Weights/Performance

[G-man]

Hello,

I been looking at youtube seeing a lot of 'street' type cars designed for drag race. Was quite interested in the 1968-1970 Roadrunners/GTX, and the 1968-1969 Coronet/superbees. They all had the wide slicks on the back, mini tubbed, but still had that regular street car look to them. Running stroked 440s or hemis (512-572ci) some procharged and what not. Either way a lot of the cars ran 10's and 9's and didn't look like drag cars but street cars with fat tires on the back.

So here I am wondering, the shape of the charger, the weight of the charger, the roof line that extends past the rear window that causes the natural braking effect that the Superbee, roadrunner etc don't have... would the Charger powered the same, same setup etc also run those 10's and 9's the roadrunners/superbees (GTX/Coronets) run or are those cars more suitable for that type of thing and the 68-70 charger is not (Is the charger heavier, how much drag does that roof line cause etc)?

EG: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ipdq8VC7Esc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doorvW76RWs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOK0Or7en6k






I see a lot of these types of cars doing it. Besides the light A-bodies, most B bodies seem to be runners/bee's, coronets/GTX's.

So here I am wondering, is the shape, the roofline that extends past the rear window, weight etc of the charger just not as suitable/good and the roadrunner/superbee style B-body is better for a street/drag type set up or?

[70 sublime]

I would think project car starting price has something to do with it also why not so many Chargers done up for drag cars

[Mopar John]

Here is a picture of my 1970 GTX at Joliet, Illinois.
The best is 9.43 @ 141 MPH.
MJ

[Mike DC]

       
The Charger body's weight penalty is minor.  Aside from the extra bolt-ons (bucket seats, upper door panels, center console, etc), the body differences might bring a few dozen pounds.  That's like 3% more final curb weight.


Aero resistance does virtually nothing below 40-50 mph.  The effect is there at 100 mph but the difference between a Coronet vs Charger is minor.   

The NASCAR guys could have used Coronets in 1968-70.  The C500/Daytona crew did wind tunnel tests on a Coronet.  IIRC the Charger's aero, for all its problems, was still better overall.

The NASCAR guys cared so much about aero because the effect cubes-up as you go faster.  200 mph is 8x the air resistance of 100 mph.   At NASCAR speeds the air is so thick it's like trying to drive underwater. 

[JB400]

I would think prices and part interchangability plays a big part in what cars are used.  Charger was the halo car for Dodge back then.  Outside of the main b body platform, not much interchanges.  If a Coronet or a GTX wrecks, it has several different models they can fall back on to fix it cheaply.  End result, you can spend more money on go fast parts and be on track quicker

[G-man]

Thanks for that.

Nice GTX Mopar John

I assume based on whats been said, theoretically if Mopar J had a 68-70 charger built like that GTX it would also run under 10's?

Besides the initial purchase price difference (and maybe parts) between a GTX/Coronet/Charger, is there any benefit/advantage to the GTX/Coronet in the performance department over a similar built charger, or it should make no difference, if a 700HP GTX can hit 10's then a 700HP Charger can hit 10s etc?

[c00nhunterjoe]

My charger on a 9 inch wide tire, bone stock suspension, a legit 440 on pump gas at 4011 lbs runs low 10s at 130 mph currently. The difference in a charger vs a roadrunner is negligible