Re: DODGE let me down........CHALLENGER. Kinda LONG. Sorry
[Re: RodStRace]
#335793
06/02/09 09:58 AM
06/02/09 09:58 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,166 Left Coast
BobR
master
|
master
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,166
Left Coast
|
Quote:
I don't doubt your story and that there are 'faster' and 'slower' cars being built. I do know that they have adaptive memory, and driving like a little old lady all week will cause it to 'learn' that type of driving and probably affects Saturday's times. It seems you went in with rose tinted glasses after reading everything you could about these cars, expecting to be able to hop in and match pro drivers' times and performance. After failing at that, the whole ownership soured to the point where you sold it off. I know that if I were selling new cars, there is no way I'd let a customer take out the inventory and beat on them to select the one he liked best. Don't they have to break in first anyway? I think the only solution is to buy used from a racer.
At our last PSCA race in Fontana there was an orange Challenger SRT8 with drag radials running 11.20's at 123. I'm sure this car wasn't bone stock but he was running it through full exhaust. Just shows what's possible with the correct add-ons.
|
|
|
Re: DODGE let me down........CHALLENGER. Kinda LONG. So
#335794
06/02/09 10:24 AM
06/02/09 10:24 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 876 Arizona
PolyDart
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 876
Arizona
|
Quote:
i have heard the R/T's are actually better than the SRT's performance wise.
I wouldn't guarantee that... I've seen an R/T at our local track never make it out of the 14s...
|
|
|
Re: DODGE let me down........CHALLENGER. Kinda LONG. So
[Re: BB70DUSTER]
#335796
06/02/09 11:39 AM
06/02/09 11:39 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,717 Rancho Cucamonga, Calif.
PUNK
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,717
Rancho Cucamonga, Calif.
|
That car that dragrcr97 had was very nice. However, when a manufacturer makes a claim that seems to be backed up by all the magazines that simply doesnt stack up to real world performance with the car that you purchase; the excitement over the car kinda wilts away. I know Ron and believe me, he talked to anyone and everyone that was somebody at the dealers and to people that are in the know on these cars along with many intelligent car guys. Basically with the vehicle not having a driveability problem or check engine light on; the dealer couldnt fix anything just because the car didnt run what the magazines claimed. Another friend of mine ran at the SAME track with his wifes SRT8 300C 108mph and it IS bone stock. Rons Challenger for some reason seamed to be a DOG in performance. I must admit, I was even dissapointed and I am not the one that purchased it. Personally, I would have sold it to being that the manufacturer or dealer couldnt have done anything about it. Why spend extra money on the car to make it run what its supposed to. Dragrcr97s Dad had a new 2007? Vette with an auto when they first came out, they took it to the track and it exceeded our expectations. It was an automatic and it ran high 12s at well over 107 maybe higher, I cant remember because its a CHevy. I simply couldnt deal with having a SRT8 Challenger knowing that it doesnt run what it should only to have some dude in a Mustang GT pull up next to you and go door handle to door handle or worse and beat you. Thats not Representing. The Mopars have to be faster guys. STOCK! Having a slow car that you have to throw tons of money at to make fast is for foreign cars guys. Its an SRT8 CHallenger for cryin out loud, its supposed to be fast and then if you want to throw money at it, its will be REAL fast. Oh well...I would have sold it to. It was seriously one of the nicest looking and driving cars I have ever been in. I would love to have one....only if its fast like the magazines claim however. On another note, does anyone know if the RT Challengers have aluminum blocks vs. the cast iron block of the SRT8??? ANYONE? ANYONE?
10.53 @ 125mph. 1.37 60 foot. Caltracs and Monoleafs, AFCO shocks.
Heads by INDIO MOTOR MACHINE; IMM. CP Pistons, PC Carbs.
|
|
|
Re: DODGE let me down........CHALLENGER. Kinda LONG. So
[Re: Dodgetony]
#335800
06/02/09 12:27 PM
06/02/09 12:27 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,880 USA
Ron Silva
OP
top fuel
|
OP
top fuel
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,880
USA
|
Sloan has a good point. I was not going to be out there on the street (or the track) and have my butt handed to me by a mustang GT or worse, an import.
When I was at the track, with one of the most BITCHEN cars to come out in a long time, and someone would literally RUN up to me and ask "did you run it yet, what did it run"? (with stars in their eyes!) Then all I could do is slink down in the seat and lie or avoid the question. I decided right then and there, ME and that CAR would never go to the drag strip again. Period.
You also have to realize that I did not have an ADDITIONAL $9500 to spend on the car. I LOST $9500 when I sold it. I did not have that money to spend on mods like has been suggested. Plus I did not want to modify it. Period. The $9500 included tax and liscense and I did get some use out of the car. I had a lot of fun with it.
The car ran perfect so I could not take it to the dealer, and then again, what would I say?
Also note, I was strictly going by Pure stock MPH. I was not going by ET. I think if I had the air filter in the MPH probably would have been 98 or 99 MPH. And yes it would improve at sea level and yes it would improve with a better launch, but not that much. Some of you are wishful thinkers, but I am realistic. Thanks, Ron.
SRT DEMON ONE SEAT
|
|
|
Re: DODGE let me down........CHALLENGER. Kinda LONG. So
[Re: Ron Silva]
#335801
06/02/09 12:28 PM
06/02/09 12:28 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,880 USA
Ron Silva
OP
top fuel
|
OP
top fuel
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,880
USA
|
The oil level was normal to low. That car burned 2 quarts in the first 5000 miles.
SRT DEMON ONE SEAT
|
|
|
Re: DODGE let me down........CHALLENGER. Kinda LONG. So
[Re: Ron Silva]
#335804
06/02/09 12:38 PM
06/02/09 12:38 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 12,032 Finally a HUSKER again
Moparnut426
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 12,032
Finally a HUSKER again
|
Quote:
The oil level was normal to low. That car burned 2 quarts in the first 5000 miles.
Im a shop manager in a dealership, that oil burned alone would have convinced me to fix your car, there is all kinds of people in chryslers reserch department I could have called for you, star center on line, or other engineers that could help you out.
If any one of you guys here have any problems like that again seriously just give me a call, I can call Russ in the engineering dept at chrysler, we have gone rounds before, and he has always been very happy to help me out.
Kasey
|
|
|
Re: DODGE let me down........CHALLENGER. Kinda LONG. So
[Re: Moparnut426]
#335805
06/02/09 12:42 PM
06/02/09 12:42 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,880 USA
Ron Silva
OP
top fuel
|
OP
top fuel
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,880
USA
|
I did not mean to start an oil burning controversy. I checked the oil at every fillup. It was never more than a quart low because I added when necessary. NO dealer I know of would ever do anything about burning a quart of oil in 2500 miles. NONE. ESPECIALLY in a new Engine. So you must be one in a million. Thanks.
SRT DEMON ONE SEAT
|
|
|
Re: DODGE let me down........CHALLENGER. Kinda LONG. So
[Re: Ron Silva]
#335806
06/02/09 12:43 PM
06/02/09 12:43 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562 Brookeville, Md
Mr.Yuck
Not enough dumb comments...yet
|
Not enough dumb comments...yet
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,562
Brookeville, Md
|
Quote:
I did not mean to start an oil burning controversy. I checked the oil at every fillup. It was never more than a quart low because I added when necessary. NO dealer I know of would ever do anything about burning a quart of oil in 2500 miles. NONE. ESPECIALLY in a new Engine. So you must be one in a million. Thanks.
that seems excessive to me. My 5.2 dakota doesn't go thru that amount in 3500miles and it has 148k on it. Why would a new engine require that much oil comsumpsion?
|
|
|
Re: DODGE let me down........CHALLENGER. Kinda LONG. So
[Re: Moparnut426]
#335808
06/02/09 12:53 PM
06/02/09 12:53 PM
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,899 Milwaukee WI
R_Blaha
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,899
Milwaukee WI
|
If your not happy with your old challenger most likely you will not be happy with a new one as well. If I was in your shoes I would be looking at the new camaro ss or GT500 and test drive them both compaired to your challenger. Pick the favorite of the 3 cars after you drove them.
LOOKING FOR THE 68 GTS IN THE AVATAR SPOT 1969 Dodge Superbee post coupe 383 1969 Dodge Superbee hardtop 472 hemi 1989 Mustang GT 1993 mustang lx 5.0 2004 screaming yellow cobra 2013 CVO Roadglide
|
|
|
Re: DODGE let me down........CHALLENGER. Kinda LONG. So
[Re: Ron Silva]
#335809
06/02/09 01:39 PM
06/02/09 01:39 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 876 Arizona
PolyDart
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 876
Arizona
|
Quote:
The car ran perfect so I could not take it to the dealer, and then again, what would I say?
You could have said that the car was not producing the advertised horsepower and it wasn't even close. The formulas which give you horse power numbers from the cars weight, and MPH in the quarter are pretty close, armed with that and dyno data, you would have had a case to show that the car was not running as well as it appeared.
They can't just advertise that a car has X amount of horsepower and sell cars which don't come close, they have to back it up within a certain percentage.
|
|
|
Re: DODGE let me down........CHALLENGER. Kinda LONG. So
[Re: Ron Silva]
#335810
06/02/09 01:43 PM
06/02/09 01:43 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 876 Arizona
PolyDart
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 876
Arizona
|
Quote:
The oil level was normal to low. That car burned 2 quarts in the first 5000 miles.
I would have demanded they run a leak down and compression test.
|
|
|
|
|