Is the chrysler srt8 core ripper value at $49,990 drive away

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by HULK_I6T

interested in your thoughts on 6.4 hemi vs miami supercharged.

You moved on the s/c miami for the srt8? Give us all the Good, bad and ugly?

All in here http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11416161

Originally Posted by mcnews

The F6 was better than the GT at everything until you got a GT you were adamant.... Then the GT was better than the F6 when you got a GT, at everything,..... Now the SRT8 is better than the GT now you have one, at everything, ROFLMAO. You just convince yourself of whatever you want to at the time Rodge. Just justifying your own purchase to yourself. What ever works for you bud!

See below which says it well. Technology moves on. People expect more kit in their cars as the years unfold. FPV's do the core functions, performance and braking, very well and handling is sort of okay but people expect more tecnology and equipment in their cars these days...something HSV has realised for some time and is the reason they've consistently outsold FPV by at least 2:1. The F6 was a great car in 2008 and the SC FPV in 2010 but its 2014 now and Ford havn't invested enough to keep the Falcon right up to date. If I thought the FH XR8 would have kept up to date with VF level's of technology I would have waited for it, but it won't and its clear the FH will be little more than a mildly facelifted FG3. Blame Alan Mulally, they've deliberatly planned the obsolecence of the Falcon.

Originally Posted by UberKnee

Its only natural for people to buy better and better cars. F6 is a great car but the GT is noisier, quicker and has more cheap mod potential. But in turn the SRT8 is more refined, more well rounded, packed with more features and just a better car to be in day to day. Having been in these cars, even the FPVs feel basic after you've been in a spec'd up SRT8. For daily driving the SRT8 cant be beat in this country, in the rwd 4 door market.

Sums it up very well. Also as people get older their prorities change and they don;t see any harm at all in comfort and luxury.

Originally Posted by Bent8

I have to disagree with you regarding the low speed torque available in the GT's... they are officially rated at 570Nm but we all know they have around 650Nm with the factory tune so while the SRT has 631Nm at 2900rpm, the GT is making more than this from 2200rpm all the way till 5500rpm.
Also, the GT will have tighter gearing (ZF vs 5-speed) so there is always more torque (and power) available to the driver... you may be experiencing the so-called "placebo" effect.
The R-Spec GT would easily beat a fully spec'd SRT8 around the track as it is nearly 200kg lighter and making about 30hp more power.

The fact the GT uses more fuel is because the SRT8 sounds like an econobox at the lights (cylinder deactivation) but let's be honest, a V8 driver doesn't care how much fuel their car drinks!

See Motor magazine Fewbruary 2013. SRT8 beat the R Spec on the track.
The figures on the SC FPV are fudged. They don't make 570nm's at 2,200 revs. I call BS. In stock tune they're not really a firecracker until you hit 4,500 revs then they go off with a really good bang. They're nothing like a F6 which really is making the torque numbers FPV claim in the 2,000-4,000 rev range. Ask anyone who's owned both an F6 and a SC FPV like I have. F6 has a far stronger bottom end. SRT8 feels like a blend of a F6 and SC FPV in the way it goes about its work.
I think different people have different views on fuel consumption. Many people want strong performacne and reasonable consumption...why do you think the turbo six is such a popular engine, it makes efficient power and abundent torque.

[XD ESP! XELR8]

Originally Posted by AU1XLS

It's an opinion, every ones entitled to an opinion, view etc etc
Move on

Go over he's post's mate and I'm sure you will no were I was going..

And yeap I'm going off most of the ones he's had deleted?

All I can say without stepping over the line..

Dave

Ps yeap every is entitled to there opinion but come on mate we want real time stuff not made up..

[xr6tjet]

I think the design of these things has really aged now and it recieved the most minimal design update, they still look almost identical to the previous model. I'm personally not a fan I see them on the road daily and they still do nothing for me. Each to their own though.

[mcnews]

The latest ones look worse than the first model. the design is aging terribly in my opinion. Now they just look plain ugly. I am a Chrysler man more than I am a Ford man, hell the WA Charger and Chrysler Club even have a perpetual trophy in my name! But I can't get my head around how butt ugly the 300C. But looks are subjective for sure

[kaniSS]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

The question has to be asked though, why only auto?

You should know in these cars auto is the only option because it leaves your other hand free for bustin caps in asses as you drive by..

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by mcnews

The latest ones look worse than the first model. the design is aging terribly in my opinion. Now they just look plain ugly. I am a Chrysler man more than I am a Ford man, hell the WA Charger and Chrysler Club even have a perpetual trophy in my name! But I can't get my head around how butt ugly the 300C. But looks are subjective for sure

I like the look of the Gen1's, much tougher, but would swap in the interior of the new.

The new versions rear is a shocker.

[PepeLePew]

Rodge I'm interested to hear your actual consumption. DOD has shown itself a wonderful thing in the SS as well, on paper. But in the real world unless you're just cruising all day every day (which I mostly do), it just looks good on greenguide.

In those hills you love fanging around, I can't see it having much effect...the city cycle of the cars is around 20l/100 about the same. How does your average consumption compare under the same conditions? I'd wish for DOD in any vehicle I have due my daily drive conditions, but it certainly doesn't work for all.

[Charliewool]

Be great if they made a SRT Hemi UTE!
With Falcon & Commie Ute going, there ain't going to be much of a choice in performance commercial vehicles.

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by PepeLePew

Rodge I'm interested to hear your actual consumption. DOD has shown itself a wonderful thing in the SS as well, on paper. But in the real world unless you're just cruising all day every day (which I mostly do), it just looks good on greenguide.

In those hills you love fanging around, I can't see it having much effect...the city cycle of the cars is around 20l/100 about the same. How does your average consumption compare under the same conditions? I'd wish for DOD in any vehicle I have due my daily drive conditions, but it certainly doesn't work for all.

SRT8's official combined ADR is 13.0 and my trip computer is presently sitting on 12.9. SC FPV official ADR is 13.7 and I never saw an average under 15.
Typically over the years with all the cars in my signature I've seen the official ADR + 10% give or take a percent or two but with the new SRT8 at the stage its bang on the official figure. Part of this is probably to do with me simply enjoying cruising in it more often on the open road, i.e. a change of open road vs around town use, but OTOH the engine is still tight and its only done 2,500 km's.

You're spot on that DOD is far more useful on the open road, (Australia is a big place and i would have thought a circa 13% fuel efficiency advantage compared to a SC FPV is not to be sneezed at for anyone doing significant amounts of country running). Regardless of the fact that the looks are controversial, I find it such a pleasant place to spend time.
I couldn't care less if people think it ugly in their opinion, some people think an S Class is too conservative, others that a Jaguar XFR is too swoopy...there's no accounting for taste.

I like to think of it as the thinking man's Bentley, (thinking, because nobody in their right financial mind would spend all that money on a Bentley that depreciates) but the full spec SRT8 has essentially 95% of the kit and technology that's in a BMW 750 Motorsport or Bentley at a mere fraction of the price, and that's the key to the SRT8's charm right there...
The core doesn't do it for me because the niche for the vehicle as far as i'm concerned sits in the large saloon with mega tech and equipment with top performance for sensible dollars catagory but on an objective basis the core is still a lot of kit for $49,990.

[blackwasp]

not trying to sound rude but they look ok and probably not a bad drive.
but when i see one on the road i can't help think , there goes another wannabe gangster!

[PepeLePew]

Thanks Rodge, certainly not to be sneezed at Depends on your driving too I guess, I get 10's all day every day of the week in the ute, 8's are the same territory as my 3.2 Ranger. Pretty darn impressive for a 2T car with a lot of cubes.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Charliewool

Be great if they made a SRT Hemi UTE!
With Falcon & Commie Ute going, there ain't going to be much of a choice in performance commercial vehicles.

Have to make your own one Charlie, get a Ranger and pimp it out with performance mods

[Charliewool]

Hmmm.. Maybe start with a SRT Jeep, cut the *** off, fit a tray..
Bibbidi-Bobbidi... there we have a utey boo!
PLUS.. The Jeep has an EIGHT speed auto (not that crappy ancient 5 speed relic)

[XD ESP! XELR8]

Originally Posted by blackwasp

not trying to sound rude but they look ok and probably not a bad drive.
but when i see one on the road i can't help think , there goes another wannabe gangster!

Lol seen one over the weekend SE subs of melb with 22 inch bling and plates along the line of mobster or something lol

Did look good tho..