how fast will my new Dodge Challenger R/T be?
Well the new Challenger will have the 5.7-liter HEMI V-8 engine with 370hp/398tq with the 5 speed automatic and 375hp/404tq if you go with the 6-speed manual. Despite the all that power unfortunately the Challenger is not really all that fast. 0-60 is about 5.9sec which is not bad, but considering the 2009 Toyota Camry V6 SE does 0-60 in 5.9seconds the muscle car doesn't seem all that impressive... The big issue is weight, all that style and presence weighs in at a hefty 4,041 lbs. This car is all about style, sound, and presence, overall speed is not really its forte.
Clifton - Ignore that other response! Comparing a Camry to the new Challenger R/T is like comparing a beautiful woman that you are in lust/love with to your mom! It's just not fair. It never was about specifications and numbers, it's how the car makes you feel! This car is pretty, powerful, fast and very cool! Everything about this car will excite you. The sound, the strong feel of everything, the design and the build quality are all top notch. About 5 times every week total strangers will stop me to comment on the car. The one valid point is that the Challenger is a big and heavy car. But with 375 HP it's no dog. The old Challengers would go faster from 0-60, but this one does even faster 100-0 and tops out over 150. It seats 5 comfortably and the Toyota will almost fit in my trunk. Kidding...
yeah and end up crossing the 1/4 mile mark at 14.0 flat or even faster. that new hemi will also give you tire smoking torque with a ton of potential. plus you can still get 25 mpg on the hwy with that hp.
5.9... 0-60?? who the hell is doing the driving ? I have a stock automatic 2010 R/T so far the best 0-60 I have is 5.2sec .I will be purchacing the Diablo Preditor Tuner for 350 bucks this will reprogram the car and I should see #`s under 5- 0-60. Bring me any Toyota Camery and all you will see is my ass !
those numbers are fabricated by mustang enthusiests. the RT 6 speed is roughly in the 5.1 to 5.3 range and the reason its pushing 4000 lbs that fast is because the 379 hp is a little underrated. it runs a 1/4 in the low 13s (13.3) consistantly and if you own one and got down on it, it will not feel like a "camery", believe me.
Those numbers are fabricated by mustang enthusiasts. the RT 6 speed is roughly in the 5.1 to 5.3 range and the reason its pushing 4000 lbs that fast is because the 379 hp is a little underrated. it runs a 1/4 in the low 13s (13.3) consistantly and if you own one and got down on it, it will not feel like a "Camery", believe me.
#1 your car will certainly be faster than a similarly equipped mustang, trust me ive seen it two similarly equipped automatics went at it (to rule out driver error) the challenger had the mustang all the way through also we had chevy diehards driving both cars to rule out driver biasing. #2 be happy with the fact that your car isnt an asshole in the sense of how every one has one. also your car is flat out much better looking and also if a 2011 V6 camry is so fast then how come my 10,000lb ram 3500 is faster than one???
The new 5.0 mustang gt would wax the rt and srt version of this car. You must have seen the old 4.6 in action
LOL...The SRT8 Challenger puts out 470-hp and 470 lb-ft.... 5.0 Mustang, 412-hp and 390 lb.-ft. and weights maybe 200 lbs less than the Challenger. It wouldn't even win let alone "wax" it.......Even the R/T puts out as much torque as the new 5L
You need to do some more research. You couldn't be more wrong. I hate mustangs but the new 5.0 would put a beat down on the srt. Look it up. Srt vs 5.0 is a much larger weight difference than 200 lbs. Check the performance numbers of the 1/4 mile and other numbers such as the skid pad. Mustang beats it in ALL of the above.
ill do the research for you actually.... challenger $46k 1/4: 12.9 weight: 4200 braking: 160 skid pad: .88 mustang: $30k 1/4: 12.7 weight: 3600 braking: 153 skid pad: .94 considering the mustang is $15k cheaper this isnt even a comparison. mustang>>>>>>>challenger. you can love the styling of the challenger all you want but performance wise the mustang is the best american muscle car on the market right now. i hate the mustang but its the truth
idk i dont play with cars,generally if it doesnt have a diesel engine i dont touch it haha not being an asshole but i paid 20,xxx for the truck i have listed my 2004.5 ram 3500 diesel, thats including all the upgrades i named and ive laid a pretty mean beat down on what looked to me to be a brand spankin new V8 mustang, to me the newer years blur together and look the same so i dont really know what year it was but i know it was newer than 2005 with a V8 and my truck wieghs 10,000 with 33X12.50s on it and i run about 11.3 1/4mile hahaha but with all respect both cars are nice i just dont like the fact that i see mustangs every day of my life
you would know if it was the new 5.0 gt...its says 5.0 right on the side instead of GT and the rear end is slightly different. and good choice with the cummins. i work in the engineering department for them :D
I agree 100% the new 5.0 Mustang is deff faster than the r/t or the 2010 srt8 as far as the new 392 I am not sure I have not seen a real road test of the 392 and I know the 2008-2010 srt8 was getting 4.2 sec on 0-60 runs I am assuming with the 50 more hp should be a bit better. As for the price yes the Mustang is a way better deal and one hell of a car, but I would stil go with the R/T . I have a 2010 R/T Challenget and over this winter (I live in Fl) I got 4.91 sec 0-60 out of my Auto-stick stock no mods R/T. I do not think in my mind the 10-15K more for the srt is worth getting and extra 1/2 sec. Also in 5 years when it is paid off I can add a supercharger.
After looking up the numbers it's only slighty faster (in a straight line) than the new srt. Anything requiring braking and turns though it's a much better car. The challenger has much better styling IMO. Best on the market. It's just so huge that the weight is a killer for it. And a procharger rt is a beast car.
i love it, its my first diesel, but ive always been into diesel engines and i grew up around them in snowgroomers. i almost bought a 7.3 powerstroke but i felt how much of a dog it was compared to the cummins. PS i need a 6.7 cummins VGT turbo and the exhaust manifold i want a VGT on my 5.9 and thats the only way to do it ive already got the standalone controller for it
So you just did a complete 180 on your argument....you went from the mustang "waxing" all to now more realistically an extremely close race. But I couldn't have been more wrong?
the new 5.0 wouldnt wax the srt in the 1.4 mile thats correct. it would be a close race but edge still goes to the stang. too bad that people race on more than just 1.4 mile tracks though. where the mustang makes the srt look terrible. still waxing it. no 180 here. 5.0>>>>>>>>srt. especially for the money.
hit the . when i meant to hit the /. replace 1.4 with 1/4
The numbers are so close it will almost always come down to the driver, and the numbers seem to be all over the place... Edmunds has the Challenger at 12.6 and the Mustang at 13.0 in the 1/4. It's not by any means "waxing" I will give you that the mustang is a staggering 800lbs lighter, and much cheaper.
the drivers @ edmonds need to find a new line of work. They got the Challenger R/T doing 0-60 in 5.9 sec. The 1st time my wife drove our R/T Challenger she did 5.5 sec 0-60 My best is 4.91. Edmonds can suck my ass and they need new "drivers" cause the ones they have need to learn how to drive.
Hey i just bought a dodge challenger rt 2011, do you know what i can do to make it faster???
Where can i get this tuner and how much does it costs to install
Join a forum and start reading. I'm sure there is a lot of stuff there that can help you out. But there's the simple oviois stuff. Longtubes and catback, cai, and a tune to get the easy power. I believe from what I've heard/read the srt manifolds can be swapped to the 5.7 for some power gain as well. Not sure though so don't quote me. And those things are boats. Find some weight reduction articles and see what you can ditch to help lighten that thing up.
Had a good laugh today, was at the local dragstrip and saw a 2010 challenger get beat by a ford flex with an ecoboost v6! Will post a link to the video.
Here's the youtube link. If you watch right til the end, you will see the win light come on in the Flex"s lane.: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4CBKhTCiuc
I thought I heard 14. something on the final run, 1st off the ford flex does 0-60 in a whopping 9 seconds and I saw this one take the R/T off the line, how can that be possible? I`ll tell ya... The person driving the R/T couldnt drive miss daisy and the Flex has some Nitros, cause that is the only way it does the 1/4 in 14 anything. Has somehing other than ecoboost under the hood or in the trunk. I am sure I can find a video of a Pinto beating a Cobra.
and here it is.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bv6r_aulDic
You have a point, but unfortunately I personally took the video yesterterday. The Challenger was running low 15's to high 14's all day. The ecoboost Flex v6(twinturbo from factory, no nitrous, 365 hp) was running 14.7's like clockwork, all wheel drive as well.
that is crazy 365 hp in one of those Flex`s... I still will beat it .. hell Edmonds was getting 13.9 from the R/T and they couldnt drive miss daisy either.. Maybe the Challenger driver had 3 fat friends in the car too..lol
LOL, I don't think the driver was a pro driver by any means! There was an orange Challenger there running in the 13's all day.
Well I bought my 2012 Challenger R/T Jan. 14th and today on my way home from work was the first time I was able to see what my baby would do under pressure. Long story short, the sweet looking yellow Camaro SS with black racing stripes across the trunk and hood was getting harder and harder to see in my rear view mirror as I broke 145mph, didn't eat him up but did take a few good bites before we slowed down and gave each other the "Thumbs Up!" He was a good sport and we both had fun with our toys but he knew as well as I did that I had the faster car.
That's a funny story cause my basically stock 04 gto just beat a 2012 today...the ss driver wasn't trying too hard or had the auto.
My dodge challenger hit a 5.2 in 0-60! I had it all stock!!! And now with a k&n headers and a new diablo predator tune I get 4.7 in 0-6 I'm thinking about a supper charger but not to shure yet! But my bro has a comarro ss and over all he is thinking of trading it in to get a challenger.. Just saying !!!!!!!!overall best smooth driving car out there I think if u don't own one I would think on buying one if I was you! It's a car that is worth your money
HA! i love all the Ford people trying to say Fords can beat a HEMI...2012 Srt8 challenger with a THREE HUNDRED NINETY TWO cubic inch block....2012 ford GT with a 305....hilarious
CJ...first of all the mustang gt has 302 not a 305 if I remember correctly. Furthermore that Mustang GT has 420 hp. What's the 392 have? 460 hp right? Now go compare the weights of the 2 vehicles.
false they've had 302's labeled 5.0 liter....but mustangs were never true five liters till 2010 when they became 305's.....if they're stilll 302's then Ford is still just rounding up, as they have with they're horsepower ratings...ive seen brand new gt500's dyno at 525hp max, a few times even lower when i was in auto tech
The original 302's were just under 302 cubic inches, the new ones are 302 cubic inches, Chevy has the 305 cubic inch motor. By the way, brand new GT500's dyno at 662 horsepower, do some research before posting. My son has a 2003 Mustang Mach 1 "overrated" by Ford at 305 horsepower. Last weekend at the dragstrip he ran a 12.82, not bad for a measley 305 horsepower. Only mod is a cold air intake and long tube headers.
The 302 windsor is not actually 302 cubic inches. Displacement is (pi × r2 × h × cylinders), which becomes (pi × 4 × 3 × 8), thus pi × 96, thus 301.59289 cubic inches. BTW, a 5.0 litre motor can be anything from a 4.95 litre to a 5.05 litre engine depending on how the manufacturer rounds it up, so cubic inches can range from 301.5 to 305 cubic inches and still be called a 5.0 litre.
Dynos vary from different types. It's not a good judge of power. The strip is. I call bs on the Mach 1 under 13 as well. Those cars are dogs. Fact is the new 302 boss is the best bang for the buck period...ad I'm a GM guy. If you want GM performance the gto is still where it's at with weight and power. Dodge/Chrysler has the best styling of any vehicle. Hands down. But it's the worst performing of the group. All hp but no handling or braking in comparison.
I traded my 2010 Challenger R/T for a 2013 5.0 this April. My first race was a Charger 392 and I beat it by a nose if I had a little more skill with the stick shift I would have easily bEAT THE 392.
Ford bias's at work....and yeah, the 2013 gt500 will go over 550 horse....ive literally done my own 2011 gt500 on a dyno....525hp solid....and my 84 firebird trans am with a chevy 350 ZZ4 in it ( rated 355, 405) THAT has a low 12 second quarter mile....the mach 1 has a 13.5 quarter mile....i dont see a second getting knocked off with cold air.....alll ive been arguing as that u cant beat the efficiency and reliability of a hemi engine at high rpms....take two identical engines, but one with hemi heads and the other with square heads or something, and the hemi will juice more horse out of it at 5-8,000rpms and be happy running all day up at those speeds
I'll take GMs cathedral port heads all day. Hemi is a great engine. I had one. Makes great power and it's reliable but IMO the Ls series engine is the best there is and the new 5.0 from ford is badass.
It also has slicks and 4:10's.
The 2013 GT 500 runs 11.7 on street tires, with launch control.
I average 5.3 0-60. My grandma could do 5.9 on my 2012 rt six speed. The complements are never ending. The challenger is the only car that got the retro correct.
boys, boys, boys.....it's a muscle car...it's about attitude not just speed. My 2011 toxic orange R/T is a little slower than a lot of the mustangs....but who cares? Mustangs are cool but they'll never be rare because they're a dime-a-dozen out there. The R/T is and will continue to be classic old-school muscle...yeah mustang is 412 hp...but at what?...10,000 rpm?...try to sustain that and see what happens. Put 500 lbs. of concrete blocks in the trunk of that stang to even things up and I'll leave it at the starting line
And how much gas does your 500 lbs more of bricks with a bigger engine suck? FYI 412hp at 6500 rpm. 18/25 mpg. Challenger 15/24 mpg, hp 376@5150 rpm. A small displacement 5.0 litre motor with 4-valve heads will buzz at 6500 rpm just as long as a hemi headed 350 cubic inch motor will at 5250.
And how much gas does your 500 lbs more of bricks with a bigger engine suck? FYI 412hp at 6500 rpm. 18/25 mpg. Challenger 15/24 mpg, hp 376@5150 rpm. A small displacement 5.0 litre motor with 4-valve heads will buzz at 6500 rpm just as long as a hemi headed 350 cubic inch motor will at 5250. also for mr I call a 12 second Mach 1 bs, here's video proof at SIR in And how much gas does your 500 lbs more of bricks with a bigger engine suck? FYI 412hp at 6500 rpm. 18/25 mpg. Challenger 15/24 mpg, hp 376@5150 rpm. A small displacement 5.0 litre motor with 4-valve heads will buzz at 6500 rpm just as long as a hemi headed 350 cubic inch motor will at 5250. Also for Chase who said: I call bs on the Mach 1 under 13 as well. Her is proof from SIR in Saskatchewan: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gN0SFEnEZE&feature=share&list=UUsHSSv-ydh6IwoccZX8YXfw
I do almost all highway...100 miles per day...I was getting 26+ when it was stock; getting 28 now with CAI and flow masters.....if it was all just about mileage I wouldn't be in an R/T and you wouldn't be in a Mustang; we'd both be in smart cars and that would truly suck. At the end of the day....what we purchase is a compromise...your mustang turns better 0-60s and 1/4 miles....my R/T turns better top end (mine probably turns more heads).....and don't worry about the bricks, I'll carry them...I've got an actual back seat and a trunk with it's own zip code
I can agree with that, if it weren't for other models, the one we own would be that much less to enjoy, like in the mid 2000's when the Mustang was the only one available. The 12 second Mach1 in the video still gets 28 mpg as well.
you both are correct, I was the owner of a 2010 R/T Challenger and have recently traded it in on a 2013 Mustang 5.0. The Challenger is deff the better looking of the two and way more comfy to drive and has some balls to boot, I got the Mustang for the performance, handling and it is just way more fun to drive... Gas mileage was never a thought in either purchase as I work from home :)
That car looked like it had drag radials on it....throw the stock rubber on it and it doesn't break 13
It has drag slicks, you're right, with street tires it would never run in the 12"s.
Sort of had to chuckle at Mark's Mach I story. First it was only one mod, which was actually two, cold air and long tube headers. Then we find it has a 4:10 rear, and then we find it was on drag slicks. What else haven't we been told. You can make any car go fast; this discussion was trying to compare generally stock cars. Everyone I know, even the Ford and Chevy die-hards, have said the Challenger wins hands down with styling alone. I had a Mustang and couldn't stand the foot wide center console encroaching on my right leg and the gaping brake handle taking up the rest of the space to my right. Camaro didn't work because I wasn't going to drive a muscle car that had an interior with a quality equal with my Hyundai Accent. I have the best compromise ever. Plenty of room and style, a nice ride, and a very handsome and artful piece of automotive history.
All of u guys dont know shit,i traded my new mustang in on a 2013 challenger rt and it drives,handles and looks better than a mustang any day
How about the number 8 cylinder having problem,ford fixed my car 3xs for that problem so i went to dodge no more pos fords for me,i had my wife trade her f150 in on a dodge 1500 another good upgrade
Better you than me.;P
Too bad the skidpad numbers don't verify your story about the handling.
I just read this and was laughing at the Mustang 5.0 fans comment on smoking a Challanger R/T, well here's a first person response I beat hands down a new 5.0 on the street in my 2010 R/T with only a cold air intake as soon as I install my tuner watch out. And mine is way better looking than that common 5.0, every where you look there's at least ten mustangs to one R/T, and it's not cause there better just cheaper.
This guy is either lying, the mustang wasn't a new 5.0, the mustang wasn't trying, or the mustang driver can't drive.
Exactly, here are the specs: The Mustang GT needs around 30% less space to stop from 60mph, 104 ft vs 142 ft More than 10% faster in the 1/4 mile, 12.7 s @ 111 mph vs 14.3 s @ 102 mph The Mustang GT hits 60mph around 30% faster, 4.4 seconds vs 5.9 seconds
How can it beat a 5.0 litre when this one can't beat a Flex?: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4CBKhTCiuc
Bluemax, I do agree the Challenger is a cooler looking car, but I have owned both a 2010 R/T and a 2013 5.0 and I can tell you your statement is not true. I have already beat a Charger SRT8 392 in my 5.0. Can you explain how your 4200lb car is faster than a 3600lb car that has 50 more hp? I dont see how it`s possible. My R/T`s best 0-60 time was 4.64 seconds and that was with upgraded rubber. My current best in the Mustang is 4.3 and that is with the stock tires and I still do not have great launching skills with the 6spd yet. No mods at all.
Quick note, Ford and Chevy cars have to supercharge to keep up to the hemi. Put the same supercharger on an srt8 and see what happens..
true huntinthewild, but regardless of how much each manufacturer "ups the ante", the Challenger is heavy, and consequently at a speed disadvantage...mine stands out at the car show, where we are all going the same speed, (zero)...it's the head-turning classic muscle car with the big trunk and back seat with all the women hanging around it.....right next to that row of 100 nondescript, dime-a-dozen Mustangs.
Have to supercharge to keep up with the Hemi? Have you never heard about the LS7 from Chevy? Lmfao
Duh, the Ford 5.0 & Boss 302 are not supercharged, just the GT 50's 5.8 is supercharged. Unless you call technological advances like 4 valves per cylinder & DOHC supercharging.....
This is true Chase, but the branding is off, you don't have to be a car nut to know what a Hemi is and what it means. Let's be honest, if I were to make a car for the drag strip I would scrap the Mustang, Camaro, and the Challenger, as they are all weight wagons that sit too high off the ground. Much less have a barn door on the front. Point is, the Challenger was resurrected from evolutional heaven to once again roam the streets. It is a big car that handles as expected, just like the old muscle cars. However, the mustang never stopped production so it kept evolving...into a sports car. The Camaro isn't far off, but still a sports car. The challenger has the body style and still comes with a stock block from the factory. It's not going to win races, but it definitely wins hearts. I will leave you with one parting question, Justin Bieber, Brittany Spears, and Daniel Craig go shopping for cars. Who buys a Camaro, Mustang, and Challenger, respectively?
Ford Flex.... ok... i have a 2010 EcoBoost Flex. The 3.5 EcoBoost is incredibly detuned from the factory. With just a tune and a little bit of methanol we were able to get about 500 HP out of our Flex. Our Flex has gone 12.7! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMSI0mEyGk4
man whatever i have 1996 challenger and it goes 0-60 in 4.9
man whatever...if you have a 1996 Challenger; hold on to it because it's wicked rare....they were out of production from 1983 until 2008.
Looking for a Used Challenger in your area?CarGurus has 15,434 nationwide Challenger listings starting at $12,993.
Search Dodge Challenger Questions
Dodge Challenger Experts