2008 Mustang GT versus 2008 Dodge Charger R/T with.........

#21
I guess I don't understand the problem with the Charger being a 4 door car. The biggest problem with making 2 doors is that the market for them just doesn't exist in any kind of volume.

Also, even though a Charger is somewhat slower than a current Mustang GT, an RT has performance comparable with a late 60's Charger R/T with a 440. An SRT8 Charger is faster than a 60's Charger with a Hemi.

If I were to buy a 4 door car, I'd certainly consider one.
 
#22


+1
 
#24

What do you mean please explain yourself? I'm not talking about srt8's the R/T's are what I'm referring to. I don't know if you've run against one but a regular mazda6 can hang with those things, mazdaspeed6's eat them alive. Before I got my cams I could mop the floor with them, afterwards, well I haven't even bothered since then. I am not a very skill full racer by any means either. So what if they have a ton of hp and tq, I understand their computers limit the amount of power that they can use on launch and they don't move that well from a roll either. I give them credit for being like that have having four doors but I'd rather have a speed6 any day of the week.

On a side note when I'm driving my focus they do seem to be able to beat me I should also say while I've driven all the cars mentioned above I have not driven an 05+ stang but I thought those should have been at least as fast as my car pre-cams.
 
#25
I beat one pretty badly at the track month or so ago. I think it was an 07. He ran a 9.1 bone stock. (1/8th mile of course) and I've ran a 9.2 with a bone stock 05 mustang. With the driver mod i'm sure the charger could run 8.7's or so
 
#27


I agree with you 100%. That's why I'm buying one
 
#28

I disagree with you. The MazdaSpeed6 does not even close to the Charger R/T in horsepower and torque. What is so amazing about the Mazdaspeed6 anyways? They don't have the horsepower and torque of a Charger R/T.
 
#29
RED2001GT said:
No they're not. The R/T's are very fast and they have excellent handling. Get your facts right.
Click to expand...

If you are comparing the Charger R/T to a Crown Vic, they are fast. Handling though, they are not much better. Comparing the Charger R/T to a newer Mustang GT, the Charger's are quite slow...
 
#30
TGJ said:
If you are comparing the Charger R/T to a Crown Vic, they are fast. Handling though, they are not much better. Comparing the Charger R/T to a newer Mustang GT, the Charger's are quite slow...
Click to expand...

I don't understand? How can a "regular stock" 2008 Mustang GT beat a 2008 Charger R/T? The Mustang GT has only 300hp and the Charger R/T has 340hp. The torque on a 2008 Mustang GT is not even close to the 390ft./lbs. of torque that the 2008 CHarger R/T has? How can you call the Charger slow with that type of horsepower and torque? Even with its weight of 4,000 lbs, the Charger has to be faster than the Mustang GT with all of the Charger's horsepower and torque.
 
#31

You're underestimating how much the weight difference really matters. The chargers weigh about 600 lbs. more than the new GT's. The RT's run high 13's to low 14's while the '05+ GT's can run mid-13's consistently.
 
#32
RED2001GT said:
I disagree with you. The MazdaSpeed6 does not even close to the Charger R/T in horsepower and torque. What is so amazing about the Mazdaspeed6 anyways? They don't have the horsepower and torque of a Charger R/T.
Click to expand...

The mazdaspeed6 is much faster than the R/T, it's not really even a drivers race. I use those as comparisons because they are both sporty four door cars that you can drive your family around with. You shouldn't discount something solely because of the hp/tq it puts out on paper. A mazdaspeed6 with a decent driver will see mid to high 13's at the track when they are bone stock, an R/T should be more like 14.0-14.3 from what I've seen. I've seen srt8's relatively stock pull low 13's to mid 12's.
SRT8 =
Think of the R/T as a mustang v6 and the v6 charger as a ford festiva . Except if you get an R/T you can to a Weight reduction and cam that bitch and have a really fast machine. I'm not trying to completely rip the R/T but it doesn't really contend with a mustang gt "these days" or a mazdaspeed6, I love the 4 door sports car aspect and I do respect the charger for that as well but the mazda won that... Except they are nixing it in favor of a higher hp v6
 
#33

The Charger is about 700 pounds heaviev than the Mustang. Depending on options and transmission the Mustang has a 3.31 or 3.55 gear ratio in the axle. The Charger R/T has a 2.82 gear ratio in the axle. A standard transmission mustang will lose less hp in the drivetrain than the Charger, automatic mustang and Charger will lose about the same.

If you are going to compare the Charger to a standard transmission Mustang, that little HP advantage at the wheels the Charger might have will NOT overcome the huge advantages the Mustang has providing the pony can put it's power to the ground. The auto Mustang is also pretty potent and it as well has the huge advantages over the Charger.

A rule of thumb is .1 in the 1/4 for every 100 pounds. The Charger R/T would need about another 70 HP to be competitive with a newer Mustang GT.
 
#34

Hate to tell you this, but the Charger was a big arsed Sedan that had a large engine. Most of the Muscle cars in those days were considered family cars, but with large cubic inches under the hood.

Lets see, Coronets (Super Bees), Beleveder (GTX), Charger, Road Runner, Lemans (GTO), Cutlass (442), Impala, Chevelle, Fairlane, Torino, Galaxie . . . none of these were exactly small cars, but all could be had with large engines and considered Muscle Cars in the '60's.

And I doubt you will see a Barracuda, seeing there is no Plymouth brand any longer.
 
#37

That's odd because I drove an R/T just the other day and I find that it handles excellent on the road and highway. The car felt very tight on the road and it was very responsive. It is also a very smooth driver.
 
#38
The R/T that I want to buy is the one with the R/T Performance Package which gives it 10 more horsepower. Mine will have 350hp with 390 ft./lbs. of torque.
I am not really looking for a car to race a Mustang with. What I am really looking for is a vehicle which has a lot of power which is a full sized vehicle. The ONLY car which I found that fits this criteria is the 2008 Dodge Charger R/T. I love the R/T. Especially the one that comes with the R/T Performance package. It's just right for me.
 
#40

You must not have looked very far... G8 is about to hit the streets, GTO's are already out (they are full size enough), and you can pickup used Audi S6's and S4's all day long in that price range - not to mention some used Mercedes CLS-500's for just a couple thousand more.

Maybe my standards are just way to high (as in I've actually DRIVEN the cars that blow the chargers out of the water lol), but chargers handle like a cat box and are as slow as one too The SRT-8's have more grunt, and make for a more fun drive, but still they are big and clumsy, not to mention the brakes (about as bad as a mustang lol).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Progress Thread Evolution of the 'Hudson Heap' plans (87 GT)
Replies
29
Views
3K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Noobz347
M
03 Mustang GT 4R70W trans help!
Replies
2
Views
1K
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Motox852
M
Fox Build ideas for the 'Hudson Heap' (87 GT)
Replies
20
Views
3K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
MadSquirrelTech
C
Progress Thread 2004 Comp Orange GT
Replies
9
Views
2K
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
ctandc
C
I
T-5 NWC Rebuild, noise only in 4th gear above 55mph
Replies
3
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
AeroCoupe
Menu
Log in
Register