2011 Challenger SRT-8

[LOLzilla]

The 2011 Challenger SRT-8 has been revised.

http://media.il.edmunds-media.com/dodge/challenger/2011/ft/2011_dodge_challenger_actburn_ft_1203101_815.jpg

Power:
470 hp @ 6,000 rpm, 470 lb-ft of torque @ 4,200 rpm

0-60 mph:
4.5 seconds

What Works (pros):
Larger Hemi engine offers more top-end power with gutsier low-end torque, quicker steering, stiffer suspension.

What Needs Work (cons):
Abrupt-shifting automatic transmission is down a gear to competition, won't hold gears in Manual mode, Inaugural Edition white seats wouldn't have been cool even in 1970.

Edmunds Review (http://www.insideline.com/dodge/challenger/2011/2011-dodge-challenger-srt8-392-full-test.html)

TTYL

[Anomaly]

Originally posted by Edmunds

4,257-pound Challenger




:eek:

That aside, it looks like it's competitive now with the Camaro and Mustang at least... and still quite sexy.

[InRich]

looks mean

[Kloubek]

The Challenger looks decent on the outside. But it needs this much power just to push its ridiculously bloated mass. And it still has the crappy Dodge interior (which is pretty much their brand trademark these days).

No thanks. I'll still sooner get a Mustang. (And I've never even been a Mustang guy.)

[Alak]

Point of fact, my land rover weighs around 4,257 pounds.

[Kloubek]

Originally posted by Alak
Point of fact, my land rover weighs around 4,257 pounds.

Since when? DII's are supposed to weigh at least 4500 lbs - if not a couple of hundred pounds more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Rover_Discovery
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/1999-to-2004-land-rover-discovery-ii-6.htm
http://www.vehix.com/car-reviews/1999/land-rover/discovery-series-ii/vehicle-specifications

Regardless, 4300lbs is ENTIRELY too much for a car... in particular, one that is supposed to be sporty.

[dino_martini]

I think the pistol grip shifter is the greatest idea ever. Otherwise I think I would rather have a 5 litre Stang'

[Aleks]

Originally posted by Kloubek
The Challenger looks decent on the outside. But it needs this much power just to push its ridiculously bloated mass. And it still has the crappy Dodge interior (which is pretty much their brand trademark these days).

No thanks. I'll still sooner get a Mustang. (And I've never even been a Mustang guy.)

Dodge has pretty much updated all of their interiors except for the Challenger for 2011 :dunno: The inside of a Jeep GC now looks really nice for example.

[Zewind]

Originally posted by Kloubek
The Challenger looks decent on the outside. But it needs this much power just to push its ridiculously bloated mass. And it still has the crappy Dodge interior (which is pretty much their brand trademark these days).

No thanks. I'll still sooner get a Mustang. (And I've never even been a Mustang guy.)

I havent seen the interior of the mustang in awhile, but I think all 3 car have crappy interiors

[Shlade]

Hot car

Very very heavy tho. The new 5.0 has this thing beat with less HP.

Intake, tune, 3.73 gear option for the new 5.0= Stupid fast.. Almost as fast as mine would be with full boltons and adding a supercharger :eek:

[kevie88]

Mustang is teh winnar.

Nothing in the musclecar world looks as cool as a Challenger tho!

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by LOLzilla
What Needs Work (cons):
Abrupt-shifting automatic transmission is down a gear to competition, won't hold gears in Manual mode, Inaugural Edition white seats wouldn't have been cool even in 1970.People are idiots. That's why this is required.


Originally posted by Zewind
I havent seen the interior of the mustang in awhile, but I think all 3 car have crappy interiors I went and saw the new Mustang GT 5.0L with the premium interior package and it's fucking beautiful. I absolutely loved it. And the shifter was just tits. Machined aluminum shifter/shift ball, felt very sturdy and the throws were short and notchy, as a sports car should feel.

[Shlade]

I know exactly what you mean about the shifter torquedog.

Mine has the exact same one and its awesome for shifting gears!

Its funny my 08 has the same suspension the 2010-2011 ones have right now!

Id like a new 5.0 but couldnt justify remodding all over again lol

[Alak]

Originally posted by Kloubek


Since when? DII's are supposed to weigh at least 4500 lbs - if not a couple of hundred pounds more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Rover_Discovery
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/1999-to-2004-land-rover-discovery-ii-6.htm
http://www.vehix.com/car-reviews/1999/land-rover/discovery-series-ii/vehicle-specifications

Regardless, 4300lbs is ENTIRELY too much for a car... in particular, one that is supposed to be sporty.

I weighed it on the scale at work. On a full tank of gas, with my bumper and winch, and stuff in the back it was aprox. 4500lbs. I know between the bumper and winch theres at least 150 pounds.

I'll weigh it tomorrow if I remember just for entertainment sake. Should be more since I've added some more extras. :angel:

[KRyn]

As everyone else has mentioned the Mustang is more car than the Challanger or Camaro can ever hope to be. I guess older guys who love Challangers growing up will pick a new one up as no real enthusiast could enjoy this over the Mustang.

[95teetee]

Originally posted by KRyn
As everyone else has mentioned the Mustang is more car than the Challanger or Camaro can ever hope to be. I guess older guys who love Challangers growing up will pick a new one up as no real enthusiast could enjoy this over the Mustang. I would guess that most people like the Chally more based on aesthetics. Exterior-wise, imho, it's easily the best one of the three. If not for the back end, the Mustang would be right there with it. The Camaro, you couldn't do enough to un-fugly it.
That said, the 'stang is the only one of the three I've seriously considered buying (after all, it wouldn't be me looking at the ugly taillights:D)

[THEMONK]

And I thought the Mustang was overweight. In 1997 the Corvette weighed 3200 lbs, wtf are they putting into cars nowadays that get them so grossly obese.

[heavyD]

Originally posted by kevie88
Mustang is teh winnar.

Nothing in the musclecar world looks as cool as a Challenger tho!

The Mustang is the overall better package but I much prefer the inteior and exterior styling of the Challenger. A hybrid of the Mustang with the Challenger's interior and exterior styling would be near perfection.

[Anomaly]

Originally posted by Shlade
3.73 gear


I'd like to see what the challenger would do with something other than 3.06 gears :burnout:

[Darkane]

Originally posted by THEMONK
And I thought the Mustang was overweight. In 1997 the Corvette weighed 3200 lbs, wtf are they putting into cars nowadays that get them so grossly obese.

I know eh? The notchback 5.0's weighed in at 2800lbs lol.

Hell Civic's are near 3000lbs now!

[sr20s14zenki]

Originally posted by Darkane


I know eh? The notchback 5.0's weighed in at 2800lbs lol.

Hell Civic's are near 3000lbs now!

Its the petroleum companies sneaking lead weights in after production....cant let them get TOO good of mileage :eek:

[Shlade]

I test drove a automatic (i couldnt take the 6 speed because of the sports package and summer tires) for a test drive yesterday

Impressive car. But my car seems to feel faster than it. Must be the gear ratio.. and the new 5.0 feels a lot heavier. Im hopefully gonna try a sport package with the 6 speed, 3.73 gears and brembo brake package in the spring when it warms up.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by THEMONK
And I thought the Mustang was overweight. In 1997 the Corvette weighed 3200 lbs, wtf are they putting into cars nowadays that get them so grossly obese. Safety engineering.

[Kloubek]

^ Yeah, I agree. With all the airbags, impact beams, etc etc going into cars these days, I think it is really contributing to raising the overall weights. Plus, cars are overall getting bigger and bigger.... possibly in part to accomodate the obese North American driver. Finally, I think the list of standard equipment has grown over time; people expect power ammenities now, along with air conditioning, abs, etc.

For comparison's sake:

Original Civic:
140" l
53.3" w
53" h
Weight: 1880lbs

2011 Civic EX:
177.3" l
69" w
56.5" h
Weight: 2800lbs

[94boosted]

It's a fat cow, a good looking and powerfull fat cow. Shave 500 pounds off of that car and price it more inline with the Mustang & Camaro and :drool:

[Shlade]

^

Good luck in making that happen. The SS camaro and 5.0 are $42k.

The SRT8's brand new have always been about 55k. None of these cars are exactly cheap for a summer only vehicle

[Moe Man]

Originally posted by Shlade
I know exactly what you mean about the shifter torquedog.


Its funny my 08 has the same suspension the 2010-2011 ones have right now!

nothing to brag about. Its a solid rear axle that everyone was knocking down! IRS is the way to go! huge difference.

and its not the same. 2010-2011 dont hop under wheel spin, they added a brace to the newer mustangs.

[Shlade]

^

A tower Brace? I have one too stock.. The only reason they hop is because of the poor control arms they put on the cars

There is ZERO hop after stiffer LCA's are installed. The suspension they tossed in the 2010-2011 I have in my 2008 bullitt.

[Moe Man]

Originally posted by Shlade
^

A tower Brace? I have one too stock.. The only reason they hop is because of the poor control arms they put on the cars

There is ZERO hop after stiffer LCA's are installed. The suspension they tossed in the 2010-2011 I have in my 2008 bullitt.

there are no control arms on the rear end, what does that have to do with wheel hop?

anyway my point is its not the same, read about it, they said that they changed some shit for 2010-2011. couldnt find what they changed and i dont care. its still a shitty rear end so i dont understand why your so happy to have a similar rear end as the newer mustangs.

[Shlade]

Lower control arms, Ever heard of those? Stock ones cause terrible wheel hop. I got upgraded Steeda ones and I have next to no wheel hop now that ive changed the crappy stock LCA's.

Im not talking about the rear end itself im talking about the suspension components of it. Lower control arms in these cars IS what causes wheel hop on them.

EDIT: Are you talking about them adding a swarr bar on the rear end itself?

[CUG]

I'm a huuuuge fan of the mustang. I'd drive any of these, but I'd take the new mustangs over any of them. The Camaro's look too generic, same with the Dodge lineup. Like someone else said: I'm not a mustang guy either. I also like Ford because we didn't bail them out with our tax dollars (I think)

[AaronK]

Gorgeous car! My dad had a sublime green 71 challenger. Unreal car

[Moe Man]

Originally posted by Shlade
Lower control arms, Ever heard of those? Stock ones cause terrible wheel hop. I got upgraded Steeda ones and I have next to no wheel hop now that ive changed the crappy stock LCA's.

Im not talking about the rear end itself im talking about the suspension components of it. Lower control arms in these cars IS what causes wheel hop on them.

EDIT: Are you talking about them adding a swarr bar on the rear end itself?

so the front lower control arms cause the rear end to hop?

doesnt make sense to me, from my understanding a diff brace will stop wheel hop.

[THEMONK]

Of the 3 Pony cars the Challenger would be the last one I'd take, IMO it's fat and ugly, the performance is decent but that's about all it has going for it. Even in Pony car haydays the Challenger/'Cuda were the redheaded step children, good to see that things haven't changed much in 45 years.

[Toma]

I'm at a SERIOUS dilemna...

The price of the new 5.0's cant be ignored, I REALLY want one, with the automatic....

If I buy it now, I'll dyno it, and drive it straight home and start upgrading for the 800rwhp that it needs! ;)

But I friggin have... what... 10 cars? Fuck! Someone buy my damn 2002 Camaro SS, and the '88 Stang!!!

Shit! lol

[Toma]

Oh.... Dodge brought an overweight pig to a rabbbit race.

Decent looking car, but its the only fullsize platform out of the 3....

The motor is ok, but man.... HEAVY PIG.

[Shlade]

Toma,

Im not gonna lie I was not too impressed with the auto 5.0

It felt really heavy and slower than I thought. Id like to give the 6speed a try but after trying out the auto really did not do much for me. Gear ratio in the car might be the issue. Im sure once you toss 4.10`s or 4.56`s in there it autta do the trick :thumbsup:

[Toma]

Originally posted by Shlade
Toma,

Im not gonna lie I was not too impressed with the auto 5.0

It felt really heavy and slower than I thought. Id like to give the 6speed a try but after trying out the auto really did not do much for me. Gear ratio in the car might be the issue. Im sure once you toss 4.10`s or 4.56`s in there it autta do the trick :thumbsup:
I dont care about stock... into the 10's or 9's... the auto is the onlyu way to go

[Graham_A_M]

Originally posted by Anomaly



I'd like to see what the challenger would do with something other than 3.06 gears :burnout:
Get even worse fuel economy? :dunno:

[Jeff Lange]

Originally posted by Moe Man


so the front lower control arms cause the rear end to hop?

doesnt make sense to me, from my understanding a diff brace will stop wheel hop.

Never once did he say front lower control arms, he said lower control arms, obviously referencing the REAR lower control arms.

Jeff

[Twin_Cam_Turbo]

The new 5.0L Mustang is so nice. I might think about picking up a used one in a few years.

[95teetee]

Originally posted by Twin_Cam_Turbo
The new 5.0L Mustang is so nice. I might think about picking up a used one in a few years. I saw one in Drum today (a new 5.0 'vert. Yes, today, in the snow).
And I'm rethinking the fact that I like it (a lot) more than the Camaro, and (a fair bit) less than the Challenger.

I think now I'd put it at the top of the list.