Motor Trends GenIII numbers correct?

Hans Christian

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 8, 2000
Posts
523
Reaction score
0
Location
Glendora, CA, USA
what specs, please advise. I am currently sitting in North East Brazil and can't get hold of any car mags any time soon.

hope its good and trustable news (HMM from a car mag)??

thanks

Hans Christian
 

Brian Denham

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 3, 2000
Posts
167
Reaction score
0
Location
North Little Rock, AR
From memory, so bare with me.......

0-60 in 3.9sec
1/4 mile in 11.9 sec at 120+mph.
Base price was listed at our current base.

I belive that they stated these numbers were estimates. They would have to wait till Summer for an actual test of the '03.
 

Ray R

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 2, 2000
Posts
71
Reaction score
0
Location
Aurora, OR
The cover said 220mph. The article said it had a 220mph speedometer. I'll wait for a real road test before believing anything....
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2000
Posts
4,368
Reaction score
0
Location
Quantico, VA
By my calculations, if the GenIII makes 50 HP and 10 ft/lbs more HP than the GenII, weighs 100 lbs less, and has a cd of .42 (worse than the GTS, better than the RT/10), it will have performance of:

0-60: .2 sec faster than GenII, or about 3.8 sec
1/4 mile e.t.: 0.4 sec quicker, or 11.8 - 12.0 sec
1/4 mile mph : 2 mph faster, or 119 - 120 mph

Top speed: 192 mph

Now, for REAL fun, imagine a hardtop GTS version of this car with a .35 cd, a 4.5" ground clearance and a 0.66 5th gear ratio. THAT car would pick up an extra MPH in the 1/4 (121 mph) and would have a top speed of 208 (!!) mph.
 

Steve Ferguson

Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 4, 2000
Posts
2,447
Reaction score
0
Location
Burr Ridge, IL
What you forgot to put in your equation was the drag coefficient. That in itself can drop the 1/4 times by .5 seconds! The current Viper is like driving down the track with a parachute OPENED.

As for what the speedo says, if you look at it you will notice that it really goes to 230, since there is an incremental line PAST 220! Will it do that? We will all have to wait and see!
 

Jay Herbert

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 7, 1997
Posts
3,111
Reaction score
0
Location
Sunnyvale, CA
Performance specs in MT are guesses (although by looking at them, you certainly would believe they are "test" numbers)......

I believe very little I read in Motor Trend, they have run Vipers on chassis dynos, quoted HP, but neglected to note the car had Nitrous......

A couple of blatant errors/misconceptions in the article:

1) That is not a picture of the 2003 (505/500/500) Viper engine, it is a picture of the current Viper engine

2) The comment on the "chambered" exhaust is incorrect.... The current cars have something very special, but production exhaust is still not finalized.
 

Joseph Houss

Former VCA National President
VCA Officer
Joined
Jul 19, 2000
Posts
3,330
Reaction score
0
Location
NJ USA
I'll guarantee it!

Disclaimer:

If your 2003 V-10, 500+ HP Viper doesn't offer you a 3.9 or better 0-60 time (after break-in, of course), with an experienced driver, I, Joe Houss, will be glad to purchase said vehicle for dealer invoice. I reserve the right to resell the vehicle at fair market value to an avid enthusiast who doesn't care about 0-60 times! LOL
 

Steve Ferguson

Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 4, 2000
Posts
2,447
Reaction score
0
Location
Burr Ridge, IL
Dear Mr. Venomous,

I Steve Ferguson, would love to except your little challenge. In fact, I will go as far to wager a "Chicago 68 oz. Porterhouse" plus air fare for a 3 lb. Main Lobster dinner plus air fare.( Got to keep up that pleasantly plump figure of mine!)

I say that the numbers from the "first 2003 production model tested will be even lower than the ones posted in this current MT article!"

Do you dare?
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2000
Posts
4,368
Reaction score
0
Location
Quantico, VA
A couple of notes:

(1) I did not forget coefficient of drag. It's abbreviated cd, and I assumed .42 as stated. The Gen-III is lower than the Gen-II, so even if the cd is worse than the GTS (.42 vs .38) it has less frontal area and thus a higher top speed. Obviously, .42 is a guess; the actual cd could be anywhere from .35 to .50 from inspection...

(2) Under identical conditions, if a 408 RWHP 3450 lb gen-II accelerates 0-60 in 4.0 seconds (as numerous magazines have reported) then a 452 RWHP 3350 lb gen-III with wider rear tires will accelerate 0-60 in 3.8 seconds. The fact that certain readers on certain road surfaces can't manage 4.0sec 0-60s in their current gen-II cars is irrelevant to this discussion
You must be registered for see images
 

Paul Fischer

Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 28, 2000
Posts
321
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas, USA
68 oz Porterhouse, 3 lb. lobster? I like the way you think Steve, you are THE MAN! Promise us you'll be in charge of the food and beverage at VOI 7.
 

dblankenbaker

Viper Owner
Joined
Oct 3, 2000
Posts
383
Reaction score
0
Location
Scottsdale, AZ
What Steve isn't sharing is that the cd is well under .30 with the top up. People who are guessing the cd high haven't looked under the car.

db
 

Kurt 97 GTS

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 2, 2000
Posts
853
Reaction score
0
Location
Dallas, TX
Steve - FOOD--that's what I ment!!!

I'm with Paul. Maybe you can help arrange the food for our regions VOI in May. Looking forward to it
You must be registered for see images
You must be registered for see images
 

venemous

Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 5, 2000
Posts
56
Reaction score
0
Location
charlotte
Ben, nice guess but it wont break under 4.0 still 0-60
I do calculate it to run that 1/4 @121 or so ....cd i think will be more like .39

Dont make me out to be MR negative , but few people even get there gen11's at the 4.0 range ..... reasons ..some are obvious that a big guy(200+) cant run with 140lb man .

50hp wont do anything for the 0-60 if 3/100 maybe???

We well see ,I challege anyone to correct me??
John
 

venemous

Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 5, 2000
Posts
56
Reaction score
0
Location
charlotte
Db, how low is the car ?

Steve ,post the first numbers tested for the 2003
Are we going with just the 0-60 being higher mine said , your lower?

Ben , various magazines say alot of things and you cant always believe them to be true.

Mr hennessey , If you will please answer on the subject of the 0-60 on a genII .What numbers have you tested them to be? I have found the car to be more like 4.2!
Wish I had those magazines that said 4.5 !!!WOW

I love this !
 

Steve Ferguson

Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 4, 2000
Posts
2,447
Reaction score
0
Location
Burr Ridge, IL
I wish I could post the numbers, but in a short time all will know the truth. I can say that those drag numbers are off. The main reason is that Dodge is looking forward to releasing this information over the next few months. That should really build up the excitement level.

For now, we all have to speculate, sorry. All I can say is that all Viper owners will be full of pride when the numbers hit the street.

As for magazines, if you are an owner you should understand why the numbers are so confusing. Think about it. How many people can get into a Viper and actually push it through testing at a maximum level? Judging by my experience with automotive writers, none of them are even close. Why do you think they like the more "user friendly" cars like the ZO6? Because it fits their particular skill level in actually piloting a high performance vehicle
 

Y2K10 SRT#39

Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 21, 2000
Posts
1,715
Reaction score
0
Location
Olympia, WA, USA
I'm still waiting for the REAL numbers. Them are the ones that indicate the time for 0-100-0. We ALL know the brakes were the sore point in the past (other mag. tests had the Viper beat by a "P" car due to the brakes....).
I'm looking forward to these REAL numbers.... not just the MT guesses.
 

CAS

Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 2, 2000
Posts
840
Reaction score
0
LOL Mako, my thoughts exactly. There is no way that a convertible could go 220 but I think people are overestimating Cd. The look, to me, is totally off of what I had expected, (headlights from S2000!!). I've seen the GTS/R concept at Barrett-Jackson and OMG that car is STUNNING. The actual RT is kind of disappointing.
 
Top