In a recent review of the Mustang GT 5.0, I alluded to it's desirability over a Dodge Challenger for various reasons. A friend of mine who works at a Dodge/Fiat dealer shot me and email basically saying "have you driven a 392 yet? They're awesome." Considering my limited experience the LX cars in general, and my overall fondness (on paper) for the new 392ci Hemi V8 (6.4L for you continental types), I figured I'd jump on it. I mean, who would say no to driving a 470 horsepower sports car? The primary difference between the 2011+ Challenger SRT-8's and the previous (2008-2010) models is under the hood. I've written plenty on the new 6.4L Hemi V8, but here are the basics: more displacement (6.4L vs 6.1L), more power (470bhp vs 425bhp), more torque and a wider torque curve (470lb-ft vs 420lb-ft), and better fuel economy. Despite weighing 4100+lbs and sporting 470 horsepower with a 3.92 rear axle ratio, the SRT-8 392 is rated at 14/23 by the EPA. Which is odd, because the automatic-transmission SRT8 - which features MDS (cylinder shutdown), which the 6-speed doesn't have - is rated at 14/22. 
And while the SRT-8 still doesn't delivery fuel economy numbers like the GT 5.0 does (18/26), I have to doubt that people plunking down 44k and change (plus options) to get a 470 horsepower slice of rumbling Americana really give half a rat's ass about fuel economy numbers. Still, it's nice that the engine went up in size and power and gained 1mpg on the highway cycle with a manual. 
But saying that the Challenger SRT8 gets bad fuel economy is about as relevant as saying Heidi Klum struggles to understand biochemistry - who cares? The power available underneath your right foot is intoxicating. While the 5.0 in the Mustang likes to rev, and makes most of it's power higher in the rev range, the 392ci Hemi presents instantaneous thrust, divisible by tiny fractions of an inch, with a flex of your toe. It's the kind of power that strains your neck muscles, makes your ribs hurt, and makes grown-ass men giggle like little kids. It's an impressively smooth and flexible engine, too. GM isn't the only company that can build big pushrod V8's that are happy to thunder around near 6,000 rpm, but this 6.4L motor will also whisk you past a minivan clogging up the left lane at 40mph in 4th gear. It's reminiscent of the kind of anywhere power that AMG V8's make - which isn't surprising, considering the amount of Mercedes DNA still left over in these LX-chassis cars. Of course, it offers something that still hasn't even been an option in an AMG - a clutch pedal. 
Sure, you could get an SRT8 with an automatic. And it'd still run quarter mile times in the 12's, it'd still send shivers up your spine when you plant your foot in the carpet, but you're missing out on the intricacies, the little details that come with operating such a massively powerful motor with a traditional manual. And this is a surprisingly good one: a heavy-duty Tremec TR6060 with a twin-disc Sachs clutch attached to a short-throw six speed linkage (with a pistol-grip shifter!), the manual in the SRT8 is an unobstructive, willing partner. Shift quality is great, much smoother than the Getrag in the Ford, and for this meaty of a motor, the clutch is suprisingly light. Plus, you don't get that slightly scary wiggle of the rear end when you shove home 2nd gear near the top end of first with an automatic. The fact that the shifter itself is slightly canted over towards the driver can either be viewed as A) a sign of just how damn big these cars are, or B) a small anachronism from the days of the original muscle cars. The lever itself is taller than in Mustangs or Camaros, and the throws are a little longer, but it fits with the more relaxed, slack-fit nature of the Challenger compared with those cars. Is it fast? Sure. It's about on par with a 5.0 with 3.73 final drive gears, or a Camaro SS 6-speed. It would have trouble keeping sight of a GT500 or ZL-1, but it's down nearly 80 horsepower on both of those beasts, so that's no surprise. Would you sweat numbers like that when driving it? Absolutely not. You'd be having too much fun. 
Where the Challenger differs the most from it's competitors is the interior. That is, there's actually room for full-sized human beings in the front and back, and you can see out of it. The rear seats on the Mustang and Camaro are best kept for small children or double amputees; a 6'1" person sat comfortably in the back while I was driving. You just don't feel as crammed into the Challenger as you do the Camaro; although the Mustang is a tight fit as well, it's not as bad due to having a reasonable ratio of glass to sheet metal (whereas the Camaro passes off gun slits for windows.) 
Seats have always been a strong suit on Chrysler's SRT products, and the Challenger is no exception - the suede back and butt inserts are soft and grippy, and those big leather torso and thigh bolsters are just as comfortable as they look. Downside? While the rest of the LX cars got new interiors with the update (300, Charger), the Challenger continues on with basic updates to the original interior. It's not quite as high-brow as the interior in the new Charger; but then again, I think I'd rather have a 6-speed manual (not available in any Charger or 300) than a new dashboard. There's a big touch-screen mounted in the center dash that does all the things you'd expect of a modern satnav/audio setup, there are heated seats, good gauges, so nothing of any real substance to complain about. It's not exactly an easy entry into the back seat of the Challenger, but this (along with the fuel economy) again falls under the "who cares?" heading. 
Of course, you can't go through an entire review of the Challenger without mentioning the looks. And they're hard to ignore when it's slathered in "Toxic Orange Pearl." Of all the three muscle cars, the Challenger is the most unabashedly retro, and it's truly a gorgeous thing. While the Camaro looks contrived and slightly awkward from the get-go, and the Mustang is an odd mix of retro and modern styling cues, the Challenger is big, brash, and comfortable with it. It does not try to blend in with the scenery. 
There's more to the Challenger 392 than just a huge engine. Of course, that really would be enough, but Chrysler has thankfully left their "half-assed" stage of mechanical engineering in which it's sufficient to stuff an 8.3L V10 and a Tremec into a Ram 1500, slap a spoiler and huge wheels on it, and call it a day. Or stuff a blown PT Cruiser motor into a Neon with wind-up rear windows. (Just kidding SRT-4 fans!) The Challenger can also turn and stop. Suspension is independent at all four corners in all Challengers, and the SRT8 has the stiffest, lowest suspension of all of them. Unequal length control arms with coil springs and an anti-roll bar suspend the front, while an independent multi-link (are you listening, Ford?) with coil springs and an anti-roll bar holds up the rear. The SRT8 gets big ventilated, slotted Brembo rotors and 4-piston calipers to haul it down from 60mph in 110 feet - suprisingly short for anything north of two tons. There's a standard limited-slip differential in the rear (thankfully they realized you can't apply 470lb-ft of torque to the ground with a brake-lock diff) with short 3.92:1 gears for hard acceleration, and lightweight forged 20" wheels mounting 245/45/ZR20 Goodyear Eagle RS-A's. I would personally like to see tires wider than a 245 on the back of a car with this huge of an engine; I think you'd have no trouble fitting a 285 or 295 in the Challenger's rear fenders. 
Then you get to EVIC, which smacks mildly of Nissan GT-R. It's integrated into the 6.5" center stack and center gauge display, and on regular models it shows you things like average fuel economy (sigh), distance to empty, temperature etc. On the SRT8, it also shows you 0-60 times, maximum lateral acceleration, braking distances, quarter and eighth mile times, and a digital speed indicator. There are other niceties like keyless entry and ignition (keep the fob in your pocket; press a button the door handle to unlock, and the start button to crank the engine over), heated seats, aux and USB inputs, etc. 
I'll be the first to admit that I never held the Challenger in especially high regard; I realize now that it was because I was comparing it directly to the Mustang and Camaro, and that's not quite right. It's aiming for a similar demographic, but different requirements. It's not as stiff, tight, cramped and low-slung: it's more a cruiser, it just happens to have a massively impressive motor under the hood. When I think of a Boss 302, the first scenario that pops into my head is heel-and-toe downshifting into 2nd as I approach the hairpin before the back straight on VIR, waiting to hear that small quad-cam V8 rev all the way out to 7500 in 3rd as I approach the bottom of the hill. When I think of a ZL-1 Camaro, I envision lining up at the tree at Rockingham, supercharged V8 wailing as the second amber light pops on. When I think of a Challenger SRT-8, I see myself driving down Capital Boulevard late at night, the windows down, my favorite album cranked up on the (admittedly impressive) stereo, the huge pushrod V8 just barely a whisper above idle in 5th gear, basking in the world around me, with a pretty girl in the passenger seat. It's a cruiser, and it's a damn good one. Einstein once said "Everyone is a genius, but if you judge a fish on it's ability to climb a tree, it will spend it's whole life thinking it's stupid." If you judge a Challenger 392 as a competitor to the hardcore Mustangs or Camaros (or even stuff like the M3), it falls short. If you judge it as what it's designed for, it's absolutely superb. I want one. In Toxic Orange. But hey, Mopar: make it louder! 
2012 Dodge Challenger SRT-8 392 Base price: $43,780 Price as tested: $46,385 Options: Toxic Orange Pearl Paint ($295), Media Center 730N ($790; 6.5" touch screen, CD/DVD/MP3/HDD/Nav/Radio with Voice command, 30GB HD, SiriusXM Satellite Radio, Sirius XM Traffic info, UConnect Voice Command, iPod integration, Aux Jack, USB port, Bluetooth connectivity), SRT Option Group II ($695, 13 speaker Kicker-SRT stereo, 200 watt Kicker Subwoofer, 322 watt Kicker Amplifier), Body: Unit construction 2-door Coupe Drivetrain: Front longitudinal-engine rear wheel drive, 6-speed Tremec manual transmission, limited slip rear differential with 3.92:1 FD ratio Accomodations: 5 passengers Engine: V8, iron block, aluminum cylinder heads Displacement: 6410cc (6.4L, 392cid) Aspiration: natural Fuel delivery: Sequential Multi-Port Fuel Injection Valvetrain: Cam-in-block, pushrod, 2 valves/cylinder (16v total) with variable cam timing Compression ratio: 10.9:1 Horsepower: 470bhp@6,000rpm Torque: 470lb-ft (637nM)@4,200rpm Suspension (F): Unequal length double control arms, coil springs, gas shocks, anti-roll bar Suspension (R): Independent Multi-link, coil springs, gas shocks, anti-roll bar Steering: Rack & Pinion, power assist Wheels/Tires: 20x9" aluminum alloy, Goodyear Eagle RSA 245/45/ZR20 Brakes (F/R): 360mm ventilated and slotted discs, 4-piston Brembo Calipers (F), 350mm ventilated and slotted discs, 2-piston calipers (R), ABS 0-60mph: 4.8s Top speed: 182 (claimed) 1/4 Mile@ET: 12.4@113mph (dragtimes.com) EPA fuel mileage estimate: 14 city/ 23 highway/ 19 combined Recommended fuel: 91 Octane (premium) Fuel Tank Capacity: 19 gallons Theoretical Range: 437 miles Wheelbase: 116" Length: 197.7" Track (F/R): 63"/63.1" Width: 75.7" Height: 57.1" Curb weight: 4160lbs Main Competitors: Ford Mustang GT 5.0 and GT500, Chevrolet Camaro SS and ZL-1, Dodge Charger SRT8 Pros: Unmistakable presence, torque beyond belief, loaded with features, piston-grip Tremec tranny, fits 4 real adults, some of the most comfortable seats ever made, tons of fun to drive Cons: Fuel economy still pretty bad, some people like a tighter fit, weighs 4100+lbs, 15k more than a Mustang GT Conclusion: A very powerful cruiser, not a Boss 302. Judge it for what it is, and you'll love it too. Thanks to Greg Eaton and all the nice folks at Hendrick Dodge/Fiat for letting me drive this monster!
0 Komentar