Cause everyone buys 50k dollar cars strictly based on how fast they are. :rollseyes
MY 03 pullied cobra vs stock 2011 Challenger SRT8 392 Hemi
- Thread starter SVTlove
- Start date
Cause everyone buys 50k dollar cars strictly based on how fast they are. :rollseyes
Nice kill... Raced one in my upper/i/e 03 a month or so ago and I was surprised at how he kept up decently. Although I still beat him by 4 or so cars in a roll race. I was stationed at FE Warren btw, got out in 06. Seems like forever ago now.
It is what it is.... I raced a stage 3 big turbo neon last night (which I beat) that kept up better than the challenger did.
If your powers numbers are for the Denver area, you probably have 100rwhp in addition to the ~700# weight advantage on him. I would have expected you to win by more than what you did.
Good kill either way
Tough crowd for basically calling the Challenger owner a moron for buying the car he wanted.
Good kill either way
Tough crowd for basically calling the Challenger owner a moron for buying the car he wanted.
Last edited:
The power numbers on mine are corrected. It's a dynojet and it automatically corrects based on altitude, air temp, humidity, etc. And I don't know for sure the car lengths, I am making a best guess. All I know is that I beat it very badly. He didn't keep very well at all.
So much for the 12:40 bone stock talk in the Challenger forum. Nice Kill for you Cobra
Yea, Denver altitude with three people in the car
Anyway, 12:40 would be extremely slow for a bulldozer
Last edited:
Challenger is a beautiful car, but Im assuming he is really only going for looks? If he was a SMART consumer and looking for performance he never would have let the Shelby go.
nice kill
i think those challengers are the best looking of the three nowadays, i would definetly buy one for the looks and not so much for the performance factor. helps that i used to love the 60s/70s mopars...
i think those challengers are the best looking of the three nowadays, i would definetly buy one for the looks and not so much for the performance factor. helps that i used to love the 60s/70s mopars...
So much for the 12:40 bone stock talk in the Challenger forum. Nice Kill for you Cobra
1 in a million, there are guys claiming 12.2-12.3s in stock GTs too. The Challenger is a 4300lb car, it's probably a driver's race for a stock 03/04 Cobra.
Not everyone wants a modded car especially the older crowd.. As O.P said, he owned an older Challenger, so maybe it was a car he's been wanting . There was an older fella by my house that owned a Shelby, had it bone stock and trade it for a Camaro SS. That car has been completely stock also.
I would say the edge goes to the 392 especially up top. The Challenger 392 seems to keep pulling hard all the way and doesn't run out of breath compared to the Cobra or 5.0 GT when going over 60+ (which don't either but compared to the 392, they fall behind)
Regardless, the 392 seems to fall more as a classic looking car type, I wouldn't mind owing one for a weekend cruiser and keep it next to bone stock. For anything else, there's my lil snake :rockon:
Sorry? But Cobras and new 5.0s do not run out of steam up top. :uh oh:
I don't know who told you that Cobras or 5.0s run out of steam after 60mph. :lol::lol::lol: Maybe in 6th gear against a Corvette, otherwise it doesn't run out of steam whatsoever.
A stock Cobra and GT can both trap over 112-113mph.
[youtube_browser]EkreHYwJt6g[/youtube_browser]
2011 5.0 GT
C/D TEST RESULTS: Zero to 60 mph: 4.6 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 11.0 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 19.8 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 5.1 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.2 sec @ 109 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 146 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 153 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.94 g
2012 SRT-8 392
C/D TEST RESULTS: Zero to 60 mph: 4.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.2 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 16.3 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 24.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.9 sec @ 114 mph Top speed (drag limited, est.): 170 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 160 ft
Roadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.88 g
2003 Cobra
C/D TEST RESULTS: Zero to 60 mph: 4.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.4 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 18.5 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 30.5 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.9 sec @ 111 mph
Top speed (drag limited, est.): 155 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 182 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.90 g
Now, I'm not exactly basing EVERYTHING on this, but its pretty much a scale on what the outcome can be. Maybe it might be closer than what it seems like depending on weather and track, etc, but its still a pretty decent difference which I doubt it can be make up.
So how much power you think the hemi putting down to the ground?
Too bad those cars are so heavy, bulky, and look like they cant even fit a 295 tire on them....
Threads like this remind me of the old days when 5.0 mustangs where showing cobras with 40,50,60+ hp tailights... Its nice to be on the other side of the fence with all these new heavy cars hehe
power to weight all I gota say
Too bad those cars are so heavy, bulky, and look like they cant even fit a 295 tire on them....
Threads like this remind me of the old days when 5.0 mustangs where showing cobras with 40,50,60+ hp tailights... Its nice to be on the other side of the fence with all these new heavy cars hehe
power to weight all I gota say
Nice kill and in my neighborhood too. I love the looks of those cars but have been a Mustang man all my life so I'll stick with my Cobra.
Those are the best results from a rag for a 392 and the worst for a 5.0.
Plenty of videos showing these cars even 130mph+.
The only loss would be a magazine editor not being able to shift into 5th properly. There are bolt-on GTs making less power than a 392 trapping 117-118mph+.
Just to update this thread. I ran into my old Chief again at the base exchange and took some pics of his SRT8
sorry about the crappy quality... cell phone pics... plus I think the camera on my phone is going bad or something...
sorry about the crappy quality... cell phone pics... plus I think the camera on my phone is going bad or something...
While the manual v a blast to drive its slower than the automatic. Hate all you want on autos that's just the truth. Truth is he's not as dumb as you think he is.
Users who are viewing this thread
