Ultimatecarpage.com
> Cars by brand
> United States
> Dodge
> Magnum SRT-8
 Comments
|
| Dodge Magnum SRT-8 |
| Article | Image gallery (12) | Specifications | User Comments (39) |
|
|
Add your comments on the Dodge Magnum SRT-8
| Way to go Dodge |
| MoparOrNoCar3187 21-12-2003 |
What do you know dodge hit the nail on the head with another excellent design. The Magnum has a low lying race lok but still has the convience of more room. And get this it runs 13s in the quarter mile, a station wagon!!! I would love to have one of these. And if they work with Kenne Bell like they did to make the supercharger package for the 03 Hemi Ram called Rumble Bee this car could be a one hell of a sleeper. Mopar Forever!!! |
| sign me up, I can't wait! |
| firesign 1-9-2003 |
"well... call me car nut or whatever... I can't wait to get one of these in my driveway! I've never owned a Chrysler or a Dodge but I've been watching with great interest. The Crossfire is a SLK 230 with new skin, and although I've owned an SLK it was quick, but not fast. I can only imagine with all the H.P. pumped to the rear wheels that this car will do all I want plus a whole lot more. I've owned a few muscle cars but never anything like this one promises. My wife loves to scoot and drives a souped up A4. We love it, but this one will definatley be a car for her mainly, I will just have to pry the keys from her hands for my turn. With what Chrysler is doing with their cars, warranties, and performance, ""sign me up, I can't wait"" !!!!" |
| Different Styles of Roads |
| danscan 12-8-2003 |
SRT-8 looks great and is a much better solution then many of these boring SUVs. I think one of things we all have to put into the equation when comparing cars is Price. Hell give me twice the money to work with and I will have twice the car. So yes the RS6 is better. But the average person can buy a 35K car but not a 55K car(Dollars). Now back to the cars and engines. The people who say it does not have enough valves should remeber its a HEMI. and has a very similiar design to the combustion chamber as most DOHC engines. Also as the size of the motor increases they become harder to get 100hp to litter. Other parts of the motor make that up like a more usable power curve. 500 hp at 7000rpm is nice but if you regularly drive at 2000 to 3500 rpm the car may be boggy. Also Americans drive alot further everyday then europeans. America is very very big. Much of this driving is on a highway at 55 to 75mph which with a desial or a small 4cylinder in any type of midsize car can be tough. While the V8 in my mustang will cruise at 1800rpm at 65mph and have no problems passing while in 5th. The smaller engines lose gas milage at higher speeds and since most americans are driving on highways while eurpeans are driving lower speed roads their solution will not work for us. As for emissions although our gasoline to european gasoline is very similiar what makes our streets breahtable is lack of desiels. Maybe scientificly desiels our as good for the environment(I am not sure but I am sure if they weren't greens would be up in arms) trying to walk down Dublin or Rome at rush hour is a like walk through hell. I could hardly breath with smell of desiel while in Rome (dublin I was usually drunk). Also of the three major car places I believe the americans are the inventors, the Germans are the engineers, and the Japanese are the refiners. Many of the off the wall ideas cam from america its just that GM, FORD, and Mopar left it on the shelf. Completely varible timing through the use of siloniods was done on the not rod circuit back in the sixties, but now BMW is engineering it. Side comment. Its just like WW2. The germans have wonderfully engineered weapons far advanced(Me 262), the Americans take old stuff and make it work and make alot of em(P51 or P47 or hellcat), The japanese refine it to its purest form(Zero) |
| hey its just maryland |
| justMaryland 26-5-2003 |
the only thing that appears to missing to me is that the interior is blocky... I think the best interior is that of the Audi A4 or A6 or TT because it blends in between the dash and the doors. This is the only thing that is missing from the CAR . . . I really want this car I just hope that they hurry up and release it so i can get my two cheeks planted on that seat flooring the pedal and burning up some pavement in a rental.. hahahahaha... i really dream about this car. |
| Why does it just seat 5!!!! |
| Engineer1 10-5-2003 |
I'm a car guy with a family and was desperately hopping this thing had a third row, salvation from the mini-van. Any 4-door out there will seat 5, I don't care about more room for stuff I need a people mover!...alas I guess it's off to Volvo XC-90 for me. |
| Hmmm... |
| prozacian 10-5-2003 |
Well, I dunno really, I'm British you see, but I gotta tell you all this. American prototypes are satill tbhe best. Whether or not the finished article is any good is a different story. I'd just like to say this much to Gary Shook, wtf are you on about. You never even invented the car...get a life you sad sad little man! If you had anything about you, you would respect the Europeans for their great engineering. The American gas guzzler has gone, kaput, finito! If yu want to bring any of your so called $20k 'sports cars' then please put them against the pride and joy of Euro motoring. Other than that, I'm liking th styling of this car... once it becomes a managable sized engine, should be quite tasty, stick a 6 speed manual, and Bobs your uncle, one of the best Yanky cars to date! |
| Dodge Magnum SRT-8 |
| DaleSrfan4ever 3-5-2003 |
Where do I put my money? Just look at it uglier then the Impala or even a'40 Willys (I've owned both).Can't wait to add this one. |
| Agree to disagree |
| elmo6113 25-4-2003 |
I agree that the US has some great designs and concepts and the Dodge Magnum is one of them. Everyone has different tastes, but the car has to be unique from the start. My example is the Chevy Caviler, no matter what you do to, buy for or trick out on a Caviler it is still... a Caviler. Another country that has a style all its own is Germany. They are amazing with some of the engineering they have done under the hood, under the car and in the car and have still managed to keep both style and quality. And Gary, Audi is a German car, use the website. |
| Dodge Magnum is, and will be a great car... |
| Gary Shook 24-4-2003 |
First off, I would just like to say that this is my first post on this web site. It has come to my attention that there are a lot of different opinions on this car. Here is mine, and the reason I decided to finally post after reading some of the pathetic false hood opinions about this and other American cars. First of, you can thank us American for the Automobile. If it were up to thw Swede's we probably still be riding in buggies. However, I do like Audi. Great cars, great engineering and great looks. But show me an Audi that can go 400 miles on no gas. Show me a competition anywhere except for the US that features electric cars racing cross country. Show me a country that has strictor emissions than the US except for Japan or China. If you want my opinion and you probably could give a rats, but I believe that the US and Japanesee motor companies are the leaders. They could easily put all other companies out of business. Anyway, between the super 3, GM, Ford and Chrysler they produce and employ more people than all other motor companies combined. BTW- Don't make fun of us rice burning fart can exhuast drivers. We'll eat you alive. Show me a car that I can throw $20k into including labor and the price of the car and do easy 10 sec quarter mile runs. I'll take on any thing in the same price range and I will show you tail lights. And I still can manage to get 30 mpg, as long as I am not putting you in your place. I would like to thank the outlandish rants of MOTORHEAD for waking me up and commiting me to start posting on this site. As for my final thoughts when Dodge was running the hemi's back in the day, the American car companies ruled the Earth. I think it's time we get back to our roots and take back over what is rightly ours. WE AMERICANS ARE THE KINGS AND QUEENS OF THE ROAD. STEP ASIDE!!! |
| Believers@NON-Believers... |
| evasive1 3-4-2003 |
"Everyone is talking about this beautiful machine like Dodge is actually going to put this HP & Tourque in a vehicle. If any of you believe that they will produce a 430hp, 480ft lbs of tourque MoNsTeR, you're kidding yourselves. The chopped look of this dragon wagon is unbelievable. That we might see go to pruduction. Other than that it's more than likely to get a Magnum V-8....JUST LIKE THE NAME PLATE! If ""I"" was going to name a true Muscle car like this one ""would"" be...I would call it the HEMI SRT-8. Then ""I"" would throw that Super8-Hemi crap out the window, and fire whoever designed it. Don't get me wrong, if the SRT-8 takes off AS IS, I'll refinance, or sell a limb to purchase it at 33,000 dollars. I love the Audi, but I'd jump all over the American made muscle in a second. Even if the Dodge costed more. If you guys really were car guys, I would think you would choose a rear wheel drive over a ""womanized""(no offense ladies) vehicle. To each his own, but just remember where we live." |
| AUDI RS6 IS THE BIG WINNER!!!! |
| Arosaturbo 19-3-2003 |
Well,the Audi RS6 is much,much,much better than this Dodge (FREAK OF US ENGINERS!!!!).The RS6 has 450 hp from a 4.2 liters engine with Twin Turbos, a Quattro All Wheel Drive system and it has a top speed of around 290 km/h without the speed limit system that really sucks on the car.(Why this speed limit anyway?)The Dodge has less horse power and it has a bigger engine with a supercharger(5.7 liters engine!!!???????)Except that, it burns to much gasoline,it's to big to move around with it and it is very ugly(DUCK!!!) |
| Hemi with a Slush Box??? |
| Gear$Head 9-3-2003 |
Hemi with a Slush Box??? Shame on you!!! A six-speed manual and AWD would be nice...then again, that would make it too much like an Audi now, wouldn't it? |
| Hemi power YEAH |
| Psylex 7-2-2003 |
This is deffinately a beautiful car, it has attitude and baditude. The Audi RS6 is a surprisingly well crafted car but it just doesn't make the same powerful statement as the Magnum. And talk about better design the magnum is bigger and lighter. About the retro interior, if we forget about the classics how they evolved into the modern we can never truly appreciate the now, some people just need a good reminder. Torque is the true key to acceleration and the magnum outputs a good deal more. Besides who wouldn't like to leave a rice burner staring at you tailights with your entire family with thier luggage and your trailer? |
| Relax! |
| SpecV 27-1-2003 |
Wow, does everybody get so riled up!#? What's up will all the bashing? What a great sports tourer. Even though Audi has had a vehicle like this for a long time, Props to Dodge for having the hair on thier balls to be a domestic seller to attempt this. Let's define this very easily. Sweet Hemi engine by Dodge!!!! However, the whole car was engineered by Mercedez Benz! Smart Move for Daimler to sell half of the company to them. Rock On! |
| CAN YOU SAY AUDI!?!?! |
| gr8vetttte 23-1-2003 |
"Am I crazy or is this thing Look almost EXACTLY like a dead on match for the ""Audi Pikes Peak Quattro"". Of course without the benefit of Quattro traction and the extra 70 HP that the Audi comes with plus the superior build and engenering that AUDI is renown for. And probably the big friggin price tag too. So you EURO's dont get your panties all in a bunch when your own biggest car company is making the exact same thing as ours. Does anybody find it wierd that Benz and Audi are trying to make the same thing. Go figure." |
| DODGE DIFFERENT & GRAB LIFE BY HORNS! |
| moaz123 21-1-2003 |
Well Well Well. What have we hear some asians some americans some europians, and mostly people who never owend a dodge. Let me give you my piece of life. I own a 2000 intrepid R/T its a 244hp V6 3.5L doch. I get 23mpg driving at a constant 85mph, and in that i go to 100mph for brief periods of time. I get 0-60 in less than 7.3secs n this car weigs around 3200pounds! n 1/4mile runs at 13.2secs at 92mph flat. Dogde makes great cars n americans r making great new car with few pethetic cars from fords saturns n GMC. But sooner or later people will realize that their is really no reason not to buy a USA car. The hemiv8 you are talkin about will come with a EPA rating of 25mpg/19mpg and i would say if you drive the beast a little more effienctntly you will get 22-24mpg/17-19mpg. That is good enough for the US. The car looks so damn sexy that i never though i would ever say or buy a wagon! as i remember the old japanes wagons! YUCK!. And another thing you will see. In the late 80s the janapes cars were so damn rough bad seats n all that very bumpy ride road vibration n all that. Just compare a 1991 camry to 2003 camry look what happends???? insted of americans following the janapnes opposit happend the new camries are like buicks with great seats long leg space and bland styling while they forced the US cars to become like them stiff controls rides n other stuff. So in the end i would say in another 3-7yrs you will see a total turn around US has simply one of the best minds working for them while germans n brits have only brits n germans working for them, so this is so great about USA so many great people n minds from so many countries. time will tell how things will go the US way just look at the aircraft industry the AIRBUS having on hand the same tech as US is still on less than par in saftey n perfomence than the BOEING and GE! |
| the states!!! |
| motorhead 19-1-2003 |
This is country full of car freaks. To me everybody in america is a car freak. The freaks are divided in to two, extreme freaks and normal freaks. In america everything that has got to do with the automobile is extreamly cheap. The fuel there is cheap and cars there are exceptionally cheap too. Most americans love SUVs and trucks because they are firstly confortable, powerful, sound great, spacious, refined and realible. When you talk about emmissions and fuel comsumption for american cars, the trees start to wither but nowadays guess what is hapening at GM. They are developing engines which have 21st century technology and are tree huggers and do at least 20miles to the gallon and all those engines are actually V8s or V6s. There will come a time when fuel is gone but by then scientist would have though of an alternative. now this is one of the kind of cars GM are talking about. The other thing is the cadillac cien. It has a technology developed by GM. The technology is that if the engine is not being used fully or hard the V12 will auomatically run on only 6 cylinders to improve emmision levels and fuel consumtion. That is going to be the main feature on all GM built cars starting next half a decade. Dodge love buiding big engines which is what americans and the world love so they should continue building big engines but develope technologies to improve the engine's all rounf ability instead of just concentrating on performance and nothing else. |
| Back to the topic at hand |
| Boomer 18-1-2003 |
"Emissions Schmissens. Look at what the vehicle is. A FULL sized wagon with respectable power that can easily be increased with after-market doo-dads. The Audi mentioned below is one sweet vehicle, true, but a bit small. You guys read the Specs on the Magnum? This puppy is large and in charge. Not cramped like the rest of the cars everyone (American, Japanese and European alike) are producing. Why do you think the U.S. of A. is overrun with SUV's? We like 'em big and comfy, gas is dirt cheap (heck, Premium is $1.98/gal) and we got lots of freeway miles to fill. Big is also better when you are stuck in the wonders of Seattle gridlock. Get past the work day commute and out to the cruzin' scene at night and the Magnum (That's ""MR. SRT"" to you!) will out shine them all. I can't wait to see the rest of the line up. So crank up the Rock-n-Roll and open them pipes 'cuz the V8 thunder is coming back. - Boom! PS: Oh yeah, to all the little rick racers out there in their Honda Civics with the rattle-can exhaust...you are about to hear what a real set of pipes should sound like. ...Can you imagine the Magnum with a set of Cherry Bomb exhaust?? BOY-O-BOY-O-BOY!!!" |
| I am ready to spend my $40k.... |
| Warlock 17-1-2003 |
Yeap, I am buying one of these. Starting price is $33k so I expect the top of the line model will be near that 40k mark. To clear a few points. Superchargers are primarily larger motors do to their instant power at low rpms. Superchargers are instant power since they work from the crank and under 2500rpms and they are hooked to the crank(they have a belt). Exactly as one gentleman refered. All your turbos are mainly on smaller engines do to their high revs. Reason being, is that turbos are really effient above the 2500 rpm is when they really show their power. (exhaust driven). I am sure you heard the term turbo lag. It is because when you stomp on the pedal its not instant. All turbos have lag. They have improved but there is still a delay. I wish they would experient and make a supercharged 911. It will be interesting. Anyway, I am certain that I am buying one of these srt-8's. I wish they would give up some final pricing. |
| Just Do IT! |
| Andonis 11-1-2003 |
Don't change a thing, just do it! |
| ...additionally: |
| GTS25t 11-1-2003 |
The reason the RS6 uses two turbos is that the engine is V in configuration. 1 turbo per bank of cylinders and yes, this configuration allows a much faster spool up than a single turbo in a V configured engine. A turbo on each exhaust bank means that the incoming charge from each turbo has a much shorter path to travel than if the exhaust gasses from both banks had to meet at the one turbo and then make their way back to the inlet(s). Also the flow rate of a smaller turbo may be adequate to power 4 cylinders but not 8. If you use two turbos that can provide adequate flow for 4 cylinders, again you have smaller compressor/impeller wheels which have lower moments of inertia than a single larger turbo. The result? Much quicker spool up times. Finally FYI- turbos do not make it an easier task to smooth out power delivery. Try adding a turbo to a naturally aspirated engine then tuning that engine on a dynamometer and watch what happens to your power curve.... |
| Valid points but... |
| GTS25t 11-1-2003 |
... you are missing other important points about the technologies that you seem to dismiss as inconsequential to an engine's character. Firstly regarding turbo vs superchargers, you failed to mention that as a supercharger draws power from the crank that a supercharger, like and airconditioning unti will also sap power from the engine as well as provide forced induction. An off boost turbo certainly will result in increased back pressure and doughiness in an engine, but as it uses exhaust gasses to drive itself, you are getting energy from a resource that otherwise heads to atmosphere via the exhaust. In that respect, a turbo results in much greater efficiency than a supercharger. Additionally a turbocharged engine tends to rev to redline in an exponential rush, rather than the more linear surge of a suprecharged or atmo engine. Secondly, extra valves and camshafts by themselves do not neccesarily result in more power than a lesser number. Mercedes have fallen back on 3 valves per cylinder from 4 and the latest crop of Merc. engines are certainly impressive. However, by using two camshafts instead of one or 4 valves instead of 2 for example, you can have smaller components which tends to result in lower weight for each individual moving part. The result is a much lower moment of inertia to overcome. Multivalve/camshaft engines therefore tend to have a much easier time reaching higher rom ranges. Tune the engine right and this characteristic can be exploited resulting in smooth/fast revving engines. Anyone who has sampled a pushrod V8 then a DOHC multivalve V8 will be able to appreciate the difference in feel the extra components make. I like my engines smooth and am addicted to the rush of a turbo developing high levels of boost, so a turbo-ed, multivalve, DOHC in-line six does it for me. However a supercharged, pushrod V8 does have a very distinct and enjoyable character. They produce bulk power without hysterics ,power is always on hand when you want it and pushrod engines sound pretty special. Live and let live. |
| I'll try to clear this up...(long) |
| levk80 10-1-2003 |
"I see many people here judging efficiency, performance, fuel consuption, and God knows what else by the number of valves, camshafts, and where those camshafts are, turbos, etc.; which (the number) has nothing to do with the finer points responsible. 1st the turbos: The only advantage turbos have over supercharger (as in belt driven supercharger) is the ease with which the spool is controlled. When the maximum efficiency of the compressor is reached, the computer can ease off the exhaust pressure with a bypass valve (and a supercharger would need a gearbox of some sort). Speaking from an engeneering standpoint, turbos are a nightmare, as the volumetric efficiency of the engine is almost always down to about 70%. The whole fuel consumption problem goes out the window here: the a/f mix in the combustion chamber is 14% fuel, the rest is air. It makes sense that the more air you put in, the more fuel you're burning. In the industry, turbos are used to smooth out delivery of a coarse, underdeveloped, or just plain old engines. Take any deisel engine to prove the point. The added power is a byproduct that could have been explioted in Japan, were it not for their 280hp agreement. And yes, in the RS6 turbos are used to smooth out delivery, otherwise, why would they use 2? ""For faster spool up""? What a load of crap. 2nd the camshafts. From my understanding camshafts are used to open valves with lobes on them. I mean, you could use 1 camshaft to open and close 16 valves, or you could use 16 camshafts to open and close those same 16 valves, as long as they're open and closed at the right times; what difference does it make? And where they're located?! As a matter of fact; the location of the camshafts in OHC engines is prescisely what limits the ceiling airflow of these engines. Just pick your favorite OHC engine, dig up a cut away view of the cylinder head, and look at the angle the mix has to make on its way in, and exhaust on its way out. I'm not even talking about the rotating mass. The longer belts/chains produce reliability questions. The increased weight and higher center of gravity don't do it any favors either. The manufacturing costs are WAY up. So why do manufacturers do it? Let me paint you a little picture about how engines are engineered. There's no blueprint to a perfect engine. No formulas that will predict the throttle feel, the sound of exhaust, even the power/torque curves. Some rules of thumb applies, but, mainly: the marketing people decide which cars they'll put this engines in. This will give you the ballpark figure on power. The platform people will tell you the dimensions of the engine bay. From there you look for a block that is similar (to what you want) and worked very well. Rid that of known and obvious flaws. That's your block. Same with heads. Your problem is that you need an engine that will work well anywhere. You need an engine that would work the same way in Oslo as it would in Cairo. Let me tell you, no same engine would do that. That is why in your design you need to account for expandability. You see, in engeneereing (whether car engines or software or anything else that can be engeneered) the only fact you need to account for is expandability to ensure a good design. Maximum number of camshafts accounts for maximum expandability, above all else. The thing is, big companies; like GM, Ford, and Chrysler; can afford to design and make whole different engines for different markets. Simple doesn't make stupid in this regard. I don't have time for the valves right now, maybe Monday. I'd just like to say that a friend of mine drives a 2001 VW Passat 1.8T. It is a DOHC engine with 5 valves/cyl; which should be, like, the best engine ever. The engine is coarse, feels slower than my 88 BMW 735i (I only have 2 hp on him, given that it's an 88, he probably has numbers on me) despite a 1,000 pound weight difference and he gets 23MPG at 75MPH cruise. It's understandable why people think this way about ""high tech"". It's simple: bigger number means better. You don't have to go to school for that. And I'm sure your local Toyota dealer will swear on his mothers grave that it IS the case (simple trick realy, car dealers don't have mothers). It's the finer points that matter.""" |
| we care |
| henk4 10-1-2003 |
in Europe gas is about 1.3$ per litre, so we care. We also somehow care about the environment and therefore about emissions. |
| Who cares about emissions and mileage |
| mopar426 9-1-2003 |
Who cares about emissions and gas mileage? Gas is $1.30 a gallon. Dodge just spanked the new GTO and the mustang with a station wagon. The only problem with this car is the supercharger. Only ford supercharges there vehicles. I say stroke it out to a 383 or bring back the 426. Or just settle for 400hp from a naturally aspirated engine. |
| A Comment in American Engineering |
| Getallized 9-1-2003 |
"Hello to ya all car freaks. I'm coming from a country in Europe with no engineering at all, mostly known as Greece.I'm studying mechanical engineering and aeronautics in the University and I'd like to participate to your conversation comparing European and US technology. It's known to all that 40 or 50 years ago US automotive industry had some brilliant ideas to include in the constrution of a car, and I'm not talking about design. US engineers had already constructed a DOHC V8 engine since 1962. But American Automotive Association convinced society and politicians that cars must have great displacement and low technology in order to be more safe and consumpt less. So, Ford and GM who had these motors simply threw them away and started to build OHC engines combining them with more than 290 cu.in. of displacement and a block made of Fe. The whole idea of muscle cars in the period '64-'75 was based on that structure.After that, the fuel crisis forced the US government to ban big block engines and set a limit in displacement. In addition, insurance companies taxed muscle cars much more than ordinary cars gaining the the integral loss of this category. The results are known to everyone. Just compare 1970's Camaro Z28 to 1982 Camaro Z28. Although they share the same name, that is finally the only thing they have in common... Years have indeed passed, crisis finally came to an end and American automotive industry decided to reincarnate the so-called muscle car project. The beastly named Viper was a typical muscle car and the only vehicle in the world which was so agressive, menacing, and overstating. On the other hand, Europe had made remarkable progress since the '60s. Take for example '64 Ferrari 250 GTO and '94 Ferrari 355 Berlinetta. Even Porsche 993 turbo was faster and more stable than Viper, even in the updated version, GTS-R, presented in 1994, thanks to 4 wheel drive and Porsche's Stability Management. That's the big difference between US and European cars, in any category. Americans use the old logo ""nothing beats cubic inches"" to produce sport cars, whereas Europeans, especially Italy and Germany use modern technology and updated firmware to produce ultimate performance cars. We can't blame neither of them. Both have their constructing philosophy which is not always determined by the company's marketing and target points. Many other parameters constitute the final product, such as laws, fuel price, buyers profiles and stipulations, even the morphology of each country. That's why Europe's cars and by far better in handling and cornering than US cars, no offence. But, tragically, United States have only long, boring and strait highways. Europe has mountains, so her products must first satisfy her and then other continents. As far as consuption is concerned, I believe that we cannot make a comparison between a US car running in the US and a European running in Europe. They must be compared in equal terms, in other words with the same weather conditions, same fuel price and same roads. Thank you for your time and I hope we can talk about automobiles again. P.S.:US never gave a second chance to Wankel rotary engine.Why's that?I'm talking specifically about her, 'cause Europeans are too stubborn to change their minds and start working on a project brand new.On the other hand, Americans and Japanese are more open minded and experiment themselves more. Just take a closer look at Mazda's Rx-8.... """ |
| quantity and quality |
| henk4 9-1-2003 |
Suppose BS is right that US gasoline burns slightly cleaner than European supplied stuff, say 5-10%. Let's then assume that the average US car burns twice as much gasoline than a European car, now guess which car causes more pollution? |
| listen people.... |
| motorhead 9-1-2003 |
who cares about the engine and fuel economy. This thing loooks damn bloody nice and thats it. It looks so good that nobody would even care if it had a 1.3L engine or the most unrealible engine on earth(it is not unrealible though) Take for example the new range rover. It has some problems with the bmw 4.4 because of its fantastic capibility to offroad but nobody cares about the engine because it looks so damn good. Just take a look at its techno watch style headlights and interior which looks like a concept car. Now look people if this thing ever goes into prodction it is deffinately going to have more than 15MPG so why worry. There are cars which are getting 8MPG in especially in america(the land of SUVs and Monster Pick Ups) |
| hey forza |
| BlackSunshine 8-1-2003 |
"I'm dislexic, back off. And just so ya know, America does have stricter emissions laws that several european contries, the UK included. That very reason (along with impact tests) are why there are so many forighn cars that can't be driven on the street here with out modifications done to the engine and exhaust systems. It's also why several cars that are shipped over here have a slightly lower BHP raiting that their european counter parts (after you make up for the differance in rating systems for the two places). And no, you don't get the same gasoline over there that we get over here. I live in Texas, 180miles south of Houston (been an oil town for over a hundred years). The city I live in, is one of the most vital petrochemical ports in the nation, and the world. I know chemists and refinery engineers from all over the world; they have flat out told me that they make differant grades of gasoline for differant areas, and that is what's shipped to the UK and europe does not burn as clean. Even cleaner burning gas (that some what reduces power) is shipped to heavily poluted cities such as LA, San Fransisco, and Houston. So don't tell me all gasoline burns the same, cause it doesn't.""" |
| Another run in with blacksunshine . . . |
| kudosdude 8-1-2003 |
Okay blacksunshine, time for you to calm down ... again. Never (no not even once) did I mention emissions in my post, and 2, efficiency is a completely different thing entirely. Anyway as most people know what I'm going on about, and so as not to rile BS (that's BlackSunshine not Bull Shine?), I won't waste my time harping on about the disadvanges of big heavy engines that don't produce as much power as they could and require vast consumption of fuel. . . (actually I think I will just clear this up) The point I am trying to make is that, while this engine produces a LOT of power, it takes a lot of fuel and capacity to acheive this. A smaller engine with similar power & torque curves, maybe a diesel, though not necessarily so, would make much more sense. Just as a thought, look what happens to fuel prices in a war, it's all very well saying, yeah but it's cheap now, think of who will be laughing when it's not. Damn, gonna get off my high horse now. Just so you know I love the old hemi's, they HAD an unmistakable charm, but in todays world they are as useful as making B&W sets, i.e. they do the job, just not as well as widescreen colour . . . |
| Magnum scmagnum! |
| Forza 8-1-2003 |
I think that there is no question that Europe is the one who masters engineering of engines as well as cars. All the nonsense that is talked about is just plain words without any substance. Everybody knows that European cars are lightyears ahead of American, both technically as qualitywise!! I think retarded is written like this, not retarted. Reading certain articles here just tells the world that there are now two of those coming from Texas. American engineering is like the certain persons writing, full of mistakes. |
| nonsense |
| henk4 8-1-2003 |
As usual (out of stubborness or just plain stupidity) BS is talking nonsense again when it comes to pollution levels. We are getting the same gasoline overhere, twin spark systems are available for some cars (but contribute very little) and cats are mandatory since the stone age. Remains the fact that Americans cars manage about half the mileage of european cars and you can do your calculations. I like the suggestion of putting a diesel engine in the Dodge, obviously some people are waking up across the pond. Mercedes has some pretty nice V8's that would fit perfectly and would leave the Hemi standing. |
| Solution for gas mileage |
| 5.0 fever2004 7-1-2003 |
I heard the other day a Dodge rep talking about the future of Deisels in the US. Putting a deisel in this might make better mileage. Deisels have been used in europe for years, and just about every car over their now is deisel. All we need is Gasoline prices to go up and make deisel cheapest. Then lets see how quick americans switch to deisel. probably not long. |
| Kudos Dude & Motorhead |
| BlackSunshine 6-1-2003 |
FIRST: Do you even know where your name comes from Motorhead? I'm just curious. SECOND: are you both retarted? Do europians have any idea what their talking about when it comes to polution? If you did, you would know one simple fact. AMERICAN CARS HAVE CLEANER EMISSIONS!!! American cars employ several differant methods to insure that, while the cars over hear may get worse mealage, they still produce less polutants in their exhaust. How? With differant kinds of gasoline that are more invironmentaly freindly, with dual spark plug chamber that insure a cleaner burn providing more power and less polutants, and 3, with a f***ing catylitic converter (modern cats have little or no impact on power) that helps burn up any excess polutants causing a chemical reaction that helps convert polutants into enert gassess. THIRD: If dodge will truely continue in the tradition of the HEMI, this motor is underrated. Chrysler officials have already stated that in factory tune of the 353 Himi could easily be adjusted to a potent 400 ponies in natrually aspirated trim. A super charger is probably just a little cheaper of all. Turbo's? They cost a lot more because of changes to the exhaust system. Either way Americans are about to inflict a serious threat on the european markets with what's traditionally been their territory. American or European I say... shut up, sit down, and enjoy the ride. |
| normally...... |
| motorhead 6-1-2003 |
"dodge buyers which are mostly americans do not even care how much their car drinks and how much dirty carbon manoxide is given out by their cars. Dodge did not want to ""piss off"" the engine by giving it too much power but is 430hp nit enough for a god damn estate. Let me reapeat that ESTATE! Audis RS6(which i really love so much)produces 450hp but that is an audi and who can bLAME THEM. basically dodge just missed audi. Like i said in my earlier comment, try harder dodge!!! """ |
| Fuel efficient engine ? |
| kudosdude 6-1-2003 |
"The engine that turns the HUGE tyres on this beast cannot, no CANNOT be called fuel efficient. The very nature of it's design (2 valves per cylinder for goodness sake) and the fact that it is a petrol destines this beast to frequent pitstops at a pump near you. The very fact that this car is available with supercharger also negates the efficiency conundrum. A supercharger is much less efficient than a turbocharger to run. It may look like a great car, but lets keep the ""efficient"" out of the press blurb. PS it takes 5.7 litres AND a supercharger to create 430 bhp? Quite frankly that is pathetic.""" |
| super!!!! |
| motorhead 6-1-2003 |
This is the nicest looking dodge ever. it looks a bit like the super 8 hemi but the only difference is that this looks much better. This is the only rival to the rs6 avant. The interior looks good, not as good as audis though. Will this beat the RS6, never!!! It looks too retro compared to the simple but lovely design of the RS6. try harder next time dodge! |
| Very nice! |
| jrengine47 6-1-2003 |
To the designers at Dodge: Kudos! This new Magnum SRT-8 is one of my favorite concept cars to be produced by Dodge, and I really hope that they will make this a production car, along with the Super8 Hemi and the Power Wagon. I really like the direction that the designers have taken with these latest concept vehicles, and I hope that this is a preview of where the new Dodge vehicles will go in the future! If they do, they will surely have my support! |
| The Ferrari of Wagons |
| Edge 6-1-2003 |
Station wagons are becoming the coolest rides, the srt 8 will only severly spice up the segment which is great, the hemi engine will attract thousands of buys every month for a very long time, this car has a great chance at becoming a sales success, who wouldn't want a hemi powered wagon? it'll beat the muscle coupes easily with their drivers not believing that a wagon left them in the dust. this thing will haul you with your family and cargo pretty damn fast and macho looking. |
| Article | Image gallery (12) | Specifications | User Comments (39) |
| All Cars - Contact us - Privacy Statement - Top | © 1998 - 2024 Ultimatecarpage.com |