[GreyGhost]

>>> Article <<<

>>> Race Team Article and Unveil Vid <<<

I think it looks great and it's good to see there's a Factory Racing Team again as well ...


Gregg

This post has been edited by GreyGhost: 04 April 2012 - 11:07 PM

[caudleryan]

Is it me or does the front end remind you of a Ferrari?

RYAN.

[Bigasshammm]

Looks like a Ferrari had sex with a corvette and they birthed a prom queen. Gorgeous car.

[Wayne S]

Only if they could have pulled more rpms out of them.

[ChesshireCat]

caudleryan, on 05 April 2012 - 12:09 AM, said:

Is it me or does the front end remind you of a Ferrari?

RYAN.

the body style is much different than the dark blue prototype I saw a few months back. I personally liked the other much more, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Lancia/Fiat/Ferrari/Maserati/Chrysler are all in the same corporate group now. I look for a lot of serious Italian engineering to be employed in the high end hot rods over the next few years. My guess is that this is the last run of the V10 engine as they now have a better selection of engines. Plus it's no secret that Dodge was playing with a six litre V12 a few years back that was based off the 3.5 V6 engine
good for them
gary

[ChesshireCat]

Wayne S, on 05 April 2012 - 02:46 AM, said:

Only if they could have pulled more rpms out of them.

RPM means little. It's the power curve, and that V10 has it in spades. 10,000 rpm means nothing without the ability to make serious power at that speed. 600 horse power at 7,000 rpm means a lot more than 400 horse power at 10,000 rpm (typical for a modern domestic V8 that can rev that high. Than you add in the very flat power curve and the same flat curve of the torque curve, and you simply have a beast. The Hennesy Viper is still the only factory car made in the USA to break the 200 mph barrier at Bonneville (and yes they've easilly sold enough of them to qualify as a factory production car)
gary

This post has been edited by ChesshireCat: 05 April 2012 - 07:04 PM

[GreyGhost]

According to some at Mother MOPAR, the Viper will always have a V10 ...

Styling wise, I love how they brought back many of the curves of the first gen Viper ...


-Gregg

[Wayne S]

ChesshireCat, on 05 April 2012 - 07:04 PM, said:

RPM means little. It's the power curve, and that V10 has it in spades. 10,000 rpm means nothing without the ability to make serious power at that speed. 600 horse power at 7,000 rpm means a lot more than 400 horse power at 10,000 rpm (typical for a modern domestic V8 that can rev that high. Than you add in the very flat power curve and the same flat curve of the torque curve, and you simply have a beast. The Hennesy Viper is still the only factory car made in the USA to break the 200 mph barrier at Bonneville (and yes they've easilly sold enough of them to qualify as a factory production car)
gary

More rpm one can pull the more torque they are able to get. Transmission gears, rear gears and size of tires are torque multipliers.

Hennesy viper is not a factory production car by any shape or form. Hennesy viper =s Factory produced, then bought and "modified" by a "high performance shop".
Bonneville is pretty irrelevant when writing about a performance car, it really does not tell us anything about fast/ acceleration etc. We could build a bicycle and cover the salt flats over 125mph if we wanted to.
Far as I know the fastest (speed in mph) American production car is still the SSC Ultimate Aero.

[ChesshireCat]

Wayne S, on 06 April 2012 - 02:40 AM, said:

More rpm one can pull the more torque they are able to get. Transmission gears, rear gears and size of tires are torque multipliers.

Hennesy viper is not a factory production car by any shape or form. Hennesy viper =s Factory produced, then bought and "modified" by a "high performance shop".
Bonneville is pretty irrelevant when writing about a performance car, it really does not tell us anything about fast/ acceleration etc. We could build a bicycle and cover the salt flats over 125mph if we wanted to.
Far as I know the fastest (speed in mph) American production car is still the SSC Ultimate Aero.

that's completely incorrect. The power band on an engine is setup by the cam shaft profile and the flow the the cylinder heads. Very high flow (velocity) usually gets you more torque, but it's also common knowledge that huge ports have a low velocity of air going thru them. Example: a 426 hemi had huge ports that were dead inline with the intake valves. No bends in them (sideways)and a smooth curve right into the valve pocket. A 426 hemi will rev 10K rpm with the right roller cam, but dosn't make anymore power at 10,000 rpm than it does at 8000rpm. The same motor destroked to 3.38" will still rev 10K rpm, and makes about 100 hp. less all the way thru the band. Yet it will rev to 10K easier. Years ago when they had all the dragster classes; guys were destroking small block Chevys down to about 230". The motors would rev to 12,000 rpm, but made no more power (on the dyno) at 12K than they made at 7500 rpm. The motors can only handle so much air going thru them no matter how fast you spin them. The same class was later dominated by a small Desoto hemi (240") that wouldn't rev past 7,000 rpm, but made a lot more power.

FIA rules state that you must manufacture 120 cars to be known as production. They have made over a thousand Hennesey Vipers over the years. The bodies are built on the same prodution line as a standard Viper, and the last few years were built by Dodge. The Hennesy Viper is recognized as a production car by the FIA and the SCTA, and this isn't new as it's been that way for at least three years now. (also at Maxton, the Texas Mile, and two or three other places). The Shelby Cobra was the same way. Shelby didn't make the body (Ace did), and Ford did the engines (not sure who modified them on the Stage II's and III's). He simply assembled them, and built enough to qualify as a production car (although the total amount was less at the time). The car that forced a rule revision was the Prosche GT. (first one) They never really admitted to how many they built and it was very small at best. That brought on the 120 chassis minimum. NHRA goes by a 50 chassis minimum, and there are at least two car bodies out there that were less than ten when all the excise tax records are pulled. There was one version of the Shelby Cobra that slipped by for a couple years till they found out they only built seven.
gary

[ChesshireCat]

GreyGhost, on 06 April 2012 - 01:01 AM, said:

According to some at Mother MOPAR, the Viper will always have a V10 ...

Styling wise, I love how they brought back many of the curves of the first gen Viper ...


-Gregg

Guys that own them want that motor or nothing, but it also had some issues. They did build an aluminum 404" fuel injected hemi test mule that simply smoked the V10 (there was only a couple and these were never sold). The idea of the V12 was to gain access into other markets by taking a little weight off the front end for better handeling with similar horse power. Plus they already had the tooling in house to machine 75% of the V12. I'd say that when the tooling for the V10 is worn out, we'll see a new motor. The V10 has many issues that can't be engineered out of it with out a new block & head design. The one major issue was oiling in the back 25% of the cylinder heads under hard accelleration. The race car guys pretty much fixed it, but the consumer couldn't. The other was the 90 degree engine with ten cylinders. Should have been 72 degrees instead of 90 degrees.
gary

[Wayne S]

ChesshireCat, on 06 April 2012 - 06:12 PM, said:

that's completely incorrect.

It is completely correct.

Quote

More rpm one can pull the more torque they are able to get. Transmission gears, rear gears and size of tires are torque multipliers.

[ChesshireCat]

Wayne S, on 06 April 2012 - 11:13 PM, said:

It is completely correct.

i'll argue that point till we're blue in the face. The only engines that keep making more power the faster you spin them are turbines. That is an engineering fact. But a better look see is to simply pick an issue of Hot Rod magazine and look at the power graphs they often show in them. An engines develops a power peak, and the faster it goes above than power peak dosn't mean it will gain one horsepower.
gary

[Wayne S]

ChesshireCat, on 07 April 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

i'll argue that point till we're blue in the face.

I would not get blue in the face since I understand what I wrote and know.

ChesshireCat, on 07 April 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

But a better look see is to simply pick an issue of Hot Rod magazine and look at the power graphs they often show in them.

I do not need to look to a magazine to know how things work in the real world.

ChesshireCat, on 07 April 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

An engines develops a power peak, and the faster it goes above than power peak dosn't mean it will gain one horsepower.
gary

Aging I will re-post what I wrote.

Quote

More rpm one can pull the more torque they are able to get. Transmission gears, rear gears and size of tires are torque multipliers.

It is the reason why cars have gears in the first place. Want to prove your theory "with-out" knowing what I am writing about?
Go put 1:1 gear in your transmission (most likely already there, in one gear) and 1:1 gear in the differential, make the final gear ratio 1:1, see how far that "peak power" gets you.

My "Original" post

Quote

Only if they could have pulled more rpms out of them.

2013 specs.
Power (SAE net) 640 bhp (477 kW) @ 6,150 rpm (76 bhp/L)
Torque (SAE net) 600 lb.-ft. (814 Nïm) @ 4,950 rpm
Max. Engine Speed 6,400 rpm (fuel cutoff)

Transmission specs.
1st 2.26
2nd 1.58
3rd 1.19
4th 1.00
5th 0.77
6th 0.63
Axle Ratio 3.55
Overall Top-gear 2.24

This post has been edited by Wayne S: 07 April 2012 - 10:03 PM

[kiowafixer]

Very Nice Looking Car! Makes me laugh though that the steering wheel controls for the cruise control, phone, menues, etc... look identical to my 2012 Challenger. I would think they would make something more unique for a car of this price.

KiowaFixer

[GreyGhost]

A lot of ergonomic thought goes into the design and placement of those buttons so these two vehicles sharing the same button cluster layout isn't surprising to me ...


Gregg

PS, congrats on the new Chally !

[Wayne S]

kiowafixer, on 13 April 2012 - 08:30 PM, said:

Very Nice Looking Car! Makes me laugh though that the steering wheel controls for the cruise control, phone, menues, etc... look identical to my 2012 Challenger. I would think they would make something more unique for a car of this price.

KiowaFixer

Parts been scavenging has been part of the Viper since it was first made, that in a way to me makes it what it is in some ways
a lot of parts from companies like knobs for controls are fleet wide.

Sometimes it is cool that they do it, specially with customization, like when an aftermarket company makes aluminum knobs for a specific vehicle and those parts could also be used on others.

[K-5]

Wonder what's the insurance man is going to ask to cover this one?
My 2012 GT is breaking a bank because they classify it as high risk vehicle even if driver has never had any violations or ever been pulled over...

[Wayne S]

K-5, on 25 May 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

Wonder what's the insurance man is going to ask to cover this one?
My 2012 GT is breaking a bank because they classify it as high risk vehicle even if driver has never had any violations or ever been pulled over...

I would guess who ever owns one is not really going to care about insurance price that much.

Saying that, talking Mustangs, for the most part they have always been cheap to insure for me.
With yours I wonder if other things come into to play and possibly they did not look at ways to get the insurance down.
High risk can also mean things like how long the thing is on the road, If vehicle is stored outside And primary vehicle driven in risky areas like cities etc.

Price of insurance wise, My work truck can be seen as a high risk and as of now cost more to insure then any vehicle I own.

[K-5]

Wayne S, on 25 May 2012 - 11:25 AM, said:

I would guess who ever owns one is not really going to care about insurance price that much.

It might be California thing, state is getting serious about enforcing manadatory insurance rule now that the red light cameras are gone, and insurance companies are preying on new drivers and those who drive high hp cars. Stuff like high risk and what not is a justification for unreasonable policy pricing.

This post has been edited by K-5: 26 May 2012 - 09:59 PM

[K-5]

ChesshireCat, on 07 April 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

i'll argue that point till we're blue in the face. The only engines that keep making more power the faster you spin them are turbines.

There is a well known limit to LPC/HPC RPMs after which flow is degenerate.