New SRT is not any better than GEN II cars but for brakes and Power

[Toronto_ACR]

I keep hearing that the new SRT is made from a clean sheet of paper and because of that it is supposed to be much better in every way compared to the GENII cars. Well if you compare the magazine tests namely MotorTrend from this year and from previous years you will see that the new SRT will outperform the ACR and GTS from past competition tests only in quarter mile and zero to 60. This is due obviously to the extra power which the GEN II cars can be modified to also have, and the upgraded brakes. But every other test will show that the handling tests are the same even though the SRT has the extra power. So please stop the crap that the suspension has been redesigned which makes the SRT much better in handling. It is simply not true. The quarter mile difference is due to the extra power and nothing else. If a GEN II car has the mopar computer and the exhaust modifications you will see that it is the same in quarter mile and 0-60. Add a Stoptech braking system and you will also see the same results as the SRT. The suspension modifications and the new so called frame means nothing in terms of performance compared to the GEN II.

 

[GR8_ASP]

Keep dreaming and eventually you will talk yourself into it. Once some get out on the track you will find out the real answer.

Of course I assume that you have driven back to back so your conclusions have more basis than just second hand information about tests done by different people at different times.

 

[Toronto_ACR]

Show me an article that shows it out handles an GEN II even with the extra power. If it does it is due to the extra power and not the suspension

 

[lleone]

Yawn...

 

[Wayne Finch]

No question about it, having an 02 ACR and an 03 SRT, I can tell you the SRT is a far superior handling car. Now appearance is something else. I much prefer the ACR.

 

[GR8_ASP]

I would think tests at the same time on the same track by PVO with the SRT beating the Gen II by several seconds a lap would suffice. But you can always claim that it is the braking and acceleration, unless of course you measure corner exit speeds.

You can check the archives as there was a lot of discussion about that late last year.

 

[viper spray]

My 95 is faster and my 97 looks better , but I still want one Bad!!

 

[Toronto_ACR]

Motortrend claimed that the record in lateral G was the 99 GTSr with 40 HP less. That car is an ACR as you know. Everthing is the same except for the wing. I say again that the GEN II cars suspension is no worse and no better than the SRT. The difference is braking and more horsepower plus a different look.

 

[George Murray]

Yeah like the car mags are the best, most accurate source for performance numbers.

Give the SRT some time to generate some real numbers in the real world. The car has only been on the street for a few months, and most of those months have been cold for a lot of the cars.

 

[SERPENT INDIANA]

....sorta sounds like the Corvette argument to me ...."If my car had mods it could run as fast as yours"....I have had all generations of Vipers, and believe me, this SRT is the most awsome Viper yet.....smooth, brutal, all at one time....it is the most impressive car I have ever owned.....

 

[Y2K5SRT]

First, off, let me say that the SRT is not necessarily a better car than the Gen II, as that is all subjective. Most would agree the GTS slaps the SRT silly when it comes to looks. Many would argue that the Gen II is toe-to-toe with the SRT in acceleration as well - and they would be right. However, I am afraid that you will be pretty much alone in your argument that the suspension is equivalent on the SRT and the Gen II. In a word: Nope.

I remember I liked to quote the very best numbers I could find when I did my show plaque for my 2000 GTS. Didn't matter what year the car was, I would take the best published numbers and quote them. I seem to recall that the GTS-R was the high point for lateral G's and that was 1.01 back in 1998. I don't recall a published test eclipsing that since then, although I could be wrong. Of course, it makes no difference, as the most recent Motor Trend showed a lateral G on the SRT-10 at 1.05. BIG difference. Braking? Most guys that have upgraded their brakes on their Gen II's say that they still cannot outbrake an SRT - yes, even with your Stoptechs. And why is that? Suspension. The suspension on the SRT was not only designed for killer handling, but also to plant those brakes like no other car on the road today. One look at the numbers and you can see that for yourself. Even better, look under the car and check out the cross-bracing and everything else that has been done to the suspension. It is not the same as the Gen II. Period.

Now, I would reiterate that the SRT is NOT necessarily a better car. I get this feeling that some people are feeling defensive based on the ugly duckling showing some pretty respectable numbers. Hey, the GTS is simply one of the most gorgeous cars ever built and always will be. Still, it ain't perfect. The SRT is NOT one of the most gorgeous cars ever built, but it is improved in every performance category - without exception. And it too ain't perfect. They will probably come out with a REALLY ugly Gen IV in 2013 with 650 horsepower and even better suspension and braking. I will acknowledge it and move on. The important thing is that you have the car that YOU wanted - not what some other geek is driving.

Chris

 

[GTS Dean]

Speaking from first hand experience, it takes about $3-4k in suspension work on a Gen2 to get to the handling level of the SRT. The wider front track of the SRT is noticeable, as is the reduction in anti-dive geometry in the front suspension. I don't think you will ever see a Gen2 brake with the eye-popping effectiveness of the SRT.

Unfortunately, I will not get the opportunity to run the new car on track before it is in the hands of a new owner. I'm sticking to my Penskes and a car that doesn't have to have an aftermarket roll bar or special dispensation from the track time organizer so I can get my go-fast jollies. Maybe it's time to seriously look at a Comp Coupe or a GT-1 Viper .

 

[Jim Hodel]

Sorry, but some of you Gen II owners sound a little insecure. I have no problem if the new SRT-10 is faster, stops better, corners better, and is improved in other ways. I hope it is, as other makes of cars are continually improving and if we want Vipers to represent us well, they need to improve as well.

And, no matter how fast the SRT-10 is, it doesn't make my Gen II GTS any slower.

Jim

 

[Fred(DrivingSchool)Kinder]

Toronto ACR,

You do not like the SRT-10 that is crystal clear.

You pulled me into this ridiculous thread with your lack of knowledge.

You Said:

"If a GEN II car has the mopar computer and the exhaust modifications you will see that it is the same in quarter mile and 0-60. Add a Stoptech braking system and you will also see the same results as the SRT." Not a Chance!

You Said:
"Motortrend claimed that the record in lateral G was the 99 GTSr with 40 HP less. That car is an ACR as you know. Everthing is the same except for the wing. I say again that the GEN II cars suspension is no worse and no better than the SRT. The difference is braking and more horsepower plus a different look."

Facts about the GT2
It is a 1998 not a 99.
It is a badged GTS with K&N filters not an ACR. The GT2 has GTS springs and shocks, NOT ACR Adjustable shocks.

Handling:
The SRT is better balanced and lighter than the GenII, one result is better turn in and exit speed.

I am not selling religion so you can believe what ever you want, but it is not the truth!

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

The negativity wouldn't be noticable if the SRT wouldn't have lost all those big beautiful curves. Oh well, maybe in 2013?

 

[Fred(DrivingSchool)Kinder]

Once someone said:

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder!

My SRT10 is Beautiful.

And so are the Gen 1 and Gen 2.

 

[94 RT/10 Black MAMBA]

I think the SRT10 is beautiful too....just like a Camaro or Vette.

But they ain't Vipers EITHER!

Whoever approved the body change on the Viper is my buddy. The original body style cars will only go up from here.

 

[motor602]

chuck has a very valid point there. IF you liked the looks of the car you wouldn't be whining trying to justify why you dont have an SRT.

 

[monnieh]

The negativity wouldn't be noticable if the SRT wouldn't have lost all those big beautiful curves. Oh well, maybe in 2013?

what's up in 2013? V3?

 

[Vic]

Maybe what Viper needs is an SUV version, ala' the Porsche Cayenne. That'd be nice.

The SRT kicks butt in so many ways, I have to give it full credit. Motor Trend has it winning 5 out of 9 performance tests, besting the Lambo in many of them, and thats no small feat!

 

[jcaspar1]

Does the SRT have a two-way adjustable suspension ala ACR or does it just have the one way adjustable shocks like the GTS?

 

[phiebert]

Hey, why all this comparison between the SRT and the Gen II, I think the Gen I takes both of them! Just kidding...but why the heck are we arguing about whether a Gen II with mods can keep up with a SRT, a Subaru with mods can keep up with a SRT. Shouldn't we just be happy that the Viper legacy is being continued with an improved performer (albeit maybe not the best looker). It's about upping the base that we build on isn't it, not about whether the newest stock vehicle can be beaten by a older modded car?

 

[Toronto_ACR]

I never said that I do not like the SRT. I like the fact that it is a Viper and that it is doing well. Having said that, I have to disagree with you about a few points. The GTSr had the same suspension as the ACR. It did not have the same suspension as in the GTSr race car as yu have claimed. I also said that I have not found any numbers to back up the claim that it handles better than the ACR GenII car. take a look at all the past Motor Ttrend test drives and you will see that I am correct The GTS in 1999 had numbers of 1.02G and 72 MPH in the 600 slalmom. I have not found that to date in the SRT.

What I am claiming is that it is supposed to be compeletely redisigned and is to be far superior to the GEN II cars and I say that it not correct. Slap on the Stoptech and some more horsepower and I still say that it will be equal.

Toronto ACR,

You do not like the SRT-10 that is crystal clear.

You pulled me into this ridiculous thread with your lack of knowledge.

You Said:

"If a GEN II car has the mopar computer and the exhaust modifications you will see that it is the same in quarter mile and 0-60. Add a Stoptech braking system and you will also see the same results as the SRT." Not a Chance!

You Said:
"Motortrend claimed that the record in lateral G was the 99 GTSr with 40 HP less. That car is an ACR as you know. Everthing is the same except for the wing. I say again that the GEN II cars suspension is no worse and no better than the SRT. The difference is braking and more horsepower plus a different look."

Facts about the GT2
It is a 1998 not a 99.
It is a badged GTS with K&N filters not an ACR. The GT2 has GTS springs and shocks, NOT ACR Adjustable shocks.

Handling:
The SRT is better balanced and lighter than the GenII, one result is better turn in and exit speed.

I am not selling religion so you can believe what ever you want, but it is not the truth!

 

[GR8_ASP]

Slap on the Stoptech and some more horsepower and I still say that it will be equal.

Yep, you talked me into it. No need for any side by side testing or even same day testing. Absolutely. Course this is the same numbers game that the Z06 people use to PROVE that the Z06 is faster/quicker/better handling than a Viper.

 

[SylvanSRT]

the numbers and reviews speak for themselves the SRT beats a Gen 1 or 2 in about everyway possible performance wise(well).

 

[99 R/T 10]

Are you kidding?! You are going to quote Motor Trend as gospel?! What are you a nut case?!

 

[Frank Parise]

I had over 18,000 miles of road racing experience in a well-prepared highly modified Gen II GTS (VRL GT-1 class) on race tires. I also had a 20 minute track experience in a factory stock SRT-10 on street tires.

The SRT-10 has far superior balance, handling, forgiveability, braking, etc. This results in superior lap times.

Were you to take both cars out on a road racing circuit, you would experience the difference immediately. It's significant.

Dean, did you ever get your SRT-10 out on a road course. I think it would take more like $40,000 to equalize the cars from a lap-time standpoint. Just my opinion.

 

[Steve-Indy]

Some VERY credible Viper Pilots have spoken in favor or SRT-10...I appreciate their info...especially about track performance.

As a confirmed POSER, I will add that I have had the opportunity to drive ALL three generations of Vipers in the SAME afternoon over the same roads...a combo of city-highway-interstate...'95 RT/10, '96 RT/10, '97 GTS, '99 ACR, '01 GTS, and '03 SRT-10.....the DRIVER'S Viper IS the SRT-10 in my opinion....that Baby GOES, handles, and STOPS !!! I'm certainly NOT trying to fuel a debate; just passing along a little bit of personal opinion.

 

[Fred(DrivingSchool)Kinder]

The "GT2" is not a race car.

 

[garolittle]

ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz