why do people think....

[1974dodgecharger]

The old chargers are faster (more torque and HP) than new chargers/challengers? Or are they? I ask this because awhile back I asked about the HP ratings vs modern engines and the most everyone was saying modern engines are way more efficient and powerful than before.

[Indygenerallee]

New SRT8 Chargers would eat the old ones stock for stock and get alot better MPG doing it, That's why I am putting a modded 5.7 Hemi in my 69!!!

[Mytur Binsdirti]

New SRT8 Chargers would eat the old ones stock for stock and get alot better MPG doing it,

...and have a/c, better handling, and come complete with all of the creature comforts.

[Troy]

Because they're living in the past? My dad raced cars "back in the day" which he remembers being pretty fast. Some of the modern cars are downright scary and he questions his memory whenever he rides in one.

In my opinion, it doesn't matter how fast they are - new cars in general lack the "style" the old ones had. I can park my tattered old car next to a new ZR-1 (or Charger or Challenger) and draw more attention. It doesn't matter if it can't get out of its own way (as proven by my 73 Barracuda with the original, tired 318 auto and torn seats and peeling paint).

Besides, if you want to be the fastest car I can't imagine why you'd start with a big, heavy Charger in the first place. It never ceases to amaze me how many people try to bend the laws of physics just to prove they can. If you want to drag race - start with a Dart/Duster. It will be cheaper, faster, and you'll break fewer parts.

Troy

[cdr]

Because they're living in the past? My dad raced cars "back in the day" which he remembers being pretty fast. Some of the modern cars are downright scary and he questions his memory whenever he rides in one.

In my opinion, it doesn't matter how fast they are - new cars in general lack the "style" the old ones had. I can park my tattered old car next to a new ZR-1 (or Charger or Challenger) and draw more attention. It doesn't matter if it can't get out of its own way (as proven by my 73 Barracuda with the original, tired 318 auto and torn seats and peeling paint).

Besides, if you want to be the fastest car I can't imagine why you'd start with a big, heavy Charger in the first place. It never ceases to amaze me how many people try to bend the laws of physics just to prove they can. If you want to drag race - start with a Dart/Duster. It will be cheaper, faster, and you'll break fewer parts.

Troy

THIS IS WHY

[Mike DC]

I basically agree with Troy.



Also , the car that is fastest on the stopwatch is not always the car that feels the fastest to the driver.  

Newer cars are fastest by the clock but they are wrapped in bodies that mute away most of the drama that gives it a sense of speed.  All that sound deadening, insulation, body stiffness, smooth ride, low unsprung weight, etc.  A new car can make 100mph feel safer than 60mph in an old one . . . but are you really buying a fast car so the driving experience feels safe and drama-free?  The earth is traveling a zillion miles an hour through space 24/7 but it doesn't feel like it because our bodies are isolated from all the sensory evidence of it.

Newer engines also produce markedly less torque under the high point of the power curve.  So they feel less powerful than a big-cube older car any time you aren't mashing the throttle wide open.  This is also partly why their MPG is better most of the time.  If you want more power then you have to pay for more gas.  New cars have mastered the trick of only having more power when you mash the throttle and not the rest of the time.  Some guys prefer that, some don't.  

[cdr]

i'll take a rattle trap old hot rod over the newer hot rods any day

[440]

Agreed new cars are quicker but hands down they don't give you the driving experience of an old car.

You don't get the noise, the rawness, the sweet smell of combustion, the seat of your pants feel etc.

[NYCMille]

It's all about perception. For years muscle cars have been looked at as these great unstoppable beasts, however the truth of the matter is, they simply weren't that fast. The beauty however is that one can still pull up next a new car in a say a 318 Dart with a decent exhaust and the other guy will go, "uh oh..." - it's what makes these cars great.

[GT]

Owning both, my 2012 SRT8 beats out my 70 in every category (mileage, power, top end, safety, emissions, comfort, braking, cornering, gadgets, etc. etc.).

Now when the v10 transplant is finished - i expect my 70 to trounce the SRT8 performance wise (but not safety/gadgets/etc.).

All in all - if I had to pick one I'd let the SRT8 go in a heartbeat over my 70...

Newer cars just dont have the Soul of the older metal.  

[Cooter]

See, IMO, the real question here is why do people tend to lend more respect to the older cars. They are considered old skool and WAY cooler than anything on the road today. This is why people will pay $30K for a new car, because it's a NEW CAR...They will pay $30K for an older Charger because it's cooler. NOT because it may or may not be faster/more powerful, etc.


Here in Va., we tend to agree that the older cars are more powerful because of the old addage, If you can make 600 HP with basically a Small Block Chevy "Hemi" from Mercedes, then what kind of power could one make with say a 572 C.I. Hemi from yesterday? Everything being equal, the bigger the engine you BEGIN with, the more power it will make and do it longer.  Try making 700 HP at the wheels, 345 C.I. Hemi, Or even dare I say a 426 C.I. Hemi, and I bet you will need a supercharger of some sort. We have one 572 right here (pic. above), that clearly shows it can be done without a supercharger, and is the same physical size as the original engine.(IE Parts from original will bolt on it). Oh, and just wait until the emissions laws begin to tighten on emissions sniffers up the tailpipe of that blown 6.1 liter making 800 HP at the wheels..You'll begin to see alot less of them on the road. Contrary to popular belief, emissions stations dyno the cars at WOT too, and if your car has a blower and 800 hp, it WILL register on the machine as "Not very green"......

The old school Musclecars were what IS a musclecar IMO. Not some overpriced, Mercedes Benz, with fifteen Side impact air bags, nav. system, etc. The older musclecars are IMO, Basically like comparing the Real Bikers that actually build their bikes in their living rooms out of a 1974 HD, Have a few patches on their leathers, etc. and the "New age" bikers with their brand new HD's, and work in a doctors office....
Sure, they are doing the same thing, riding the same make of bike, but there's a difference...
The older musclecars were WAY overpowered for their braking, handling, etc. You had to DRIVE them..Unlike today where there's Traction control for the low performance driver, and the like.
There's something "Primal" about that feeling of "oh sh*t", I coulda f*cked up there. This thing is dangerous!"....

Bigger engines lighter cars priced to where the average guy could buy one and kill him/herself if they wanted to.
Today, you have to spend at LEAST $60K on a New Shelby if you want all the beans. Yesterday, you could buy a damn racecar right off the showroom floor for pennies over what the average new car would cost you and you could ORDER ANYTHING you wanted. Lemme see the day when Chrysler/fiat/mercedes whatever, allows me to order my new Challenger with a 6.4 Hemi, 6 speed manual, delete everything but what I have to have safety to register it, LIVE REAR AXLE (READ Dana 60), and price it to where the payments aren't $650/month and I'll be the first in line...Until then, I prefer to have my musclecar my way...Fast, Quick, Loud, Obnoxious, and dangerous...

[Troy]

There was an article several months ago (can't remember which magazine) comparing three generations of Camaros (1969, late 90s(?) and new). The 1969 felt fastest because of what Mike said - it's raw and unmuted. The newest version is so tight and quiet that the sensory overload just isn't there. You hear a bit of a whir and feel a steady push into the seat - nothing like slamming a 69 big block through the gears!

My dad says that if he were to buy another car (toy) he'd likely just get a new Mustang (or similar) because he gets the V8 power and sound with modern conveniences like good steering, better brakes, comfy seats, A/C, and a decent radio. He loves the old cars but they take a lot out of him on any trip longer than about 30 minutes.

Troy

[skip68]

It's like I always say .....
I don't care how fast, quick or how much HP a new Car is, you still have to be seen driving it.  It's all about the style.   Mr Angry, you're wrong.  These cars were fast back in the day.   They would peg 150 MPH +  

[1969chargerrtse]

I always saw my Charger as an old barking dog. Intimidating but not as fast as cars out today. My 2002 Trans am runs in the 13's they tell me getting 18 to 27 mpg.
That's why I moved on. Old cars, new cars, they both have a place on the map as exciting in one way or another.  I always said I hope 40 years later we have improved the gasoline engine, and we have.  No more pumping the carb for me though.

[NYCMille]

Agreed - they would move when necessary but they delivered speed differently. Old cars let you feel the speed - they're loud, make noises and dare I say, "scare you" at anything over 120 +. Whereas a new car, hell even something like a Honda Accord will cruise all day long at 120 + with the A/C and stereo on won't even blink an eye. Plus they'll take more abuse and offer more reliability than anything that was built back in the day.

I just sold my SRT8 Magnum and while it was a brilliant vehicle, it was just that... a vehicle. However, when I needed to get someplace fast and in total comfort, it was great.

I always saw my Charger as an old barking dog. Intimidating but not as fast as cars out today.

- BINGO!

[skip68]

One thing to remember is these cars were the last of an era far as high HP.   By 1974, cars were getting choked down with emissions.  No more hemi's or 400+ HP.  For 30 years or so (70's, 80's and early 90's) horsepower was low. Now we have horsepower and good emissions.   

[Indygenerallee]

Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8 Twin Turbo 1134 HP and being 4wd I am pretty sure that drivetrain wins any race hands down..

[Road Dog]

My old high mileage Charger feels faster than my 2011 Challenger. My Challenger is more forgiving with better road manners.

[cdr]

I always saw my Charger as an old barking dog. Intimidating but not as fast as cars out today. My 2002 Trans am runs in the 13's they tell me getting 18 to 27 mpg.
That's why I moved on. Old cars, new cars, they both have a place on the map as exciting in one way or another.  I always said I hope 40 years later we have improved the gasoline engine, and we have.  No more pumping the carb for me though.

alott of old mopars ran in the 13s,some in the 12s,although 20 mpg & comfort was not there

[kab69440]

THIS IS WHY

Can't say I've seen a stupid SRT do that lately...

[Indygenerallee]

http://youtu.be/tavE9WgZXnc Here is a link to the Jeep SRT8

[Brass]

Stock?  Yes, the new cars are faster.  But you can get a lot of go-fast goodies for the price of a new car.  Check this out:

http://wot.motortrend.com/old-vs-new-pro-touring-1969-chevrolet-camaro-takes-on-2012-camaro-zl1-239295.html

Also, I would rather drive a muscle car at any speed and have a visceral experience than cruise all day long at 120 mph which feels more like 60 in a sensory-deprecated new car. 

[Ghoste]

The ones are quicker and with less effort, less wow factor too.  A lot of the old ones didn't run as fast as we think either, a stock musclecar from the 60's that can run in the 13's is REALLY carrying the mail!  (and no matter what anyone says, a stock musclecar from the 60's that does run 13's is a very rare beast)
But at the end of the day, they still ran it with more cool than the ones today and that is something you can't just bolt on.

[Troy]

Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8 Twin Turbo 1134 HP and being 4wd I am pretty sure that drivetrain wins any race hands down..

Yeah - for $150k (or so). The new Cherokee SRT-8 starts at over $61k. Put that into an "old" car and see what you can come up with.

And, judging by the video, that thing isn't AWD.

Troy

[myk]

I always saw my Charger as an old barking dog. Intimidating but not as fast as cars out today. My 2002 Trans am runs in the 13's they tell me getting 18 to 27 mpg.
That's why I moved on. Old cars, new cars, they both have a place on the map as exciting in one way or another.  I always said I hope 40 years later we have improved the gasoline engine, and we have.  No more pumping the carb for me though.

God Bless the LS1 F body, man.  As for old muscle?  Their performance is mostly hyped up talk from guys "back in the day."  Let's face it-most of the muscle cars from that era were 14 or even 15 second 1/4 mile cars at best from the factory including Chargers.  Now.....the performance capabilities of the 60's may be gone but their styling will be timeless.  I love some of today's cars, like my '99 Ram-Air Bird, but nothing, NOTHING will ever look as good as the stuff from "back in the day..."

[Brock Lee]

Speed is not even a factor for me. I love the experience. I turn on the original radio, take a ride it sends me straight back to my childhood when that is how cars were. The smells, the sounds, feels etc. It is a timewarp.

[Indygenerallee]

$140,000?!   and no that one is not AWD because when it pulls the front wheels it would snap the axleshaft, the ones that run in the 8's and 9's have disabled AWD to prevent front axle damage. But that's not the point of the video, you put a 6.1 Hemi or even a 5.7 Hemi with mods in a old B body and they will easily out do the original 440's and 426 Hemis and get better MPG doing it. Just my preferance to click a couple buttons on the Diablosport Trinity tuner and go from one "tune" to another in a matter of seconds. So for myself I prefer old muscle with modern drivetrain...

[triple_green]

I just had a guy come up and talk to me about this last Friday at a local car show. He has a new SRT8 392 challenger. He asked me about the low end torque of my 71 challenger convertible, 426 hemi 3.91 gears. I said it was great, like nothing else I have driven.

He said that he is disappointed in the low end torque of his 392 hemi. He said the real torque isn't until the 5-6K rpm range. Doesn't feel the same as the old Muscle cars.

Interesting.

[cdr]

my loong term plan is port fuel inj on my old school 496,already doin the over drive tranny

[Troy]

$140,000?!  and no that one is not AWD because when it pulls the front wheels it would snap the axleshaft, the ones that run in the 8's and 9's have disabled AWD to prevent front axle damage. But that's not the point of the video, you put a 6.1 Hemi or even a 5.7 Hemi with mods in a old B body and they will easily out do the original 440's and 426 Hemis and get better MPG doing it. Just my preferance to click a couple buttons on the Diablosport Trinity tuner and go from one "tune" to another in a matter of seconds. So for myself I prefer old muscle with modern drivetrain...

You seem confused then. You said it had 1,145 horsepower and 4wd. Do you have the receipts for that vehicle? If not, how can you contest my guess at its cost? That intercooler doesn't look like a junkyard part. It alone likely costs about as much as I have in my 440 (certainly more than I have in my 383!). Are the turbos takeoffs from a dead Cummins or new? The last turbo I purchased new cost about $2,500. Is labor free these days? And that certainly isn't a stock bottom end. Probably not heads either. Or transmission. Or fuel system. Or axles. Or ignition. I doubt a Diablosport will tune a Hemi with twin turbos and 1,145 hp. I suppose I could be wrong. I'm all for technology and modern horsepower in a classic package (at least one of my cars follows this formula) - but I'm also realistic.

Troy

[Aero426]

There seems to be more and more comparisons of old versus new, and that the old must somehow measure up to the latest stuff being produced today.    As far as I am concerned it is an apples to oranges issue.   In fact, to me, it is a total non-issue.     There are positives of both kinds of cars, but they aren't the same experience.   

[Indygenerallee]

Troy, you would be amazed what putting twin turbos on ANY vehicle and a tune will do! I highly doubt the guy has $140,000 dollars in it, may have a added $20,000 in it but I can't see it being much more.

[Indygenerallee]

I got ahold of the shop that performed the work on that SRT8 Jeep and they quoted me a price of $13,500 to do the twin turbo setup and tune to get the 1100hp on a SRT8 Jeep! Cheaper than I thought The guy said they were backlogged for 4 months......

[skip68]

I got ahold of the shop that performed the work on that SRT8 Jeep and they quoted me a price of $13,500 to do the twin turbo setup and tune to get the 1100hp on a SRT8 Jeep! Cheaper than I thought The guy said they were backlogged for 4 months......

   So how much money would you have to put into the jeep to handle 1100hp ?   I would think lots of added support and beefed up components.   

[Patronus]

Speed is not even a factor for me. I love the experience. I turn on the original radio, take a ride it sends me straight back to my childhood when that is how cars were. The smells, the sounds, feels etc. It is a timewarp.

I agree with Brock. Maybe not childhood, but definitely of a time long gone. Sometimes I drive with the windows up so its harder to see the big grin on my face.

[Cooter]

I got ahold of the shop that performed the work on that SRT8 Jeep and they quoted me a price of $13,500 to do the twin turbo setup and tune to get the 1100hp on a SRT8 Jeep! Cheaper than I thought The guy said they were backlogged for 4 months......

   So how much money would you have to put into the jeep to handle 1100hp ?   I would think lots of added support and beefed up components.   

AMEN....That thing has a sh*t ton of money in it.

[1969chargerrtse]

I always saw my Charger as an old barking dog. Intimidating but not as fast as cars out today. My 2002 Trans am runs in the 13's they tell me getting 18 to 27 mpg.
That's why I moved on. Old cars, new cars, they both have a place on the map as exciting in one way or another.  I always said I hope 40 years later we have improved the gasoline engine, and we have. No more pumping the carb for me though.

God Bless the LS1 F body, man. A's for old muscle? Their performance is mostly hyped up talk from guys "back in the day." Let's face it-most of the muscle cars from that era were 14 or even 15 second 1/4 mile cars at best from the factory including Chargers. Now.....the performance capabilities of the 60's may be gone but their styling will be timeless.  I love some of today's cars, like my '99 Ram-Air Bird, but nothing, NOTHING will ever look as good as the stuff from "back in the day..."

I love the look of my new Muscle as much as my old muscle but as noted before they are apples and oranges.  I had a brand new Shelby conv zip by me the other day, that thing was so power massive it almost sucked my TA into it's hood. That car was as intimidating and scary as a Hemi car back in the day and as nice looking. It's all good.

[Scaregrabber]

My 71 HemiCharger ran 13.2's, My 70 Hemi Challenger ran 13.0s and my 66 Hemi Coronet (albeit with a 472) runs hard into the 11.s. That's faster than any stock new Challenger I've seen.
I also never thought of the old cars as trim and light but they sure are in comparison to the new "Chargers" and Challengers.
If you want to daily drive a car then the new stuff is fine but the old stuff will never be replaced. When you drive your new car you're pretty much driving what the govt. mandates you to drive. When you drive an old one, that car was strictly designed the best way they knew how for the buyer. They designed it so the styling would appeal to the buyer and the powertrain would impress the buyer, no thought at all was given to fitting into conformity mandated by the govt.

Sheldon

[cdr]

My 71 HemiCharger ran 13.2's, My 70 Hemi Challenger ran 13.0s and my 66 Hemi Coronet (albeit with a 472) runs hard into the 11.s. That's faster than any stock new Challenger I've seen.
I also never thought of the old cars as trim and light but they sure are in comparison to the new "Chargers" and Challengers.
If you want to daily drive a car then the new stuff is fine but the old stuff will never be replaced. When you drive your new car you're pretty much driving what the govt. mandates you to drive. When you drive an old one, that car was strictly designed the best way they knew how for the buyer. They designed it so the styling would appeal to the buyer and the powertrain would impress the buyer, no thought at all was given to fitting into conformity mandated by the govt.

Sheldon

YEAH WHAT HE SAID

[Troy]

I got ahold of the shop that performed the work on that SRT8 Jeep and they quoted me a price of $13,500 to do the twin turbo setup and tune to get the 1100hp on a SRT8 Jeep! Cheaper than I thought The guy said they were backlogged for 4 months......

I'll believe it when you show me copies of the bill and dyno sheet. So I did my own research on that Jeep:

    TwinTurboCreations 6262mm Precision Kit
    ERL 426 Stroker Gen. III HEMI
    Paramount Unlimited Hp Tranny
    Paramount Dominator Torque Converter
    Crank This Performance Billet Fuel hat
    Paramount upgraded rear Axles
    Arrington Stage 2 Intake manifold
    Arringtopn 90mm Throttle body

That short block is $5,400 + an $1,100 core. Add in another $1,450 for additional machine work according to their site. No details on the heads but they mentioned $4,000 in a discussion. A similar Arrington 426 (used in one of their other feature Jeeps or previously in this one) lists for $17k complete. The rear diff is $6,500, axles are $950, and drive shaft is $850. The transmission is $5,250, torque converter is $979, and transfer case is $2,150. The fuel hat is $990 with pumps, intake is $1,500, and throttle body is $1,259.

Figuring just the block and heads (which makes it $5k cheaper than the Arrington) that all comes to just over $32k. Add in your $13k twin turbo kit to your $60k Jeep and you're hovering at $105k - without labor. A shop I talked to recently gets about $2,200 for an engine swap. Machin shop labor around here is about $800 for engine assembly. I can't really put a price on the 10 point cage, after market wheels, sticky tires, upgraded MAP sensor (and probably oxygen sensors) but I'd bet it isn't cheaper than an additional $5k. When you're done you have to run it on race gas. My numbers may have been off a tad but not nearly as far off as you think.

It's still a fat pig (over 5,000 pounds) and looks like a cracker box on wheels. That much money would buy every car in my garage without looking as cool as any one of them - and I have one for every day of the week! I know of several cars on this site that run only slightly slower and you could probably build all of them for the cost of that one Jeep.

Troy

[redmist]

I was reading a Car and Driver magazine and they had an article on one of the new BMW's M-5???  Anyhow, they said that BMW now uses the stock stereo to make an "engine noise" to better stimulate your senses during driving...  wow, haah!

[Ghoste]

You're kidding, have we really come to that?

[Cooter]

You're kidding, have we really come to that?

Who you kidding Ghoste, we been doing that for years .....What's the old saying, "If it don't go, chrome it"...Well, if it don't give you the raw feel of performance, hell turn the radio up a bit....

[Cooter]

I got ahold of the shop that performed the work on that SRT8 Jeep and they quoted me a price of $13,500 to do the twin turbo setup and tune to get the 1100hp on a SRT8 Jeep! Cheaper than I thought The guy said they were backlogged for 4 months......

I'll believe it when you show me copies of the bill and dyno sheet. So I did my own research on that Jeep:

   TwinTurboCreations 6262mm Precision Kit
   ERL 426 Stroker Gen. III HEMI
   Paramount Unlimited Hp Tranny
   Paramount Dominator Torque Converter
   Crank This Performance Billet Fuel hat
   Paramount upgraded rear Axles
   Arrington Stage 2 Intake manifold
   Arringtopn 90mm Throttle body

That short block is $5,400 + an $1,100 core. Add in another $1,450 for additional machine work according to their site. No details on the heads but they mentioned $4,000 in a discussion. A similar Arrington 426 (used in one of their other feature Jeeps or previously in this one) lists for $17k complete. The rear diff is $6,500, axles are $950, and drive shaft is $850. The transmission is $5,250, torque converter is $979, and transfer case is $2,150. The fuel hat is $990 with pumps, intake is $1,500, and throttle body is $1,259.

Figuring just the block and heads (which makes it $5k cheaper than the Arrington) that all comes to just over $32k. Add in your $13k twin turbo kit to your $60k Jeep and you're hovering at $105k - without labor. A shop I talked to recently gets about $2,200 for an engine swap. Machin shop labor around here is about $800 for engine assembly. I can't really put a price on the 10 point cage, after market wheels, sticky tires, upgraded MAP sensor (and probably oxygen sensors) but I'd bet it isn't cheaper than an additional $5k. When you're done you have to run it on race gas. My numbers may have been off a tad but not nearly as far off as you think.

It's still a fat pig (over 5,000 pounds) and looks like a cracker box on wheels. That much money would buy every car in my garage without looking as cool as any one of them - and I have one for every day of the week! I know of several cars on this site that run only slightly slower and you could probably build all of them for the cost of that one Jeep.

Troy

'ol "Negative Nancy" here....

AMEN....For my $105K it better come with 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, and maybe a backyard cause I'd have to live in it. And people say you those FAST guys aren't all rich....That SRT8 Jeep sure looks "Stock", but runs like hell. If the Jeep owner isn't loaded, he's doing it the American way it seems these days, jamming everything on Credit cards, playing while it lasts, then bankrupts everything. I refuse to do that, and if that causes me to live a "Sliver" of the life, then so be it. At least everything I got is paid for.

[Mytur Binsdirti]

My 71 HemiCharger ran 13.2's, My 70 Hemi Challenger ran 13.0s and my 66 Hemi Coronet (albeit with a 472) runs hard into the 11.s. That's faster than any stock new Challenger I've seen.

I hear ya. 12.44 really sucks. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFbxZZtywZ0&feature=player_embedded#!

[adauto]

There's something "Primal" about that feeling of "oh sh*t", I coulda f*cked up there. This thing is dangerous!"....

Cooter said it all right here. And boy its fun!

[1969chargerrtse]

 

I got ahold of the shop that performed the work on that SRT8 Jeep and they quoted me a price of $13,500 to do the twin turbo setup and tune to get the 1100hp on a SRT8 Jeep! Cheaper than I thought The guy said they were backlogged for 4 months......

I'll believe it when you show me copies of the bill and dyno sheet. So I did my own research on that Jeep:

   TwinTurboCreations 6262mm Precision Kit
   ERL 426 Stroker Gen. III HEMI
   Paramount Unlimited Hp Tranny
   Paramount Dominator Torque Converter
   Crank This Performance Billet Fuel hat
   Paramount upgraded rear Axles
   Arrington Stage 2 Intake manifold
   Arringtopn 90mm Throttle body

That short block is $5,400 + an $1,100 core. Add in another $1,450 for additional machine work according to their site. No details on the heads but they mentioned $4,000 in a discussion. A similar Arrington 426 (used in one of their other feature Jeeps or previously in this one) lists for $17k complete. The rear diff is $6,500, axles are $950, and drive shaft is $850. The transmission is $5,250, torque converter is $979, and transfer case is $2,150. The fuel hat is $990 with pumps, intake is $1,500, and throttle body is $1,259.

Figuring just the block and heads (which makes it $5k cheaper than the Arrington) that all comes to just over $32k. Add in your $13k twin turbo kit to your $60k Jeep and you're hovering at $105k - without labor. A shop I talked to recently gets about $2,200 for an engine swap. Machin shop labor around here is about $800 for engine assembly. I can't really put a price on the 10 point cage, after market wheels, sticky tires, upgraded MAP sensor (and probably oxygen sensors) but I'd bet it isn't cheaper than an additional $5k. When you're done you have to run it on race gas. My numbers may have been off a tad but not nearly as far off as you think.

It's still a fat pig (over 5,000 pounds) and looks like a cracker box on wheels. That much money would buy every car in my garage without looking as cool as any one of them - and I have one for every day of the week! I know of several cars on this site that run only slightly slower and you could probably build all of them for the cost of that one Jeep.

Troy

I
'ol "Negative Nancy" here....

AMEN....For my $105K it better come with 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, and maybe a backyard cause I'd have to live in it. And people say you those FAST guys aren't all rich....That SRT8 Jeep sure looks "Stock", but runs like hell. If the Jeep owner isn't loaded, he's doing it the American way it seems these days, jamming everything on Credit cards, playing while it lasts, then bankrupts everything. I refuse to do that, and if that causes me to live a "Sliver" of the life, then so be it. At least everything I got is paid for.

I don't think going bankrupt is as much fun anymore. I think laws changed whereas you can claim bankrupt but have to pay everything back in a long term plan. No more free ticket.

[440]

This Jeep moves, 9.17 @ 151mph.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ic2fgsGs-cU&feature=related

[skip68]

DON'T FORGET TRACTION CONTROL AND TIRES AND GEARING!  
Take a 69 hemi Charger, put the same rear gears, same modern tranny, same tires and traction control as a new Challenger or anything and see what happens.   I'd bet that old 426 hemi Charger wins.  

[skip68]

What's the torque numbers on some of these high horsepower engines?   I've seen high HP motors that make low torque.    
Remember, torque is what moves you.   

[Troy]

What's the torque numbers on some of these high horsepower engines?   I've seen high HP motors that make low torque.    
Remember, torque is what moves you.   

That Jeep was around 973ish I think. Pretty potent! Especially for a small block. I am actually somewhat surprised by how cheap *some* of the parts are. Obviously they aren't dealer sold parts or the prices would be double.

On the other hand, you can buy a Dart and install a 512 stroker, Cope Racing transmission, and a Dana 60 that will run close to the same speed for about the cost of that Arrington 426. Again, why fight physics? Start with a car that's nearly a ton lighter and you don't have to be nearly as creative.

Troy

[1969chargerrtse]

DON'T FORGET TRACTION CONTROL AND TIRES AND GEARING!  
Take a 69 hemi Charger, put the same rear gears, same modern tranny, same tires and traction control as a new Challenger or anything and see what happens.   I'd bet that old 426 hemi Charger wins.  

Plus you wanna tune that baby for racing.  I've always heard a 440/6 could do better than a stock factory Hemi. Tires are a huge point. My big fat wide GoodYears certainly grab better than the poly glass F70's back in the day.

[Ghoste]

DON'T FORGET TRACTION CONTROL AND TIRES AND GEARING!  
Take a 69 hemi Charger, put the same rear gears, same modern tranny, same tires and traction control as a new Challenger or anything and see what happens.   I'd bet that old 426 hemi Charger wins.  

Hmm, could make for a very interesting race.  I wouldn't be so sure those things will automatically tip the balance so easily, modern engine controls over spark and fuel have made optimum tuning almost a given in the new ones.

[Ghoste]

You're kidding, have we really come to that?

Who you kidding Ghoste, we been doing that for years .....What's the old saying, "If it don't go, chrome it"...Well, if it don't give you the raw feel of performance, hell turn the radio up a bit....

Yeah but we always turned the radio up before to hide the lack of performance sounds, not to broadcast pre-recorded ones. 

[UH60L]

In my experience in the four years of driving my charger before it went into the body shop is that in the few cases where someone really wanted to race me in a new car.......it was almost as if the sound of my exhaust scared them off, because I beat them every time.

The best one was the guy on the freeway that pulled up next to me in the fast lane and made the "lets race" motion with his hand and then stepped on it.  When I pulled away from him at 110mph and proceeded to hit 130 or so and then back off...you should have seen the look on his face after he caught back up to me.....priceless!       

My '11 challenger is fun to drive, probably the closest thign to experiencing driving my '69 charger, but it will just never have the same level of cool factor.  Many of the amenities people talk about with new cars can be added to old ones, as long as your not worried about the car being stock.  I have keyless entry and a nice alpine stereo system in my '69.  A/C could be addded if I really needed it.  And, my '69 was getting 22mpg on the highway before I started the body work, so, not that bad really....

[skip68]

When I was a kid I put playing cards with a clothes pin on the frame of my bike.  The end of the card would rub the spokes and I would pretend to be riding a motorcycle.   
I guess this is the same thing with motor sounds on the radio.   

[Ghoste]

Except when we were kids, it was cool.  Now its just pathetic. 

[1969chargerrtse]

DON'T FORGET TRACTION CONTROL AND TIRES AND GEARING!  
Take a 69 hemi Charger, put the same rear gears, same modern tranny, same tires and traction control as a new Challenger or anything and see what happens.   I'd bet that old 426 hemi Charger wins.  

Hmm, could make for a very interesting race.  I wouldn't be so sure those things will automatically tip the balance so easily, modern engine controls over spark and fuel have made optimum tuning almost a given in the new ones.

It's all about traction and power.  You can have all the power you want but if your 1969 Polyglass tires are spinning, you're gonna do a slower time than the modern traction control, big ass tire cars.

[Cooter]

DON'T FORGET TRACTION CONTROL AND TIRES AND GEARING!  
Take a 69 hemi Charger, put the same rear gears, same modern tranny, same tires and traction control as a new Challenger or anything and see what happens.   I'd bet that old 426 hemi Charger wins.  

Hmm, could make for a very interesting race.  I wouldn't be so sure those things will automatically tip the balance so easily, modern engine controls over spark and fuel have made optimum tuning almost a given in the new ones.

It's all about traction and power.  You can have all the power you want but if your 1969 Polyglass tires are spinning, you're gonna do a slower time than the modern traction control, big ass tire cars.

Not according to the FAST guys...They run in the 9's on Bias ply tires, carrying the front wheels.

[Chryco Psycho]

Prove that people think , I have seen a lot that never seem too 

[1969chargerrtse]

DON'T FORGET TRACTION CONTROL AND TIRES AND GEARING!  
Take a 69 hemi Charger, put the same rear gears, same modern tranny, same tires and traction control as a new Challenger or anything and see what happens.   I'd bet that old 426 hemi Charger wins.  

Hmm, could make for a very interesting race.  I wouldn't be so sure those things will automatically tip the balance so easily, modern engine controls over spark and fuel have made optimum tuning almost a given in the new ones.

It's all about traction and power.  You can have all the power you want but if your 1969 Polyglass tires are spinning, you're gonna do a slower time than the modern traction control, big ass tire cars.

Not according to the FAST guys...They run in the 9's on Bias ply tires, carrying the front wheels.

14/15" F70's?

[Cooter]

You tell me???

I think the black car managed to dip into the 9's a couple times.

[Chippa]

I have no idea how hard my 440 is going to be as i havent had the luxury of driving it (3 weeks away !!) but i bought this car for all of the reasons that matter to me like owning a American classic that you dont see much down here,cool factor and all of the other valid points raised...

I recently sold my 2006 BF XR6 Turbo Falcon (Aussies will know what i'm on about) they are a 4 ltr 6 cyl and are very easily and cheap to mod up (they newer FG model can easily run a 12.9 sec 1/4 mile )...after a small outlay say 3-4k i had 430 HP at the wheels and about 14lb of boost...these cars can be very sedate to drive being a newer car but can get very angry very quickly!! point i'm making is having the older classic is more appealing than going quick to me hence the reason for selling and going old school again..

My two cents 

[1969chargerrtse]

You tell me???

I think the black car managed to dip into the 9's a couple times.

What the?