Congratulations Whiners!

[King GTS]

I've talked to a whole lot of guys who are very seriously looking at the GT-40 right now. Exclsively because of the SRT.

Funny though, on the other thread, right below this one, "I GOT MY 2003 IN!!!!!!!" a guy saw the pics and his wife asked him if it was the "NEW" Honda S2000! They happen to have one of them! Go and ck it out. The guy only has 2 posts to his credit & already his wife thinks the new "Viper" is a "RICER"! SAD.

 

[Godsil Performance]

I am not even going to get into the arguement of the looks of the SRT/10, however I wish someone could answer my question. Doesn't it cost the same money to build an ugly car than it does to build a gorgeous car? I am not talking about clamshell/conventional hood, I mean just styling. I keep hearing about trying to make money on this new car and why Ferraris cost $160,000. Do we really think that you have to pay for better styling? If the GT40 is made out of the same material that the SRT/10 is, would it cost the same to produce? If it does cost the same then why is the GT40 (arguably) so much better looking? I am just currious because I visit my local Ferrari dealer about every 3 weeks to chat and drool and I just don't understand why more cars don't grab you like them. Are the designers of these other cars just really bored and hate life?

 

[King GTS]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark O:
I see said the blind man as he picked up his hammer and saw!!

I can now see why the SRT/VGX/Corvette/Camaro/Miata/S2000 appeals to you.....Down deep you're a tried & true Corvette guy. I've often thought that there are many Viper owners who are Corvette turncoats that simply bought the next best thing.


Like the current style Corvette, the 2003 shares bland styling, but still has more power & handles better than the Vette so that's why you're with the "new" Viper more than ever. Tell me, if GM ever came out with a Vette that really was a Viper ******, would you drop Dodge like a bad habbit & go back to GM in a heartbeat (no pun intended).

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That was actually a pretty funny Post!

 

[Snakester]

I agree that I do prefer the pre-Daimler, early 90s Chrysler car designs best like the Prowler, Viper, Copperhead, Charger and other beautiful cars that I've drooled over.

I think that the Sidewinder pickup looked truly cool as a V10 sports truck, and I think that it would have taken more of the Lightning's market than the immense SRT-Ram will (despite having the right stuff under the skin).

And I think that the new Crossfire and Razor's design looks chunky rather than the graceful and timeless lines of the earlier Chrysler designs.

Also Chrysler has had some really elegant luxury concept cars like the Atlantic, Chronos, and Phaeton. But they would have taken away market share from Mercedes for sure, so no go.

I'm happy that they didn't axe the Viper like they did the Prowler (which) could have had renewed sales if it had a V8 in it.

I'll admit I'm not brand-loyal. I had a Mustang two years ago, a Corvette last year, and now a Viper (one from each of the big-three).

I'd be happy to get an SRT-10 when they come down to a price that I can afford (read used). But if some other car manufacturer makes a drop-dead georgous convertible, that exceeds my Viper is performance and style (not likely) and is under $60K (less likely)I sure would consider buying it.

-Dean.

 

[GTS Dean]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Godsil Performance:
I am not even going to get into the arguement of the looks of the SRT/10, however I wish someone could answer my question. Doesn't it cost the same money to build an ugly car than it does to build a gorgeous car? I am not talking about clamshell/conventional hood, I mean just styling.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think the cost of building the two cars is pretty much the same. However, the cost of *designing* a beautiful car vs an ugly one is much higher. Tom Gale - Styling Chief on the original Viper waved goodbye said "Sayonara" to DC. I guess the Germans took that as a hint to hire a 2-bit Japanese stylist to do the next one. You get what you pay for.

I bet Gale, Lutz and Sjoberg are laughing their butts off. Lutz even does it in public.

 

[Steve Ferguson]

FYI, Tom Gale was still in charge, and like the first RT/10 and GTS, he approved this design. It was Tom who nixed the mid-engine for the convertible. He did NOT draw the first one's and did not draw this one. It is under hes guidance and his power to select that the first Viper and the new ones have ALL been approved.

Do you want the difference? Viper 1+2= looks and image first. Viper 3+4= performance first.

BTW. Tom Gale officially retired, but he STILL works for DC as the PRIMARY styling consultant.

 

[GR8_ASP]

I think I can help answer the question of why the original RT/10 was appearance first and performance second. Its appearance was changed very little from concept/show car to production. If I recall correctly it was stated in one of the Viper books that the intent was to bring it to production with no unnecessary styling revisions. The engineers then produced powertrain and chassis systems to maximize performance within that envelope, given the available time. This time the style and performance aspects appear to have been created in concert with one another, rather than one following the other.

Ron

 

[AviP]

I have a 4-letter word for the SRT-10

GT40

-Avi

 

[GR8_ASP]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Originally posted by Steve Ferguson:

Do you want the difference? Viper 1+2= looks and image first. Viper 3+4= performance first.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Originally posted by Maxwedge:

Steve F
If you will recall in 1989 when the viper Prototype and or 1991-1993 when the car was developed (I could be a little wrong on those dates), a 415hp motor was more powerfull than all but a Ferrari 288GTO or F40 or Porsche 959. Those were the ONLY cars that I can remember being more powerful..even then they werent more than 50hp more, and they ertainly had LESS torque. So I beg to differn on your "Gen 1+Gen2 vipers were about style" comment..also if the Gen 2 was all about style and not performance why is it that the Viper consistantly palces in the Top 3 of almost every road test it was put in(aside from Breaking)???If performance was 2nd palce to pefromance shouldnt they have place MUCH lower than top3????and why would they do constant(yearly) changes to the car if Chrysler didnt care about performance?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was this series of comments earlier that asked that question.
The development sequence did indicate that style was first and foremost for GenI, and the Team Viper made performance their goal. But the style existed before Team Viper.

No harm, no foul and of course, no flame intended.

Ron

 

[Mike Brunton]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark O:
I see said the blind man as he picked up his hammer and saw!!

I can now see why the SRT/VGX/Corvette/Camaro/Miata/S2000 appeals to you.....Down deep you're a tried & true Corvette guy. I've often thought that there are many Viper owners who are Corvette turncoats that simply bought the next best thing.

Like the current style Corvette, the 2003 shares bland styling, but still has more power & handles better than the Vette so that's why you're with the "new" Viper more than ever. Tell me, if GM ever came out with a Vette that really was a Viper ******, would you drop Dodge like a bad habbit & go back to GM in a heartbeat (no pun intended).
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey Mark,

How about you head up to the drag strip tomorrow and bring the Viper? Are you up for it? I'll be there. I'll run my bike against you - best so far is mid 12's, but I still think I can take you - are you game?

Also, I would like to see you at the Autocross that is coming up in a few weeks - are you up for that? I'm going. We can stack the white-trash-yuppie-mobile-BMW up against the MarkO-Posermobile and see who comes out with the best time - you in?

We're also doing a road course racing school at NHIS in August - are you willing to bring the Viper? I'll be there in my bottom-of-the-line-only-a-schlep-would-ever-buy-one BMW, but I still wager I'll give you a run for your money with my 187hp to your 450hp.

Let me know if you're in. Don't worry - taking the car over 4,000 RPM's won't hurt it - trust me

.

As for the Vette/Viper thing - I have no hidden loyalties. If GM came out with a car I liked better than the Viper, I'd buy it in a heartbeat (pun intended). Same goes if Ford comes out with something I like better. Why would anyone restrict themselves to only buying one make of car? Can you imagine if you've been a car guy but were limited to ford, and only able to buy Mustangs all these years while others had their Vipers and Vettes?

Let me know on the racing stuff... hell I'll even pay your admission for these events - all you gotta do is show up!

 

[Steve Ferguson]

It was made clear to then Team Viper from day one, that they had to develop the big block power train to work with the "show car" looks and features. So what we got was essentially a show car (looks wise) with a monster power source. But we also got a great deal of front end lift do to the clamshell hood (works like a big parachute when air gets underneath it), a less than desirable sounding exhaust (feds did not like the sidepipes), and a vehicle that has a higher drag coefficient than a Ram. The best part is that do to the tremendous power the Team put under the hood, it still managed to make a great statement and win all of our hearts. May times it has been said by the people behind the initial Viper that it started from the top down (meaning working with the body and then filling in the rest). Did you know that originally they wanted to do the Viper without doors that open? Did you know that up until 6 month's prior to PRODUCTION that the plan was to NOT have windows and a top? The only reason they got them was because Lutz was out running around in a test mule and got stuck at a gas station for over an hour waiting for the rain to go away. Hell, they did not even want to put wipers on the car initially.

 

[SmokinV10]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
This is a vehicle that is absolutely, positively, without question, the only car on the face of God's earth, guaranteed to be worth a small fortune 15 years from now. I'll be at the Shelby American factory in Vegas next week if anyone has any questions.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

15 years from now, the GT40, the Gen I and II Vipers, and Current CSX Cobras all could potentially be worth a fortune due to limited production and desirability. Did you see how much original GT40's went for at the Barret Jackson? Current CSX4000's are not necessarily aluminum. They come standard in fiberglass and if they are aluminum, they are nothing more than a Kirkham Kit car with an amercan shelby VIN (CSC Number). Then for 90K for just a fiberglass car, why wouldnt I call Superformance and order a Rolling chassis for slightly over $40K? I could care less if the VIN is a little different. The GT40, is however different. Yes, you can get a kit car, at the tune of about $75K. (see www.GT40cars.com) but thats awfully close to the real deal that ford is about to release. AND with either a kit orginal style GT40 or the new real GT40, there seems to be more exclusivity than a 427 roadster. I almost see more 427 kit cars driving around than Vipers.

 

[Viperfreak2]

I don't like the headlights, the snake eyes look is gone (too big, too squared off, and too toyota-ish) but the rest of the car is beautiful! Check out how the old style stripes suddenly add back the aggressive look.... If all the 'old styling' fans can't live with the new car, this club may end up split into VCA and VCA2.

You must be registered for see images

 

[SmokinV10]

Since you said it was "toyotaish" it got me thinking....next thing they are probably going to do is put those tacky clear tail light lenses in the back.

 

[Mike Brunton]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark O:
Mike:
I'll be in Michagan tomorrow & visiting the Viper plant on Thursday am. I'm going to have to pocket a couple of **** bags from the plane, just in case there's a 2003 there for me to view. Sorry I won't be able to meet with you, but when I get the hemi sorted out, I am game on bringing it up to the drags sometime before the summer heat sets in.

Now as far as your bike goes...mid 12's???? Those times sound pretty slow for new crotch rockets, but fast for a typical Harley! I assume you are running a crothch rocket, right??? If so, what's wrong with the bike, or maybe it's a lack of aerodynamics with a person of your stature (ahem, ahem) on it?????

Disclaimer: You do realize that I'm having fun here!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mark,

Of course, all in good fun. Please do not **** on MY SRT - it will mess up the beautiful aerodynamic lines!

As for the track... well, I was planning on running my VTX - it's a big fat hog of a cruiser weighing in at 750lbs, and of course my 250lbs mounted atop. Some guys have gone 11's on 'em, but I don't think I could. I do have some crotchrockets too - but I don't think you want any of that action. The R1 (385lbs, 135hp to the wheel) ran 10.32@135mph.... but if you like, I'll bring it and we can line it up against the belvie. Let me know when you get back. I hope you are keeping the barfwagon long enough to run my SRT against it? Pleeeeaassee?