For All You Future V-6 Owners

[Evilangel]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

holy crap...I took a link to another page, check this out:
100 + hp on 4.5 psi?!? Jeez!
I think whoever first said this little engine has some potential was understating the situation!

Hi Dragoneye. Could you please provide the link to this story?

[Mr. Wyndham]

Absolutely...don't know why I didn't in the first place...

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=7079

[Dom]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Absolutely...don't know why I didn't in the first place...

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=7079

Wow, I wonder what type of SC that is and how much it will cost.

[Evilangel]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Absolutely...don't know why I didn't in the first place...

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=7079

THANKS!!!

[jackierats]

Originally Posted by Dom

I remember back in the day when everyone had a LT1, it was common knowledge that they run roughly 14.2s stock on average. Then I compared it to the 5th gen V6 and everyone with a LT1 got all offended and all of a sudden the LT1 is a mid to high 13s stock. Yeah sure, now they're faster then LS1s.

So all those people who said how fast the LT1 was back when it was the top dog are saying how much of a girls car the 5th gen V6 is just makes me laugh.
How is this 6 not a performance car when the LT1 was a performance car? If the bar got bumped higher we should start calling LT1s girls cars too then.

Same for when I compared them to GTs. I had both a modded V6 and now have a near stock LS1. V6 with just 200hp, gears and verter, no engine mods what so ever ran 14.3 in the 1/4. New camaro will probably do as you said low to mid 14s stock on average. You're looking at 100 more hp, way more torque in the low rpm. My 3.8 was a dog until 3k thats why the verter and gears helped so much. If a skilled driver can do 13.8 with the mustang GT then a skilled driver can do 14.0 with a 5th gen V6. I ran 12.9 @107.5 with a lid and muffler in my '00Z on street tires. I guess I'm a second faster then Mustangs GTs and at least 8mph more on the top end. That's the kind of turd that Mustang is. They only reason for their good 0-60 is a really high gearing. It makes up for weak hp just like high gearing made up for weak hp on my V6. I cut 1.8 60s in my V6 and my LS1 can only cut 2.0 60s. The mustang GT will have a slight edge due to 250 less lbs and more torque. Think about how ridiculous that is to have a competitors V6 keep up with your V8.

so are you saying that changing the gears to a higher number would make it closer to keeping up with the GT's?
would that void the warranty
(sorry if stupid question im still learning )

[SScattergunSS]

This is something I think everybody will get a kick out of, especially future V6 Camaro owners. I just read in the current ( December 2008 ) issue of Road & Track on page 122. Believe it or not, they tested the Dodge Challenger R/T, ( NOT the SRT8, but the R/T )and got a 0-60 time of 6.2 seconds, and a quarter mile time of 14.5 seconds at 99 mph. If the Direct 6 Camaro is as advertised, there are going to be some turly surprised and very upset / embarrassed Challenger R/T owners!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[andyrew]

I was not impressed with the R/T when I test drove it a couple of weeks ago..


Also I will be one of the guys that will also turbocharge the v6 when the warranty goes out. I'll be looking for well over 400whp (500whp would be nice running water injection) on pump gas on daily driving situations. I drive a Audi A4 1.8t quattro daily and with lots of mods, including a bigger turbo I've gone from 155hp to right around 325 on pump gas with stock internals.

[SS4EVER]

Originally Posted by SScattergunSS

This is something I think everybody will get a kick out of, especially future V6 Camaro owners. I just read in the current ( December 2008 ) issue of Road & Track on page 122. Believe it or not, they tested the Dodge Challenger R/T, ( NOT the SRT8, but the R/T )and got a 0-60 time of 6.2 seconds, and a quarter mile time of 14.5 seconds at 99 mph. If the Direct 6 Camaro is as advertised, there are going to be some turly surprised and very upset / embarrassed Challenger R/T owners!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, I also saw that. The Challenger is soo heavy it's not even funny. Made me happy though...

Haha my Cobalt SS/SC is quicker than that...

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by SScattergunSS

This is something I think everybody will get a kick out of, especially future V6 Camaro owners. I just read in the current ( December 2008 ) issue of Road & Track on page 122. Believe it or not, they tested the Dodge Challenger R/T, ( NOT the SRT8, but the R/T )and got a 0-60 time of 6.2 seconds, and a quarter mile time of 14.5 seconds at 99 mph. If the Direct 6 Camaro is as advertised, there are going to be some turly surprised and very upset / embarrassed Challenger R/T owners!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No kidding!?! Wow.

Even if you put it at 6.0 and 14.3 for "drivers error", that's still in line with the V6 Camaro...interesting. And sad for Dodge guys....

[Xanthos]

Maybe the challenger will get better (if and) when GM buys out DC.
- Xanthos

[Crowley]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

No kidding!?! Wow.

Even if you put it at 6.0 and 14.3 for "drivers error", that's still in line with the V6 Camaro...interesting. And sad for Dodge guys....

Motortrend go the following from the R/T ..

2009 DODGE CHALLENGER R/T
Base price $29,995
Price as tested $39,055
Vehicle layout Front-engine, RWD, 5-pass, 2-door, coupe
Engine 5.7L/376-hp/410-lb-ft OHV 16-valve V-8
Transmission 6-speed manual
Curb weight (f/r dist) 4154 lb (53/47%)
Wheelbase 116.0 in
Length x width x height 197.7 x 75.7 x 57.1 in
0-60 mph 5.1 sec
Quarter mile 13.6 sec @ 104.9 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph 135 ft
Lateral acceleration 0.82 g (avg)
MT figure eight 27.5 sec @ 0.63 g (avg)
EPA city/hwy fuel econ 16 / 25 mpg
CO2 emissions 1.02 lb/mile

For the SRT8 ..

2009 DODGE CHALLENGER SRT8
Base price $41,695
Price as tested $43,730 (manual), $42,840 (auto)
Vehicle layout Front-engine, RWD, 5-pass, 2-door, coupe
Engine 6.1L/425-hp/420-lb-ft OHV 16-valve V-8
Transmission 6-speed manual, 5-speed auto
Curb weight 4146 lb (man), 4137 lb (auto)
Weight dist, f/r 55/45%
Wheelbase 116.0 in
Length x width x height 197.7 x 75.7 x 57.1 in
0-60 mph 4.6 sec (man), 4.7 sec (auto)
Quarter mile 13.1 sec @ 108.4 mph (man), 13.1 sec @ 108.3 mph (auto),
Braking, 60-0 mph 121 ft (man)/117 ft (auto)
Lateral acceleration 0.87 g (avg, man), 0.87 g (avg, auto)
MT figure eight 26.7 sec @ 0.67 g (avg, man), 26.4 sec @ 0.69 g (avg, auto)
EPA city/hwy fuel econ 14/22 mpg (man), 13/19 mpg (auto)
CO2 emissions 1.16-1.28 lb/mile

[BowtieGuy]

Originally Posted by SScattergunSS

This is something I think everybody will get a kick out of, especially future V6 Camaro owners. I just read in the current ( December 2008 ) issue of Road & Track on page 122. Believe it or not, they tested the Dodge Challenger R/T, ( NOT the SRT8, but the R/T )and got a 0-60 time of 6.2 seconds, and a quarter mile time of 14.5 seconds at 99 mph. If the Direct 6 Camaro is as advertised, there are going to be some turly surprised and very upset / embarrassed Challenger R/T owners!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That pretty funny, but Road and Track, Car and Driver, and Edmund's can't test a car properly to save their lives. They honestly can't drive. I go with M/T for times.

[SemperFi]

The MT numbers are usually spot on. But heres a few things to get your smile back on.
7.3 - The 0-60 time of the base Challenger. Hahaha.
15.6 - The 1/4 time of the base Challenger. Hahaha.

13G's - The difference in base prices for the SS and the SRT8. And the SS is just as fast

[headpunter]

Originally Posted by SemperFi

The MT numbers are usually spot on. But heres a few things to get your smile back on.
7.3 - The 0-60 time of the base Challenger. Hahaha.
15.6 - The 1/4 time of the base Challenger. Hahaha.

13G's - The difference in base prices for the SS and the SRT8. And the SS is faster

fixed