Thanks Jay, I know you are a potential buyer, just admit it :)
I think it's a good idea but also game theory at its finest. Seeing a price per unit for a discount for 50 units might make the discount on just 10 seem like a rip-off and dissuade potential buyers to the point that we can't...
I totally agree, neo rambo and swexlin. The whole point of this thread is to explore how far down we can push the price on these components. I'm pretty sure we could get it down to the price equivalent of a nice set of new tires, which is not that big of an investment to make in a Viper. It's...
I'll try to do some research on the potential resale value of the used OEM pan as an offset to the price of the upgrade. My gut feeling tells me it will be pretty close to scrap value. In terms of least desirable stock gen 3 Viper parts it's probably second only to the Michelin runcraps (3rd...
I know for sure that the Gen IV swing arm and pan is an improvement over the CC (CC only swings one way and is not centered well in the pan). Although the CC is definitely better than gen 3 OEM, there have been documented failures on track with it.
That being said, you most likely won't need...
Allan, good to hear you decided to pull the trigger. You either have the most durable gen III in existence, or you are the smoothest Viper driver around a racetrack :)
I haven't done it myself but recall from members who have that it's not hard and takes maybe a couple of hours, but you need a lift to get the car high up enough. See post #46 in this thread:
http://forums.viperclub.org/threads/656957-Gen-III-oiling-issues?p=3123867#post3123867
Gen 3 owners, your #3 rod bearing needs your help! It may be starving...
Well, at least if you are serious about track days or even twisty back country roads. Biggest problem is your oil pan and oil pick-up design - in long high-G sweepers oil is sloshed away from the pick-up tube, so your...
I'm starting to entertain thoughts on a Gen IV swing arm group buy proposal. Seems like there are enough concerned gen III owners to gather critical mass. Please pm me if interested.
Sorry to hear that, sounds awful. It's great that you still haven't given up on the car after two catastrophic failures. This reminds me of another forum member who recently lost two engines on his '06 (the one the car came with, and shortly thereafter the rebuilt one). If you are rebuilding...
Some input from past SRT Engineers' posts:
i) Regarding the Gen III-IV regulators: "A - There was a change made to the window regulator in the middle of the 2009 Model Year to improve the support and durability of the window regulator. It was the same vendor. The production part number for...
If there's anything good about that ad, it's the picture. Finally a Gen V that has grown some chest hair to go along with the loud mouth. Park it next to a Gen IV ACR and it won't look like its girlfriend. All it took was getting rid of the annoying LED eyelashes and getting a couple of black...
Something to keep in mind:
1. Look at the 1.50 and 1.55 marks in the viper video. They might have as well put that fan behind the car - the hood blocks off essentially ALL the airflow to the intake.
2. 3.55 gearing should result in lower numerical dyno numbers vs. 3.07, all else equal.
3...
Ralph: "Our media cars are never "tuned"". Hmmm, how did the presumably stock '09 GEN IV coupe get SAE 581 hp at the wheels on the same dyno, two years ago, then? Something just doesn't add up. Maybe it's the "two years ago" variable.
I've read somewhere that there is no fan (used on a chassis dyno) that can simulate air flow at more than 40 mph. It's obvious why the ZR1 is less sensitive to that variable.
Funny that two years ago Edmunds tested the 2009 orange/black striped coupe on the same dyno (MD Automotive). 581 hp / 551 lb-ft:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZgn9978shU
I thought the dyno must have been off, as these numbers are way too high for a stock Gen IV on 91 gas. However, that...
He says that around the 7.30 mark in the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0lK_b-5gerM
Don't get me wrong, I hope he's totally wrong. It's maybe just a perception caused by the combination of VVT (waking up in high 3000's) and lighter rotating assembly. Plus...
I wouldn't take this review too seriously. Cars were admittedly tested by the guy who produced the following "gem" of auto journalism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctzqEo04-FI
It seems to me SRT has gone the LS7 route a little bit to squeeze that last 10% of EPA-approved performance - lighter valvetrain / higher revving / higher hp engine, which jives with Randy Pobst's surprising comment that "it's a high revving engine, not a torque monster". Almost sounds like an...
Next up, a 4-door Viper to put the Panamera to shame.
Then, a 4x4 version to embarrass the Caye... Oops, forgot there already is a 4x4 Viper, it's called the Viper (with stock suspension).
My bad. Got a little overexcited. As Mr. Wolf would eloquently put it: let's not start sucking each other's ..... quite yet.
However, even the remote possibility of a new ACR registering a Ring time starting with a "6" helps put things in perspective and reversing this thread's negative...
^ if the above about the Trofeo R is true, a gen V ACR with Trofeo R's might as well break the 7.00 minute barrier at Nurburgring... An ACR-X with 640 hp, MPSC and the old chassis (although gutted down) is already at 7.03 min.
Anyone else notice that 'SRT Engineers' spent no less than 2.5 hours viewing this thread just today?
Sometimes confidentiality and various strategic legal/marketing constraints can prevent the direct communication with the car's creators that we all desire (although a quick read through SRT...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.