That car is absolultley beautiful!! Thats good for DODGE... They are going to sell thousands upon thousands of those cars..

So yes, your right RaginStormLocke, 400RWHP is a must...

The Challenger is going to force the Mustang V6's and GT's to form an alliance... No longer will the war pit brother vs brother, like it is now... No, when the Challenger comes, and the new Camaros, we must band together to defend the Ford Name.. At some point, Ford really needs to give up the 5.4L DOHC to an SE Mustang option...

For us V6'ers every race, every run down the track is going to be a dangerous, because the competition is so fierce... Are they going to be releasing a V6 version of that car? We cant run with the V8's.. We must let the V8 Mustangs deal with that... I'm sure 600RWHP is going to be common for the new Challenger...

 

We will have to wait and see, unless they go carbon fiber on the whole thing, I don't think it will put down numbers like the GT. Keep in mind this thing is projected to be the same thrust/weight ratio as the Charger. And we all know the GT is faster than a Charger in the 1/4 mile. Great engine, but they put it around a frame designed for a 4 door sedan. Sick. But then again it's just speculation until we see the production unit.

But I for one once I'm running a major power adder on top of my zex would like a crack at this thing stock or lightly modded. But you are right, this is V8 business and we do need to stick togather. Besides, my goal is to hand out a%$ woopins to import tuner POS.

The car is beautiful though. Pontiac better learn from Ford and Dodge, thier GTO looks like utter crap! It's fast crap, but you have to dig the look of your car.

Anyway, seems we have a lot of options for cooling a FI system. We just need to narrow it down to the best one. I need something suitable for track and street since this is my DD.

 

I'm not so sure. The Charger SRT8 has 425hp. The Mustang GT is right around 13.8. The 300C SRT8 does 13.2. The Charger SRT8 should be around 13 flat:
http://www.srt8oc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=111

 

Oh, ok, thanks Jimp. I was going on the times in Car and Drive maganzine when they did the Bullit re-enactment. The GT won, but that wasn't just staright away power, it was also handling at high speeds in San Francisco.

 

here's the thread that Mike posted when they ran in the 11's... They were in Michigan for something SCT related... they ran the car at the track in Milan on Friday night... Mike took me for ride on Sunday... so it was the full 400RWHP setup! It was just a short jaunt around town... it was awesome!

Here's the thread with dyno sheet...

http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index....opic=37797&hl=

 

I am seriously thinking about getting a Challenger when I pay of Jezebel. Was thinking abut the Cobra, and still am, but why have two cars that look the same? I can get my little pony up to 350HP and then begin work on my Challenger.... It's like having multiple girlfriends... You want them all to be different. Unless you're dating twins...

The Challenger should be lighter than the Charger judging from pictures that I have seen. How much lighter is anyone's guess.

 

Twins!!!! You crack me up man.

 

Glanced through this really quick..

So what about pulleys? I know scrming can post his findings with the PHP Alternator Pulley, what of the others? Steeda UD Pulley and the ASP Pulley (also mentioned here before).

 

Well that's not really a power adder, more like a bolt on mod. From what I've seen they really don't give you that much extra power and to me, it's too much of a risk:
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showtopic=42537

 

Made a small update to the main post. I added a little info about the Vortech(MSP, forced or anyone else feel free to add any info), added pics of the Vortech and Procharger from their websites. If anyone has any additions or corrections please feel free to reply here and I will make them.

 

I would add a pic of Johns twins to the Zex portion. LOL.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(rygenstormlocke @ February 2, 2006, 5:25 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I would add a pic of Johns twins to the Zex portion. LOL.
[/b][/quote]

Good call. I'll ask him if it's ok.

 

So I think it's worth adding a section on actual user gains. For example, scrming's gains on his various nitrous jets, MSP's gains on his vortech, mine with my Procharger.

Just to get the numbers out again for me:

Procharger, 7 PSI of boost, running dual magnaflows, stock Y-pipe:

RWHP: 302.5
RWTQ: 291

Flywheel numbers... hard to say, but assuming 18% loss with an auto,

FWHP: 368
FWTQ: 355

Of course, these are likely very optimistic, I'd guess more like 350 actual FWHP and 340 FWTQ

Cons:

7 PSI kit requires higher flow injectors (not included)
9 PSI kit requires higher flow fuel pump (not included)
Both kits do not ship with a tune.

Pros:

Sounds cool as heck. Makes the car go fast. Almost better than sex.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Belial @ February 2, 2006, 10:25 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
So I think it's worth adding a section on actual user gains. For example, scrming's gains on his various nitrous jets, MSP's gains on his vortech, mine with my Procharger.

Just to get the numbers out again for me:

Procharger, 7 PSI of boost, running dual magnaflows, stock Y-pipe:

RWHP: 302.5
RWTQ: 291

Flywheel numbers... hard to say, but assuming 18% loss with an auto,

FWHP: 368
FWTQ: 355

Of course, these are likely very optimistic, I'd guess more like 350 actual FWHP and 340 FWTQ

Cons:

7 PSI kit requires higher flow injectors (not included)
9 PSI kit requires higher flow fuel pump (not included)
Both kits do not ship with a tune.

Pros:

Sounds cool as heck. Makes the car go fast. Almost better than sex.
[/b][/quote]

Making the changes you requested now. I'm adding your numbers, MSP's numbers and scrming's numbers where applicable.

 

I should have the dyno run files tomorrow Jimp.. This way you can place the Dyno sheet inside... While we are on the subject, I think its important to make sure if we are all going to be quoting from the same standard... Of course this would be the SAE standard.. However, it is strange that this standard since it produces a slightly less number seems more appropriate for me to quote, as opposed to others before me.. LOL!! But no problem.. But I think you must enforce that everyone provide concrete proof by way of an SAE corrected Dyno sheet which actually specifies SAE Corrected somewhere on the runfile before posting numbers..


I would suggest Belial help me along with this, and produce a dyno run which does indeed show SAE corrected numbers @ the Rear wheels.. Also, there must be a standard for loss on the automatics that everyone is mandated to use.. No floating between 15 to 25% randomly.. We need some way of proving the Flywheel numbers, or we can only allow for rear wheel numbers to be entered.. For the 5 spds everyone agrees on 15%.. The automatics also need some type of number.. Typically, this can be had by starting off at 210HP and 240TQ for everyone.. When an Auto has a baseline run, whatever that number is at the rear wheels, should give the percentage of loss throughout the drivetrain.. From that point all automatics must use that number.. Not a random number from 15 to 25% at will.. You gotta run a tight ship Jimp.. This is your deal! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumb.gif[/img]

 

Pros for Vortech...

You may also want to add that the Vortech comes STANDARD with a 3-year limited warranty. No extra cost like some others.

Also comes with a Diablosport Predator that can do many extra things like data log, check and clear check engine lights, and many other.

We are pretty close to having an EO number...I don't think ANY blower has one yet.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(forced @ February 3, 2006, 3:05 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Pros for Vortech...

You may also want to add that the Vortech comes STANDARD with a 3-year limited warranty. No extra cost like some others.

Also comes with a Diablosport Predator that can do many extra things like data log, check and clear check engine lights, and many other.

We are pretty close to having an EO number...I don't think ANY blower has one yet.
[/b][/quote]

Done deal.

If you have a bigger picture I could replace the tiny one that's there now. That polished blower looks really nice, I'd like for people to be able to see it. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/04.gif[/img]

What exactly is an EO number?

 

I tend to disagree with the whole "percentage" loss for either a manual or an automatic.

Power, to include "horse" power, is a measure of the ability to do "work". Of course, there is a certain amount of power required to turn the clutch, transmission, driveshaft, rearend and finally tires. The sum of the HP required to turn these is not going to increase because the engine's output increases.... which is what a flat percentage implies.

Does this make sense, or am I just talking out of my posterior?

Oh, by the way.... I'm new to these forums. I'll try not to stir up too much stuff. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif[/img]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MSP @ February 3, 2006, 2:22 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I should have the dyno run files tomorrow Jimp.. This way you can place the Dyno sheet inside... While we are on the subject, I think its important to make sure if we are all going to be quoting from the same standard... Of course this would be the SAE standard.. However, it is strange that this standard since it produces a slightly less number seems more appropriate for me to quote, as opposed to others before me.. LOL!! But no problem.. But I think you must enforce that everyone provide concrete proof by way of an SAE corrected Dyno sheet which actually specifies SAE Corrected somewhere on the runfile before posting numbers..
I would suggest Belial help me along with this, and produce a dyno run which does indeed show SAE corrected numbers @ the Rear wheels.. Also, there must be a standard for loss on the automatics that everyone is mandated to use.. No floating between 15 to 25% randomly.. We need some way of proving the Flywheel numbers, or we can only allow for rear wheel numbers to be entered.. For the 5 spds everyone agrees on 15%.. The automatics also need some type of number.. Typically, this can be had by starting off at 210HP and 240TQ for everyone.. When an Auto has a baseline run, whatever that number is at the rear wheels, should give the percentage of loss throughout the drivetrain.. From that point all automatics must use that number.. Not a random number from 15 to 25% at will.. You gotta run a tight ship Jimp.. This is your deal! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumb.gif[/img]
[/b][/quote]

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Flapjack @ February 4, 2006, 9:43 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I tend to disagree with the whole "percentage" loss for either a manual or an automatic.

Power, to include "horse" power, is a measure of the ability to do "work". Of course, there is a certain amount of power required to turn the clutch, transmission, driveshaft, rearend and finally tires. The sum of the HP required to turn these is not going to increase because the engine's output increases.... which is what a flat percentage implies.

Does this make sense, or am I just talking out of my posterior?

Oh, by the way.... I'm new to these forums. I'll try not to stir up too much stuff. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif[/img]
[/b][/quote]

That does make sense.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Flapjack @ February 4, 2006, 8:43 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I tend to disagree with the whole "percentage" loss for either a manual or an automatic.

Power, to include "horse" power, is a measure of the ability to do "work". Of course, there is a certain amount of power required to turn the clutch, transmission, driveshaft, rearend and finally tires. The sum of the HP required to turn these is not going to increase because the engine's output increases.... which is what a flat percentage implies.

Does this make sense, or am I just talking out of my posterior?

Oh, by the way.... I'm new to these forums. I'll try not to stir up too much stuff. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif[/img]
[/b][/quote]


Flapjack,

Glad to see you over here!!! Welcome aboard. Post away!