FIRST IMPRESSIONS of SRT/10

[George Murray]

Roger all that...

To those who respnded to my questions, thanks for all the info, folks.

It will be interesting to see more numbers thrown up on this board once more SRTs are dyno'd.

 

[Venom Lover]

luc,

First, DC's claim of 400, 450, and now 500 hp are all at the flywheel. Hence, the claimed increase is 50 fwhp or bhp for each generation, not rwhp. Assuming 13% driveline loss, that's a claimed increase of 43.5 rwhp for each generation. This is why I say I'm not wildly excited to hear about 447 rwhp for an SRT when my bone stock '97 GTS dyno'd at 425 rwhp. +22 rwhp is only about half of the +43.5 rwhp that you would hope for based on DC's claimed output of the motor.

 

[Paul Hawker]

Gentlemen...Your mileage may vary.
As seen, there is a significant variation between cars and dyno results in every post.
Don't get all bent out of shape by ONE dyno run on ONE SRT/10.
Maybe it is a very strong SRT/10, maybe a very weak one. We all know there is some variation to be expected. Please don't jump the gun and rush to judgement just because of one dyno run.

 

[Y2K5SRT]

First off, I would like to thank Dean for the review on the SRT. His was the first "real world" review of the car and I hope to see more comments on the SRT - including my own.

Now, since this has begun focusing on Dyno runs, I will add my two cents: First off, I think Mike's '97 posted exceptionally high numbers for a stock Gen II. Scratch that, I know that Mike's '97 posted numbers for a Gen II are high (425 rwhp bone stock). '97's seem to be the most consistant at posting high numbers (a very good year for Vipers). Here are a few recently posted dyno runs of relatively stock Gen II's I could find here:

1997 GTS (bone stock): 396.5 rwhp, 445.9 rwtq
2001 GTS (bone stock): 396.0 rwhp, 427.3 rwtq
2001 GTS (stock): 418 rwhp, 455 rwtq
1997 GTS (tubes, filters, headers, cat back): 411 rwhp, 452 rwtq
1997 GTS (stock): 408 rwhp, 441 rwtq
1998 GTS (tubes & filters): 407 rwhp, 449 rwtq
2001 GTS (tubes, filters, cat back): 407 rwhp, 445 rwtq
2000 GTS (stock): 408 rwhp, 449 rwtq
1999 ACR (smooth tubes/filters): 413.3 rwhp, 456.0 rwtq
1999 RT/10 (smooth tubes/filters, cat back): 409.4 rwhp, 466.4 rwtq
1999 GTS (tubes, filters, airbox, cat back): 414.6 rwhp, 469.2 rwtq
1997 GTS (tubes, filters, & 26,000 miles): 416.0 rwhp, 467.1 rwtq

I would also note that most of these showed mileage of around 10,000 miles - very well broken in. These were from Dyno's from around the world. Compare that to absolutely bone stock with very low miles: 447.5 rwhp, 490.1 rwtq

I would also point out the torque numbers are really where the surprise is for me. While the SRT is rated at only a 10 ft lb improvement over the Gen II (500 vs 490), this first dyno run shows it to be MUCH stronger than that - anywhere from 20 - 60 ft lbs more at the rear wheels! Now, I am not a techy by any means, but isn't torque where the power meets the road? While I think the horsepower is where it should be (and that is not to say I didn't hope for a 460 rwhp from the first report myself), I think the torque is exceptionally strong no matter how you slice it. With those evergreen-sized stock filters pulled in favor of K&N's and a few more miles, I think this particular car will easily top 460 rwhp and 500 rwtq. It takes some work to get the Gen II to that level, and that doesn't include the brakes and the handling - both of which will smite our Gen II numbers handily.

Again, I am not pushing the SRT for a second over the Gen II. Heck, I will be lucky to be able to keep my SRT and will undoubtedly end up with another GTS at some point regardless. I would simply point out that the SRT may not be the 525 horsepower we were secretly hoping for (at least not this one with low miles), but it is still one badass car - and a Viper!

Chris

 

[Venom Lover]

Chris,

That's actually a good point on the torque numbers. Very impressive at 490 ft-lbs to the wheels. While we're at it, I'd like to see the overall dyno curve. The shape of the torque curve is as important to me as anything else.

Sorry if my reactions have been overly negative. I'm sure I'm now relegated to getting the very last SRT ever produced!

--Mike

 

[Joseph Houss]

Needless to say, the claimed 500HP has been reached (and even exceeded!), but more important than that...

The engineering of the SRT (braking, rear diff, weight) is significantly improved as well! and THAT means absolute dominance (as usual) against all competitors!

This should be a great season!

 

[luc]

Since the Gen1 was rated at 400 and Gen2 at 450 and now the SRT at 500,do we have an average (rwhp) of +50 between 2 and 1 and +50 between SRT and 2 and finaly +100 between SRT and 1 ?

Luc.

00GTS
03 SRT

 

[Joseph Houss]

Chris,

I believe Dodge realized the awesome torque before last year's auto show (see pic)! 525 lb/ft of torque! Beat THAT, bowties!!!!

You must be registered for see images

Once again, Dodge has raised the benchmark, and good luck to ALL competitors trying to catch up!

We now have 3 world class Snakes, our Gen 1 - still remarkably competitive....at 10 years old! , our Gen 2 cars - absolutely tops against all, and now "Chapter 3" - the story continues!

 

[Bill Pemberton Woodhouse]

Chris brought out the one point that seemed lacking --- this car was barely broken in. Virtually all the strong numbers we have seen here, have come from well broken in motors( 5,000 - 10,000
miles ). The numbers are great for a 8.3 ltr. V10 with around 1000 miles, and it will be interesting to see what they do after they have a few miles on them.

 

[Venom Lover]

I'm not convinced that motors are like fine wine -- that they improve with age. I say this based on tracking dyno results on my Z06 (bought new) and '97 GTS (bought with 7000 miles). Dyno results never budged on the Z06. Dyno results went up on the '97 GTS but only because of mods. With the same mods, the car dyno'd the same from one year to the next.

Does anyone have dyno results on a Viper showing that with the same mods power numbers go up with mileage?

 

[Mike Brunton]

Mike,

I am going to have to agree with you on this one too. I dynoed my car with a couple of thousand miles and it made around 415.2RWHP. With 15k on it the car made 414.8RWHP and with 24k it dynoed at 415RWHP. This was pretty much in the same state of tune.

However, this is but a single data point. Maybe (hopefully) it's the lowest we'll see. The car certainly makes the numbers it's rated to make (and then some) but like Mike, I just think it's not quite as under-rated as the older ones are.

P.S. Chris - what did your GenII dyno at again?

 

[Venom Lover]

95yellow,

No one is saying that the SRT won't be faster than the GTS. What I'm saying is that these numbers mean the SRT is not much faster, as has been shown in the car mags.

With 27 more rwhp and 100 lbs less weight than my '97 GTS, the difference in weight-to-power ratio is something like 8.7 lbs/rwhp for the '97 and 8.1 lbs/rwhp for the '03. So, is around 7-8% increase in power-to-weight ratio a big improvement after 6 model years? And don't forget the SRT is more expensive.

That's all.

 

[toddt]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mike Brunton:
Toddt, you're still buying me my SRT right? Or are you welching on me????

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah baby! But if I remember, you ordered black, didn't you. That is non-optimal.

If it's red, just let me know the date I pick it up, and how much I have to pay you.

 

[Mike Brunton]

Todd,

The color IS red, and you can pay MSRP for it.

You DO realize that you're buying the car FOR me, not FROM me, right???? Just makin' sure

 

[toddt]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mike Brunton:
You DO realize that you're buying the car FOR me, not FROM me, right???? Just makin' sure

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

uh, yes, of course! I knew that! Um..oh look at the time. Gotta go!

Well, you are all making a big mistake anyhow because as we've read, the S55 is faster than any car on the planet, even at 4300 pounds. It was on the G-tech, it must be true.

 

[91ZR1#661]

I think the dyno numbers speak for themselves.The power output
is right on or close to the factory numbers.The SRT weighs less
than the GTS and has more power.Now maybe I am plain dumb,but
does that make it a faster car?In stock form.
95yellovett
1995 corvette(Z07)

 

[SnakeBitten]

Since all this dyno this, dyno that Ill add my two cents....How does the cd on the SRT compare to the GTS...Top up or top down................Take em both off the dyno and do a high speed run....How bad will the GTS lose, or will it?????? Bench racing is fun but useless.....I think the SRT will be faster but not by much IMHO.

 

[Gary Lashinsky]

DC has delivered what they promised and more! All of this concern about HP and TQ is great, but DC gave all of us who have or soon will have a great new, refined, Viper. The SRT 10 has raised the bar for all of it's competition. How about overall driving impressions on the SRT 10. By the way, Steven Cole Smith, automotive editor of the Orlando Sentinel gave the SRT 10 a great reveiw in this weeks paper. Many of you may remember that Steve was the editor of Car & Driver Magazine. Chech out his reveiw at www.orlandosentinel.com. It was in the Thursday, Jan.2 issue.

 

[George Murray]

Dunno if the '03 SRT has a higher top speed than the GTS.

When the yellow SRTs are built, it's a given that they'll be faster than the GTS'.

 

[GTS Bruce]

I rember reading somewhere that this SRT is more aerodynamic and has less drag than an RT.However it has more drag than the GTS.Also the frame is stiffer in the SRT compared to the RT but not as stiff as a GTS.If they make an SGTS is should be a hell of a car. Bruce

 

[Snakester]

Most people quote 15% driveline losses for manual tranny cars and 18% for automatic transmission cars.

I had read 13% here, but never 11%.

At 13%, that's 514HP at the crank. At 15% it's 526HP.

This sounds MORE like a complaint that D/C didn't underrate the SRT-10 as MUCH as they did the GTS. D/C can only be held responsible for their minimum promises, not people's maximum expectations based on power output variances of some previous GTSs.

Also at 13% loss, the 490RWTQ reading is 563TQ at the crank, which is a good deal better than the 525TQ rating.

The dyno numbers are interesting specs, but I'm REALLY interested to see some of the better Viper drivers take the SRT-10s to the tracks, so that we start seeing better than 12.0@118MPH 1/4 mile times, that we got from the early magazine tests.

Plus I'm looking forward to reading some comparison tests with a production SRT-10 and cars like the $$$ Porsche GT2, Ferrari 360, and Lamborghini Murcielago on some road courses and circuit tracks.

It's quite likely that the SRT-10 is now the fastest convertible sold in the U.S., at least until the $$$$ Porsche Carrera GT, and Mercedes SLR come out. And for under $100K, that's mightly impressive indeed.

-Dean.

 

[toddt]

Cajun--

2961 VIEWS ON YOUR POST.

And I guarantee it wasn't for the spirited discussion about freaking dynomometers.

MORE DRIVING IMPRESSIONS!!!