Clamshell hood on an SRT?

[ViperGTS]

GEN-I and -II came with the clamshell hood.
GEN-III and IV not.

Put LAMBO doors on your car!

 

[GTSnake]

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't boats made of fiberglass? They get pretty big and they must be strong because they take a hell of a pounding.

And how much does it weigh?...

 

[Warfang]

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't boats made of fiberglass? They get pretty big and they must be strong because they take a hell of a pounding.

Maybe it was just for automotive uses.

 

[sdaddy]

Where did you get this info from?
When we get into accidents and have to pay for a new hood through insurance, what does that have to do with Dodge? It dosnt cost them a dime. If anything they make more $$$$ by selling the marked up hoods...

Maybe Dodge could reduce their manufacturing costs and improve their profit margin by $10,000, reduce Viper owner insurance rates and eliminate paint flex crack issues by elimination of the clamshell hood? I hate mine every time I work on the engine.

 

[GTSnake]

I actually think it's easier to work on my engine with the clamshell. I don't have to worry about scratching up the fenders when I bend over. Of course head clearance is a different issue.

 

[plumcrazy]

Adding 10% to the sale price seems worth it to have a much better look and it would help it get back to some of its roots. Which I think it needs.

 

[SylvanSRT]

i dont think any car has stayed closer to the roots than the Viper. if you can get the same look and better function without it, so be it. I really like the hood much better on the gen 3/4 than either of the gen 2s i owned. In addition keep repair costs down is not a bad thing either

 

[VENOMAHOLIC]

The costs of the clamshell are not near the costs of parts on many of the European exotics with similar production levels. The Gen I and II clamshell hood perfectly accentuates the side engine vents where on the 1989 concept Viper the exaust headers bulged out. I only wish that they made the hinges stronger or had an arm to brace the hood when opened.

 

[PDCjonny]

I actually think it's easier to work on my engine with the clamshell. I don't have to worry about scratching up the fenders when I bend over. Of course head clearance is a different issue.

Very simply removed (two people) for access to the entire engine bay, that's how Chuck Tator does it.

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

I always wondered why the Comp coupe hood wasn't adapted for the SRT.

+1. That is exactly what they should do with the Gen4. And if federal regulations permit I would even use the same latches. Vipers don't need any hinges.

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

All one piece! No cracks/seams. Just 100% curves

Yup. Removing the seam between the hood and the fender would be a huge styling improvement and yet would be so subtle people wouldn't realize why the Viper looks better, just that it does look better.

Use the Comp Coupe hood!

 

[white out]

I am glad that the genIII & IV have the separate hood. It gives the car a sinister look. While the genI & II hood adds to the car's graceful lines.
Like an XKE vs. XJS.

Nick

 

[plumcrazy]

gen 1 & 2 are graceful looking ?

 

[2000_Black_RT10]

I've work on closure designs (hoods, doors, etc..) in my automotive design career I can mention that a clamshell is a heck of a design nightmare for adjustment, margins / gaps, latching and hinges. Thinking about separate a separate hood and fenders, multiple parts are easier to adjust to build tolerances. Having to fit to a door gap and to the headlights is a challenge, thinking all of the parts between. Hood design is required to a pass a blow-by test, which is a side road test, for instance if a truck blows by while you are parked, the hood is not supposed to shut on a person if tinkering under the hood, and a clamshell catches more air being a disadvantage. Latching is troublesome, the clamshell twists and it's hard to open freely like a conventional hood, to add stiffness to a clamshell would require more structure which adds weight. The car chassis can twist, adding more work to sort out deflection, squeaking, rubbing at margins, etc.. A conventional hood only requires a couple basic hinges, the clamshell hinge assembly is quite complex, many parts which adds cost. The folks in assembly are surely happy with fitting fenders and goods. It's an easy rant from the engineering and manufacturing world.. yet it's great for engine bay servicability.. just sharing some design insight..

yet I own one, and I like it!

 

[Vipuronr]

Having had the choice of a Gen III vs a Gen II, I chose to buy the Gen II because of the unique and classic lines. The hood is a large part of what makes the Gen I/II so beautiful. It is the flowing lines, not just the clamshell hood that makes it what it is.

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

I've work on closure designs (hoods, doors, etc..) in my automotive design career I can mention that a clamshell is a heck of a design nightmare for adjustment, margins / gaps, latching and hinges. Thinking about separate a separate hood and fenders, multiple parts are easier to adjust to build tolerances. Having to fit to a door gap and to the headlights is a challenge, thinking all of the parts between. Hood design is required to a pass a blow-by test, which is a side road test, for instance if a truck blows by while you are parked, the hood is not supposed to shut on a person if tinkering under the hood, and a clamshell catches more air being a disadvantage. Latching is troublesome, the clamshell twists and it's hard to open freely like a conventional hood, to add stiffness to a clamshell would require more structure which adds weight. The car chassis can twist, adding more work to sort out deflection, squeaking, rubbing at margins, etc.. A conventional hood only requires a couple basic hinges, the clamshell hinge assembly is quite complex, many parts which adds cost. The folks in assembly are surely happy with fitting fenders and goods. It's an easy rant from the engineering and manufacturing world.. yet it's great for engine bay servicability.. just sharing some design insight..

yet I own one, and I like it!

All excellent points. But nothing worth having comes easy and the clamshell is definitely worth having.

What are your thoughts regarding a CC hood on a Gen4? The CC hood wouldn't be a difficult to manufacture or fit.

Also do federal regulations require the hood be hinged or can it be entirely removable like the CC?

 

[2000_Black_RT10]

All excellent points. But nothing worth having comes easy and the clamshell is definitely worth having.

What are your thoughts regarding a CC hood on a Gen4? The CC hood wouldn't be a difficult to manufacture or fit.

Also do federal regulations require the hood be hinged or can it be entirely removable like the CC?

Problem is with FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) is that you need a secondary latch if the first fixed latch opens fails and the hood can catch air at speed. Any hood that opens from the front like an alligator mouth requires a secondary latch because it can flip up over the windshield blocking vision. A hood that opens up from the cowl (backwards) like a Corvette such as a C5 didn't require a secondary latch because going forward the wind will keep the hood down, it won't flip up over the windshield. In other words, if you pop the hood latch on a C5 from inside the car, you just lift the hood, you don't have to flip a secondary release. The Gen2 Viper clamshell is dual motion, pops open from the front first, hence a secondary latch release, then it lifts from the rear. That's the problem, regulation requires a fixed secondary hood retainer if the first latch mechanism fails and if it can catch air.

Regards,
Mike

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

Problem is with FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) is that you need a secondary latch if the first fixed latch opens fails and the hood can catch air at speed. Any hood that opens from the front like an alligator mouth requires a secondary latch because it can flip up over the windshield blocking vision. A hood that opens up from the cowl (backwards) like a Corvette such as a C5 didn't require a secondary latch because going forward the wind will keep the hood down, it won't flip up over the windshield. In other words, if you pop the hood latch on a C5 from inside the car, you just lift the hood, you don't have to flip a secondary release. The Gen2 Viper clamshell is dual motion, pops open from the front first, hence a secondary latch release, then it lifts from the rear. That's the problem, regulation requires a fixed secondary hood retainer if the first latch mechanism fails and if it can catch air.

Regards,
Mike

Thanks for the explanation.

Doesn't it seem strange that a hood safe enough for 190mph 24-hour endurance racing isn't safe enough for the street? Any ideas on why the FMVSS wouldn't see this?

 

[GTSnake]

Problem is with FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) is that you need a secondary latch if the first fixed latch opens fails and the hood can catch air at speed. Any hood that opens from the front like an alligator mouth requires a secondary latch because it can flip up over the windshield blocking vision. A hood that opens up from the cowl (backwards) like a Corvette such as a C5 didn't require a secondary latch because going forward the wind will keep the hood down, it won't flip up over the windshield. In other words, if you pop the hood latch on a C5 from inside the car, you just lift the hood, you don't have to flip a secondary release. The Gen2 Viper clamshell is dual motion, pops open from the front first, hence a secondary latch release, then it lifts from the rear. That's the problem, regulation requires a fixed secondary hood retainer if the first latch mechanism fails and if it can catch air.

Regards,
Mike

So that means that since our hood cannot open completely forward we really don't need that second latch?..... I've always wondered about that..... Maybe an opportunity for some weight saving or at least less complexity.

 

[ViperGeorge]

The hood on a Gen 1/2 IMO is elegant but the hood on a Gen 4 is sinister. I like both (although I kind of lean towards the sinister look more) but would not want to spend thousands more for a clam shell hood on a Gen 5. Some people have posted that they would not mind paying 10% more for a clam shell hood but the math doesn't work for me unless Dodge has figured out some miracle manufacturing process to drastically lower the cost. A Gen 2 hood has always been hugely expensive, even when the Gen 1/2s were brand new. Now they're crazy money for a new one. Ok, you can buy a used Gen 2 hood for $5-7K or even an aftermarket one for that but that is still 4 times the cost of an OEM Gen 4 hood. An OEM hood that has had to meet all Federal standards by the way.

You also have all of the engineering issues that 2000 Black RT/10 pointed out above plus the crash worthiness standards that new cars have to meet. I had heard that the very first prototype Gen 4 hoods failed crash tests because they were too strong. They didn't crumple properly and had to be made thinner in order to meet crash standards. I would suspect the clam shell might be a difficult engineering exercise given the hinge and crash issues.

One more thing does anyone know if those aftermarket hoods are even crash tested? My guess is not. So I wonder what would happen in a crash with an aftermarket hood. It was one of the reasons I went with an OEM 08 hood on my 06 instead of an aftermarket or Carbon Fiber version.

Either way the design changes are one of the reasons that I love the Viper. I can appreciate each of the generations for what they are. They each offer unique features and designs. For a Gen 5 I wouldn't mind seeing a clamshell hood if they can figure out how to install it for little more money than the separate hood/fender combination but I would not want to spend $5-10K more for it. I rather spend that money on a factory supercharger.

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

One more thing does anyone know if those aftermarket hoods are even crash tested?

Probably not. But federal regulations get pretty ridiculous with their requirements too. For one, not allowing the front spoiler to extend beyond the bumper because some pedestrian might get their feet cut off. As if there is an epidemic of pedestrians getting ever so precisely hit by sports cars as to get their feet cut off. This country draws no lines for the ridiculousness of excessive safety. Wearing a padded bra while we drive will undoubtedly, eventually save someone from injury too, perhaps we should all be required to wear padded bras?

 

[Warfang]

Wearing a padded bra while we drive will undoubtedly, eventually save someone from injury too, perhaps we should all be required to wear padded bras?

Look Chuck... just because YOU wear a padded bra doesn't mean you can make us wear em.

Besides, said bra adds 2 ounces to the car's weight.

 

[Warfang]

Thanks for the explanation.

Doesn't it seem strange that a hood safe enough for 190mph 24-hour endurance racing isn't safe enough for the street? Any ideas on why the FMVSS wouldn't see this?

Any acronym that has an F for federal... need I say more? Can't wait for the F in health care!

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

Look Chuck... just because YOU wear a padded bra doesn't mean you can make us wear em.

Look, if it saves just one life it's worth it.

 

[RTTTTed]

Look, if it saves just one life it's worth it.

No it's not! You're sounding like the Goverment. Seat belts, airbags, crush zones, etc. and now cars cost $15,000 for import POS that a Deer could kill the passengers. You're meaning a double airbag padded bra? Probably cost $3,000.

OK, post a pic and then we can decide how much of a fashio accessory it would be.

Take an old 58 Plymouth or Buick Roadmaster and even driving through a herd of Deer the passengers wouldn't get hurt. LOL.

Ted

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

No it's not! You're sounding like the Goverment.

Yep, that's me. Pro-government. Help eliminate Darwinism - legislate everything.


/sarc