Muhahahahaha!!!!

[M3FordBoy]

^ Thats the fastest i've heard to for 0-60 of a srt-10. And i'm looking at a Motor Trend mag right now and thats what it says.

[Demon_Mustang]

samurai wrote:
"This is being talked about in a viper forum that I am a member of. Anyway there is a pic of a magazine article that has the two head to head where the viper wins. 1/4 Viper-11.77, Ford GT-11.78. yes I know a tenth of a secant but that can also be true with both cars, and drivers but still 0-60 Viper- 3.3, Ford GT- 3.6."

psst, Car & Driver has the Ford GT 0-60 in 3.3 seconds and 1/4 in 11.6 seconds. Looks like the driver of the GT in Motor Trend just can't drive.

Also, just in case this little detail isn't clear. Sure the GT has a supercharger, but it's a 5.4L matching or beating a 8.28L.

I don't think it's very common for just a s/c to compensate for almost 3L of displacement and spread out over 2 more cylinders to boot...

The Dodge Viper really needs to get its act together...

[Demon_Mustang]

Oh, BTW samurai, get your eyes checked. This is the Motor Trend article you were referring to:
Viper vs. GT

I have this issue, and it clearly says the Viper did 0-60mph in 3.9 seconds, not 3.3, you're remembering the Ford GT's time according to Car & Driver Vol. 49 No. 7 article entitled "Judgment Day!" Or Megastars on their website.

[Samurai75007]

Why did you open a 3-month-old Thread? I see that in the original photo that I put on here has the viper for 3.9. Also on supercars.net has the viper for 4.1. Different testers have different times due to different drivers. So again why bring this up this thread hadn’t been posted in for 3 months?

[Demon_Mustang]

Um... because there is only like, FOUR threads in this entire GT forum, and this was actually one of the ones higher on the list...

You act like I went through pages of threads to find this one...

Besides, it's obvious different testers got different results, but you refered to the Motor Trend article that compared the two. I have that article, and you cited the wrong numbers, simple as that.

[Samurai75007]

I put a photo up anyone could check it there.

[Demon_Mustang]

samurai, when you click on the link, all you see is a viper logo.

Also, sorry to tell you this, but if it says the Viper did 0-60 in 3.3 seconds in that photo, then the people at Viperclub.org or whatever it is, altered the image, because I HAVE THAT MAGAZINE WITH THAT ARTICLE, and it DOES NOT SAY IT!

Here is a link to the article, not posted on some Viper fan site, but posted by Motor Trend themselves:

Viper vs. GT results

Now, in the UNALTERED table, it clearly states that the Viper did 0-60 in 3.9 seconds. Sorry dude, but your viper fan website is lying to you.

[Samurai75007]

I don’t see a viper logo when I click on the link; I see a photo of the article. I am sure that I to have the article as well as many others that put so many more cars to the test against the GT, but anyway I corrected myself before. I am sorry O god of all things FORD. I STILL WOULDENT BUY A FUCKING FORD!!! Leave it at that.

[Demon_Mustang]

samurai, don't know how much you know about computers, but you see the image because it's already in your cache. That website does not allow remote linking, so others trying to go to it through an outside link will get a generic image. That's what we see.

Anyway, it's funny that you are talking bad about Ford when everyone I know whow as stupid enough to buy anything from Chrysler, including Dodge, has had nothing but problems with their car. Especially the transmission.

So hey, knock yourself out going to a viper forum to see altered images so they can blow smoke up your ass and make you feel good about your Viper with it's engine big enough to crank over 800hp, but in reality only getting 500 at the crank. Yep, perfect example of Dodge efficiency.

Just in case you didn't know, Ford has a n/a 6.4L V10 cranking out over 605bhp. That's 1.8L less displacement, and more than 100 more horsepower, just in case you were about to cite the supercharger in the 5.4L that is magically making up almost 3L of displacement difference. Power adders HELP, but nothing should beat sheer displacement, well, I guess Dodge proved that wrong, lol.

[Samurai75007]

I dont have a viper and never said that I did.

[Samurai75007]

So $170,000 is the cheapest Ford GT on E-bay right now. You can walk into your local dodge with $80 cash. So you saved $90k for .6 seconds or so slower. For that you can buy another one or get 0-60: 2.43 sec Venom 800 Twin Turbo Upgrade for $42,000. And still have enough to get a really nice car to drive around in on bad weather days. Where if you had the GT you only had that if you could find one.

[Demon_Mustang]

Hell, in THAT case, we should all just spend $800 on an old DSM and supe it up so it'll do 10-second quarter miles! Man, that's better than the Ferrari Enzo, GT, AND Viper all at once!

Edit: In case you don't get it. If you were on a budget, you wouldn't be buying the Ford GT OR the Viper. Both cars are for people WITH money who would buy it for more than simple performance. Trust me, anyone who has enough money to buy a Ford GT can probably afford to buy several if he/she was intending on spending all of his/her money...

If you want cheap performance, go out and get yourself an old 1988 5.0 Mustang for about $2k and put about $10k in the engine and you'd be doing 8-second quarter miles. When you get to these types of cars, you are buying it for a lot more than simple speed.

My gripe with Dodge is that they SHOULD have been able to accomplish 500hp with a much smaller engine and ended up saving a whole lot of weight. They don't seem to be able to, the Viper is their "best" and it can barely compete.

But hey, if you get your facts from doctored images posted in some Viper fan site, then I guess you have plenty of reason to believe that Dodge is the greatest company and the Viper is the ultimate sports car. More power to you, you can like whatever the hell you want, just don't go around posting fake information.

I'm sure if I go over to the Viper forums and tell them that the Ford GT can do 0-60 in 1.9 seconds and 1.2g on the skidpad, I'm sure to be an idiot!

[Samurai75007]

Originally Posted by Demon_Mustang

"My gripe with Dodge is that they SHOULD have been able to accomplish 500hp with a much smaller engine and ended up saving a whole lot of weight. They don't seem to be able to, the Viper is their "best" and it can barely compete."

Don’t get me wrong I don’t like Dodge ether, and yes they should get more power out of an engine that big. The new SRT-8 is a 6.1lr N/A putting out 425hp. (forgot how big the viper is). They should have better cars.

Originally Posted by Demon_Mustang

"But hey, if you get your facts from doctored images posted in some Viper fan site"

Again I said earlier that I was wrong about the numbers. It wasn’t doctored it was too small to read.

[Demon_Mustang]

"It wasn’t doctored it was too small to read."

hehe, ok then, I apologize for jumping the gun, but it would have been funnier if they had doctored the image, lol. Like I said, the image doesn't work for me because of the whole stupid remote linking thing that server has. For everyone who has already seen the picture on their computer and it is still stored in the cache, it will work, but for everyone else, they get a Viper logo...

But anyway, I didn't actually see it from the pic, but I do have the magazine, no two cars are made alike I guess since Car and Driver's numbers were better, and I know there have been even better numbers for the GT by other people, but who knows...

[jcsaleen]

Very nice car. But already has a recall