Can Someone tell me where/how did dodge get 50 hp more out of gen II?

[Gottaviper]

I'm wondering exactly what the changes were to a gen II motor that increased it's crank hp output.
Thanks
Jon

 

[Russ M]

I dont think it was really 50hp, the gen 1's seem to pull about 15-20hp less at the wheels than gen 2's. Most likely Dodge just severly under rated the gen 1 motors.

It seems if you put gen 2 headers, a good exhaust, and air filters a gen 1 makes the same power as a gen 2 and alot more torque.

 

[dansauto]

gen2 have better heads and exhaust manifolds,

 

[KWIK96]

They "borrowed" it from the early vettes.
However Chevy has asked for it back now, so they can include it on the Z06

Just a theory

 

[V 10 MAFIA]

I think an even better question is why does a Gen 1 motor develop more torque than a gen 2? People have stated this claim in the past and I proved it to myself when I drove a friends Gen 1,definitely had greater torque than my Gen 2.

 

[hemibeep]

1. head redesign.
2. cam specs
3. better cooling allowing compression increase.
4. slightly redesigned exhaust manifolds.
5. also motor is actually lighter including(head bolts shorter = 6 lbs)

 

[PDCjonny]

I think an even better question is why does a Gen 1 motor develop more torque than a gen 2? People have stated this claim in the past and I proved it to myself when I drove a friends Gen 1,definitely had greater torque than my Gen 2.

Thats not exactly the way I heard the story, Charlie.....

 

[V 10 MAFIA]

I think an even better question is why does a Gen 1 motor develop more torque than a gen 2? People have stated this claim in the past and I proved it to myself when I drove a friends Gen 1,definitely had greater torque than my Gen 2.

Thats not exactly the way I heard the story, Charlie.....

Jon you Bastard! What are you talking about? My rematch with the Wizzard? He's on a strict Deviled Egg, Pizza, Carvel Diet right now and is not allowed to do any mods on his car until the great race. Until then I am training hard and running 10 to 20 miles a day to loose more weight. I am determined to make sure I have a 75 pound weight advantage for the race. Right now I have to order the wizzard another Papa Johns Pie, see you soon lean and mean.

 

[Gerald Levin]

Are the following statements true? Hard to believe:
1. Russ M said "I dont think it was really 50hp, the gen 1's seem to pull about 15-20hp less at the wheels than gen 2's. Most likely Dodge just severly under rated the gen 1 motors."

2. V 10 Mafia said "I think an even better question is why does a Gen 1 motor develop more torque than a gen 2?"

Hey, my weekend has started so I've had a couple drinks but I believe a couple of guys here have a head start on me as this is hard to believe. True or False?

 

[hemibeep]

I thought I recalled the first 92 was rated at 400, then within a year or two it went to 415hp. don't recall the torque numbers.

As far as "feeling" more torque, a lot of this "feeling" is a perception. If the Gen I had top off and loud exhaust it may have "felt" that way from the difference of sound. Notice how an old muscle car sounds faster than it really is.

Although the Gen II is my pick, I would stand tall and proud to have a Gen I also, they look soooo wide and low...who cares about a couple HP between brothers.??

 

[red98RT10]

I thought I recalled the first 92 was rated at 400, then within a year or two it went to 415hp. don't recall the torque numbers.

As far as "feeling" more torque, a lot of this "feeling" is a perception. If the Gen I had top off and loud exhaust it may have "felt" that way from the difference of sound. Notice how an old muscle car sounds faster than it really is.

Although the Gen II is my pick, I would stand tall and proud to have a Gen I also, they look soooo wide and low...who cares about a couple HP between brothers.??

Well said!

 

[red98RT10]

I thought I recalled the first 92 was rated at 400, then within a year or two it went to 415hp. don't recall the torque numbers.

As far as "feeling" more torque, a lot of this "feeling" is a perception. If the Gen I had top off and loud exhaust it may have "felt" that way from the difference of sound. Notice how an old muscle car sounds faster than it really is.

Although the Gen II is my pick, I would stand tall and proud to have a Gen I also, they look soooo wide and low...who cares about a couple HP between brothers.??

Well said!

 

[klamathpro]

I thought I recalled the first 92 was rated at 400, then within a year or two it went to 415hp. don't recall the torque numbers...

The 92' - 95' were rated:
400 @ 4600 RPM
465 Foot Pounds at 3600 RPM
Rated 12.9 @ 113MPH

In 1996 the numbers changed to:
415 bhp @ 5200 rpm
488 Foot Pounds @ 3600 RPM
Rated 12.6 @ 113MPH

Info found here:
http://www.viperclub.org/menus/index_ivr_specs.htm

Whether the numbers are true is up to actual dyno comparisons and ET's. I don't understand how 15HP and 23ft/lbs extra can cut 3/10ths of a second but not yield a better trap according to the reported info. Maybe Dodge was holding back on the original numbers.

 

[Paul Hawker]

Gen 1's went from 400 to 415 HP in 96 due mostly to change from side exhaust to rear exhaust.

Gen II's were an entirely different engine. Few parts interchangable. 450 HP. Slight differences over the years depending on cam, headers, pistons. Some dyno variation car to car even in same year. 96-97 lumpy cams. Later came the smoother "cream puffs"

Gen III's still another engine. Larger displacement and few interchangable parts. 505-510 HP depending on testing protocol.

Gen IV...Ooops, can't talk about that.

 

[Cris]

Run to run variation for et's can cover the .3 easily. That said the tires went through a big change from 1995 to 1996 which made launching much easier and better.

 

[opnwide]

Better tires for '96? The original '95 tires (XGTs) had a treadwear rating of 100! That is almost a race tire. But it was too rough for comfortable street use. The succeeding tire (MXX3) was rated at 180, and the pilot sport at 200.

As far as differences, the heads and cam made the big difference. The lumpier cam and better-flowing heads shifted the torque curve up by about 500-700 rpm, resulting in higer hp and similar torque (hp is a function of torqueXrpm).

 

[Randy]

I thought I recalled the first 92 was rated at 400, then within a year or two it went to 415hp. don't recall the torque numbers.

They didn't got to 415 until the 1996 RT/10, which was due to different exhaust (rear exit versus side-pipes).

However, to address the original question, where have you been??? Just look at the engine specs - completely different engine, different throttle bodies, different exhaust, what else? I put 70k miles on a Gen I, and only 15k on a Gen II, and there definitely is a difference - and, to me, part of it is a negative; e.g. I really do NOT like the different throttle response of the Gen II - I want my power *now*, without having to futz with the ECM. However, with that said, there is more power in the gen II - I've felt it in the straightaways on the track, etc.

If you've got a Gen I, though, definitely don't feel that you're missing out. Unless you really want windows (I admit, for a daily driver, they *are* nice), I'd be happy with a Gen I.

 

[Marv S]

Lots of little things and as said above, the Gen 1 was underrated. We've seen that at dyno days. Yeah, the magazine articles and books point to the +15 hp for the '96 RT/10 as a result of changing from side exhaust to rear exhaust. They don't mention the fact that is the only Viper that does not have side sill resonators/mufflers.

For the 96 GTS, Dodge claimed the exhaust system reduced backpressure by 20%. The intake resonator was gone with the 96 GTS. Compression ration was up from 9.0 to 9.6. Exhaust manifolds were cast iron on the 96 and & 97 Gen 2 cars - like the Gen 1. Wasn't until 1998 they went to the short tube header stainless design.

The MXX3 was a street version of the Pilot SX racing slick used on the GTS-R. They sure seemed to grip a whole lot better than the XGT tire. That change alone is a factor in the magazine test times.

 

[V 10 MAFIA]

I think an even better question is why does a Gen 1 motor develop more torque than a gen 2? People have stated this claim in the past and I proved it to myself when I drove a friends Gen 1,definitely had greater torque than my Gen 2.

I need the Viper Wizard to help me on this one because he does have an explanation for this.

 

[VENOMAHOLIC]

I rented a Gen I for a day and own a Gen II. There is a noticable difference in performance mostly due to refinements overal in Gen II. The Gen I was the first Viper I ever drove and I will always think it to be a thrill. Compared to other cars even today it still is hyper fast.
Paul Hawker, You seem to have some inside info. Gice us a clue or just a shred of something to look foward to.