2015 Challenger Hellcat 707 HP

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

Interesting that MotorTrend has an actual head-to-head comparison between the two that you somehow fail to mention??

MotorTrend
ZL1: 0-60, 3.8sec; 1/4mile 12.1 @ 117.4mph, 4051lbs
Boss LS: 0-60, 4.0sec; 1/4mile 12.4 @ 113.9mph, 3638lbs

Oh, I see, you were cherry-picking data to try to support such foolishness. Nice try.



Almost like a 707hp car only trapping 122mph...
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...the-strip.html

I'm simply posting the Motor Trend data which you seem to love so much.

Here is the ZL1 review.

Now on to the Camaro. Chevrolet rates the ZL1's LSA 6.2-liter supercharged V-8 at an SAE-certified 580 hp and 556 lb-ft of torque. Our six-speed manual tester put down 472 hp and 482 lb-ft of torque to the rear wheels, which K&N noted was about 20 fewer wheel horsepower than it was used to seeing from a stock Camaro ZL1. Assuming a 10-percent drivetrain loss for the manual Camaromeans the LSA is making 524 hp and 536 lb-ft of torque at the crank. While a bit lower than expected, it's worth noting that our ZL1 tester's test track numbers were exactly what we'd expect from a ZL1.

I know this hurts.

[Runin11z]

Originally Posted by newmoon

I'm simply posting the Motor Trend data which you seem to love so much.

Here is the ZL1 review.

Now on to the Camaro. Chevrolet rates the ZL1's LSA 6.2-liter supercharged V-8 at an SAE-certified 580 hp and 556 lb-ft of torque. Our six-speed manual tester put down 472 hp and 482 lb-ft of torque to the rear wheels, which K&N noted was about 20 fewer wheel horsepower than it was used to seeing from a stock Camaro ZL1. Assuming a 10-percent drivetrain loss for the manual Camaromeans the LSA is making 524 hp and 536 lb-ft of torque at the crank. While a bit lower than expected, it's worth noting that our ZL1 tester's test track numbers were exactly what we'd expect from a ZL1.

I know this hurts.

I think the ZL1 numbers are a moot point as we all know where they dyno normally...

[URBAN LEGEND]

I'm a fan of MEDISIN. He always brings the heat.

[URBAN LEGEND]

Close to 2000 posts...

[Whos_Drivin]

Originally Posted by newmoon

I'm simply posting the Motor Trend data which you seem to love so much.

Here is the ZL1 review.

Now on to the Camaro. Chevrolet rates the ZL1's LSA 6.2-liter supercharged V-8 at an SAE-certified 580 hp and 556 lb-ft of torque. Our six-speed manual tester put down 472 hp and 482 lb-ft of torque to the rear wheels, which K&N noted was about 20 fewer wheel horsepower than it was used to seeing from a stock Camaro ZL1. Assuming a 10-percent drivetrain loss for the manual Camaromeans the LSA is making 524 hp and 536 lb-ft of torque at the crank. While a bit lower than expected, it's worth noting that our ZL1 tester's test track numbers were exactly what we'd expect from a ZL1.

I know this hurts.

LOL - why would that hurt? The ZL1 is within .5 ET with a lemon of a car...according to the dyno. For 472 rwhp that time is pretty respectable. Now the 11.7 from 635 rwhp...that's gotta hurt...

[Runin11z]

Originally Posted by Whos_Drivin

LOL - why would that hurt? The ZL1 is within .5 ET with a lemon of a car...according to the dyno. For 472 rwhp that time is pretty respectable. Now the 11.7 from 635 rwhp...that's gotta hurt...

Except we all know where the ZL1 stands in the 1320' in the hands of enthusiasts in -DA, and we've yet to see what the Hellcat is capable of in the hands of people that are fixated on running the fastest bone stock times...

[tones2SS]

HOLY COW!!!!
"IF" those numbers are correct, 635 HP and 591 TQ rear wheel numbers, that beast is putting out more than 707 HP and 650 TQ at the crank. The engineers at SRT did say that the engine does produce more than 800 HP months ago.
I need to see an actual dyno with a video camera and see the numbers up on the screen to be fully convinced. I like good hard proof. Not saying these are false or real numbers, just like to see hard proof to take away any doubt.

[SEVEN-OH JOE]

Originally Posted by Runin11z

This car segment should have a street presence and a lot of that presence is from the hp rating of the Challenger...

Just as it was back in the day. Street Hemis with 425 hp! 490 lb-ft! WOW! And they sold HOW MANY HEMIS against "failure Fords" and "garbage GMs?"

They sold so many the car disappeared 40 years ago.

Watch the Hellcats' volumes SOAR!

NOT.

Originally Posted by Loading.....

Not to take anything away from the Hellcat, but this is pure marketing propaganda at its finest.

Gosh, how can you say such a thing?

Originally Posted by tones2SS

HOLY COW!!!!
SRT did say that the engine does produce more than 800 HP months ago.

Now, THAT'S "viral" marketing propaganda. In spades.

If the engine makes 800+, then the dyno confirms it has a 20%+ driveline loss. And I don't think that's quite the case. We KNOW it's a Clydesdale, but in this case it must have CRUSHED the dyno drum from excessive weight.

If that was true, "months ago", perhaps, by the time they got it in production, it was past its "Best Before" date?!

[Runin11z]

Originally Posted by SEVEN-OH JOE

Just as it was back in the day. Street Hemis with 425 hp! 490 lb-ft! WOW! And they sold HOW MANY HEMIS against "failure Fords" and "garbage GMs?"

They sold so many the car disappeared 40 years ago.

Watch the Hellcats' volumes SOAR!

NOT.

Why would I be concerned about units sold? I have no interests in FCA.. Now that you've opened the door, I did have a bundle tied up in GM before the restructure (and that's putting it lightly) guess what happened to that money... Recall my statement about the '70 Ls6 Chevelle highest HP in the segment in it's time...


Gosh, how can you say such a thing?


Now, THAT'S "viral" marketing propaganda. In spades.

I say wait till all the facts are in from multiple sources...

[SEVEN-OH JOE]

Why would I be concerned about units sold? I have no interests in FCA.. Now that you've opened the door, I did have a bundle tied up in GM before the restructure (and that's putting it lightly) guess what happened to that money...

You shouldn't have to buy tp until, oh, about 2018.

Smart people dropped it l-o-n-g before 2009. Even GM execs.

[Runin11z]

Originally Posted by SEVEN-OH JOE

Why would I be concerned about units sold? I have no interests in FCA.. Now that you've opened the door, I did have a bundle tied up in GM before the restructure (and that's putting it lightly) guess what happened to that money...

You shouldn't have to buy tp until, oh, about 2018.

Smart people dropped it l-o-n-g before 2009. Even GM execs.

I guess GM execs might have had some inside info.... And it doesn't change the fact that I had faith in our grassroots American company, even after all that I purchased four more vehicles from GM...

[SEVEN-OH JOE]

Originally Posted by Runin11z

I guess GM execs might have had some inside info....

The "tea leaves" were there for the reading. By EVERYONE.

"Your results may vary". Just like the performance times and hp claims (800) being "marketed" for the Hellcat.

[Runin11z]

Originally Posted by SEVEN-OH JOE

The "tea leaves" were there for the reading. By EVERYONE.

"Your results may vary". Just like the performance times and hp claims (800) being "marketed" for the Hellcat.

I'm not worried, I'm the type to let it ride especially in a company that I love... Since I've more than made up for it with the blue chip Chevron stocks... I'm a betting type of man and I'm willing to wager ($200) to you that enthusiasts will run better times than what is claimed by Dodge... Whatcha say are you game...

[BaylorCamaro]

Who cares about dyno numbers, real world performance numbers are what really matter. The ZL1 ran a 12.2 which isn't that surprising and seems in line with other reports. But the 10.80 NHRA certified Challenger Hellcat only ran an 11.70? That's what I'm surprised about. In the eight speed AUTOMATIC no less.

Also, more importantly (to me, but not most people) the Challenger fell short on the figure eight which gives an indication of its handling ability. I'm curious as to what laps times will be for the Hellcat, as no doubt the huge horse power advantage will mask some of its short comings in the handling department.