I think they underrated it a tad! With say a 10% drive-train loss, that's around 800 flywheel hp perhaps???
Last edited:
Stock Dodge Hellcat chassis dyno!
- Thread starter Drew99GT
- Start date
- Status
Are there any insurance companies out there that would insure a 20 year old with a Hellcat?
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Are there any insurance companies out there that would insure a 20 year old with a Hellcat?
If you have the money, someone will cover it
Are there any insurance companies out there that would insure a 20 year old with a Hellcat?
If you have the money, someone will cover it
Originally Posted By: michaelluscher
If you have the money, someone will cover it
I'm guessing $800-$900 a month for a 20 year old plus the car payment.
If you have the money, someone will cover it
I'm guessing $800-$900 a month for a 20 year old plus the car payment.
Chrysler has a long history of under rating their power levels.
They rate them under the worst conditions possible, then if you optimize the test conditions you can easily exceed them.
The hellcat seems to generate adequate horsepower...
They rate them under the worst conditions possible, then if you optimize the test conditions you can easily exceed them.
The hellcat seems to generate adequate horsepower...
Nice car, but I would rather have a Z06.
665 was the max with two bags of ice on the blower and the hood up.
Do you really think people will take the hoods off and put ice on the blower?
Do you really think people will take the hoods off and put ice on the blower?
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Are there any insurance companies out there that would insure a 20 year old with a Hellcat?
I was car shopping in West Texas, the "Permian Basin", where a LOT of rich, oil people lived when Nissan came out with the 300Z twin-turbo V6.
I was shopping for a little Nissan truck, but I asked the car salesman, "Do you sell very many of the new 300Z twin turbo", and he said, "Oh yeah, we sell a lot of them! We have local oil executives that come in and but them all of the time for their 16 and 17 year old high school boys that attend Permian High School..." To which I replied "WOW!...I'll bet their insurance is pretty high!", and he said "Yeah, it's typically $500-$600 per month..."
Yeeoowwzaaaa!
Ed
Are there any insurance companies out there that would insure a 20 year old with a Hellcat?
I was car shopping in West Texas, the "Permian Basin", where a LOT of rich, oil people lived when Nissan came out with the 300Z twin-turbo V6.
I was shopping for a little Nissan truck, but I asked the car salesman, "Do you sell very many of the new 300Z twin turbo", and he said, "Oh yeah, we sell a lot of them! We have local oil executives that come in and but them all of the time for their 16 and 17 year old high school boys that attend Permian High School..." To which I replied "WOW!...I'll bet their insurance is pretty high!", and he said "Yeah, it's typically $500-$600 per month..."
Yeeoowwzaaaa!
Ed
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Chrysler has a long history of under rating their power levels.
They rate them under the worst conditions possible, then if you optimize the test conditions you can easily exceed them.
The hellcat seems to generate adequate horsepower...
I like adequate horsepower.
Chrysler has a long history of under rating their power levels.
They rate them under the worst conditions possible, then if you optimize the test conditions you can easily exceed them.
The hellcat seems to generate adequate horsepower...
I like adequate horsepower.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
I posted the results from Hotrod in another thread where they ran the Hellcat, Camaro and Mustang on Kenne Bell's dyno:
http://www.hotrod.com/cars/featured/1504-2015-dodge-challenger-hellcat-dyno-test/
Originally Posted By: Hotrod
Strapped to the dyno, the eight-speed automatic-equipped '15 SRT Hellcat Challenger from Chrysler's West Coast media fleet produced a corrected rear-wheel peak of 620 hp, happening at the fuel-limited 6,200-rpm redline in Fourth gear. (Rear-wheel torque maxed at 579 lb-ft at 4,200 rpm.) By comparison, a stock '13 Chevy Camaro ZL1 six-speed automatic maxed out at 465 hp at 6,300 rpm (also run in Fourth gear and limited electronically by fuel), and 473 lb-ft of twist at 3,700 rpm. The completely stock '13 Ford Mustang Shelby GT 500 was a six-speed manual trans model, and in Fourth gear, put out peaks of 587 hp at 6,400 rpm and 575 lb-ft at 4,300 rpm.
If we use the 15% driveline loss figure:
1. Hellcat, 620RWHP = ~713HP (707HP rated)
2. Camaro, 465RWHP = ~535HP (580HP rated)
3. Mustang, 587RWHP = ~675HP (662HP rated)
It would appear the Hellcat and Mustang are overachievers.
http://www.hotrod.com/cars/featured/1504-2015-dodge-challenger-hellcat-dyno-test/
Originally Posted By: Hotrod
Strapped to the dyno, the eight-speed automatic-equipped '15 SRT Hellcat Challenger from Chrysler's West Coast media fleet produced a corrected rear-wheel peak of 620 hp, happening at the fuel-limited 6,200-rpm redline in Fourth gear. (Rear-wheel torque maxed at 579 lb-ft at 4,200 rpm.) By comparison, a stock '13 Chevy Camaro ZL1 six-speed automatic maxed out at 465 hp at 6,300 rpm (also run in Fourth gear and limited electronically by fuel), and 473 lb-ft of twist at 3,700 rpm. The completely stock '13 Ford Mustang Shelby GT 500 was a six-speed manual trans model, and in Fourth gear, put out peaks of 587 hp at 6,400 rpm and 575 lb-ft at 4,300 rpm.
If we use the 15% driveline loss figure:
1. Hellcat, 620RWHP = ~713HP (707HP rated)
2. Camaro, 465RWHP = ~535HP (580HP rated)
3. Mustang, 587RWHP = ~675HP (662HP rated)
It would appear the Hellcat and Mustang are overachievers.
I have not driven the Shelby (yet... I literally live across the street from the biggest Ford dealership in the area), and keeping in mind my general "meh" attitudettowards American cars (let's face it, the 90-00's 'stangs were a bad joke), the Boss BLEW ME AWAY!
I would love to see one strapped to a DynoJet, because even with aggressive gearing, it was much faster than the bhp/lb would suggest...
I would love to see one strapped to a DynoJet, because even with aggressive gearing, it was much faster than the bhp/lb would suggest...
- Status
Similar threads
