Track Test: 2005 Dodge Viper SRT-10 Vs. 2005 Ford GT
Welcome to the 500-horsepower club
As different as fire and ice: The SRT-10 and GT are American, fast, beautiful, and aluminum-intensive --but so unique, as evidenced by their approaches to powerplant philosophy.
By Jack Keebler & Todd Lassa
Motor Trend, January 2004
The Game - Plain and simple: Which of these all-American power players accelerates quickest, handles best, and stops shortest?
The Players - Ford's exotic, heritage inspired, 500-horse GT takes on the only other American sports car packing the same power output, the always-ready Dodge Viper SRT-10.
Enough talk. You demanded a legit, track-test showdown between America's 500-horse contenders. We're here to serve.
Sorry, Bow-Tie boosters, Chevy's Corvette sat this one out. Among the world's best-performance values, even the 405-horsepower Z06 lacks the beans to tee up on this turf. And, as you can tell from our cover and related article in this issue, a new Corvette is on its way, which creates all sorts of future shoot-around possibilities. Stay tuned on that front.
This is a track test, not a road test, so there won't be any cupholder talk, and we couldn't care less about golf-bag capacity. We're here for numbers and an understanding of how these two philosophically and mechanically differing designs, and their disparate technical approaches, get the job done.
Other than the fact that the Fabulous Ford and the Demonic Dodge are both built in Michigan, USA, they couldn't be more mismatched. The Viper uses a steel chassis with composite bodywork, powered by a front-mounted 8.3-liter naturally aspirated overhead-valve V-10. Ford's new GT relies on aluminum alloys for its chassis and coachwork and runs a supercharged, DOHC V-8 mounted amidships. The Viper is a convertible, the GT a coupe.
These guys can't agree on anything. A perfect matchup.
Our Viper was a production SRT-10. The GT assigned to us was prosaically dubbed "Engineering CP-04." That's "confirmation/certification prototype number four" in engineerspeak. In other words, something beyond an initial prototype, but not yet a pure, production piece, either. Of the 15 CPs built, some will be crashed (okay to wince here...), some will do emissions duty, others will serve the Powertrain Gods. And our gritty, well-worn tester is regularly taken out for torture by the ride and handling teams. Still, it's largely representative of what a real GT will perform like, but not quite. 2005 GT production begins this spring.
Getting 500 horsepower to the ground on street tires isn't easy. Too many revs, and the tires go up in smoke. Too little rpm, and the engine bogs and can fall off its power curve. There's usually a 1-2 or even a tricky 2-3 shift to hang things up. But none of that is your problem; it's just our challenge. We're thrilled to report that both the Viper and GT are up to it, and then some.
Neither the Ford nor the Dodge require a shift before hitting 60 mph, a key ingredient to their respective 3.6- and 3.9-second performances. Indeed, 60 arrives just at the crankshaft-straining first-gear redline in both machines. The Ford's 0.3-second advantage may not sound like a big margin, but in acceleration parlance, it's a lifetime.
Things tightened up farther down the dragstrip. The GT remained a bumper ahead all the way to 100, which the Viper reached in 8.4 seconds and the GT hit in just 8.1. By the time both cars hit the quarter-mile traps, the Viper caught its breath and managed to nip the GT by just 100th of a second with a slightly lower trap speed of 123.63 versus the GT's 124.31. Yeow. Without electronic timing, it'd be way too close to call.
Thanks to both players' electronic anti-lock systems, multipot calipers, and massive brake rotors, stopping requires far less driver skill than laying down a John Force-quality launch. Standing on the GT's pedal from 60 mph nailed six stops all at less than 115 feet with no cool down in between runs (brakes take the inertial energy of the vehicle and convert it into a zillion calories of heat energy, which is then dissipated into the air by the rotors). Thomas Reichenbach, the GT's vehicle-engineering manager, claims the car has stopped in as little as 107 feet during Ford's testing, with the brake pads up to maximum temp. We tried several 80-to-0 stops in an attempt to warm things up a bit; a final 60-to-0 stop yielded 111 feet, as fade-free and linear feeling as on the first run. Our seatbelt bruises are finally fading, thanks.
Although we attempt to keep things as equal as possible, our Viper was tested on what might've been a slightly grippier section of test-track pavement. Dodge also equips the car with bigger-rubber contact patches. Stopping the Viper was even more like hitting a wall, taking a staggeringly short 97 feet to haul down from 60 to 0. And, like the GT, it could repeat the deed over and over, with no heat-related fade. That's how far braking and tire technology have come. In the stopping department, the Viper is record-setting, the GT merely outstanding.
We usually address handling and ride at the same time. But, obviously, these cars are handling-biased to the extreme. We didn't have the opportunity to sample them back to back on public roads. And this GT was equipped with decidedly nonproduction carbon-fiber bucket seats that gave a false impression of a harder ride than what customers can expect. Between track runs, we gathered some impressions on a variety of the smooth and not-so-smooth pavement ribboned throughout our closed-course test locale.
That said, we'll stick our necks out to interpolate that the GT has better ride characteristics than the infamously stiff Viper. The GT has the longer wheelbase, which reduces ride motions. It runs on slightly smaller wheels and tires, which means lower unsprung mass. This also tends to be an asset in ride quality. Another reason the GT's hard buckets muddied our impression is because the Viper has comfortable, supportive seats with curve-handy side bolstering.
Both of these muscle/sports cars exhibited high levels of grip and impressive handling during our slalom test. Few hot rides can do the 600-foot cone dance as quickly as these two-seaters; anything over 70 mph is serious stuff. This pair qualified, with the Ford nipping the Dodge by 1.1 mph (71.5 versus 70.4). The GT is so together it somehow feels like it's going slower than it actually is.
It takes less time to get friendly with the GT. We learned the handling limits with ease because there's more clear feedback about what's going on where the rubber meets the road. At the limits of adhesion, we could detect even slight chassis yaw earlier in the Ford than in the Viper and counter-steer corrections into the equation. All said, the Ford enjoys better overall chassis balance and a more progressive, precise, and lighter steering feel.
The previous-generation Viper had a reputation for punishing slow-reacting and inattentive drivers. It had high limits, but they were never reached or communicated to the cockpit in anything resembling a progressive manner. The SRT-10 has much-improved on-limit handling behavior and feedback. But the chassis still feels a tad numb, at least as compared with the mongoose-quick GT. Without an electronic stability-control system to lean on, Viper pilots are well-advised to restrict oversteer tricks to the track, while keeping the cell-phone holstered.
The Viper's cabin is a much more hospitable place than the 1992-2002 RT/10's was. The driving position is excellent, with a big tach front and center and ancillary gauges just to the driver's right.
The views from their respective cockpits are different in some ways, similar in others. Like the original, Ford's GT is encapsulating; the driver is enveloped in its cabin, and rearward visibility presents a few blind spots. But it feels great and makes you want to strap on a helmet and whistle down the Mulsanne straight at Le Mans. The Viper, being a convertible, offers a visual version of surround sound.
These cars are completely different in the audio department, too: The hyper-Ford burbles in classic V-8 tones from out behind you somewhere, the steady rumble overlaid by the barely perceptible whine of the supercharger. The SRT-10's sidepipes spit and warble out their own V-10 voice, with mechanical rumblings heard--and felt--from just ahead of the radio.
Forget picking a clear winner here. As an enthusiast, your design or brand preference (or the price difference) are as important as anything we say. And both machines are obviously incredible performers. The Viper's existence spurred Ford's hunger to build a halo machine--and we hear the future Z06 will have the 500 or so horsepower needed to play a round with these two next time.
Both cabins offer variations on the black-plastic-and-leather theme, with splashes of aluminum, or aluminum-like plastic, trim bits to brighten things up. Each provides a full complement of racing-style instrumentation with the tach centered inside the steering-wheel rim, although the GT's gauge faces are black, while the Viper has white units. The Dodge's buckets are friendly and supportive, but proved narrow for wider drivers; we'll withhold judgment on the Ford's chairs until we put in a 500-mile day on production seating.
This pair of 500-horsepower players are screaming-bargains when compared with high-ticket foreign goods. It's worth noting that the Viper delivers objective performance generally on par with that of the GT for about 40-percent-less money. The heritage-inspired Ford packs more tech and is a more sophisticated piece, so its higher price is justified--but that in no way diminishes the SRT-10's impressive punch-per-penny quotient.
Meet you back at the club.
The GT's heritage-inspired instrument layout, splashes of aluminum trim, and modern-day rocker-switches.
-----
Underneath Ford and Dodge's Supercars
The GT and SRT-10's space-frame construction is somewhat similar. Both rely on a super-stiff endoskeleton of stressed, welded beams. But what dem bones are made of differs from a materials and layout standpoint.
Ford employs an aluminum frame composed of various extrusions, castings, and stampings wrapped by unstressed aluminum bodywork. The Viper's rigid chassis is a complex, welded-steel space frame, carrying a (mostly) non-loaded skin of sheet-molded and reaction-injection molded composite plastic.
Both cars are functionally, though not technically, mid-engined; just look at their weight distributions in the spec chart. But the Ford is more obviously so. Neil Hannemann, Ford GT's chief program engineer, helped develop them. He describes being part of the Viper and GT programs as "once-in-a-lifetime experiences that happened to him twice." He says both required a small, highly dedicated team of empowered enthusiasts to bring the cars to market. The major difference on the GT was the amount of Ford computing power available to do things like stress and thermal analysis.
"In 1989, when we did the Viper, it was just a big room with a bunch of people and drawingboards. With the GT, there wasn't a drawingboard in sight. In fact, we didn't even have a table to lay a drawing on." Neil adds that road manners were higher priority on the Ford program than they were with that raw, unadulterated Viper of the early 1990s. "In the end, we got a better track car with very few compromises for the road."--J.K. & T.L.
-----
Comparision Chart
2005 Dodge Viper SRT-10
2005 Ford GT
POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS
Drivetrain layout
Front engine, rwd
Mid-engine, rwd
Engine type
90* V-10, aluminum block/heads
90* V-8, aluminum block/heads
Valve gear
OHV, 2 valves/cyl
DOHC, 4 valves/cyl
Bore x stroke in/mm
4.03x3.96 / 102.4x100.6
3.55x4.16 / 90.2x105.8
Displacement, ci/cc
505.1/8277
330.1/5409
Compression ratio
9.6:1
8.4:1
Max horsepower @ rpm
500 @ 5600
500 @ 6000
Max torque @ rpm
525 @ 4200
500 @ 4500
Redline rpm
6000
6500
Engine rpm @ 60 mph
1200
1515
Transmission
6-speed manual
6-speed manual
Axle/final-drive ratio:
3.07 / 1.54
3.36 / 2.12
Suspension front; rear
Upper and lower control arms,coil springs, anti-roll bar, upper and lower control arms, coil, springs, anti-roll bar
Upper and lower control arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar; upper and lower control arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar
Brakes, f/r
14.0-in vented disc, 14.0-in vented disc, ABS
14.0-in vented disc, 13.2-in vented disc, ABS
Wheels, f/r
10.0x18; 13.0x19, forged aluminum
9.0x18; 11.5x19, forged aluminum
Tires, f/r
275/35ZR18; 345/30ZR19, Michelin Pilot Sport
235/45ZR18; 315/40ZR19, Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar
DIMENSIONS
Seating capacity
2
2
Wheelbase, in
98.8
106.7
Track, f/r, in
61.6/60.9
63.0/63.7
Length, in
175.6
182.8
Width, in
75.2
76.9
Height, in
47.6
44.3
Turning circle, ft
40.5
40.0
Headroom, in
36.5
35.4
Legroom, in
42.4
44.6
Shoulder room, in
54.1
57.7
Curb weight, lb
3410
3400
Weight, f/r, %
48/52
43/57
Fuel capacity, gal
18.5
17.5
TEST DATA
Acceleration, sec
0-30 mph
1.7
1.7
0-40 mph
2.4
2.3
0-50 mph
3.0
2.9
0-60 mph
3.9
3.6
0-70 mph
4.8
4.7
0-80 mph
5.8
5.6
0-90 mph
7.0
6.5
0-100 mph
8.4
8.1
1/4 mile, sec @ mph
11.77 @ 123.63
11.78 @ 124.31
Braking, 60-0 mph, ft
97
111
600-ft slalom, mph
70.4
71.5
CONSUMER INFO
On sale in U.S.
Currently
May 2004
Base price
$80,995
$139,995
Airbags
Dual front
Dual front
Basic warranty
3 yrs/36,000 miles
3 yrs/36,000 miles
Powertrain warranty
7 yrs/70,000 miles
3 yrs/36,000 miles
EPA mpg, city/hwy
12/20
14/21
Range, miles, city/hwy
222/370
245/368
Current Cars:
2019 BMW X3 M40i Stage 2, 12.44 at 110mph
1972 Chevy Super Cheyenne C10 Pickup 402 big block, 700R4
2004 GMC 2500HD 8.1L
Past Cars:
1970 Chevy Blazer, 2wd
2003 BMW X5 4.6IS Doushmobile, moneypit
2015 Ford Fiesta ST | Cobb Stage 1, catless downpipe
2008 Corvette Z06 - 11.39 at 123.8mph
2002 Corvette Z06 - 12.10 at 116.5mph
2005 Jeep Wrangler LJ
1993 5L Mustang - 12.59 at 108mph
1989 5L Mustang
1990 Jeep Cherokee
1991 Acura Integra RS 403Honda
Quote
