RE: down with dodge
Login  | |
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/11/2008 10:05:15 PM
|
|
|
woozie
Posts: 46
Joined: 5/3/2008
Status: offline
|
fryboydon- you discussed sh!t, it was just another part of your showing-off. and the rust thing, that's absolutely plain stup!d to just accept such a deffect and try to cover it up. and it's not me who needs to grow up, it's disgusting people like you who needs to just f*ckin die. and my guns get blazin when someone starts insulting (even if it was out of joking) such as your pathetic self. can't your type of low life loosers joke without insulting someone?
blownsoot- welcome to the thread. these are very interesting info you mentioned, would you please give me a clearer understanding about the ratios and numbers and how to interpret them. i really would appreciate that. and about totaling the car also, it wasn't very clear, but it seemed like a very INTERESTING idea  ,so would you please repost the details again or send them by email?
djmagic- what i meant is you should get the upgrades from OUTSIDE the factory. i think it'll cost a lot less.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/11/2008 11:14:42 PM
|
|
|
blownsoot
Posts: 182
Joined: 11/10/2006
From: The Silver State
Status: offline
|
If the tires are only rated to 200km/h but the car can do 275 when it comes out of the factory then if you were to push it to that point and wreck due to a tire failure the maker of the car maker would be liable so they limit the cars to just under what the factory tires are rated for. As far as power to rate ratio it is the weight of the vehicle divided by the horespower of the engine, the higher the number the more powerful it will feel. As far as the low end power I mean torque, I believe in the metric it is kwh power. The more of it the faster the car will be off the line, the lower the rpms are that it peaks the faster it will be off the line. As you can see by my sig my truck is big and heavy but will still beat most sports cars, 400 horse and 800 ft lbs of torque at very low rpms, my last truck was pretty close in size but with the hemi, its peak torque was at 4500 rpms with the cummins it is at 1600 rpms, it might have 15 less horsepower and 1500 more lbs in weight but it is a faster truck.
< Message edited by blownsoot -- 5/11/2008 11:24:02 PM >
_____________________________
2006 Ram mega cab 2500 ctd auto 4" fabtech lift 35" mudders, silencer ring what silencer ring, Banks six gun with pda
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/11/2008 11:39:06 PM
|
|
|
woozie
Posts: 46
Joined: 5/3/2008
Status: offline
|
blownsoot- that's some useful info. i'd surely take into consideration while buying my new car (most probably not a dodge). but about the tyres, what if i change the stock tyres? i'm speaking Pirelli Pzero or Pnero 20") so then i can change my max speed accordingly without voiding my warranty? and about the weight to power ratio, is this scientifically proven or it's just a common estimate? and btw, thanks a bunch, you're really adding a lot to my data bank.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/11/2008 11:52:20 PM
|
|
|
blownsoot
Posts: 182
Joined: 11/10/2006
From: The Silver State
Status: offline
|
As far as cars go it is pretty well a fact, the higher the horsepower to pound the faster the car even if it has less total horspower, lets say you have a 3,000 pound car with 300 horsepower, that is .1 horse per pound, now lets say you have a 6000 pound care with 300 horse that is .05 horse per pound, which will be faster, they both have the same power. My equation was wrong earilier it is horsepower divided by weight.
I don't know about the waranty, seems like your laws don't protect the buyer as much as here.
_____________________________
2006 Ram mega cab 2500 ctd auto 4" fabtech lift 35" mudders, silencer ring what silencer ring, Banks six gun with pda
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/12/2008 12:12:11 AM
|
|
|
woozie
Posts: 46
Joined: 5/3/2008
Status: offline
|
thanks man... that really shed some light.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/12/2008 1:18:17 AM
|
|
|
minnesotamopar
Posts: 99
Joined: 9/16/2007
Status: offline
|
Not to pile on here please take this as a constructive addition to this discussion, but I think most people were greatly disappointed when they learned early on before release that the Charger was to be a 4 door. This was rather widely spoken of in most auto magazines as well as online well before and after it was released. Eventually the auto magazines like they always do found a way to make it sound like you really wanted a four door muscle car. Perhaps if you read some of these articles you were a bit mislead...
This would have been my first tip off before buying that this car might be a compromise in designs--something of a hybrid between American Muscle and a grocery getter. (IMHO a poor decision by Daimler Chrysler)
The second item I think most obviously gives away that this vehicle isn't truly a great example of American Muscle is the fact that IT HAS the so called Hemi 5.7 engine. Reason: This is Ma Mopar's latest do-all engine. This engine is also widely known to be one of the lowest cost engines Chrysler Corp. has ever made with eight cylinders. Since American's like power, and 8 cylinders, it makes great business sense to toss this powerplant into everything it might fit in. So they do. In the times we live in with smog regs etc. this engine is a rare thing to come along, I totally salute DCX for this but it's not worthy of the prestige attached to the history of winning races and legendary street fights that the 426 Hemi EARNED.
The current 5.7 Hemi would have been rather more appropriately named IMHO the 340 A engine small block if it was to be equated to an historical Mopar engine, eventhough the displacement is different.
I think a number of people are mislead by the Hemi advertisements, not just people overseas without appropriate access to information about these vehicles. I can imagine how you might have felt mislead.
--Minnesota Mopar
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/12/2008 1:35:49 AM
|
|
|
woozie
Posts: 46
Joined: 5/3/2008
Status: offline
|
minnesotamopar- welcome to the thread... and then let me express my happiness that finally someone is backing my opinion up. although your contribution is 100% more professional, more organised and objective focused than mine. and i do admit that we have a lack of information regarding the motor world. unprofessional magazines, deceitfull deals,...etc you name it. but that my friend does not spare Dodge & Chrysler from the fact that they were as much deceitfull as anybody can ever be. thank you again for your post.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/12/2008 4:39:27 PM
|
|
|
fryboydon
Posts: 3
Joined: 5/10/2008
Status: offline
|
 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/13/2008 8:33:47 AM
|
|
|
superdak05
Posts: 2651
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: ct.
Status: offline
|
woozie, sorry to hear about your misfortune with your charger. even though the hemi puts out 345 at the crank, dodge loses about 50 to 60 horsepower through the drive train, putting the rear wheel power to only abot 265-270 which is not bad for a family sedan. i am on my 2nd dodge and have a great time with it. both were trucks. now i have a 4.7 dakota that has the same rear wheel power as a stock charger, because of my upgrades. nitrous was a big help in that dept. if you have so many problems with the charger take it back. i did not read all the threads people wrote, got tired of everyones poor attitude. if the car is still warrentied have dodge keep doing the upgrades until you are satisfied, if not go complain to the d.m.v. thats what we pay taxes for and tell them the dealership is not doing their job or giving you the run around
_____________________________
thats right, i did it so what, cry two tears in a bucket, @#$% it, lets take it to the stage
13.7 / 101.3 in the 1/4 mile
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/13/2008 10:38:38 AM
|
|
|
woozie
Posts: 46
Joined: 5/3/2008
Status: offline
|
superdak05- again i'm happy to see more decent people come to the thread and actually giving honest and practical opinion. i heard about the transmission fact but i was wondering if it was true... since BMW is a RWD and is giving optimum performance. and if it was true... is there a way to fix this? like changing the gearbox, installing manual transmission (if that's even possible, it's just a thought). unfortunately, i'm living in the united arab emirates (gulf), so consumer rights are not pretty much preserved. i really envy you guys, you have lots of protective laws for the consumer, i always tell this to my friends from the US. although they're enjoying their stay here but it is clear that this is something that both they and we are missing here. i'm about to try complaining to the service center anyways, and hopefully they'll do something.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/13/2008 4:57:54 PM
|
|
|
Midnight
Katrina Fund Contributor
Posts: 17863
Joined: 12/10/2004
From: Tallahassee, Florida
Status: offline
|
WOW Comparing a light weight sports car (coupe), to a large, heavy family sedan is completely.... anyway
PLEASE stop comparing the two. You should have bought a sports car if you wanted a... sports car. "Charger" is a name. Do NOT let the name fool you. It's a heavy sedan and it's not suppose to haul ass like a sports car. It whoops up on OTHER SEDANS. Not all of them, but a lot of them. And a lot of other cars too.
It does not matter that the Charger R/T has 340 hp, it's weight is gonna stop it from taking lighter cars. It's about power to weight. It seems like you saw the name "Charger" and thought of some performance sports car that was gonna kick ass. Maybe you should have seen it like many others do and like the pros do, as a sedan that has supising kick to it for being so heavy.
The Charger is a nicely rated FAMILY SEDAN and gets great reviews from all over for what it is meant to do. Those comparing it to Mustang GTs will ofcourse be disappointed.
If you actually look at all the numbers. NOTHING is a suprise.
The Mustang GT is SUPPOSE to take the Charger R/T.
Charger:. 4,100 lbs, 340 hp, .08292 HP/LBS, 12.0588 LBS per HP
Mustang: 3,500 lbs, 300 hp, .08571 HP/LBS, 11.6666 LBS per HP
You might say, that's not much difference, but it is. In the world of autos, slight numbers make big differences. Learn to tune cars and you'll find that out.
Look on the net for 1/4 mile times and you'll see that the Mustang GT edges out the Charger R/T by an averge of just .3 to .6 seconds and I imagine a lot of those GTs are manuals. GT runs a high 13 and the Charger runs a low-mid 14.
Again, none of this is suprising if you know cars and how they work. Ofcourse, aerodynamics, gear ratios, ride height, suspension etc all come into affect. Those make little differences. But remember that a sport coupe is geared much better for racing than a family sedan with a big V8. And the sports coupe vs family sedan thing comes into play with most of the categories. Even wheel size and weight comes into play.
Oh and one last thing. If you expected a 5.7L 340 HP HEMI in a heavy family sedan, to have similar gas milage to a 4.6L 300 HP Ford engine in a lighter coupe... then I dunno man... I just dunno.... Where is Derrick when you need him?
You might have other problems with your Charger, but I am addressing the performance between the GT and R/T, as well as gas milage. That's it.
< Message edited by Midnight -- 5/13/2008 10:39:56 PM >
_____________________________
Dodge News: http://www.dodgeforum.com/forumid_42/tt.htm
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/827507
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/13/2008 5:28:14 PM
|
|
|
1996Ram318
Posts: 299
Joined: 12/15/2006
Status: offline
|
If I may adress the subject of your Egyptian culture, it seems to me that you would know that the Pharoas were mostly inbred. Maybe you should consider that before saying that we are all screwing our sisters. I`m kind of surprised that no one else pointed that out. Maybe you don`t know as much about your own history as you think. And I hate to break it to you, but a horse is much more noble of an animal than a camel.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/13/2008 8:03:24 PM
|
|
|
lghtngblt02
Posts: 1068
Joined: 1/4/2008
From: Mechanicsburg, Pa
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: 1996Ram318
If I may adress the subject of your Egyptian culture, it seems to me that you would know that the Pharoas were mostly inbred. Maybe you should consider that before saying that we are all screwing our sisters. I`m kind of surprised that no one else pointed that out. Maybe you don`t know as much about your own history as you think. And I hate to break it to you, but a horse is much more noble of an animal than a camel.
Hahaha, good point.
_____________________________
93 Dodge Dakota LE 2x4, 3.9L V6 Magnum
00 Ford Focus LX Sedan, 2.0L SPI
|
|
|
|
|
RE: down with dodge - 5/13/2008 8:34:15 PM
|
|
|
occ3377
Posts: 87
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
|
it to me seems as if poor old mister woozie is just that and anyone who dosent feel bad for him is an "a$$hole" and anyone who agrees is a decent person, and trust me this is my honest and practical opinion, and saying dodge is trying to screw you, there is a whole charger section full of people who did the research and knew what they were buying and what to expect that are fairly happy. Ford is doing the same thing by trying to say there pickups are the best, who believes that! they suck but points have to be givin to ford for circleing the problem on every vehical they have made
oh yea fyi tires not tyres, french not frensh, defect not deffect, you get the idea
_____________________________
'04 dodge 1500 qc/sb HEMI
|
|
|
|
 Today's Posts
Most Active Topics
Make A Donation
Forum Rules & FAQ
RSS Feeds
SRT Forums
Race News
Dodge Prices
Dodge Trucks & SUVs
Ram  Dakota
Durango Nitro
Dodge Cars
Avenger Intrepid
Caliber Magnum
Challenger Neon
Charger Stealth
Daytona Stratus
Dodge Viper
Advertising Info
|
Contact Us |
Link To Us |
Sitemap |
Archive |
Advertising |
Automotive Directory |
About Us |
Dodge Links |
Legal |
Privacy Policy |
© Dodge Forum
Harley Davidson |
Ford Mustang Forums |
Dodge Challenger
Dodge Forum .com is not affiliated with or endorsed by Daimler Chrysler.
|
Printable Version
