2018 Demon - some pics (and yes, it is filthy)

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: Snagglefoot

But to put this all into context, the new Demon can do the quarter in 9.65 sec. To add insult to injury, my 2005 Ford Taurus SE can keep up to a 71 340 Dodge Demon in the 0 to 60. Our memory of the glory years gets a bit foggy with time. They old muscle cars were actually wimpy compared to the modern ones.

The old cars were more "exciting"/scary to drive though. You can go to cedar point and hit 120mph in under 3 seconds, but with no input or skill involved is that really fun? Maybe for a few runs then what?

 

[tenderloin]

The biggest factors regarding times back in the day were the tires. My '69 Mach 1 Cobra Jet had F70-14's...super skinny compared to today's even Eco box cars. My '70 Boss 302 Mustang had F60-15's. Wider but nothing compared to today's tires. Add in the difference in construction and rubber compounds..Bingo. BTW my Boss 302 which was hard pressed to break into the 13 sec 1/4 mile would gap Hemis, 440 6 packs, 454 Corvettes you name any big block on street tires from a dead stop for at least 1/8 + mile when an average driver was behind the wheel. The tires would go up in smoke in a flash...5,000 rpm starts drop the clutch comparatively low wheel spin then the low and I would be gone. The sound of dual Carters 4 barrels sucking air as they went by near/past the 1/4 mile mark was a sound to behold

Originally Posted By: Snagglefoot
Originally Posted By: Chris142
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Unfortunately when I hear Dodge Demon I think of the Dart. The engine dying in left hand turns was the epitome of the 70’s.
The 340 was quite the street contender! Many big blocks go beat by a 340 at a stop light race.
Originally Posted By: xxch4osxx
Originally Posted By: Chris142
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Unfortunately when I hear Dodge Demon I think of the Dart. The engine dying in left hand turns was the epitome of the 70’s.
The 340 was quite the street contender! Many big blocks go beat by a 340 at a stop light race.


My father told me stories about those 340's showing up big block powered cars. I'm guessing they must have put out quite a bit more HP than they were advertised at.


This was true but was party due to the torque curve on the engine and vehicle weight. A 71 340 Dodge Demon had a quarter mile time of 14.56 sec. A 71 Dodge Charger with a 440 had a quarter mile time of 14.5 seconds, so a tuned 340 Demon could beat a 440 Charger.

But to put this all into context, the new Demon can do the quarter in 9.65 sec. To add insult to injury, my 2005 Ford Taurus SE can keep up to a 71 340 Dodge Demon in the 0 to 60. Our memory of the glory years gets a bit foggy with time. They old muscle cars were actually wimpy compared to the modern ones.

 

[nthach]

Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
To make a streetable 840HP? They most certainly would have. And it still wouldn't have anything close to the refinement of these modern mills.
Not to mention the fact the fuel back in those days was drastically different so not even apples to apples on that part either. 840ish HP on the street in 1969-1970 would have shaken your teeth out of your head with zero creature comforts and it would not have been that "streetable".

And those classic street rods, as cool as they look and a testament to how Detroit can build things aren't something you want to be in when things go south. If you crashed or get into a crash with a new Charger or Challenger you have a chance to unbuckle your seat belt, force the door open and walk away or the risk of serious injury is minimized(and UConnect will ping for the cops/firemen/EMS to come out). Try doing that in a classic Mopar.

The Demon is already faster than even some drag racing cars - but the NHRA banned it probably for driver safety, I think they want drivers of cars going faster than 12-13 second times to have a proper roll cage, HANS and 5-point restraints.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: nthach
Are those OEM Toyo/Nitto "street-legal" drag slicks I see?

I was under the impression FCA was using Pirelli P Zeros as the OEM tire for the Hemi Charger/Challengers.


They look for all the world like Nitto NT05Rs.

I know it is marketed sort of as a specialized quarter mile machine, but a TR6060 or 6070 would be a cool option in these.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: ARB1977
Originally Posted By: CT8
These muscle cars make the 60s muscle cars look so weak.

But don’t forget classic muscle cars didn’t need help from a supercharger. More computer [censored] to break these days.


They were also about as under-tired as anything could ever possibly be.

I don't know HOW they were even able to do an EASY launch on those bicycle tire width bias plys of the day, let alone how the "Stock Appearing" drag series has them running mid to high 10s on them now!

 

[Snagglefoot]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
To make a streetable 840HP? They most certainly would have. And it still wouldn't have anything close to the refinement of these modern mills.
Not to mention the fact the fuel back in those days was drastically different so not even apples to apples on that part either. 840ish HP on the street in 1969-1970 would have shaken your teeth out of your head with zero creature comforts and it would not have been that "streetable".


Not to mention the difference between NET and GROSS, which often isn't factored in when these numbers are compared.


Quarter mile and 0-60.

 

[Snagglefoot]

Originally Posted By: ARB1977
Originally Posted By: CT8
These muscle cars make the 60s muscle cars look so weak.

But don’t forget classic muscle cars didn’t need help from a supercharger. More computer [censored] to break these days.


The 2005 Ford Mustang GT blows away most 60’s muscle cars without a supercharger. 0-60 in 5.0 seconds. Quarter mile in 13.3.

 

[ls1mike]

My WS6 Bone stock went 13.23 at 108.02 MPH with.

My stock 2001 Z28 with the updates to the LS1 went 12.95 at 110.02 mph with 151 miles on it.

My fat girl, The Caprice has run a few 13.60s.

Horsepower was rated differently back then and the drivelines just didn't put the power down to the ground like newer cars.

The goofy 2.0 LTG Turbo Malibu is rumored to run mid 14's...I have yet to take it to the track.

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Dang. Very nice.

I'd have a difficult time choosing between a Demon or ZR-1.


Why? The demon is purpose built 1/4 mile burner.

The Corvette does many things very well. Two very different cars.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: tenderloin
Latest wide baby brother review.....


Hellcat Widebody


That is just flat out INSANE!!

But I STILL think that brutal MONSTER needs even more tire yet under it, like a 100 tread wear or less, 335/345 section width super glue gumball (at ALL four corners!).

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: ls1mike
My WS6 Bone stock went 13.23 at 108.02 MPH with.

My stock 2001 Z28 with the updates to the LS1 went 12.95 at 110.02 mph with 151 miles on it.

My fat girl, The Caprice has run a few 13.60s.

Horsepower was rated differently back then and the drivelines just didn't put the power down to the ground like newer cars.

The goofy 2.0 LTG Turbo Malibu is rumored to run mid 14's...I have yet to take it to the track.

My 2000 LS1 Z28 with no options to add weight ( and without the updated LS6 intake manifold!), and FACTORY exhaust manifolds/catcons, and just a set of Nitto 555R drag radials went 12.67 @ 114.1, and this was with 60 foot/launch KILLING; full road race type suspension, still connected 35mm SOLID front aftermarket (Strano) sway bar, and heavy/sticky 275/40-17 front tires on it.

There was not much out there for <$20K NEW at the time which even came CLOSE to that, and there STILL is not!

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
My WS6 Bone stock went 13.23 at 108.02 MPH with.

My stock 2001 Z28 with the updates to the LS1 went 12.95 at 110.02 mph with 151 miles on it.

My fat girl, The Caprice has run a few 13.60s.

Horsepower was rated differently back then and the drivelines just didn't put the power down to the ground like newer cars.

The goofy 2.0 LTG Turbo Malibu is rumored to run mid 14's...I have yet to take it to the track.

My 2000 LS1 Z28 with no options to add weight ( and without the updated LS6 intake manifold!), and FACTORY exhaust manifolds/catcons, and just a set of Nitto 555R drag radials went 12.67 @ 114.1, and this was with 60 foot/launch KILLING; full road race type suspension, still connected 35mm SOLID front aftermarket (Strano) sway bar, and heavy/sticky 275/40-17 front tires on it.

There was not much out there for div>


4th-Gen Camaros forever! With minor modifications, mine performed very well on road courses for 14 years. It always seemed to run stronger than the 305 HP factory rating, based on the higher power cars it could keep up with on the straights. And it was never passed by a Mustang on the track.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Snagglefoot
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
To make a streetable 840HP? They most certainly would have. And it still wouldn't have anything close to the refinement of these modern mills.
Not to mention the fact the fuel back in those days was drastically different so not even apples to apples on that part either. 840ish HP on the street in 1969-1970 would have shaken your teeth out of your head with zero creature comforts and it would not have been that "streetable".


Not to mention the difference between NET and GROSS, which often isn't factored in when these numbers are compared.


Quarter mile and 0-60.


And trap speed

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

And trap speed

Exactly! Trap speed does not lie and it tells you a ton about the car!

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

And trap speed

Exactly! Trap speed does not lie and it tells you a ton about the car!

 

[Silverado12]

Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

And trap speed

Exactly! Trap speed does not lie and it tells you a ton about the car!


Yes, and even with the old bias ply tires the 1960s cars had a chance to get traction and get on down the track. MPH at the end of the track is the best way IMO to tell how strong the car is, not necessarily quarter mile times.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Silverado12
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL

And trap speed

Exactly! Trap speed does not lie and it tells you a ton about the car!


Yes, and even with the old bias ply tires the 1960s cars had a chance to get traction and get on down the track. MPH at the end of the track is the best way IMO to tell how strong the car is, not necessarily quarter mile times.


Yup, ET is more about the driver and traction, MPH is about how much the car is putting down.