Theoretical and Street Racing Use this board to ask questions about street racing, discuss your street races, and "who would win?" questions. Keep it safe.

Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-21-2011, 11:13 AM
  #1  
Senior Member

Thread Starter
 
Burnout91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 4-22 / 7-25
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Car: '91 Z28 L98 G92
Engine: Modded L98
Transmission: Modded 700R4
Axle/Gears: Modded 10-Bolt
Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

My buddy at work has the Challenger and wants to line up with me after a little more break-in time. I drove the car, it has good power (feels about like my car), but the auto's shift points and shifts feel like a stocker, but still decent. Feels solid, but maybe a little heavy.

My car's best to date is 12.9 / 106 (weak sauce), but with less cam and less torque converter stall than the current combo.

I'll certainly be running 275/50-15 MT DR's. Don't know about him, probably the stock street tires.

What's the concensus??
Old 02-21-2011, 11:30 AM
  #2  
Senior Member

 
88gta3508's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Car: 00 SSEi / 94 C4
Engine: 231 / 383
Transmission: 4T65E / ZF 6sp
Axle/Gears: 2.93 / Dana 44 3:45
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

should be Interesting... if you pull that consistently
that challenger should pull half to full car at the end of a 1/4
Old 02-21-2011, 01:43 PM
  #3  
Member

iTrader: (1)
 
old z mzn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: batavia ohio
Posts: 277
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Car: 1992 z-28
Engine: 383 stealthram
Transmission: auto
Axle/Gears: 4.10
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

I think 12.9 for your car is a little slow...so with the new mods.... you will
Old 02-21-2011, 02:07 PM
  #4  
Senior Member

 
88gta3508's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Car: 00 SSEi / 94 C4
Engine: 231 / 383
Transmission: 4T65E / ZF 6sp
Axle/Gears: 2.93 / Dana 44 3:45
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

hmm are cars were similar>>> compression???
I was pulling 113 in the 1/4 launching from 2nd gear on T5 @ 2 -2.5K
how is your 700 holding up I destroyed mine fully built full man Vbody on far less power

Last edited by 88gta3508; 02-21-2011 at 03:05 PM.
Old 02-21-2011, 02:14 PM
  #5  
Supreme Member

 
freaky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: VA
Posts: 1,074
Received 9 Likes on 9 Posts
Car: 88 camaro irocz
Engine: l98 tpi
Transmission: 700r4
Axle/Gears: 2.77
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

per autoweek.com :
The 2011 Dodge Challenger SRT8 392 marks the return of the 392-cubic-inch Hemi V8.
The 392-cubic-inch Hemi (6.4 liters), which has not been in a production car for 52 years, produces 470 hp and 470 lb-ft of torque. That is up 45 hp and 50 lb-ft over the previous 6.1-liter Hemi V8 in the Challenger SRT8.
The new powertrain should propel the Challenger SRT8 down the quarter-mile in the high-12-second range, according to a Dodge spokesman.
The exterior of 2011 Challenger SRT8 will include a larger front splitter, front fender spats and Mopar quad exhaust tips. It will also have “392 Hemi” badges on the fenders.
The interior will have “392” embroidered on the front seats, just under the headrests.
Dodge will make 1,492 Inaugural Edition copies of the 2011 Challenger SRT8 392--1,100 for the United States and 392 for Canada--with a choice of blue with white stripes, or white with blue stripes, for the exterior color scheme. There will also be an Inaugural Edition 392 Hemi dash plaque.
The original 392-cubic-inch Hemi V8 debuted in 1957, replacing the original 354-cubic-inch Hemi, which debuted in 1951. The 392 was dropped as a production engine after the 1958 model year.
Old 02-21-2011, 03:10 PM
  #6  
Senior Member

 
88gta3508's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Car: 00 SSEi / 94 C4
Engine: 231 / 383
Transmission: 4T65E / ZF 6sp
Axle/Gears: 2.93 / Dana 44 3:45
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

Originally Posted by freaky
per autoweek.com :
The 2011 Dodge Challenger SRT8 392 marks the return of the 392-cubic-inch Hemi V8.
The 392-cubic-inch Hemi (6.4 liters), which has not been in a production car for 52 years, produces 470 hp and 470 lb-ft of torque. That is up 45 hp and 50 lb-ft over the previous 6.1-liter Hemi V8 in the Challenger SRT8.
The new powertrain should propel the Challenger SRT8 down the quarter-mile in the high-12-second range, according to a Dodge spokesman.
The exterior of 2011 Challenger SRT8 will include a larger front splitter, front fender spats and Mopar quad exhaust tips. It will also have “392 Hemi” badges on the fenders.
The interior will have “392” embroidered on the front seats, just under the headrests.
Dodge will make 1,492 Inaugural Edition copies of the 2011 Challenger SRT8 392--1,100 for the United States and 392 for Canada--with a choice of blue with white stripes, or white with blue stripes, for the exterior color scheme. There will also be an Inaugural Edition 392 Hemi dash plaque.
The original 392-cubic-inch Hemi V8 debuted in 1957, replacing the original 354-cubic-inch Hemi, which debuted in 1951. The 392 was dropped as a production engine after the 1958 model year.

this is what the 6 speed could do 13.0 @111.3 not to bad... give or take on elevation & temp
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...est/index.html

Last edited by 88gta3508; 02-21-2011 at 03:16 PM.
Old 02-21-2011, 04:53 PM
  #7  
aks
Junior Member

 
aks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Car: 92 Z28
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

I think you'll get him. Those Challengers are pretty damn heavy.
Old 02-24-2011, 12:57 PM
  #8  
Senior Member

iTrader: (7)
 
budfreak1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Toronto, Ohio
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Car: 1991 Trans Am GTA
Engine: 355
Transmission: 4L60
Axle/Gears: 4th gen 10 bolt 3.42 posi
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

I can't seem to find the article right now, but I just read that they got a 12.6 out of that car I believe it was. Should be a good race.
Old 02-24-2011, 01:22 PM
  #9  
Senior Member

Thread Starter
 
Burnout91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 4-22 / 7-25
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Car: '91 Z28 L98 G92
Engine: Modded L98
Transmission: Modded 700R4
Axle/Gears: Modded 10-Bolt
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

I saw a video of one running 12.44...supposedly in stock trim.
Old 02-25-2011, 02:35 PM
  #10  
Member

iTrader: (2)
 
Pab's's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Car: 1988 IROC-Z
Engine: 5.7 TPI with zz4 heads
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 9 bolt BW
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

I think you'll take him at 4140 pounds its a fatty....take him and video tape it
Old 02-25-2011, 03:00 PM
  #11  
Senior Member

 
Slash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Car: 1988 Camaro IrocZ
Engine: Holley Stealth Ram 385 Stroker
Transmission: Redline Performance 700r4 Trans
Axle/Gears: Bulletproof 4thGen Ls1 SS Rear 3.73
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

Originally Posted by Burnout91
I saw a video of one running 12.44...supposedly in stock trim.
Who woulda thought the video of the 12.446 is against a 3rd gen l0l

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFbxZZtywZ0&NR=1
Old 02-25-2011, 03:53 PM
  #12  
Supreme Member

iTrader: (3)
 
1989GTATransAm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Cypress, California
Posts: 6,859
Received 14 Likes on 14 Posts
Car: 1989 GTA
Engine: 369 TPI
Transmission: 4L60E
Axle/Gears: 3.70 Nine Bolt
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

It will be a good race. Make sure you have your slicks on or he will leave you behind. He has more tire and can get the power to the ground better stock wise. I think you have a good chance to win.
Old 02-25-2011, 04:07 PM
  #13  
Senior Member

Thread Starter
 
Burnout91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 4-22 / 7-25
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Car: '91 Z28 L98 G92
Engine: Modded L98
Transmission: Modded 700R4
Axle/Gears: Modded 10-Bolt
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

Originally Posted by Slash
Who woulda thought the video of the 12.446 is against a 3rd gen l0l

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFbxZZtywZ0&NR=1
Yeah, that's the video the owner showed me before he picked up the car. Figures it would just happen to be a ThirdGen takin' a spankin'

Bill

Last edited by Burnout91; 03-05-2011 at 10:39 AM.
Old 03-03-2011, 09:49 PM
  #14  
Senior Member

 
89rs454's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 885
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Car: 1989 SS
Engine: LT1+1500$ hooker exhaust
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.42 bogger
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

Wow if that Dodge was 3200 pounds that thing would be in the 11s lol. Why in the hell is cars so goddamn fat these days? On topic i think he will have you if he's good with a stick.
Old 03-04-2011, 10:16 AM
  #15  
Senior Member

Thread Starter
 
Burnout91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 4-22 / 7-25
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Car: '91 Z28 L98 G92
Engine: Modded L98
Transmission: Modded 700R4
Axle/Gears: Modded 10-Bolt
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

Originally Posted by 88gta3508
hmm are cars were similar>>> compression???
I was pulling 113 in the 1/4 launching from 2nd gear on T5 @ 2 -2.5K
how is your 700 holding up I destroyed mine fully built full man Vbody on far less power
My TH700R4 is holding up just fine, so far..


Originally Posted by 89rs454
Wow if that Dodge was 3200 pounds that thing would be in the 11s lol. Why in the hell is cars so goddamn fat these days? On topic i think he will have you if he's good with a stick.
He won't be driving a stick, the Challenger's an auto.

The on-board computer ('Vericom' like data) in the Challenger recorded a quarter-mile run of 13.35 / 108.

I would like to richen-up my car's fuel curve in the upper R's, hopefully on March 26, before we run, but I'll run him 'as is' if necessary.

Bill
Old 03-04-2011, 11:20 AM
  #16  
Supreme Member

iTrader: (5)
 
Dante93GTZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 2,873
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Car: 1992 Z28 Heritage Edition
Engine: L98
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.23:1
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

Originally Posted by freaky
per autoweek.com :
The 2011 Dodge Challenger SRT8 392 marks the return of the 392-cubic-inch Hemi V8.
The 392-cubic-inch Hemi (6.4 liters), which has not been in a production car for 52 years, produces 470 hp and 470 lb-ft of torque. That is up 45 hp and 50 lb-ft over the previous 6.1-liter Hemi V8 in the Challenger SRT8.
The new powertrain should propel the Challenger SRT8 down the quarter-mile in the high-12-second range, according to a Dodge spokesman.
470hp and only high-12s???? WTF? Where the hell are the big-3 putting all these extra pounds?!?! It's like these damn new cars are lined with lead.

I guess all the new gadgets like GPS, espresso makers, and glovebox coolers that are adding the weight... lol

Last edited by Dante93GTZ; 03-04-2011 at 11:23 AM.
Old 03-04-2011, 11:29 AM
  #17  
Supreme Member

iTrader: (7)
 
Tony89GTA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Prince George, BC, Canada
Posts: 2,047
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Car: 89 GTA
Engine: 5.7L Supercharged
Transmission: T-56
Axle/Gears: Moser 9" 3.70
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

Whats the weight of the challenger?
Old 03-04-2011, 11:34 AM
  #18  
Member

iTrader: (4)
 
DJ Delsym's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: 18326
Posts: 230
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Car: 86 Iroc
Engine: Soon to be LS 6.0
Transmission: Soon to be mn12
Axle/Gears: Strange 9in 4.10
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

^^^ Almost 4200 lbs

Pretty sure most of the weight comes from safety regulations, creature comforts and the heavy duty drive train. Big cars need big parts, even the lightweight mustang is ~3700lbs.

Size factors comparing the heavy weight vs lightweight
challenger 392:
* Wheelbase: 116.0 in.
* Length: 197.7 in.
* Height: 57.1 in.
* Width: 75.7 in.
* Curb weight: 4,170 lbs
* Trunk volume:16.2 cu. ft.
* Fuel tank: 19.0 gal.

boss 302
* Wheelbase: 107.1 in.
* Length: 188.1 in
* Height: 55.1 in.
* Width: 62.5 in.
* Curb weight: 3,631 lbs
* Trunk volume:13.4 cu. ft.
* Fuel tank: 17.0 gal.

Last edited by DJ Delsym; 03-04-2011 at 11:42 AM.
Old 03-04-2011, 09:44 PM
  #19  
Supreme Member

iTrader: (5)
 
Dante93GTZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 2,873
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Car: 1992 Z28 Heritage Edition
Engine: L98
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.23:1
Re: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger

That is just seriously ridiculous! In this day and age with the EPA all over everyone's ***, where do the big3 get off building these plumped up big engine cars??? I mean, seriously, if they'd cut the fat, they'd go faster and get better mileage.... You wouldn't need 470hp to go high 12s.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ZZ3Astro
Power Adders
1045
08-13-2019 12:57 AM
beltran89
Theoretical and Street Racing
46
10-07-2015 07:36 PM
3.8TransAM
Body
2
09-17-2015 02:16 PM
scottmoyer
Camaros for Sale
3
09-07-2015 07:06 PM
Thornburg
Tech / General Engine
9
09-01-2015 03:39 AM



Quick Reply: Burnout91 vs. 2011 392 Challenger



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:10 AM.