VENOM 650 SRT10 QUARTER MILE RUNS 10.76 ON FACTORY TIRE

[Mike Adams]

They where at the track today and on stock factory michelins it ran a 10.76 and a 10.44 with MT Street ET . Look out super charged cars this is a stroker engine only car. WOW.

SRT 10 modified is movin'

 

[Larry Macedo]

Thanks for the update, Mike! That is definitely fast on stock run-flats...

 

[fluffy]

Is it a stroker, or a head/cam upgrade? On the Hennessy site the 650R is listed as a Head/Cam package. Anyway, any videos or timeslips? Maybe some trap speeds and short times?

 

[Mike Adams]

This is a stroker kit with head and cam work time slipps will follow

You must be registered for see images

 

[Drag Racing Consultant]

Seems the car is moving quite well.

 

[Torquemonster]

GRIN! Like some of us have said before - when the SRT10 modified cars get sorted and into their strides - all the silly comments about how much quicker the old cars are will die a natural death. The heads alone will make more power than Gen 1 or 2 have ever known. These gen 3 babies are not even close to what they are capable of yet....

by the time you fit forged pistons and a solid roller with fully ported heads, better intake and exhaust, ECU etc - they'll spank some serious machinery and set new Viper records. Add boost and they'll make the Gen 1 or 2 look tame. The advantage is all in the heads. The intake will have to be replaced however over a certain level.

 

[DEVILDOG]

A stroker is a stroker whether it's in a Gen II or Gen III. The Gen II GTS has a lower CD. The SRT is a tad lighter. Take both to the track before you ASSUME the SRT is faster and that the Gen I or II is TAME...give me a break! Maybe you messed up and really meant to refer to the SRT's TAME looks.

 

[1TONY1]

MPH on each run ? I also think the price should be quoted.....I know it aint cheap.

p.s. NICE times...first time out so we know there is more left.....time to spray it Damn, I'm jealous.

 

[Torquemonster]

A stroker is a stroker whether it's in a Gen II or Gen III. The Gen II GTS has a lower CD. The SRT is a tad lighter. Take both to the track before you ASSUME the SRT is faster and that the Gen I or II is TAME...give me a break! Maybe you messed up and really meant to refer to the SRT's TAME looks.

Tame is a little strong - just giving you guys some smack. The point is the extra power the new heads allow - the only way you can make a gen 1 or 2 have the same potential hp wise is to run the same heads or cast your own - the old heads will not flow (even maxed out) - as much as fully ported Gen 3 heads. The old heads have seen as much as 320cfm but are getting on the limit and I won't be surprised to see cracking appear over time - esp. if they get too hot.... but 320cfm is about where good Gen 3 heads start after a bit of basic cleanup and pocket work... that's a HUGE advantage.... just wait a year or two - you'll see what i mean.

 

[DEVILDOG]

A stroker is a stroker whether it's in a Gen II or Gen III. The Gen II GTS has a lower CD. The SRT is a tad lighter. Take both to the track before you ASSUME the SRT is faster and that the Gen I or II is TAME...give me a break! Maybe you messed up and really meant to refer to the SRT's TAME looks.

Tame is a little strong - just giving you guys some smack. The point is the extra power the new heads allow - the only way you can make a gen 1 or 2 have the same potential hp wise is to run the same heads or cast your own - the old heads will not flow (even maxed out) - as much as fully ported Gen 3 heads. The old heads have seen as much as 320cfm but are getting on the limit and I won't be surprised to see cracking appear over time - esp. if they get too hot.... but 320cfm is about where good Gen 3 heads start after a bit of basic cleanup and pocket work... that's a HUGE advantage.... just wait a year or two - you'll see what i mean.

You have a point. I'll just put Gen III heads on mine. Let's race!

 

[Russ M]

Well lets let the numbers speak for them selves. The power output of the Gen 3 [******] stroker package are almost identical to the Gen 2.

The one thing you are forgetting is that the intake manifolds on both gen 2 and gen 3 are restrictive when compared to a set of ported heads, so neither will see true potential with stock intakes.

 

[BlueGTS]

Do you have the 1/4 mph for the 10 second runs?

 

[Torquemonster]

You have a point. I'll just put Gen III heads on mine. Let's race!

Hey - you can't do that - that was my plan!

oh well - I'll have to think of some more tricks to beat you

 

[Torquemonster]

Well lets let the numbers speak for them selves. The power output of the Gen 3 [******] stroker package are almost identical to the Gen 2.

The one thing you are forgetting is that the intake manifolds on both gen 2 and gen 3 are restrictive when compared to a set of ported heads, so neither will see true potential with stock intakes.

correct - but we'll see a fix for this developed.... The competition coupe intakes may be the answer - or are those the same?

 

[fluffy]

Me <--- Anxiously waiting for the first all-motor 9 second run.

 

[Jerome Sparich]

Do you have the 1/4 mph for the 10 second runs?

Michelin Pilot Runflat Tires (24 psi)
Best ET: 10.67 sec. (1.93 60 ft time)
Best MPH: 132.5 mph
Best 0-60 mph: 2.99 sec.

MT ET Streets (no skinnies were used)
Best ET: 10.44 sec. (1.67 60 ft time)
Best MPH: 133.5 mph
Best 0-60 mph: 2.67 sec.

Specs on SRT10 as Tested Today:
Venom 650R Engine Upgrade
522 CID Stroker Motor
~350 miles on motor
587 rw hp
584 rw tq
High-Flow Catalysts on car
Tested with top up
Fuel Level: 3/4 to Full tank

 

[Torquemonster]

Fluffy - on top of good driving etc - all it will take is a customer willing to ditch the slow ramp hydraulic roller cams for a decent solid roller setup. That with a good set of heads, exhaust, intake, mild stroker etc - will be capable of big power off the bottle. The "hot" cams for Vipers are really only hyd rollers, but solid rollers are where the real "all engine" power is at.

The trade off is stiffer springs and therefore potentially shorter life of the valvetrain but there are compensations that can help offset that. If you did an inventory of all the hot Vipers out there - you'd be lucky to find any running a solid roller. There are not many. None that I know of.

Solid rollers have come a long way since their "good for only 10,000 mile days". They do require a very good programmble ECU however to reprogram the engine - it's not cheap bolt on to get right, but there is serious power there. They are not just for racing or drags - you can get any grind you want. I can't wait for when my project can start.

I'd love to say more on cam grinds but am not sure whether I want to right now. I'm torn between open information and protecting some good tuners competitive edges - not that I'm conversant with their specific grinds - but if I spill the beans here - everyone will know, and is that good or bad? I don't know. ...I'll generalise

Give me a Mopar, Ford and Chevy engine - all with same cubes, same head flow, same everything. The only two differences will be each must run stock lifter bore sizes and cam ramps can be optimized - but duration at 0.050 is the same on all, as is rocker ratio.

I'll guarantee a good tuner who knows how will get the Mopar to spank the others silly. Peak power may be similar.... does anyone know what I've just said? There's serious performance gain here if you get it.

 

[Torquemonster]

Do you have the 1/4 mph for the 10 second runs?

Michelin Pilot Runflat Tires (24 psi)
Best ET: 10.67 sec. (1.93 60 ft time)
Best MPH: 132.5 mph
Best 0-60 mph: 2.99 sec.

MT ET Streets (no skinnies were used)
Best ET: 10.44 sec. (1.67 60 ft time)
Best MPH: 133.5 mph
Best 0-60 mph: 2.67 sec.

Specs on SRT10 as Tested Today:
Venom 650R Engine Upgrade
522 CID Stroker Motor
~350 miles on motor
587 rw hp
584 rw tq
High-Flow Catalysts on car
Tested with top up
Fuel Level: 3/4 to Full tank

Amazing times for that hp - awesome results! For the cynics - can you confirm there was no hidden bottle?

 

[Torquemonster]

Not trying to start smack - but the usual calculators say 587rwhp is good for 133.5mph on a weight of 3150lb. That would be with the driver in it.

An SRT10 weighs 3357lb as quoted in specs - add driver and helmet etc - say 3550lb race ready... to go 133.5mph would take 660rwhp.

What am I missing here?

 

[Russ M]

The slider rullers usualy use flywheel hp not rwhp. Is that what you are refering to?

 

[Torquemonster]

No the calc I use is hp to the ground - i used the DLM calc on his website... its proven quite good before.

 

[TX WHOS YOUR DADDY]

TORQUEMONSTER,THE SRT 10 WAS DRIVEN BY A MOTOR TREND MAGAZINE ARTICLE WRITER WHO IS AN EXCELLANT DRIVER.THE QTR. MILE NUMBERS ARE TRUE,ACCURATE AND LEGIT.NO SPRAY ALL MOTOR.DONT U KNOW THAT ALL CARS RUN FASTER IN THE REPUBLIC OF TEXAS. NORM K

 

[Snakester]

No the calc I use is hp to the ground - i used the DLM calc on his website... its proven quite good before.

Most of those computer programs are good for E.T. calculations, but bad for trap speed calculations.
At least where Vipers are concerned.

I think that it has to do with the Viper's power delivery. Where a stock Gen II Viper will run 12.2 @118MPH, other cars will run more like 12.2 @108MPH. And the calculators are probably built off of a model of general performance stats.

With Motor Trend's last test times of a stock SRT-10 Viper
11.77 @123.7MPH put into the DLM calculator (at 3550lbs), it figures around 431RWHP for the E.T.(which is about right), but it calculates that the car would need 525RWHP to make a 123.7MPH traps, which is over 600 crank HP.

-Dean.

 

[J DAWG]

I have found the same as Dean said. The DLM site has my et correct, but is off by 4 mph on my trap speed( on the low side). And my trap speeds seems low to begin with. For me to run an 11.7, it seems my mph should be around 121.


Back on topic - nice #'s and those magazine guys sure have a great job. And what is the price for this package?

 

[JRod]

Do you have the 1/4 mph for the 10 second runs?

Michelin Pilot Runflat Tires (24 psi)
Best ET: 10.67 sec. (1.93 60 ft time)
Best MPH: 132.5 mph
Best 0-60 mph: 2.99 sec.

MT ET Streets (no skinnies were used)
Best ET: 10.44 sec. (1.67 60 ft time)
Best MPH: 133.5 mph
Best 0-60 mph: 2.67 sec.

Specs on SRT10 as Tested Today:
Venom 650R Engine Upgrade
522 CID Stroker Motor
~350 miles on motor
587 rw hp
584 rw tq
High-Flow Catalysts on car
Tested with top up
Fuel Level: 3/4 to Full tank

Only one small change to that.

Best ET: 10.67 sec. (1.93 60 ft time) should read 10.76.

The car was full of gas, and there is no nitrous on the car. Also, it didn't run 132 on the 10.76 pass.

 

[Anthony - 98 GTS]

I surprised none of the smart boy and girls have thought, "Hmmmmmmmm - how do you get ET Streets on the back of an SRT-10????"

 

[Supra]

That calculator figures out HP at the CRANK. 133.5 MPH with a weight of 3550 pounds requires ~660 CRANK HP or ~560 RWHP. So the #'s are right on the money.

Not trying to start smack - but the usual calculators say 587rwhp is good for 133.5mph on a weight of 3150lb. That would be with the driver in it.

An SRT10 weighs 3357lb as quoted in specs - add driver and helmet etc - say 3550lb race ready... to go 133.5mph would take 660rwhp.

What am I missing here?

 

[Supra]

Snaekester, for most cars the HP calculator works better for MPH as the ET portion of it assumes a nearly perfect launch (very low 60 foot time) which we all know is tough to get.

The formula for the HP based on MPH and weight is HP= (TS/234)^3 * W where TS equals trap speed, W equals weight of the car with driver and HP = of course HP, it figures HP at the crank, not RWHP. For instance my Supra that went 143.2 MPH weighed in at 3780 pounds with me in it. With the formula you get 866 HP, the car was run without NOS and the most power it ever made that was was 786 RWHP which roughly translates to ~925 HP at the crank. On that same day I went 2 MPH faster in the 1/8th on a pass where I missed 4th;( I figured the car would have gone 2 MPH faster in the 1/4 on that pass which would have calculated to ~903 HP or very close to 786 RWHP the car should have been running that night. The formula works pretty good.

No the calc I use is hp to the ground - i used the DLM calc on his website... its proven quite good before.

Most of those computer programs are good for E.T. calculations, but bad for trap speed calculations.
At least where Vipers are concerned.

I think that it has to do with the Viper's power delivery. Where a stock Gen II Viper will run 12.2 @118MPH, other cars will run more like 12.2 @108MPH. And the calculators are probably built off of a model of general performance stats.

With Motor Trend's last test times of a stock SRT-10 Viper
11.77 @123.7MPH put into the DLM calculator (at 3550lbs), it figures around 431RWHP for the E.T.(which is about right), but it calculates that the car would need 525RWHP to make a 123.7MPH traps, which is over 600 crank HP.

-Dean.

 

[Viperzilla]

I surprised none of the smart boy and girls have thought, "Hmmmmmmmm - how do you get ET Streets on the back of an SRT-10????"

I'm wondering the same. Did they take off the e-brake mech. and then put on 18s or what?

 

[Anthony - 98 GTS]

I surprised none of the smart boy and girls have thought, "Hmmmmmmmm - how do you get ET Streets on the back of an SRT-10????"

I'm wondering the same. Did they take off the e-brake mech. and then put on 18s or what?

You can't get ET Streets in 18's - your thinking drag radial.