Automobile Mag arrived today: SRT cover car

[toddt]

...along with 3 others...

I hungrily consumed every word about the viper--

Analysis: SRT will own the title for at least another year. Maybe more.

I see the SRT in the 11's in at least one of the major car mags. I'm betting that same mag will score a 3.9 0-60, maybe a 3.8.

I see the SRT being more stable at 150 than the GTS of today is.

I ALSO see the SRT being over 1g in EVERY magazine, since it was in Automobile here.

Further analysis: The new styling will give the SRT legs with critics who formerly roasted our beautiful vipers.

It will be interesting to watch.

I wonder how many of us SRT haters will turn around if we see the SRT in 11's stock in every major car mag!

Oh my!

 

[cstegall]

toddt...

Thanks for the information...you have increased my anticipation even more.

Cmon SRT-10!!!!

No Flame Intended...Just Observation,
CStegall

 

[toddt]

Sure--my pleasure!

But listen--one more thing...

The article makes one very intersting statement--

It says the engine is almost completely different, sharing almost NO parts with the former engine...

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm......

Sorry to all--If I had some OCR software, I'd scan the article..

 

[toddt]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JMcGuire:
Gee, what a great benefit.

Yesterday driving through town, admid all the shouts, honks, thumbs-up, and other admiration this car attracts everywhere it goes, all I could think about was, "But eight out of ten magazine critics disagree..."

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So true!!!

It's a sure bet that if any of US listened to critics, we would be driving Lexi, not Vipers.

 

[Matt Houston]

This new car is a definite love-hate relationship...
From some angles (like the profile) the car looks great, but head on, and from the back, it's a little too vanilla. Let's face it...most folks buy cars for their looks first, i.e. the Chrysler P.T. Cruiser and Ford Thunderbird. Power is usually secondary. All I can say is I hope the SRT's power is able to overcome it's shortcomings in the style department. Matt

 

[SRT10]

1bad..What test #s'? Are you talking about Automobile mags "development mule interim data" test? We don't even know what the true horsepower rating is. I've read 525hp. It's far too early to base substance without any facts. Lets wait and see.

 

[SRTRICK]

IMHO, the current Viper has plenty of horsepower even without improvement when compared to almost any other sportscar available. The areas in greatest need of improvement have been the handling at the limit and the brakes. These are the areas that will get us the greatest gains on a racetrack. I'm not looking for a Coronet w/ a 440 six pack here, I'm looking for a sportscar. I just wish it had 400#s less weight, as I run without my top or spare tire in the car my RT/10 is probably lighter than the new SRT will be.

 

[FUSCUCLA1]

Can someone please post some of the quotes thatm were used to comment on various parts of the car. There is a specific page with two big pictures and little comments written all around the car in reference to various body panels etc. I dont have the magazine or I would just scan that page.

 

[Lee00blacksilverGTS]

1bad.. you're shootin' your mouth off again without any documentation, no magazine has tested anything but a pre-production mule, so actual numbers for a PRODUCTION car are TOTALLY unknown at this time, and all magazine predictions of top end are just that..predictions (guesses) until such time as a production car is tested. As to coeffeicient of drag or cd, no numbers have been posted by anyone yet, so for you to say it only only got slightly better is a complete crock. Common knowledge to anyone owning a Gen 1 or 2 is that the current car performs like a brick in the wind tunnel. Quoting John Fernandez about the SRT in Daniel Carneys new book ..."We wanted to spend a lot more time in aerodynamic analysis of the car, the original car spent a lot of time trying to stay true to the styling exercise that was shown at the show in 1989. In order to do that we made some aerodynamic compromises. This time we had not shown the car, so we knew we could go to the wind tunnel with the design exercises Tom Gale and his guys were working on. We spent a tremendous amount of time in the wind tunnel to make sure that we got the maximum amount of leverage from the style of the body. And we've gone to a flatbottomed car, with a full belly pan. The front of our car today, every little detail in the grille openings to the radiuses we're using on the fascias and each edge, was work that we did in the wind tunnel. Every little piece of air we get going into this thing is purposeful, to cool the brakes, to cool the engine, and to get air into the intake system. We spent a lot of time on the front end of this car. We were able to do a lot more with this car than the guys were with the first car. We feel that this car is aerodynamically superior to anything out there on the road today. That's not in terms of drag coefficient, because when you've got the kind of horsepower we've got, the speeds that we've got, what becomes more and more important than just the coefficient of drag number is aerodynamic balance of the car. As an example, a Formula one car has a terrible coefficient of of drag number, but the aerodynamic balance and downforce you can generate on an F1 car is just awesome. That is what we were looking for."
So, the styling of the car is a matter of PERSONAL CHOICE, I still admit I like the way my GTS looks. But that's got nothing to do with Performance. Anybody who thinks that this car will only marginally outperform a Gen 2 has about 30 to 60 days (actual production car test results should be out) to continue blowing smoke out their a$$ before we drag out all your old comments (I know I'm saving them!) and stick them forcefully right back from whence you blew them.

 

[Mike Brunton]

1 Bad,

You are the only performance whiner we have on this forum - lots of folks like to whine about the looks, but you're the only one whining about the numbers. I respect that

HOWEVER,

Would you say there was a big performance improvement from the GenI Viper to the GenII Viper? GenI runs mid 12's if driven very well. GenII can do mid 11's with a very good driver. How about the Corvette? Z06 is only 45hp more than the Coupe, yet it runs a good second faster than 5mph more in the 1/4 How about the Mustang? The new Cobra with "only" 70hp more than the previous cobra runs a LOT quicker. The C5 coupe runs way quicker than the LT-1 it replaces (a good 1/2 second and 4-5mph).

So HOW can you say that 50hp more and less weight will provide a "marginal" improvement? Explain to me how come the GenII is so much quicker than the GenI? How about the Vettes I listed? How come they are so much quicker?

Its not all just about HP and weight... it's got alot to do with traction, power curves, gearing, and alot of things you really can't put a number on easily. Someone who felt the GTS would offer a "marginal" improvement over the GenI RT would look pretty silly the first time a GTS ran an 11.6, wouldn't they? Your comment about a great driver in a GTS vs. an average one in an SRT is TOTALLY irrelevant... a good driver in a Celica could beat a Viper if the Viper dude is bad enough. I've seen Vipers running 14 second 1/4s too so believe it. Does that mean we should forget our Vipers and get Celicas? I dont think so.

First question - How come you can't wait until the REAL *PRODUCTION* numbers are out before you slam the car for being a pig, and barely faster than the GTS?

Second question - When the #'s come out, and if they are really good, will you eat crow and fess up to your mistake, or will you compare the #'s from a magazine to what Evan Smith ran and claim the SRT is not faster at all, because you have seen a Viper go faster?

either way, I respect the fact that you are talking about the #'s on the car and not the bodywork

 

[Lee00blacksilverGTS]

1Bad, chill man, you're gonna stroke out. You can't debate so you're gonna name call? Da Lee?, Hurt Lee? What's that mean? If you're gonna insult somebody ya gotta make sure we can understand what you're saying. And what were you smoking when you read this magazine? There is no data chart. They mentioned that it was a pre production mule with a 5800rpm fuel cutoff and production cars would be set at 6100rpm. So how valid are the acceleration numbers? And they said.. " be not dismayed, snake aficiondos: we'll be back to update the performance profile as soon as there's a chance to do so." And of course you don't bother to mention what they say next..."No such apologies are necessary fo the measurements we took in braking and cornering categories. The 1g plus limits observed during mid-speed slalom runs and straightline braking exercises are testimony to the MAJOR chasis gains implemented and the strict diet imposed during the new Viper's development." Now go back and carefully READ my post where I quoted John Fernandez regarding aerodynamics. It's not about coefficient of drag but about how well the car will stick. I suspect that you are primarily a drag racer and are not concerned with that. And finally, you are the one who sounds like a marketing guy..for FORD! And as to your insulting comments about racing etc. I had my SCCA A production ticket in the 70's. When did you start?

 

[Mike Brunton]

1 Bad,

Physics does not need to be changed. Answer these questions for me...

1) What does a GenI run in the 1/4?

2) What does a GTS do in the 1/4?

3) What is the power and weight difference between a GenI and a GenII?

4) Repeat the above 3 questions but this time compare C4 LT-1 to C5 LS-1, then compare C5 LS-1 hardtop to C5 Z06 hardtop. Then compare C5 2001 Z06 hardtop to C5 2002 Z06 hardtop.

Now, tell me how "physics" allows cars with LESS of a power difference and LESS of a weight difference between them than the SRT will have over the GTS, to run 1/2 or even up to a full second quicker in ET, and 5 or more MPH in trap speed. Please explain, I'm DYING to hear your explanation.

On the other hand, if your definition of "marginal" is 1/2 seconds in ET and 4-5mph in trap speed, then I agree that the SRT will be "marginally" better, I just disagree with your definition of marginal.

 

[Steve Ferguson]

Bad, since you believe EVERYTHING you read, please read the next statement and start quoting it:

The SRT/10 has only been tested in NON PRODUCTION form. A GT40 that is ready to be tested for ACTUAL STREET use has not yet been completed.

Just because something appears in a magazine does not all of a sudden make it a FACT! Here is a fact, when the 2003 Viper comes out there will be NO MANUFACTURED VEHICLE IN THE WORLD that can touch it in price/performance. The only way to beat it would be modify something or send in excess of $250,000.

As for your reference to your beloved "magazines", I know MANY of them who could never get a GTS under the 12.40 times, yet I know many BONE STOCK GTS' that have exceeded those numbers. How can that be, the magazine said it was not possible? The only thing those magazines are good for is wiping your a$$ after a good dump!

 

[Steve Ferguson]

Sorry Tony, I don't know many people by their habits. And I am NOT saying that I nor anyone else knows any more about the GT40 than 1bad. I am just trying to remind him that the facts he has previously and also now posted are not necessarily true, but rather speculative. At this point the only FACT is that Colletti can talk a big game. I have yet to see anything that says he can actually back up his talk.

 

[Hugo]

Why talk gt40 Idon't think thre is no gt40

 

[King GTS]

Interesting.............very interesting.

 

[Steve Ferguson]

Why don't you ask Mr. Colletti who Chris Theodore is? Maybe then you will realize that you are not the only one who has ever SPOKEN to someone within the walls of FORD. While you are smoking the FORD crack pipe, remember that while FORD has done nothing since the mid 60's, DODGE has at least built what was PROMISED. The only fault DODGE has had in UNDERRATING HP (bad Dodge). And again, since you get ALL THE FACTS, was that not you who said that, "I speak to Colletti all the time and there is no way they are going to build the GT40"?

All I can tell you is that I too have many contacts in the auto industry. Having contacts and facts are two very different matters. For all you know, Colletti could be feeding you info just to try and stir things up on this site? Hell, we already know that Ford is monitoring this section on a regular basis.

Almost forgot, no I do not have a direct line to his office. What I do have is a direct line to Theodore's(Colletti's boss) office as well as Henniman (GT40 program manager) Office and home. These great individuals are more than capable of providing accurate information once it is available. And Since Mr. Colletti has not always been forthright in the past(you know, the MAGAZINE stories proclaiming those massive 300 hp Mustangs)I will rely on individuals that have ACTUALLY produced what they stated they would (Neil-Viper GTS-R, Chris-Viper RT/10 & GTS).

 

[Mike Brunton]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 1bad gts:
MIKE you SPLITTING HAIRS.Even if the SRT-10 runs CONSISTANT 11.4s and has a top speed of 190 IT IS NOWHERE NEAR) enough to catch the GT-40 and that is all i CAN SAY.Who cares IF the overall performance is better than our cars IF IT CANT BEAT THE GT-40.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh boy... I LOVED reading this post.

So you are telling me an SRT that runs *CONSISTENT* 11.4s will be NOWHERE NEAR enough to catch a GT-40?

Ok, so to me, nowhere near means we're looking at a 1/2 second at least, maybe more. So you're saying the GT-40 will run 10's from the factory?

That statement is so ridiculous I don't even think I have to say anything about it. 1 Bad, keep going... I am saving ALL these threads and I HOPE AND PRAY you are still on this board in a few years so I can seriosuly rub all your comments in your face. I'll still be here - hope you will too! if not, I'll come find you on the GT-40 board!!!

 

[YellowSnake]

I went to www.automobilemag.com to try to see the article. This is what is posted:

You must be registered for see images

 

[MichaelP]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Steve Ferguson:
Bad, since you believe EVERYTHING you read, please read the next statement and start quoting it:

The SRT/10 has only been tested in NON PRODUCTION form. A GT40 that is ready to be tested for ACTUAL STREET use has not yet been completed.

Just because something appears in a magazine does not all of a sudden make it a FACT! Here is a fact, when the 2003 Viper comes out there will be NO MANUFACTURED VEHICLE IN THE WORLD that can touch it in price/performance. The only way to beat it would be modify something or send in excess of $250,000.

As for your reference to your beloved "magazines", I know MANY of them who could never get a GTS under the 12.40 times, yet I know many BONE STOCK GTS' that have exceeded those numbers. How can that be, the magazine said it was not possible? The only thing those magazines are good for is wiping your a$$ after a good dump!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well this sounds good.

 

[Steve Ferguson]

Was that the yellow black stripe show car? If so it to ran at the autoshow, so seeing it actually drive is no big surprise. What you want to see is one going through TESTING. At that point you will at least know what REAL potential it has. Hell, I have seen at least a dozen show cars driving around before. Just because they can stroll around does not give them King of the Hill status.

Let's hope that they have a serious mule ready for testing before September first? At least if they do, then there is a real chance that we will see production next year.

 

[Lee00blacksilverGTS]

"Certain people went for rides"...Who? Anyone we know who can comment on whether this is a production ready prototype or a one off show car? Name names! There's a lot of us who might be interested in getting money down on this car if you were'nt so mysterious about it, if you really have inside info, let's have it!