/575+tq)

618hp/588tq - 7-8psi 629hp/599tq - 8psi

641hp/611tq - 8-9psi (current durability limit of the 6-speed TREMEC; 600lbs/ft
tq)

652hp/623tq - 9psi

664hp/635tq - 9-10psi (possible target #'s; 9.5psi)

675hp/646tq - 10psi 687hp/658tq - 10-11psi

698hp/670tq - 11psi (8HP90 transmission durability limit; 663lbs/ft tq)

710hp/681tq - 11-11.6psi (8HP90 transmission durability limit; 663lbs/ft tq)


This would indicate that the Horsepower limit would be dictated by transmission."

on line numbers to get to 10.9

Your HP is 677.29 computed from your vehicle weight of 4450 pounds and ET of 10.91 seconds.

Your HP is 661.92 computed from your vehicle weight of 4349 pounds and ET of 10.91 seconds.

Your HP is 660.39 computed from your vehicle weight of 4339 pounds and ET of 10.91 seconds

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by rocket403

Your HP is 677.29 computed from your vehicle weight of 4450 pounds and ET of 10.91 seconds.

Your HP is 661.92 computed from your vehicle weight of 4349 pounds and ET of 10.91 seconds.

Your HP is 660.39 computed from your vehicle weight of 4339 pounds and ET of 10.91 seconds

What calculator are these estimates from?

When I plug in the GT500 weight and RWHP into this calculator it says it should run 10.8 @ 126mph and yet most run mid 11's on street tires.

http://www.race-cars.net/calculators/et_calculator.html

When I plug in 4300lbs and 600RWHP for the Hellcat, I get 11.2 @ 121mph.

[Loading.....]

Originally Posted by rocket403

on line numbers to get to 10.9

Your HP is 677.29 computed from your vehicle weight of 4450 pounds and ET of 10.91 seconds.

Your HP is 661.92 computed from your vehicle weight of 4349 pounds and ET of 10.91 seconds.

Your HP is 660.39 computed from your vehicle weight of 4339 pounds and ET of 10.91 seconds

You will have to up those numbers a bit. A car cant run down the drag strip by itself. So factor in the driver weight with those numbers as well. So right around 4500-4600 pounds with driver in it.

[rocket403]

GT 500 has a problem putting all it's power to the ground over powered it's body and rear suspension.

Hellcat has a better rear suspension we will need to see how that plays out

[rayhawk]

Originally Posted by rocket403

GT 500 has a problem putting all it's power to the ground over powered it's body and rear suspension.

Hellcat has a better rear suspension we will need to see how that plays out

On no planet is an IRS better for drag racing than a solid axle.

[rocket403]

Corvette has been using IRS since 1963 vette's have some of the best 1/4 times

Friend of mine has a 84 Hurst Olds with solid rear axle he is running a 520ci Olds Big block and runs a 10.50 at 140mph with 850hp and 800tq with out a tub he has gone past what the car should have on a 28" tire, I think of the GT 500 like that to much power that is not getting to the pavement, and that is the reason that it is in the 11's.
The Challenger is a bigger car and at the track this may help it in the 1/4.
If this car runs 10's is anyone going to complain that it is too big or to heavy, we will just wait and see.
I am happy to see the big three with a group of cars in the same class, comparing the SRT8 to the GT500 and the ZR1 was a bit like comparing apples to oranges.
The SRT competition is the Camaro SS and Mustang 5.0, the RT was for people that didn't care to be the fastest, until 2015 with the RT Shaker 392.

[Q'smuscle]

Originally Posted by rocket403

Corvette has been using IRS since 1963 vette's have some of the best 1/4 times

Friend of mine has a 84 Hurst Olds with solid rear axle he is running a 520ci Olds Big block and runs a 10.50 at 140mph with 850hp and 800tq with out a tub he has gone past what the car should have on a 28" tire, I think of the GT 500 like that to much power that is not getting to the pavement, and that is the reason that it is in the 11's.
The Challenger is a bigger car and at the track this may help it in the 1/4.
If this car runs 10's is anyone going to complain that it is too big or to heavy, we will just wait and see.
I am happy to see the big three with a group of cars in the same class, comparing the SRT8 to the GT500 and the ZR1 was a bit like comparing apples to oranges.
The SRT competition is the Camaro SS and Mustang 5.0, the RT was for people that didn't care to be the fastest, until 2015 with the RT Shaker 392.

Agree!

[1QwikZ28]

Originally Posted by rocket403

Corvette has been using IRS since 1963 vette's have some of the best 1/4 times

Friend of mine has a 84 Hurst Olds with solid rear axle he is running a 520ci Olds Big block and runs a 10.50 at 140mph with 850hp and 800tq with out a tub he has gone past what the car should have on a 28" tire, I think of the GT 500 like that to much power that is not getting to the pavement, and that is the reason that it is in the 11's.
The Challenger is a bigger car and at the track this may help it in the 1/4.
If this car runs 10's is anyone going to complain that it is too big or to heavy, we will just wait and see.
I am happy to see the big three with a group of cars in the same class, comparing the SRT8 to the GT500 and the ZR1 was a bit like comparing apples to oranges.
The SRT competition is the Camaro SS and Mustang 5.0, the RT was for people that didn't care to be the fastest, until 2015 with the RT Shaker 392.

Question is, how much better would the Vette be at the strip when equipped with a SRA?

[rocket403]

Not sure about 1/4 mile but it would be much more slower than the Viper TA at the road course.

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by rocket403

The SRT competition is the Camaro SS and Mustang 5.0, the RT was for people that didn't care to be the fastest, until 2015 with the RT Shaker 392.

Not directly. The SRT costs considerably more than the SS and GT. It is slightly faster in a straight line while being considerably slower around a track.

2014 Model Year
GT $31,210
SS $34,350
SRT Core $40,485
SRT8 $45,685

The stripper core model is nearly $10,000 more than the base 5.0

[rocket403]

so it does gosh gee still compare Apples to Apples

not many options left to pick on the SRT but add some to Mustang or Camaro and not much difference.

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by rocket403

so it does gosh gee still compare Apples to Apples

not many options left to pick on the SRT but add some to Mustang or Camaro and not much difference.

Not apples to apples except for straight-line performance. It does NOT compete in price or sales. The entry level 392 costs 25% more than the entry level 5.0. Dollar for dollar it is apples to tangerines which is why the Mustang outsells it 2:1

[rocket403]

I guess we should not compare the 1985-93 5.0 to the Camaro with your logic as the Camaro was 10k more than the 5.0.

The 1970 Hemi Cuda or Challenger were priced well above Ford and Chevy and not many were built but yet we compare them.

[rocket403]

Cost of SRT8 54700$
Cost Camaro 51400$
Cost Mustang 50000$

now that is Canadian Prices on cars that all have similar options. I know that I can get the SRT for under that price as Dodge will move on their price, Ford will not move on the price of the Mustangs, GM may have some room to move now but back when I was trying to get the Iroc Z I could not get any discount.

Mrsp Price of my RT Classic 45000$ I got it for 28500$ new off the lot.