2015 challenger hellcat 707 hp - Page 8 - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > Off Topic Forums > General Car Discussion



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 07-24-2014, 12:01 PM   #246
Registered Member
Regular
 
GrabberMeBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Somewhere
Region: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish416 View Post
I'm still amazed at how different the new Challenger looks from the old one ... yet it looks very similar.

Yeah, you really don't notice how different they are unless you see two of them together.


Sent from my iPad using Mustang Evolution
__________________
2012 Grabber Blue V6 Convertible
1995 Red Trans Am Convertible
1979 Gold Trans Am
GrabberMeBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-24-2014, 02:12 PM   #247
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Portland
Region: Oregon
Posts: 205
Thank you, Grabber, for the perfect comparison pics. And F!!! you, Tyler, I know damn well it's a unibody. Frame, framework, base, foundation, body, unibody, whatever. It's another coupe sitting on a sedan frame. Coupes are not supposed to be 2+2. Design me a car with two seats and as little @$$ as possible. Make the trunk just big enough to relocate the battery. If people would be willing to commit to a coupe, instead of trying to cross-breed them with mini-vans, we might be able to see a 700hp pony car that weighs less than 3000#, airbags and emissions included. That's why it would be cool to see a 2016 fox body, or the like. You could still have a nice roomy cab for the driver and the (singular) passenger if you weren't worried about leg room for the back seat.

Sorry, I wasn't directing that at anyone in particular... unless the Ford/GM/Chrysler design team(s) frequent these forums.
DavidBoren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2014, 02:52 PM   #248
Registered Member
Regular
 
GrabberMeBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Somewhere
Region: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,711
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidBoren View Post
Thank you, Grabber, for the perfect comparison pics. And F!!! you, Tyler, I know damn well it's a unibody. Frame, framework, base, foundation, body, unibody, whatever. It's another coupe sitting on a sedan frame. Coupes are not supposed to be 2+2. Design me a car with two seats and as little @$$ as possible. Make the trunk just big enough to relocate the battery. If people would be willing to commit to a coupe, instead of trying to cross-breed them with mini-vans, we might be able to see a 700hp pony car that weighs less than 3000#, airbags and emissions included. That's why it would be cool to see a 2016 fox body, or the like. You could still have a nice roomy cab for the driver and the (singular) passenger if you weren't worried about leg room for the back seat.

Sorry, I wasn't directing that at anyone in particular... unless the Ford/GM/Chrysler design team(s) frequent these forums.

Truth is, when I have my 2012 Mustang parked next to either my '79 or '95 T/As, the Mustang looks huge compared to them, yet I have no more leg room in the back of the Mustang.


Sent from my iPad using Mustang Evolution
__________________
2012 Grabber Blue V6 Convertible
1995 Red Trans Am Convertible
1979 Gold Trans Am
GrabberMeBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-24-2014, 03:52 PM   #249
Registered Member
Regular
 
SixBanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Mount Rainier, MD
Region: Maryland
Posts: 968
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrabberMeBlue View Post
Went to a car show last year and a guy had both of his parked next to one another. I snapped a few pictures just showing how the new one towers over the old. Even more noticeable in person. The '70 looks like a toy next to the '10.
Attachment 162162
Attachment 162163
Attachment 162164


Sent from my iPad using Mustang Evolution

Why is there so much car?!?!
__________________
2014 V6 Base Coupe, Sterling Gray Metallic///3.31 Gears///FP6 Appearance Package///Tech. Package///Reverse Sensing and Security Package///Mods: Boss 302 grille, MMD Ducktail Spoiler, Weathertech Floor Mats, Bassani Axle-Back Exhaust
SixBanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2014, 10:18 PM   #250
Registered Member
Regular
 
Ish416's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Winchester
Region: Indiana
Posts: 1,217
Looks like the Charger will be getting the Hellcat Hemi ..

2015 Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat - Proof Dodge Will Offer World's Most Powerful Sedan - Road & Track


Bravo to Chrysler for seriously stepping up the horsepower wars.. I just hope it lasts.
__________________
99 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 M6 - 6.676 @ 103 in 1/8, 10.512 @ 130.2 on street tires, H/C/I
93 Eagle Talon TSI AWD 5spd - Built 6 Bolt, 16G Evo3, HKS 272 Cams - under construction
Ish416 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 01:36 AM   #251
Registered Member
Regular
 
badsheep5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: the farm
Region: Other
Posts: 723
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish416 View Post
Looks like the Charger will be getting the Hellcat Hemi ..

2015 Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat - Proof Dodge Will Offer World's Most Powerful Sedan - Road & Track


Bravo to Chrysler for seriously stepping up the horsepower wars.. I just hope it lasts.

The charger does not deserve the treatment enless it sheds two doors and becomes a real charger


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
badsheep5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 01:38 AM   #252
Registered Member
Regular
 
badsheep5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: the farm
Region: Other
Posts: 723
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidBoren View Post
Thank you, Grabber, for the perfect comparison pics. And F!!! you, Tyler, I know damn well it's a unibody. Frame, framework, base, foundation, body, unibody, whatever. It's another coupe sitting on a sedan frame. Coupes are not supposed to be 2+2. Design me a car with two seats and as little @$$ as possible. Make the trunk just big enough to relocate the battery. If people would be willing to commit to a coupe, instead of trying to cross-breed them with mini-vans, we might be able to see a 700hp pony car that weighs less than 3000#, airbags and emissions included. That's why it would be cool to see a 2016 fox body, or the like. You could still have a nice roomy cab for the driver and the (singular) passenger if you weren't worried about leg room for the back seat.

Sorry, I wasn't directing that at anyone in particular... unless the Ford/GM/Chrysler design team(s) frequent these forums.

Lol touchy


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
badsheep5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 06:29 AM   #253
Staff
Regular
Staff
 
scottydsntknow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Andalusia, Spain
Region: Europe
Posts: 16,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by badsheep5.0 View Post
Lol touchy


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
Touchy, but 100% correct. Unsure why we have to have a useless back seat in the Mustang. Its good for a child or a little person and that is pretty much it. I will be deleting my rear seats soon, when my little girl is big enough for the front seat belt. I will also be ditching both airbags soon so I won't be worried about one going off if she is in the front. Only worry would probably be some overzealous soccer mom/dad yelling at me for having a kid in the front seat lol. Then you say "there are no airbags" and its like the end of the world. News flash, airbags are completely useless if you are wearing your seatbelt.
__________________
2000 Mustang GT Steeda #0048 34k miles. 99 Cobra 4V swapped, FTBR IRS swapped, exhaust, tuned by James Gordon.

Just because I give you advice, doesn't mean I know more than you. Its just means I've done more stupid ****.
scottydsntknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 08:47 AM   #254
Registered Member
Regular
 
gladiatoro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Kelowna BC
Region: Canada
Posts: 771
Quote:
Originally Posted by badsheep5.0 View Post
The charger does not deserve the treatment enless it sheds two doors and becomes a real charger


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
And I thought the FAT CAT was heavy lol... add 200 + pounds that car
will need 707 hp just to get out of the driveway.
gladiatoro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 08:54 AM   #255
Registered Member
Regular
 
Rapinator126's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Texas
Posts: 9,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladiatoro View Post
And I thought the FAT CAT was heavy lol... add 200 + pounds that car
will need 707 hp just to get out of the driveway.
Still going to beat your "vortech" 3v, as will a Bolton 5.0

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app

---------- Post added at 08:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:53 AM ----------

You need to stop being a mustang nut swinger and give respect where it's due

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app
Rapinator126 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 08:55 AM   #256
Registered Member
Regular
 
badsheep5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: the farm
Region: Other
Posts: 723
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapinator126 View Post
Still going to beat your "vortech" 3v, as will a Bolton 5.0

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app

Still the charger lost it's stamp of muscle car the moment it came 4 doors only


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
badsheep5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 08:58 AM   #257
Registered Member
Regular
 
Rapinator126's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Texas
Posts: 9,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by badsheep5.0 View Post
Still the charger lost it's stamp of muscle car the moment it came 4 doors only


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
I don't consider the mustang a " muscle car " either.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app
Rapinator126 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 09:06 AM   #258
Registered Member
Regular
 
badsheep5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: the farm
Region: Other
Posts: 723
2015 challenger hellcat 707 hp

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapinator126 View Post
I don't consider the mustang a " muscle car " either.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app

Hard do that as well there sports cars but even with that title the charger does not get to be in that category


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
badsheep5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 09:14 AM   #259
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Portland
Region: Oregon
Posts: 205
If your car came with rear seats, it's already too late to remove them. Sure, you might drop a couple pounds, but removing the back seat doesn't make your car 18" shorter. Maybe I am the one who is confused in all of this... I am under the impression that the coupe is meant to be sporty and fast. Like sports cars. And I am pretty sure that the Challenger, and the Mustang, both get judged as sports cars when it comes time to insure them. But true sports cars, in my opinion, don't have back seats. Why waste the materials and time adding something that is going to be useless anyways, and subtract from the overall sportiness of the vehicle? If you cut out everything between the rear seam of the door and the front of the back wheelwell, these cars would be shorter, lighter, faster, and handle better because of it. Look at the modern Corvette. It doesn't even have provisions for a rear seat. Seating for two, because it's an F'ing coupe! If you want to comfortably seat five, and still have the illusion of sporty or fast, get a CTS-V.
DavidBoren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 09:46 AM   #260
Registered Member
Regular
 
badsheep5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: the farm
Region: Other
Posts: 723
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidBoren View Post
If your car came with rear seats, it's already too late to remove them. Sure, you might drop a couple pounds, but removing the back seat doesn't make your car 18" shorter. Maybe I am the one who is confused in all of this... I am under the impression that the coupe is meant to be sporty and fast. Like sports cars. And I am pretty sure that the Challenger, and the Mustang, both get judged as sports cars when it comes time to insure them. But true sports cars, in my opinion, don't have back seats. Why waste the materials and time adding something that is going to be useless anyways, and subtract from the overall sportiness of the vehicle? If you cut out everything between the rear seam of the door and the front of the back wheelwell, these cars would be shorter, lighter, faster, and handle better because of it. Look at the modern Corvette. It doesn't even have provisions for a rear seat. Seating for two, because it's an F'ing coupe! If you want to comfortably seat five, and still have the illusion of sporty or fast, get a CTS-V.

I agree I believe that the cts-v and the charger are in a class of there own and I think that's what makes the Camaro and Mustang and challenger more of a muscle car that back seat lol strange I know. And the corvette, viper things like that sports cars


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
badsheep5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 09:56 AM   #261
Registered Member
Regular
 
GrabberMeBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Somewhere
Region: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,711
Quote:
Originally Posted by badsheep5.0 View Post
Still the charger lost it's stamp of muscle car the moment it came 4 doors only


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution

I guess Dodge did with the Charger what Chevy did with the '94 - '96 Impala SS. At that time I figured Chevy built that car for guys with families that still wanted a sporty car and needed a couple extra doors. I guess those cars as well as the Charger could be referred to as sport sedans.


Sent from my iPad using Mustang Evolution
__________________
2012 Grabber Blue V6 Convertible
1995 Red Trans Am Convertible
1979 Gold Trans Am
GrabberMeBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 10:03 AM   #262
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Portland
Region: Oregon
Posts: 205
I will give you that the muscle cars of yesteryear were typically based on larger framed cars, like the Torino and GTO. So you could probably get away with saying that having a back seat seperates the muscle cars from the sports cars. But muscle car, or not, there is absolutely no reason for the 2015 Challenger to be 6:5 scale of the 1975 version. No reason at all. The Toyota/Subaru FRS/BRZ still has enough of the safety and emissions crap to be street legal... so we all know that it can be packaged smaller.
DavidBoren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 10:41 AM   #263
Registered Member
Regular
 
DallasStang77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Dallas
Region: Texas
Posts: 1,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladiatoro View Post
and i thought the fat cat was heavy lol... Add 200 + pounds that car
will need 707 hp just to get out of the driveway.
Click image for larger version

Name:	ImageUploadedByMustang Evolution1406561983.131949.jpg
Views:	100
Size:	79.0 KB
ID:	162407

fat cat fat cat fat cat fatfatfat
fat cat fat cat fat cat fatfatfat
fat cat fat cat fat cat fatfatfat
DallasStang77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 10:55 AM   #264
Staff
Regular
Staff
 
scottydsntknow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Andalusia, Spain
Region: Europe
Posts: 16,791
Keep it civil guys. Also bashing any of these cars for being heavy is kind of pointless as they are all getting pretty big. Plenty of 4000+lb cars running ridiculous times if one would get out to one's local track.
__________________
2000 Mustang GT Steeda #0048 34k miles. 99 Cobra 4V swapped, FTBR IRS swapped, exhaust, tuned by James Gordon.

Just because I give you advice, doesn't mean I know more than you. Its just means I've done more stupid ****.
scottydsntknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 11:29 AM   #265
Registered Member
Regular
 
SixBanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Mount Rainier, MD
Region: Maryland
Posts: 968
Quote:
Originally Posted by badsheep5.0 View Post
Still the charger lost it's stamp of muscle car the moment it came 4 doors only


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution

Actually many of the original 50s/60s muscle cars were big, heavy, four door sedans. The Mustang isn't a muscle car, and while the distinction has become kinda arbitrary at this point, the Mustang is a pony car. It was a light two door coupe with an inline 6.
__________________
2014 V6 Base Coupe, Sterling Gray Metallic///3.31 Gears///FP6 Appearance Package///Tech. Package///Reverse Sensing and Security Package///Mods: Boss 302 grille, MMD Ducktail Spoiler, Weathertech Floor Mats, Bassani Axle-Back Exhaust
SixBanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 11:35 AM   #266
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Portland
Region: Oregon
Posts: 205
Quick comparison of factory offerings:
The 1993 Chevy 454SS (non-supercharged) weighed 4500# and ran a 15.6s 1/4 mile, with a 0-60 time of 7.1 seconds.
The 1993 Ford Lightning (non-supercharged) weighed 4700# and did the 1/4 mile in 15.4s, with a 7.1 second 0-60.
The 2004 Cadillac CTS-V (non-supercharged) weighed 3900# and ran a 13.1s 1/4 m, with a 0-60 time of 4.8 seconds.
The 2004 SVT Cobra (supercharged) weighed 3700# and did the 1/4 mile in 12.6s, with a 4.4 second 0-60.

The Mustang is also fatty fat fat. It is comparable to a luxury sedan. And it can be argued that he Mustang only beats the Cadillac because it has a supercharger.
DavidBoren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 11:40 AM   #267
Registered Member
Regular
 
Rapinator126's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Texas
Posts: 9,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidBoren View Post
Quick comparison of factory offerings:
The 1993 Chevy 454SS (non-supercharged) weighed 4500# and ran a 15.6s 1/4 mile, with a 0-60 time of 7.1 seconds.
The 1993 Ford Lightning (supercharged) weighed 4700# and did the 1/4 mile in 15.4s, with a 7.1 second 0-60.
The 2004 Cadillac CTS-V (non-supercharged) weighed 3900# and ran a 13.1s 1/4 m, with a 0-60 time of 4.8 seconds.
The 2004 SVT Cobra (supercharged) weighed 3700# and did the 1/4 mile in 12.6s, with a 4.4 second 0-60.

The Mustang is also fatty fat fat. It is comparable to a luxury sedan. And it can be argued that he Mustang only beats the Cadillac because it has a supercharger.
The 1993 lightning was not supercharged

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app
Rapinator126 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 11:46 AM   #268
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Portland
Region: Oregon
Posts: 205
Ok. My bad. I will edit my previous post. Thank you.

I didn't post that to argue, I am simply trying to illustrate that plenty of factory heavyweights are capable of moving that weight just fine. I am not calling the Mustang slow. Just saying that a Mustang lover calling the Challenger fat is kind of silly.

As for muscle cars... I am pretty sure that they got the moniker "muscle car" because they were family cars with ridiculous engines. They had more muscle than was expected, or even needed, and so it was a surprise worthy of distinction. Sports cars have always been relatively small with power, speed, and handling in mind. Pony cars are in the middle, and I guess they have the small back seat to try bridge the gap between the huge family car sized muscle cars, and the compact sports cars.
DavidBoren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 11:48 AM   #269
Registered Member
Regular
 
Rapinator126's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Texas
Posts: 9,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidBoren View Post
I didn't post that to argue, I am simply trying to illustrate that plenty of factory heavyweights are capable of moving that weight just fine. I am not calling the Mustang slow. Just saying that a Mustang lover calling the Challenger fat is kind of silly.

As for muscle cars... I am pretty sure that they got the moniker "muscle car" because they were family cars with ridiculous engines. They had more muscle than was expected, or even needed, and so it was a surprise worthy of distinction. Sports cars have always been relatively small with power, speed, and handling in mind. Pony cars are in the middle, and I guess they have the small back seat to try bridge the gap between the huge family car sized muscle cars, and the compact sports cars.
I was simply saying the 1993 lightning was not supercharged. Is was nothing more than a NA 351

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Mustang Evolution mobile app
Rapinator126 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 11:57 AM   #270
Registered Member
Regular
 
GrabberMeBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Somewhere
Region: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,711
Muscle cars really started out as intermediate-sized cars with the full-sized car's engine. When I mention car size, I'm referring to the size at the time. A lot of those intermediate cars look full-size by today's standards. We all know how the GTO got started, and started the whole "muscle car" era. If we don't, I recommend a little research. It's a great story.


Sent from my iPad using Mustang Evolution
__________________
2012 Grabber Blue V6 Convertible
1995 Red Trans Am Convertible
1979 Gold Trans Am
GrabberMeBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 12:01 PM   #271
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Portland
Region: Oregon
Posts: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrabberMeBlue View Post
Muscle cars really started out as intermediate-sized cars with the full-sized car's engine. When I mention car size, I'm referring to the size at the time. A lot of those intermediate cars look full-size by today's standards. We all know how the GTO got started, and started the whole "muscle car" era. If we don't, I recommend a little research. It's a great story.


Sent from my iPad using Mustang Evolution
+1
DavidBoren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 12:13 PM   #272
Registered Member
Regular
 
badsheep5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: the farm
Region: Other
Posts: 723
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottydsntknow View Post
Keep it civil guys. Also bashing any of these cars for being heavy is kind of pointless as they are all getting pretty big. Plenty of 4000+lb cars running ridiculous times if one would get out to one's local track.

Who said were not being civil this is us Click image for larger version

Name:	ImageUploadedByMustang Evolution1406567575.831131.jpg
Views:	90
Size:	521.8 KB
ID:	162416


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
badsheep5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 12:16 PM   #273
Registered Member
Regular
 
badsheep5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: the farm
Region: Other
Posts: 723
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrabberMeBlue View Post
Muscle cars really started out as intermediate-sized cars with the full-sized car's engine. When I mention car size, I'm referring to the size at the time. A lot of those intermediate cars look full-size by today's standards. We all know how the GTO got started, and started the whole "muscle car" era. If we don't, I recommend a little research. It's a great story.


Sent from my iPad using Mustang Evolution

This is true personally I would love to get my hands on a Torino and build the hell out of it. And while the three pony cars that are what is left in my eyes are the last of the muscle cars. But we are not here to discuss definition we are here to talk hell cat


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
badsheep5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 12:36 PM   #274
Registered Member
Regular
 
DallasStang77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Dallas
Region: Texas
Posts: 1,842
2015 challenger hellcat 707 hp

Quote:
Originally Posted by badsheep5.0 View Post
This is true personally I would love to get my hands on a Torino and build the hell out of it. And while the three pony cars that are what is left in my eyes are the last of the muscle cars. But we are not here to discuss definition we are here to talk hell cat


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
Well the discussion about the definition of muscle cars evolved from the news bit about how the Hell Cat motor is gonna find its way into a future rendition of the Charger which is closely tied to the fact that the Challenger is the only true (as true as a late model can be I guess) muscle car left.

I would love to have the Hell Cat personally. But I still prefer my mustang as my fun car. So I guess the relegates the Hell Cat as either a DD or a garage queen if I somehow buy one or win it in a sweepstakes lol.

But honestly I'm at least two years away from getting another vehicle and all things specced considered I would still take the next GT350 or whatever higher HP version over the Hell Cat.

Motor Trend just gave a first drive review and I think they said the Hell Cat still drives like a Challenger (ie drives like a boat). So since I'm not a rich ***** like Mr. Gates and I have to do one car at a time I gonna resist the temptation of a 707hp Hell Cat boat on wheels and wait for the SVT Stang.

Damn this is exciting and fun.
DallasStang77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 12:39 PM   #275
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Portland
Region: Oregon
Posts: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by badsheep5.0 View Post
This is true personally I would love to get my hands on a Torino and build the hell out of it. And while the three pony cars that are what is left in my eyes are the last of the muscle cars. But we are not here to discuss definition we are here to talk hell cat


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
True. But as Voltaire once said, "if you wish to converse with me, define your terms." To discuss the Hellcat, we have to come to an agreement on how it is defined. In other news, here is one of the most recent articles I have found about the Hellcat:
2015 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat First Test - Motor Trend
DavidBoren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 12:40 PM   #276
Registered Member
Regular
 
DallasStang77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Dallas
Region: Texas
Posts: 1,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottydsntknow View Post
Keep it civil guys. Also bashing any of these cars for being heavy is kind of pointless as they are all getting pretty big. Plenty of 4000+lb cars running ridiculous times if one would get out to one's local track.
I was singing a song... Lol
DallasStang77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 03:35 PM   #277
Registered Member
Regular
 
Ish416's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Winchester
Region: Indiana
Posts: 1,217
The last paragraph of the Motortrend article -

"Conclusion. Get some fatter, stickier rear meats for the Challenger Hellcat and it really does have the intestinal fortitude to embarrass cars costing double and triple the price. A retired and wheeled Hellcat would probably smack that Shelby around pretty good, too. Until then, Hellcat owners can happily chew on the knowledge that the next cheapest 700-horsepower steed in existence is the $322,638, 731-hp Ferrari F12 Berlinetta. More important, I've driven both cars and would much rather drive the Hellcat. I've also spent a great deal of time in the Shelby GT500. And the Viper. And the ZL1. Hellcat, hands down. Hats off to the Dodge boys. They've built an all-timer."

As for the Hellcats handling ...

BRAKING, 60-0 MPH - 109 ft
LATERAL ACCELERATION - 0.94 g (avg)
MT FIGURE EIGHT - 24.7 sec @ 0.85 g (avg)

Compared to the Track Pack Mustang GT

BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 110 ft
LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.96 g (avg)
MT FIGURE EIGHT - 25.0 sec @ 0.77 g (avg)

Well ... it's better than a track pack equipped Mustang GT. Not as good as the Shelby or Boss. Given it's 4400 lb curb weight and 275 width tires, that is one hell of an accomplishment.

I would say the Chrysler engineers did a great job.


Mustang Track pack -
2013 Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE vs. 2013 Ford Mustang GT Track Pack - Motor Trend All Pages

Hellcat -
2015 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat First Test - Motor Trend
__________________
99 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 M6 - 6.676 @ 103 in 1/8, 10.512 @ 130.2 on street tires, H/C/I
93 Eagle Talon TSI AWD 5spd - Built 6 Bolt, 16G Evo3, HKS 272 Cams - under construction
Ish416 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 04:22 PM   #278
Registered Member
Regular
 
DallasStang77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Dallas
Region: Texas
Posts: 1,842
2015 challenger hellcat 707 hp

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish416 View Post
The last paragraph of the Motortrend article -

"Conclusion. Get some fatter, stickier rear meats for the Challenger Hellcat and it really does have the intestinal fortitude to embarrass cars costing double and triple the price. A retired and wheeled Hellcat would probably smack that Shelby around pretty good, too. Until then, Hellcat owners can happily chew on the knowledge that the next cheapest 700-horsepower steed in existence is the $322,638, 731-hp Ferrari F12 Berlinetta. More important, I've driven both cars and would much rather drive the Hellcat. I've also spent a great deal of time in the Shelby GT500. And the Viper. And the ZL1. Hellcat, hands down. Hats off to the Dodge boys. They've built an all-timer."

As for the Hellcats handling ...

BRAKING, 60-0 MPH - 109 ft
LATERAL ACCELERATION - 0.94 g (avg)
MT FIGURE EIGHT - 24.7 sec @ 0.85 g (avg)

Compared to the Track Pack Mustang GT

BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 110 ft
LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.96 g (avg)
MT FIGURE EIGHT - 25.0 sec @ 0.77 g (avg)

Well ... it's better than a track pack equipped Mustang GT. Not as good as the Shelby or Boss. Given it's 4400 lb curb weight and 275 width tires, that is one hell of an accomplishment.

I would say the Chrysler engineers did a great job.


Mustang Track pack -
2013 Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE vs. 2013 Ford Mustang GT Track Pack - Motor Trend All Pages

Hellcat -
2015 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat First Test - Motor Trend
It is quite amazing the numbers that the Hell Cat puts down. But that's also why Motor Trend changed their Best Handling Car to the Best Driver's Car.

By far not even the Boss 302LS would be anywhere near the winner circle but it doesn't stop it from being a superior driver's car than say a more powerful GT500 or Aston Martin or Jag or even a Lambo.

As it stands, the last two years winner wasn't the most powerful nor the highest road holding lateral g. Both the new viper and the Z06 had higher stats all around and even faster laps I think but they finished middle of the pack.

But I do think that with some aftermarket work and some meaty tires under it this Hell Cat can rock it much much better.

I still wanna see what SVT will bring out but I wouldn't kick the Hell Cat out of my garage lol.
DallasStang77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 04:26 PM   #279
Registered Member
Regular
 
DallasStang77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Dallas
Region: Texas
Posts: 1,842
2015 challenger hellcat 707 hp

...
DallasStang77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2014, 05:00 PM   #280
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Portland
Region: Oregon
Posts: 205
I, too, am curious to see what Ford comes up with to compete in today's pony car war. But that is a discussion for a different thread.

Pertaining to the Hellcat, I am more than eager to see someone gut and shave one of these for a track only car. A little bit of carbon fiber, no interior, and a dialed in suspension. I don't know how much weight can honestly be subtracted, but anything is better than nothing. I just doubt there is anyone willing to gut a brand new $60k car that is known for its comfortable interior.
DavidBoren is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > Off Topic Forums > General Car Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2015 Challenger SRT Hellcat Ish416 General Car Discussion 14 05-20-2014 09:00 PM
Dodge Challenger Super Stock Concept JROC General Car Discussion 10 11-01-2006 09:53 PM
Dodge Challenger Official Seph General Car Discussion 22 01-19-2006 01:58 PM

» Like Us On Facebook



05:12 PM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

MustangEvolution.com is in no way associated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.