Printable View
I will probably keep my Lincoln LS and still get this car
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_2.jpg
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_8.jpg
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_5.jpg
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_4.jpg
2004 Chrysler 300C :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
Blows my car away
http://www.lincoln.com/vehicles/vehi...es/image12.jpg
http://www.lincoln.com/vehicles/vehi...es/image01.jpg
<_<
I want a ford capri... :D
Mk1 I hope?Quote:
Originally posted by Proper Bo, I tell thee@22 January 2004 - 18:42
I want a ford capri... :D
As long as it has four wheels, I'm happy. I'm a student and just turned 17 last month, nothing fancy for me ;) :D
I always wanted one of those as a kid....now i want a heavily modded, customized 2.8 :DQuote:
Originally posted by Proper Bo, I tell thee@22 January 2004 - 18:42
I want a ford capri... :D
Busyman is fickle though. The last time he talked about cars I am sure he was raving about a Dodge Bastard Death Star 5000 pickup (or something like that).
It has to be the Mk1 1600 they were the only that were acually pretty.
Fickle? I rarely "rave" about anything (especially on this board). My motto normally is that cars don't make you money. You might be getting me mixed up with 4th gen. :DQuote:
Originally posted by Biggles@22 January 2004 - 19:56
Busyman is fickle though. The last time he talked about cars I am sure he was raving about a Dodge Bastard Death Star 5000 pickup (or something like that).
It has to be the Mk1 1600 they were the only that were acually pretty.
one of those?
http://www.ihatemanu.freeserve.co.uk/mk1.jpg
it would have to be a mk1 or 3 i think
Busyman
Very possibly. :D
This is a Mk1
http://www.oldclassiccar.co.uk/class...rdcaprimk1.jpg
I know, so was the one I posted except your pic is nice and shiny. I actually saw some in auto-trader for just a few hundred, no doubt complete rust buckets :rolleyes:
i'm not trying to provike a flaming here, but honestly, that's one of the worst looking cars i've ever seen, imhoQuote:
Originally posted by Busyman@22 January 2004 - 17:40
I will probably keep my Lincoln LS and still get this car
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_2.jpg
i'm not trying to provike a flaming here, but honestly, that's one of the worst looking cars i've ever seen, imho [/b][/quote]Quote:
Originally posted by 4th gen+22 January 2004 - 18:51--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (4th gen @ 22 January 2004 - 18:51)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@22 January 2004 - 17:40
I will probably keep my Lincoln LS and still get this car
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_2.jpg
i concur
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_2.jpg
one more car to pollute our Earth, go ride on the bus u filthy animal
it's better than a smart car at least :lol:Quote:
Originally posted by james_bond_rulez@22 January 2004 - 21:05
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_2.jpg
one more car to pollute our Earth, go ride on the bus u filthy animal
i like the car except the front it scares me :ph34r:
We have two rather contrasting cars.
A 4L V8i Discovery. The stupid 7 seat automatic bastard that does about 15 mpg, but does up to 110 mph which is rather brusque for the size of car. It tends to shock people when you pull away from them on the motorway, however the fuel gauge also becomes a fan.
A Clio Authentique 1.2. The 4 door chap which goes for a trillion miles on half a tank of unleaded.
I mostly drive the latter and my good lady the former. I really rather like the clio, it is an excellent wee car to drive.
i concur [/b][/quote]Quote:
Originally posted by Azzz+22 January 2004 - 23:01--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Azzz @ 22 January 2004 - 23:01)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Quote:
Originally posted by 4th gen@22 January 2004 - 18:51
<!--QuoteBegin-Busyman
Quote:
@22 January 2004 - 17:40
I will probably keep my Lincoln LS and still get this car
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_2.jpg
i'm not trying to provike a flaming here, but honestly, that's one of the worst looking cars i've ever seen, imho
It's not flaming. Everyone has there tastes and I can't be mad because you don't like a car that I like.
I happen to think it's a great looking car and definitely better than a Ford Capri. :x
As you can tell 4th gen they took styling points from Rolls Royce and Bentley.
go ride a bus!!!!........it is a feckin bus!!!!!! :oQuote:
Originally posted by james_bond_rulez@22 January 2004 - 22:05
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_2.jpg
one more car to pollute our Earth, go ride on the bus u filthy animal
;) ;)
I know people's houses that are smaller than that!!
Busyman I like your current automobile :)
I don't get it. ??? :huh:Quote:
Welcome to the 500-horsepower club
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt08_z.jpg
As different as fire and ice: The SRT-10 and GT are American, fast, beautiful, and aluminum-intensive --but so unique, as evidenced by their approaches to powerplant philosophy.
By Jack Keebler & Todd Lassa
Motor Trend, January 2004
The Game - Plain and simple: Which of these all-American power players accelerates quickest, handles best, and stops shortest?
The Players - Ford's exotic, heritage inspired, 500-horse GT takes on the only other American sports car packing the same power output, the always-ready Dodge Viper SRT-10.
Enough talk. You demanded a legit, track-test showdown between America's 500-horse contenders. We're here to serve.
Sorry, Bow-Tie boosters, Chevy's Corvette sat this one out. Among the world's best-performance values, even the 405-horsepower Z06 lacks the beans to tee up on this turf. And, as you can tell from our cover and related article in this issue, a new Corvette is on its way, which creates all sorts of future shoot-around possibilities. Stay tuned on that front.
This is a track test, not a road test, so there won't be any cupholder talk, and we couldn't care less about golf-bag capacity. We're here for numbers and an understanding of how these two philosophically and mechanically differing designs, and their disparate technical approaches, get the job done.
Other than the fact that the Fabulous Ford and the Demonic Dodge are both built in Michigan, USA, they couldn't be more mismatched. The Viper uses a steel chassis with composite bodywork, powered by a front-mounted 8.3-liter naturally aspirated overhead-valve V-10. Ford's new GT relies on aluminum alloys for its chassis and coachwork and runs a supercharged, DOHC V-8 mounted amidships. The Viper is a convertible, the GT a coupe.
These guys can't agree on anything. A perfect matchup.
Our Viper was a production SRT-10. The GT assigned to us was prosaically dubbed "Engineering CP-04." That's "confirmation/certification prototype number four" in engineerspeak. In other words, something beyond an initial prototype, but not yet a pure, production piece, either. Of the 15 CPs built, some will be crashed (okay to wince here...), some will do emissions duty, others will serve the Powertrain Gods. And our gritty, well-worn tester is regularly taken out for torture by the ride and handling teams. Still, it's largely representative of what a real GT will perform like, but not quite. 2005 GT production begins this spring.
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt02_z.jpg
Getting 500 horsepower to the ground on street tires isn't easy. Too many revs, and the tires go up in smoke. Too little rpm, and the engine bogs and can fall off its power curve. There's usually a 1-2 or even a tricky 2-3 shift to hang things up. But none of that is your problem; it's just our challenge. We're thrilled to report that both the Viper and GT are up to it, and then some.
Neither the Ford nor the Dodge require a shift before hitting 60 mph, a key ingredient to their respective 3.6- and 3.9-second performances. Indeed, 60 arrives just at the crankshaft-straining first-gear redline in both machines. The Ford's 0.3-second advantage may not sound like a big margin, but in acceleration parlance, it's a lifetime.
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt03_z.jpg
Things tightened up farther down the dragstrip. The GT remained a bumper ahead all the way to 100, which the Viper reached in 8.4 seconds and the GT hit in just 8.1. By the time both cars hit the quarter-mile traps, the Viper caught its breath and managed to nip the GT by just 100th of a second with a slightly lower trap speed of 123.63 versus the GT's 124.31. Yeow. Without electronic timing, it'd be way too close to call.
Thanks to both players' electronic anti-lock systems, multipot calipers, and massive brake rotors, stopping requires far less driver skill than laying down a John Force-quality launch. Standing on the GT's pedal from 60 mph nailed six stops all at less than 115 feet with no cool down in between runs (brakes take the inertial energy of the vehicle and convert it into a zillion calories of heat energy, which is then dissipated into the air by the rotors). Thomas Reichenbach, the GT's vehicle-engineering manager, claims the car has stopped in as little as 107 feet during Ford's testing, with the brake pads up to maximum temp. We tried several 80-to-0 stops in an attempt to warm things up a bit; a final 60-to-0 stop yielded 111 feet, as fade-free and linear feeling as on the first run. Our seatbelt bruises are finally fading, thanks.
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt05_z.jpg
Although we attempt to keep things as equal as possible, our Viper was tested on what might've been a slightly grippier section of test-track pavement. Dodge also equips the car with bigger-rubber contact patches. Stopping the Viper was even more like hitting a wall, taking a staggeringly short 97 feet to haul down from 60 to 0. And, like the GT, it could repeat the deed over and over, with no heat-related fade. That's how far braking and tire technology have come. In the stopping department, the Viper is record-setting, the GT merely outstanding.
We usually address handling and ride at the same time. But, obviously, these cars are handling-biased to the extreme. We didn't have the opportunity to sample them back to back on public roads. And this GT was equipped with decidedly nonproduction carbon-fiber bucket seats that gave a false impression of a harder ride than what customers can expect. Between track runs, we gathered some impressions on a variety of the smooth and not-so-smooth pavement ribboned throughout our closed-course test locale.
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt07_z.jpg
That said, we'll stick our necks out to interpolate that the GT has better ride characteristics than the infamously stiff Viper. The GT has the longer wheelbase, which reduces ride motions. It runs on slightly smaller wheels and tires, which means lower unsprung mass. This also tends to be an asset in ride quality. Another reason the GT's hard buckets muddied our impression is because the Viper has comfortable, supportive seats with curve-handy side bolstering.
Both of these muscle/sports cars exhibited high levels of grip and impressive handling during our slalom test. Few hot rides can do the 600-foot cone dance as quickly as these two-seaters; anything over 70 mph is serious stuff. This pair qualified, with the Ford nipping the Dodge by 1.1 mph (71.5 versus 70.4). The GT is so together it somehow feels like it's going slower than it actually is.
It takes less time to get friendly with the GT. We learned the handling limits with ease because there's more clear feedback about what's going on where the rubber meets the road. At the limits of adhesion, we could detect even slight chassis yaw earlier in the Ford than in the Viper and counter-steer corrections into the equation. All said, the Ford enjoys better overall chassis balance and a more progressive, precise, and lighter steering feel.
The previous-generation Viper had a reputation for punishing slow-reacting and inattentive drivers. It had high limits, but they were never reached or communicated to the cockpit in anything resembling a progressive manner. The SRT-10 has much-improved on-limit handling behavior and feedback. But the chassis still feels a tad numb, at least as compared with the mongoose-quick GT. Without an electronic stability-control system to lean on, Viper pilots are well-advised to restrict oversteer tricks to the track, while keeping the cell-phone holstered.
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt04_z.jpg
The Viper's cabin is a much more hospitable place than the 1992-2002 RT/10's was. The driving position is excellent, with a big tach front and center and ancillary gauges just to the driver's right.
The views from their respective cockpits are different in some ways, similar in others. Like the original, Ford's GT is encapsulating; the driver is enveloped in its cabin, and rearward visibility presents a few blind spots. But it feels great and makes you want to strap on a helmet and whistle down the Mulsanne straight at Le Mans. The Viper, being a convertible, offers a visual version of surround sound.
These cars are completely different in the audio department, too: The hyper-Ford burbles in classic V-8 tones from out behind you somewhere, the steady rumble overlaid by the barely perceptible whine of the supercharger. The SRT-10's sidepipes spit and warble out their own V-10 voice, with mechanical rumblings heard--and felt--from just ahead of the radio.
Forget picking a clear winner here. As an enthusiast, your design or brand preference (or the price difference) are as important as anything we say. And both machines are obviously incredible performers. The Viper's existence spurred Ford's hunger to build a halo machine--and we hear the future Z06 will have the 500 or so horsepower needed to play a round with these two next time.
Both cabins offer variations on the black-plastic-and-leather theme, with splashes of aluminum, or aluminum-like plastic, trim bits to brighten things up. Each provides a full complement of racing-style instrumentation with the tach centered inside the steering-wheel rim, although the GT's gauge faces are black, while the Viper has white units. The Dodge's buckets are friendly and supportive, but proved narrow for wider drivers; we'll withhold judgment on the Ford's chairs until we put in a 500-mile day on production seating.
This pair of 500-horsepower players are screaming-bargains when compared with high-ticket foreign goods. It's worth noting that the Viper delivers objective performance generally on par with that of the GT for about 40-percent-less money. The heritage-inspired Ford packs more tech and is a more sophisticated piece, so its higher price is justified--but that in no way diminishes the SRT-10's impressive punch-per-penny quotient.
Meet you back at the club.
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt06_z.jpg
The GT's heritage-inspired instrument layout, splashes of aluminum trim, and modern-day rocker-switches.
-----
Underneath Ford and Dodge's Supercars
The GT and SRT-10's space-frame construction is somewhat similar. Both rely on a super-stiff endoskeleton of stressed, welded beams. But what dem bones are made of differs from a materials and layout standpoint.
Ford employs an aluminum frame composed of various extrusions, castings, and stampings wrapped by unstressed aluminum bodywork. The Viper's rigid chassis is a complex, welded-steel space frame, carrying a (mostly) non-loaded skin of sheet-molded and reaction-injection molded composite plastic.
Both cars are functionally, though not technically, mid-engined; just look at their weight distributions in the spec chart. But the Ford is more obviously so. Neil Hannemann, Ford GT's chief program engineer, helped develop them. He describes being part of the Viper and GT programs as "once-in-a-lifetime experiences that happened to him twice." He says both required a small, highly dedicated team of empowered enthusiasts to bring the cars to market. The major difference on the GT was the amount of Ford computing power available to do things like stress and thermal analysis.
"In 1989, when we did the Viper, it was just a big room with a bunch of people and drawingboards. With the GT, there wasn't a drawingboard in sight. In fact, we didn't even have a table to lay a drawing on." Neil adds that road manners were higher priority on the Ford program than they were with that raw, unadulterated Viper of the early 1990s. "In the end, we got a better track car with very few compromises for the road."--J.K. & T.L.
-----
Comparision Chart
2005 Dodge Viper SRT-10
2005 Ford GT
POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS
Drivetrain layout
Front engine, rwd
Mid-engine, rwd
Engine type
90* V-10, aluminum block/heads
90* V-8, aluminum block/heads
Valve gear
OHV, 2 valves/cyl
DOHC, 4 valves/cyl
Bore x stroke in/mm
4.03x3.96 / 102.4x100.6
3.55x4.16 / 90.2x105.8
Displacement, ci/cc
505.1/8277
330.1/5409
Compression ratio
9.6:1
8.4:1
Max horsepower @ rpm
500 @ 5600
500 @ 6000
Max torque @ rpm
525 @ 4200
500 @ 4500
Redline rpm
6000
6500
Engine rpm @ 60 mph
1200
1515
Transmission
6-speed manual
6-speed manual
Axle/final-drive ratio:
3.07 / 1.54
3.36 / 2.12
Suspension front; rear
Upper and lower control arms,coil springs, anti-roll bar, upper and lower control arms, coil, springs, anti-roll bar
Upper and lower control arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar; upper and lower control arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar
Brakes, f/r
14.0-in vented disc, 14.0-in vented disc, ABS
14.0-in vented disc, 13.2-in vented disc, ABS
Wheels, f/r
10.0x18; 13.0x19, forged aluminum
9.0x18; 11.5x19, forged aluminum
Tires, f/r
275/35ZR18; 345/30ZR19, Michelin Pilot Sport
235/45ZR18; 315/40ZR19, Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt01_l.jpg
DIMENSIONS
Seating capacity
2
2
Wheelbase, in
98.8
106.7
Track, f/r, in
61.6/60.9
63.0/63.7
Length, in
175.6
182.8
Width, in
75.2
76.9
Height, in
47.6
44.3
Turning circle, ft
40.5
40.0
Headroom, in
36.5
35.4
Legroom, in
42.4
44.6
Shoulder room, in
54.1
57.7
Curb weight, lb
3410
3400
Weight, f/r, %
48/52
43/57
Fuel capacity, gal
18.5
17.5
TEST DATA
Acceleration, sec
0-30 mph
1.7
1.7
0-40 mph
2.4
2.3
0-50 mph
3.0
2.9
0-60 mph
3.9
3.6
0-70 mph
4.8
4.7
0-80 mph
5.8
5.6
0-90 mph
7.0
6.5
0-100 mph
8.4
8.1
1/4 mile, sec @ mph
11.77 @ 123.63
11.78 @ 124.31
Braking, 60-0 mph, ft
97
111
600-ft slalom, mph
70.4
71.5
CONSUMER INFO
On sale in U.S.
Currently
May 2004
Base price
$80,995
$139,995
Airbags
Dual front
Dual front
Basic warranty
3 yrs/36,000 miles
3 yrs/36,000 miles
Powertrain warranty
7 yrs/70,000 miles
3 yrs/36,000 miles
EPA mpg, city/hwy
12/20
14/21
Range, miles, city/hwy
222/370
245/368
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/images/spacer.gif
I'm not impressed............ :oQuote:
Originally posted by muchspl2@23 January 2004 - 02:55
Welcome to the 500-horsepower club
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt08_z.jpg
As different as fire and ice: The SRT-10 and GT are American, fast, beautiful, and aluminum-intensive --but so unique, as evidenced by their approaches to powerplant philosophy.
By Jack Keebler & Todd Lassa
Motor Trend, January 2004
The Game - Plain and simple: Which of these all-American power players accelerates quickest, handles best, and stops shortest?
The Players - Ford's exotic, heritage inspired, 500-horse GT takes on the only other American sports car packing the same power output, the always-ready Dodge Viper SRT-10.
Enough talk. You demanded a legit, track-test showdown between America's 500-horse contenders. We're here to serve.
Sorry, Bow-Tie boosters, Chevy's Corvette sat this one out. Among the world's best-performance values, even the 405-horsepower Z06 lacks the beans to tee up on this turf. And, as you can tell from our cover and related article in this issue, a new Corvette is on its way, which creates all sorts of future shoot-around possibilities. Stay tuned on that front.
This is a track test, not a road test, so there won't be any cupholder talk, and we couldn't care less about golf-bag capacity. We're here for numbers and an understanding of how these two philosophically and mechanically differing designs, and their disparate technical approaches, get the job done.
Other than the fact that the Fabulous Ford and the Demonic Dodge are both built in Michigan, USA, they couldn't be more mismatched. The Viper uses a steel chassis with composite bodywork, powered by a front-mounted 8.3-liter naturally aspirated overhead-valve V-10. Ford's new GT relies on aluminum alloys for its chassis and coachwork and runs a supercharged, DOHC V-8 mounted amidships. The Viper is a convertible, the GT a coupe.
These guys can't agree on anything. A perfect matchup.
Our Viper was a production SRT-10. The GT assigned to us was prosaically dubbed "Engineering CP-04." That's "confirmation/certification prototype number four" in engineerspeak. In other words, something beyond an initial prototype, but not yet a pure, production piece, either. Of the 15 CPs built, some will be crashed (okay to wince here...), some will do emissions duty, others will serve the Powertrain Gods. And our gritty, well-worn tester is regularly taken out for torture by the ride and handling teams. Still, it's largely representative of what a real GT will perform like, but not quite. 2005 GT production begins this spring.
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt02_z.jpg
Getting 500 horsepower to the ground on street tires isn't easy. Too many revs, and the tires go up in smoke. Too little rpm, and the engine bogs and can fall off its power curve. There's usually a 1-2 or even a tricky 2-3 shift to hang things up. But none of that is your problem; it's just our challenge. We're thrilled to report that both the Viper and GT are up to it, and then some.
Neither the Ford nor the Dodge require a shift before hitting 60 mph, a key ingredient to their respective 3.6- and 3.9-second performances. Indeed, 60 arrives just at the crankshaft-straining first-gear redline in both machines. The Ford's 0.3-second advantage may not sound like a big margin, but in acceleration parlance, it's a lifetime.
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt03_z.jpg
Things tightened up farther down the dragstrip. The GT remained a bumper ahead all the way to 100, which the Viper reached in 8.4 seconds and the GT hit in just 8.1. By the time both cars hit the quarter-mile traps, the Viper caught its breath and managed to nip the GT by just 100th of a second with a slightly lower trap speed of 123.63 versus the GT's 124.31. Yeow. Without electronic timing, it'd be way too close to call.
Thanks to both players' electronic anti-lock systems, multipot calipers, and massive brake rotors, stopping requires far less driver skill than laying down a John Force-quality launch. Standing on the GT's pedal from 60 mph nailed six stops all at less than 115 feet with no cool down in between runs (brakes take the inertial energy of the vehicle and convert it into a zillion calories of heat energy, which is then dissipated into the air by the rotors). Thomas Reichenbach, the GT's vehicle-engineering manager, claims the car has stopped in as little as 107 feet during Ford's testing, with the brake pads up to maximum temp. We tried several 80-to-0 stops in an attempt to warm things up a bit; a final 60-to-0 stop yielded 111 feet, as fade-free and linear feeling as on the first run. Our seatbelt bruises are finally fading, thanks.
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt05_z.jpg
Although we attempt to keep things as equal as possible, our Viper was tested on what might've been a slightly grippier section of test-track pavement. Dodge also equips the car with bigger-rubber contact patches. Stopping the Viper was even more like hitting a wall, taking a staggeringly short 97 feet to haul down from 60 to 0. And, like the GT, it could repeat the deed over and over, with no heat-related fade. That's how far braking and tire technology have come. In the stopping department, the Viper is record-setting, the GT merely outstanding.
We usually address handling and ride at the same time. But, obviously, these cars are handling-biased to the extreme. We didn't have the opportunity to sample them back to back on public roads. And this GT was equipped with decidedly nonproduction carbon-fiber bucket seats that gave a false impression of a harder ride than what customers can expect. Between track runs, we gathered some impressions on a variety of the smooth and not-so-smooth pavement ribboned throughout our closed-course test locale.
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt07_z.jpg
That said, we'll stick our necks out to interpolate that the GT has better ride characteristics than the infamously stiff Viper. The GT has the longer wheelbase, which reduces ride motions. It runs on slightly smaller wheels and tires, which means lower unsprung mass. This also tends to be an asset in ride quality. Another reason the GT's hard buckets muddied our impression is because the Viper has comfortable, supportive seats with curve-handy side bolstering.
Both of these muscle/sports cars exhibited high levels of grip and impressive handling during our slalom test. Few hot rides can do the 600-foot cone dance as quickly as these two-seaters; anything over 70 mph is serious stuff. This pair qualified, with the Ford nipping the Dodge by 1.1 mph (71.5 versus 70.4). The GT is so together it somehow feels like it's going slower than it actually is.
It takes less time to get friendly with the GT. We learned the handling limits with ease because there's more clear feedback about what's going on where the rubber meets the road. At the limits of adhesion, we could detect even slight chassis yaw earlier in the Ford than in the Viper and counter-steer corrections into the equation. All said, the Ford enjoys better overall chassis balance and a more progressive, precise, and lighter steering feel.
The previous-generation Viper had a reputation for punishing slow-reacting and inattentive drivers. It had high limits, but they were never reached or communicated to the cockpit in anything resembling a progressive manner. The SRT-10 has much-improved on-limit handling behavior and feedback. But the chassis still feels a tad numb, at least as compared with the mongoose-quick GT. Without an electronic stability-control system to lean on, Viper pilots are well-advised to restrict oversteer tricks to the track, while keeping the cell-phone holstered.
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt04_z.jpg
The Viper's cabin is a much more hospitable place than the 1992-2002 RT/10's was. The driving position is excellent, with a big tach front and center and ancillary gauges just to the driver's right.
The views from their respective cockpits are different in some ways, similar in others. Like the original, Ford's GT is encapsulating; the driver is enveloped in its cabin, and rearward visibility presents a few blind spots. But it feels great and makes you want to strap on a helmet and whistle down the Mulsanne straight at Le Mans. The Viper, being a convertible, offers a visual version of surround sound.
These cars are completely different in the audio department, too: The hyper-Ford burbles in classic V-8 tones from out behind you somewhere, the steady rumble overlaid by the barely perceptible whine of the supercharger. The SRT-10's sidepipes spit and warble out their own V-10 voice, with mechanical rumblings heard--and felt--from just ahead of the radio.
Forget picking a clear winner here. As an enthusiast, your design or brand preference (or the price difference) are as important as anything we say. And both machines are obviously incredible performers. The Viper's existence spurred Ford's hunger to build a halo machine--and we hear the future Z06 will have the 500 or so horsepower needed to play a round with these two next time.
Both cabins offer variations on the black-plastic-and-leather theme, with splashes of aluminum, or aluminum-like plastic, trim bits to brighten things up. Each provides a full complement of racing-style instrumentation with the tach centered inside the steering-wheel rim, although the GT's gauge faces are black, while the Viper has white units. The Dodge's buckets are friendly and supportive, but proved narrow for wider drivers; we'll withhold judgment on the Ford's chairs until we put in a 500-mile day on production seating.
This pair of 500-horsepower players are screaming-bargains when compared with high-ticket foreign goods. It's worth noting that the Viper delivers objective performance generally on par with that of the GT for about 40-percent-less money. The heritage-inspired Ford packs more tech and is a more sophisticated piece, so its higher price is justified--but that in no way diminishes the SRT-10's impressive punch-per-penny quotient.
Meet you back at the club.
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt06_z.jpg
The GT's heritage-inspired instrument layout, splashes of aluminum trim, and modern-day rocker-switches.
-----
Underneath Ford and Dodge's Supercars
The GT and SRT-10's space-frame construction is somewhat similar. Both rely on a super-stiff endoskeleton of stressed, welded beams. But what dem bones are made of differs from a materials and layout standpoint.
Ford employs an aluminum frame composed of various extrusions, castings, and stampings wrapped by unstressed aluminum bodywork. The Viper's rigid chassis is a complex, welded-steel space frame, carrying a (mostly) non-loaded skin of sheet-molded and reaction-injection molded composite plastic.
Both cars are functionally, though not technically, mid-engined; just look at their weight distributions in the spec chart. But the Ford is more obviously so. Neil Hannemann, Ford GT's chief program engineer, helped develop them. He describes being part of the Viper and GT programs as "once-in-a-lifetime experiences that happened to him twice." He says both required a small, highly dedicated team of empowered enthusiasts to bring the cars to market. The major difference on the GT was the amount of Ford computing power available to do things like stress and thermal analysis.
"In 1989, when we did the Viper, it was just a big room with a bunch of people and drawingboards. With the GT, there wasn't a drawingboard in sight. In fact, we didn't even have a table to lay a drawing on." Neil adds that road manners were higher priority on the Ford program than they were with that raw, unadulterated Viper of the early 1990s. "In the end, we got a better track car with very few compromises for the road."--J.K. & T.L.
-----
Comparision Chart
2005 Dodge Viper SRT-10
2005 Ford GT
POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS
Drivetrain layout
Front engine, rwd
Mid-engine, rwd
Engine type
90* V-10, aluminum block/heads
90* V-8, aluminum block/heads
Valve gear
OHV, 2 valves/cyl
DOHC, 4 valves/cyl
Bore x stroke in/mm
4.03x3.96 / 102.4x100.6
3.55x4.16 / 90.2x105.8
Displacement, ci/cc
505.1/8277
330.1/5409
Compression ratio
9.6:1
8.4:1
Max horsepower @ rpm
500 @ 5600
500 @ 6000
Max torque @ rpm
525 @ 4200
500 @ 4500
Redline rpm
6000
6500
Engine rpm @ 60 mph
1200
1515
Transmission
6-speed manual
6-speed manual
Axle/final-drive ratio:
3.07 / 1.54
3.36 / 2.12
Suspension front; rear
Upper and lower control arms,coil springs, anti-roll bar, upper and lower control arms, coil, springs, anti-roll bar
Upper and lower control arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar; upper and lower control arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar
Brakes, f/r
14.0-in vented disc, 14.0-in vented disc, ABS
14.0-in vented disc, 13.2-in vented disc, ABS
Wheels, f/r
10.0x18; 13.0x19, forged aluminum
9.0x18; 11.5x19, forged aluminum
Tires, f/r
275/35ZR18; 345/30ZR19, Michelin Pilot Sport
235/45ZR18; 315/40ZR19, Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt01_l.jpg
DIMENSIONS
Seating capacity
2
2
Wheelbase, in
98.8
106.7
Track, f/r, in
61.6/60.9
63.0/63.7
Length, in
175.6
182.8
Width, in
75.2
76.9
Height, in
47.6
44.3
Turning circle, ft
40.5
40.0
Headroom, in
36.5
35.4
Legroom, in
42.4
44.6
Shoulder room, in
54.1
57.7
Curb weight, lb
3410
3400
Weight, f/r, %
48/52
43/57
Fuel capacity, gal
18.5
17.5
TEST DATA
Acceleration, sec
0-30 mph
1.7
1.7
0-40 mph
2.4
2.3
0-50 mph
3.0
2.9
0-60 mph
3.9
3.6
0-70 mph
4.8
4.7
0-80 mph
5.8
5.6
0-90 mph
7.0
6.5
0-100 mph
8.4
8.1
1/4 mile, sec @ mph
11.77 @ 123.63
11.78 @ 124.31
Braking, 60-0 mph, ft
97
111
600-ft slalom, mph
70.4
71.5
CONSUMER INFO
On sale in U.S.
Currently
May 2004
Base price
$80,995
$139,995
Airbags
Dual front
Dual front
Basic warranty
3 yrs/36,000 miles
3 yrs/36,000 miles
Powertrain warranty
7 yrs/70,000 miles
3 yrs/36,000 miles
EPA mpg, city/hwy
12/20
14/21
Range, miles, city/hwy
222/370
245/368
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/images/spacer.gif
Yogi :lol:
]2005 Dodge Viper SRT-10
http://www.dodge.com/gallery/img/viper/enlarge_2.jpg
http://www.dodge.com/gallery/img/viper/enlarge_3.jpg
http://www.dodge.com/gallery/img/viper/enlarge_6.jpg
http://www.dodge.com/gallery/img/viper/enlarge_7.jpg
http://www.dodge.com/gallery/img/viper/enlarge_8.jpg
http://www.dodge.com/gallery/img/viper/enlarge_9.jpg
http://www.dodge.com/gallery/img/viper/enlarge_10.jpg
http://www.dodge.com/gallery/img/viper/enlarge_11.jpg
http://www.dodge.com/gallery/img/viper/enlarge_12.jpg
http://www.dodge.com/gallery/img/viper/enlarge_13.jpg
http://www.dodge.com/viper/
I'm impressed you have finished reading it already :huh: ;)
p.s. go for the dodge , you get two free people with that one :)
2005 Ford GT
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_1.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_2.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_3.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_4.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...t_popup_10.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_5.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_6.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_7.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_9.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...t_popup_12.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/home.asp?bhcp=1
I know it allready!!Quote:
Originally posted by (>Zero Cool<)@23 January 2004 - 02:59
I'm impressed you have finished reading it already :huh: ;)
p.s. go for the dodge , you get two free people with that one :)
Just sold the crapcar!! :lol:
Yogs :P
that looks really nice
if only i had half a mill. :ermm:
It's not flaming. Everyone has there tastes and I can't be mad because you don't like a car that I like.Quote:
Originally posted by Busyman+23 January 2004 - 01:32--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Busyman @ 23 January 2004 - 01:32)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Quote:
Originally posted by Azzz@22 January 2004 - 23:01
Quote:
Originally posted by 4th gen@22 January 2004 - 18:51
<!--QuoteBegin-Busyman
Quote:
Quote:
@22 January 2004 - 17:40
I will probably keep my Lincoln LS and still get this car
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_2.jpg
i'm not trying to provike a flaming here, but honestly, that's one of the worst looking cars i've ever seen, imho
i concur
I happen to think it's a great looking car and definitely better than a Ford Capri. :x
As you can tell 4th gen they took styling points from Rolls Royce and Bentley.[/b][/quote]
Do you really think so. The only similarity I can see is to go with four wheels, one at each corner.
Do you get a hard-on , posting those?? :lol:Quote:
Originally posted by muchspl2@23 January 2004 - 03:00
2005 Ford GT
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_1.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_2.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_3.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_4.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...t_popup_10.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_5.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_6.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_7.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...gt_popup_9.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/i...t_popup_12.jpg
http://www.fordvehicles.com/fordgt/home.asp?bhcp=1
Yogi :P
the 2005 corvettes are sweet also, but I'll let someone else post some pics :P
http://www.rapidcars.com/tvrtuscan334.jpg
http://www.rapidcars.com/tusinterior.jpg
Still wish Santa had brought me one of these :rolleyes:
Although I my head tells me it it is an environmental disaster area my heart is smitten.
wow... those cars are hotties i must say... go one, get the car!! then you can take me round for its debut ride!! :DQuote:
Originally posted by Busyman@22 January 2004 - 20:40
I will probably keep my Lincoln LS and still get this car
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_2.jpg
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_8.jpg
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_5.jpg
http://www.chrysler.com/300series/img/enlarge_4.jpg
2004 Chrysler 300C :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
Blows my car away
http://www.lincoln.com/vehicles/vehi...es/image12.jpg
http://www.lincoln.com/vehicles/vehi...es/image01.jpg
<_<
tralalala
I REALLY hate the Viper
it's such a tacky POS...
just because it has a big engine doesn't make it any good, it's a shame people don't realise that...
I do like the Ford GT :)
Though I'd just like to point out that it's not an all-american car, even though muchspl2's post claims that ;)
this is pretty strange, but i was considering posting pics of the Tuscan S as a comparison car... :blink:Quote:
Originally posted by Biggles@23 January 2004 - 10:26
http://www.rapidcars.com/tvrtuscan334.jpg
http://www.rapidcars.com/tusinterior.jpg
Still wish Santa had brought me one of these :rolleyes:
Although I my head tells me it it is an environmental disaster area my heart is smitten.
well, that car in your sig looks kinda hot too 4th gen...
tralalala ;)
http://www.supercars.net/cars/2001@$T...uscan%20Sg.htmlQuote:
Originally posted by muchspl2@22 January 2004 - 23:55
Comparision Chart
2005 Dodge Viper SRT-10
2005 Ford GT
POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS
Drivetrain layout
Front engine, rwd
Mid-engine, rwd
Engine type
90* V-10, aluminum block/heads
90* V-8, aluminum block/heads
Valve gear
OHV, 2 valves/cyl
DOHC, 4 valves/cyl
Bore x stroke in/mm
4.03x3.96 / 102.4x100.6
3.55x4.16 / 90.2x105.8
Displacement, ci/cc
505.1/8277
330.1/5409
Compression ratio
9.6:1
8.4:1
Max horsepower @ rpm
500 @ 5600
500 @ 6000
Max torque @ rpm
525 @ 4200
500 @ 4500
Redline rpm
6000
6500
Engine rpm @ 60 mph
1200
1515
Transmission
6-speed manual
6-speed manual
Axle/final-drive ratio:
3.07 / 1.54
3.36 / 2.12
Suspension front; rear
Upper and lower control arms,coil springs, anti-roll bar, upper and lower control arms, coil, springs, anti-roll bar
Upper and lower control arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar; upper and lower control arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar
Brakes, f/r
14.0-in vented disc, 14.0-in vented disc, ABS
14.0-in vented disc, 13.2-in vented disc, ABS
Wheels, f/r
10.0x18; 13.0x19, forged aluminum
9.0x18; 11.5x19, forged aluminum
Tires, f/r
275/35ZR18; 345/30ZR19, Michelin Pilot Sport
235/45ZR18; 315/40ZR19, Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/road...pandgt01_l.jpg
DIMENSIONS
Seating capacity
2
2
Wheelbase, in
98.8
106.7
Track, f/r, in
61.6/60.9
63.0/63.7
Length, in
175.6
182.8
Width, in
75.2
76.9
Height, in
47.6
44.3
Turning circle, ft
40.5
40.0
Headroom, in
36.5
35.4
Legroom, in
42.4
44.6
Shoulder room, in
54.1
57.7
Curb weight, lb
3410
3400
Weight, f/r, %
48/52
43/57
Fuel capacity, gal
18.5
17.5
TEST DATA
Acceleration, sec
0-30 mph
1.7
1.7
0-40 mph
2.4
2.3
0-50 mph
3.0
2.9
0-60 mph
3.9
3.6
0-70 mph
4.8
4.7
0-80 mph
5.8
5.6
0-90 mph
7.0
6.5
0-100 mph
8.4
8.1
1/4 mile, sec @ mph
11.77 @ 123.63
11.78 @ 124.31
Braking, 60-0 mph, ft
97
111
600-ft slalom, mph
70.4
71.5
CONSUMER INFO
On sale in U.S.
Currently
May 2004
Base price
$80,995
$139,995
Airbags
Dual front
Dual front
Basic warranty
3 yrs/36,000 miles
3 yrs/36,000 miles
Powertrain warranty
7 yrs/70,000 miles
3 yrs/36,000 miles
EPA mpg, city/hwy
12/20
14/21
Range, miles, city/hwy
222/370
245/368
http://www.motortrend.com/motor/images/spacer.gif
I'd say the Tuscan S PWNS the 'competition', wouldn't you?
;)
yeah, but the Zonda costs too much to be considered with this class of car... :)Quote:
Originally posted by tralalala@23 January 2004 - 10:38
well, that car in your sig looks kinda hot too 4th gen...
tralalala ;)
4th Gen
Not sure why but the Tuscan just works for me. :D
As to how practical the beautiful polished brass buttons on the dash are for day to day use - well who cares. The designer looks like he has had extended periods of alien abduction and has returned brim full of ideas.
I am just going to have to wait until I win the lottery - which I suppose means I ought to buy a ticket for the thing now and again.
This is my next car, i need ever drop of that v10 engine so i can out run thos F14 when WW3 breaks out.
http://www.dodge.com/nav/photo/viper_srt10_11_main.jpg
yeah, i really like the tuscan, but if i won the lottery i'd be going for the tuscan r or even better the crazy speed 12 :oQuote:
Originally posted by Biggles@23 January 2004 - 10:50
4th Gen
Not sure why but the Tuscan just works for me. :D
As to how practical the beautiful polished brass buttons on the dash are for day to day use - well who cares. The designer looks like he has had extended periods of alien abduction and has returned brim full of ideas.
I am just going to have to wait until I win the lottery - which I suppose means I ought to buy a ticket for the thing now and again.
:)