(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--CfsXb_cu--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/wadj90b0aoi6b7o2m3kk.jpg)
Dodge has officially unveiled its 2015 Charger SRT Hellcat. Like the Dodge Challenger Hellcat, the Charger Hellcat employs a 707-horsepower 6.2L V8, making it the most power sedan money can buy. Rumored for weeks, Dodge unveiled the Charger Hellcat earlier today at an event leading up to the Woodward Dream Cruise. Like its Challenger counterpart, the Hellcat features several design tweaks compared to the standard Charger model, including a new hood with added air vents, a more aggressive front splitter, side skirts and a rear spoiler.
Although more for performance than looks, the Charger also wears large wheels shod in high-performance Pirelli rubber. Massive Brembo brakes are located at all-four corners to haul the Charger Hellcat down from speed.
Underhood, the Charger Hellcat uses Dodge's latest supercharger 6.2L V8. Power is rated at 707-horsepower and 650 lb-ft of torque, making the Charger Hellcat the most powerful four-door on the market today.
As you'd expect of a car with those kind of power figures, the Charger Hellcat can flat-out fly. The sedan, which weighs about 100 pounds more than the Challenger Hellcat, can cover the quarter mile in 11 seconds flat -- on street tires. For those keeping track, that's 0.2 seconds faster than the Challenger Hellcat. Give it enough open road and the Charger Hellcat will hit 204mph, outpacing the aero-challenged Challenger by 5mph.
No other sedan on the planet can match the Charger Hellcat's acceleration or top speed.
No pricing information has been released, but the Charger Hellcat is expected to be reasonable priced in the low-$60,000 range. The super sedan will arrive in Dodge dealerships during the fourth quarter of the year.
http://new.livestream.com/chryslerlive/DodgeProductReveal/videos/59110134 (http://new.livestream.com/chryslerlive/DodgeProductReveal/videos/59110134)
WANT!!!
Still not sure about that front end.
That much performance to ~60k is mind blowing.
Quote from: hotrodalex on August 13, 2014, 10:16:00 AM
Still not sure about that front end.
The only thing anyone will see is the back anyway.
This I like. Looks much more "mature" then the SRT-8 cars.
Quote from: SVT666 on August 13, 2014, 10:10:49 AM
WANT!!!
As odd as it sounds to say about a Chrysler product, I think I agree
Looks good, 700HP for 70K is cool but it reminds me a lot of the GT500. Just a big engine overpowering everything else. Doesnt really excite me. I'm hoping they do something like a Z28
Bout whats needed to get that 2 ton pig a movin.
That is such a cool topper to the Challenger/Charger lines. Chrysler may no longer be affiliated with MB, but these power figures and products are sure speaking with all that awesome excess of AMG.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 13, 2014, 11:30:44 AM
Looks good, 700HP for 70K is cool but it reminds me a lot of the GT500. Just a big engine overpowering everything else. Doesnt really excite me. I'm hoping they do something like a Z28
I would agree, but these hellcats are putting down the numbers on street tires that the gt500 never seemed that do
Quote from: r0tor on August 13, 2014, 11:41:26 AM
I would agree, but these hellcats are putting down the numbers on street tires that the gt500 never seemed that do
I'm guessing that MB designed rear subframe can put power down better than fords hastily designed "performance' cars.
Stock GT500 trap time issues definitely have roots in chassis and rear suspension design (prone to axle hop) but there's more. First is tires - the S197 can't handle a lot of tire in back and I suspect it's not because they won't physically fit (i.e., I suspect the GT500 has handling/control issues with more rear tire). Second is transmission - the Hellcat 8sp A/T which is going to have more advantageous gearing and shift quicker. After 120 mph or so I'm sure the GT500 will start to pull ahead as it has a notable power/weight ratio advantage - these Hellcats are hellaciously heavy (~4,450 lb for the Challenger, ~4,550 lb for the Charger).
Quote from: GoCougs on August 13, 2014, 12:35:42 PM
Stock GT500 trap time issues definitely have roots in chassis and rear suspension design (prone to axle hop) but there's more. First is tires - the S197 can't handle a lot of tire in back and I suspect it's not because they won't physically fit (i.e., I suspect the GT500 has handling/control issues with more rear tire). Second is transmission - the Hellcat 8sp A/T which is going to have more advantageous gearing and shift quicker. After 120 mph or so I'm sure the GT500 will start to pull ahead as it has a notable power/weight ratio advantage - these Hellcats are hellaciously heavy (~4,450 lb for the Challenger, ~4,550 lb for the Charger).
Weight is less of an issue than drag at triple speeds. Both cars are big barn faced bricks so to that end it's kind of anyone's call. And the Mustang can fit 315s in the back no problem... Ford just chooses to go skinnier
This thing just seems kind of silly to me. Silly in a fun, good way, but silly nonetheless. Like one of those 10 second school buses.
This is just so badass. I think the new look is great.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 13, 2014, 01:16:14 PM
And the Mustang can fit 315s in the back no problem... Ford just chooses to go skinnier
That seems to support Cougs' statement.
When's the POLICE PERFORMANCE PACKAGE arriving? :praise:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on August 13, 2014, 01:16:14 PM
Weight is less of an issue than drag at triple speeds. Both cars are big barn faced bricks so to that end it's kind of anyone's call. And the Mustang can fit 315s in the back no problem... Ford just chooses to go skinnier
This thing just seems kind of silly to me. Silly in a fun, good way, but silly nonetheless. Like one of those 10 second school buses.
GT500 is a far smaller car...
And weight definitely matters, at any speed.
Quote from: r0tor on August 13, 2014, 11:41:26 AM
I would agree, but these hellcats are putting down the numbers on street tires that the gt500 never seemed that do
When motortrend tested the challenger hellcat it put down the same times as gt500.
GT500 blasts from 0-60 mph in a scant 3.5 seconds, on toward a quarter-mile time of 11.6 seconds at 125.7 mph.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1205_2013_ford_shelby_gt500_first_test/#ixzz3AJL6gFpc (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1205_2013_ford_shelby_gt500_first_test/#ixzz3AJL6gFpc)
Hellcat challenger:
With that 4449-pound coupe's 707-hp monster under the hood and an eight-speed automatic, 0-60 mph came and went in 3.7 seconds, onto a quarter mile time of 11.7 seconds at 125.4 mph.
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1408_2015_dodge_charger_srt_hellcat_first_look/#ixzz3AJLNolGg (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1408_2015_dodge_charger_srt_hellcat_first_look/#ixzz3AJLNolGg)
The GT500 hooks fine.
Do want the charger hellcat though, I hope there is a grand cherokee hellcat version with awd.
OK, now I'm impressed.
Nice muscle car. Did anyone drive it 204 mph or is that just theory?
It used to be nothing could touch you in a Euro big bucks über-sedan. Now any redneck can blow by (for at least a while, I doubt these cars durability at constant high speed driving).
Good/Bad times depending on your perspective.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on August 14, 2014, 09:24:52 AM
It used to be nothing could touch you in a Euro big bucks über-sedan. Now any redneck can blow by (for at least a while, I doubt these cars durability at constant high speed driving).
Nobody can do constant high speed driving anywhere outside of Germany, so I don't see why that would be a concern.
QuoteGood/Bad times depending on your perspective.
Yeah, I can't imagine what it must feel like to have just spent massive amounts of money on an M5, and then get blown away by a Dodge.
Quote from: SVT666 on August 14, 2014, 09:53:44 AM
Nobody can do constant high speed driving anywhere outside of Germany, so I don't see why that would be a concern.
You should come visit. I can very easily do 200kph+ for long stretches. I have also driven the autobahn. If anything, I can drive at a constant high speed like that for longer here. I used to have a "mexican" Spirit R/T that had a 160hp turbo back in the early 90's. That thing was great but would overheat soon under such stress. That never happens with euro cars in my experience. Dad had a "real" Spirit R/T with the Lotus head, that one did fine.
Quote from: SVT666 on August 14, 2014, 09:53:44 AM
Yeah, I can't imagine what it must feel like to have just spent massive amounts of money on an M5, and then get blown away by a Dodge.
Indeed. You can always take refuge in the "but I have a nicer interior" bullshit. Or, get the M5 used for half the price of the Dodge like I did. And still do 200 MPH (because not a brick).
Quote from: SVT666 on August 14, 2014, 09:53:44 AM
Yeah, I can't imagine what it must feel like to have just spent massive amounts of money on an M5, and then get blown away by a Dodge.
Ouch. :lol:
Quote from: SJ_GTI on August 14, 2014, 10:29:58 AM
Ouch. :lol:
:cheers:
I have a soft spot for Mopar shit. Owned said Spirit R/T plus dad had a stupid fast Shelby Shadow turbo at one time. First car I bought with my own money was a Chrysler Breeze.
Quote from: SJ_GTI on August 14, 2014, 10:29:58 AM
Ouch. :lol:
The funny part is, I wasn't even thinking of his recent purchase when I made that post. :lol:
Quote from: SVT666 on August 14, 2014, 10:59:00 AM
The funny part is, I wasn't even thinking of his recent purchase when I made that post. :lol:
I am sure he isn't taking it personal. I thought it was funny even though I obviously own a car that is slower and more expensive than American makes. :ohyeah:
impressive car!
What's $60k in 1989 dollars?
1989 SHO (fastest FWD car ever, 3rd fastest sedan after $50k M5 and $70k 7er) was $20k then.
The front end looks soooo much better on the red car in live photos.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on August 14, 2014, 11:16:55 AM
impressive car!
What's $60k in 1989 dollars?
1989 SHO (fastest FWD car ever, 3rd fastest sedan after $50k M5 and $70k 7er) was $20k then.
$60k is about $30k back then ($20k then about $40k now)
Quote from: SJ_GTI on August 14, 2014, 11:05:08 AM
I am sure he isn't taking it personal. I thought it was funny even though I obviously own a car that is slower and more expensive than American makes. :ohyeah:
Of course not. There's always faster, better, cheaper, richer, etc.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on August 14, 2014, 11:16:55 AM
impressive car!
What's $60k in 1989 dollars?
1989 SHO (fastest FWD car ever, 3rd fastest sedan after $50k M5 and $70k 7er) was $20k then.
Ever? There has got to have been something FWD faster than 140 mph or whatever the SHO was by now... I think some of the later Alfa 164s got up in that territory.
The V8 W bodies did 150mph +
Quote from: SVT32V on August 13, 2014, 03:46:38 PM
When motortrend tested the challenger hellcat it put down the same times as gt500.
GT500 blasts from 0-60 mph in a scant 3.5 seconds, on toward a quarter-mile time of 11.6 seconds at 125.7 mph.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1205_2013_ford_shelby_gt500_first_test/#ixzz3AJL6gFpc (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1205_2013_ford_shelby_gt500_first_test/#ixzz3AJL6gFpc)
Hellcat challenger:
With that 4449-pound coupe's 707-hp monster under the hood and an eight-speed automatic, 0-60 mph came and went in 3.7 seconds, onto a quarter mile time of 11.7 seconds at 125.4 mph.
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1408_2015_dodge_charger_srt_hellcat_first_look/#ixzz3AJLNolGg (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1408_2015_dodge_charger_srt_hellcat_first_look/#ixzz3AJLNolGg)
The GT500 hooks fine.
The GT500 has a notable power/weight ratio advantage vs. the Hellcat. Even if it didn't hook well (= sorta lousy ET) it should trap higher but it is virtually identical.
Quote from: GoCougs on August 14, 2014, 07:36:56 PM
The GT500 has a notable power/weight ratio advantage vs. the Hellcat. Even if it didn't hook well (= sorta lousy ET) it should trap higher but it is virtually identical.
Not really, the GT500 traps and does the 1/4 right between the Z06, heavycat, and the ZR1 (per motor trend times and traps) and is right where it should be wrt power to weight.
Zo6 6.7 lbs/hp – 122-3 mph trap speed 11.7
Hellcat 6.3 lbs/hp 125 mph trap speed 11.7
GT500 5.9 lb/hp – 126 mph trap speeds 11.6
Zr1 5.2 lbs/hp – 127-8 mph trap speeds 11.4
Heavycat lol.
Quote from: SVT32V on August 14, 2014, 09:20:58 PM
Not really, the GT500 traps and does the 1/4 right between the Z06, heavycat, and the ZR1 (per motor trend times and traps) and is right where it should be wrt power to weight.
Zo6 6.7 lbs/hp – 122-3 mph trap speed 11.7
Hellcat 6.3 lbs/hp 125 mph trap speed 11.7
GT500 5.9 lb/hp – 126 mph trap speeds 11.6
Zr1 5.2 lbs/hp – 127-8 mph trap speeds 11.4
Actually, those numbers are too slow for the Chevies. Per "first tests" by Motor Trend for each:
Z06: 6.2 lb/hp - 11.5 @ 127 (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_0510_2006_chevrolet_corvette_z06/viewall.html)
Challenger Hellcat A/T: 6.3 lb/hp - 11.7 @ 125 (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1407_2015_dodge_challenger_srt_hellcat_first_test/)
Shelby GT500 M/T: 5.8 lb/hp 11.6 @ 126 (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1205_2013_ford_shelby_gt500_first_test/viewall.html)
Corvette ZR1: 5.3 lb/hp - 11.2 @ 131 (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_0810_2009_chevrolet_corvette_zr1_first_test/viewall.html)
The GT500 should be well above the Z06 and Hellcat and approach the ZR1 (which itself has hookup issues though not as severe). The two previous incarnations of the GT500 had similar issues with just not quite living up to their numbers.