[newmoon]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

So you admit the above comparison was bogus apples to oranges and now you change your tune to CTS-V vs Charger? Hahhahhahahaa okay let's go there.

Drivers race from a dig.

Road&Track
CTS-V: 0-60, 3.5, 11.6 1/4mile at 126.1mph, 4128lbs
Hellcat: 0-60, 3.8sec; 1/4mile 11.9 @ 123.1mph; 4583lbs

MotorTrend
Hellcat: 0-60, 3.7sec; 1/4mile 11.8 @ 124.3mph; 4562lbs
CTS-V: 0-60, 3.8, 11.9 1/4mile at 122.0mph, 4128lbs
Hellcat: 0-60, 3.8sec; 1/4mile 11.9 @ 122.8mph; 4530lbs
Hellcat: 0-60, 4.2sec; 1/4mile 12.1 @ 123.4mph; 4530lbs

Car&Driver
Hellcat: 0-60, 3.4sec; 1/4mile 11.4 @ 128.0mph; 4592lbs
CTS-V: 0-60 in 3.6, 11.8 1/4mile at 124.0mph, 4129lbs


In standardized testing the cars are rather similar from a dig aside from the outstanding run by C&D in November air. Regarding that run, the first remark Colwell made about launching the Fatcat: "what a pain in the ass to launch". How many launches do I have to do to get an 11.4?

From a roll, 707hp Charger every time.

On a track, no comparison. Both cars made an appearance at Lightning Lap last summer. Want to guess how that turned out?

Lightning Lap 2016
2016 Cadillac CTS-V: 2:56.8
2016 Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat: 3:03.5

Que the newmoon excuses: but, but, but the Charger is cheaper and people only roll race and people are running 10's with only a tire swap...did I miss anything?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And your 11:00s run is where? The best published time for the CTSV you posted is 11:60s, I gave you an 11:00s for the Hellcat which is exactly what Dodge advertised. Funny thing is Cadillac claims 11:60s and they indeed had a review where it reached that.

[Sven59]

Originally Posted by newmoon

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And your 11:00s run is where? The best published time for the CTSV you posted is 11:60s, I gave you an 11:00s for the Hellcat which is exactly what Dodge advertised. Funny thing is Cadillac claims 11:60s and they indeed had a review where it reached that.

So are you going to base everything on one hero run, if it isn't on the same track same time frame it is worthless.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by Sven59

So are you going to base everything on one hero run, if it isn't on the same track same time frame it is worthless.

To answer your question yes. This was run by an independent review with a 100% stock Charger in ideal conditions. It matched what Dodge advertised in ideal conditions. Now owners have actually claimed to have gone quicker but I discount these runs because you have no idea whether the car was modded in some way, its just too easy to hide mods. Also does this mean every owner will be able to achieve the same times, no just like not all owners will achieve 11:60s in the CTSV, or 11:40s in the ZL1.

Also regarding the same track same time, this arguement discounts all the times posted above as they were not same day, same conditions correct?

[Can'tHave2MuchHP]

Guys, the ZL1 is only going to reliably beat a Hellcat around a track. Straightline, the hellcat is a monster. Weight isn't bad enough to offset the power IMO.

A Hellcat is a DR away from 10s, as is the ZL1 probably, but I've seen local Hellcats with pulleys intake exhaust and drag radials running 9.7s! Hellcats are very very very underrated and everybody SHOULD know that by now. There's Hellcats that have gotten close to dynoing at 690 RWHP when they're supposed to have 707 BHP - 15%-20% = 600.95 RWHP. A SRT engineer said that the Hellcat engine actually has 745 BHP, but with many that will push 750-760 BHP. I know a guy with a Hellcat Charger that dynoed at 683 RWHP stock. On this same exact Dyno, there were C7 Z06 owners that dynoed at 550-565 RWHP. These Hellcat guys are dynoing stock what we LT4 guys dyno with bolt ons and E85. If they have bolt ons, then they're dynoing what we dyno with Heads/Cam/E85/FBO (750+ RWHP). With bolt ons and a shot of NOS, these guys are well up and over 900+ RWHP.

As a 5th Gen ZL1 owner on Camaro5 said "You want my advice? Stay away from them. They're severely underrated HP wise and with their Automatic and a good drag radial are a 9 second car with very little work." - By the way, the man who said this has a Heads/Cam/E85/FBO/Meth ZL1 (for 741 RWHP I want to say).

Easiest way to beat a Hellcat is to be driving a Vette. A ZL1 is simply going to have to outpower it, the 500 pound weight advantage isn't enough to make up for over 100 HP+ difference at every HP level (Stock for stock, Bolt on for Bolt on, Engine work for engine work, NOS for NOS, etc.) Be prepared though, if you beat a Hellcat with your FBO and Cammed ZL1, the Hellcat owner will be quick to indignantly point out that he only has a pulley and tune.

There's NO QUESTION, as is coming apparent from the reviews on this new ZL1, that it is a FAR better car than the Hellcat. Around a track it's not even close, and in many other circumstances the ZL1 is way better. But if you're on the highway, be prepared to lose. That's my point.


And before you start quoting me and start telling me what a idiot I am, please just understand that everything above is true. Also take into account that I know straight line racing is the only way a Hellcat can win. Also take into account I'm a Chevy guy to the core and want nothing but the best for the ZL1 and plan on buying one in the summer.

[Mr. Wyndham]

If that's all true...I just can't help but wonder why the heck they bothered with an SAE certification....and how the SAE cert. could be so wrong.

[URBAN LEGEND]

Originally Posted by Can'tHave2MuchHP

Guys, the ZL1 is only going to reliably beat a Hellcat around a track. Straightline, the hellcat is a monster. Weight isn't bad enough to offset the power IMO.

A Hellcat is a DR away from 10s, as is the ZL1 probably, but I've seen local Hellcats with pulleys intake exhaust and drag radials running 9.7s! Hellcats are very very very underrated and everybody SHOULD know that by now. There's Hellcats that have gotten close to dynoing at 690 RWHP when they're supposed to have 707 BHP - 15%-20% = 600.95 RWHP. A SRT engineer said that the Hellcat engine actually has 745 BHP, but with many that will push 750-760 BHP. I know a guy with a Hellcat Charger that dynoed at 683 RWHP stock. On this same exact Dyno, there were C7 Z06 owners that dynoed at 550-565 RWHP. These Hellcat guys are dynoing stock what we LT4 guys dyno with bolt ons and E85. If they have bolt ons, then they're dynoing what we dyno with Heads/Cam/E85/FBO (750+ RWHP). With bolt ons and a shot of NOS, these guys are well up and over 900+ RWHP.

As a 5th Gen ZL1 owner on Camaro5 said "You want my advice? Stay away from them. They're severely underrated HP wise and with their Automatic and a good drag radial are a 9 second car with very little work." - By the way, the man who said this has a Heads/Cam/E85/FBO/Meth ZL1 (for 741 RWHP I want to say).

Easiest way to beat a Hellcat is to be driving a Vette. A ZL1 is simply going to have to outpower it, the 500 pound weight advantage isn't enough to make up for over 100 HP+ difference at every HP level (Stock for stock, Bolt on for Bolt on, Engine work for engine work, NOS for NOS, etc.) Be prepared though, if you beat a Hellcat with your FBO and Cammed ZL1, the Hellcat owner will be quick to indignantly point out that he only has a pulley and tune.

There's NO QUESTION, as is coming apparent from the reviews on this new ZL1, that it is a FAR better car than the Hellcat. Around a track it's not even close, and in many other circumstances the ZL1 is way better. But if you're on the highway, be prepared to lose. That's my point.


And before you start quoting me and start telling me what a idiot I am, please just understand that everything above is true. Also take into account that I know straight line racing is the only way a Hellcat can win. Also take into account I'm a Chevy guy to the core and want nothing but the best for the ZL1 and plan on buying one in the summer.

None of this is new. True car guys know this.

[Can'tHave2MuchHP]

Originally Posted by URBAN LEGEND

None of this is new. True car guys know this.

That's what I'm saying, but after reading 3 pages of this with Hellcat talk, it seems most people did not know it in this thread.

And no, not all car guys know this. My dad is a car nut, been wrenching on them and busting knuckles since he was 12 years old. He can frame of restoration just about anything, could tell you every part of a car. But he wouldn't know that hellcats are underrated.

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by newmoon

And your 11:00s run is where? The best published time for the CTSV you posted is 11:60s, I gave you an 11:00s for the Hellcat which is exactly what Dodge advertised. Funny thing is Cadillac claims 11:60s and they indeed had a review where it reached that.

One hero run on a NHRA drag strip in perfect air with gallons of PJ1 on aired down tires is a fair comparison? What did cars.com run in the CTS-V that day under those conditions? That's what I thought. When the big 3 performance sources test their cars using the same standards, the results are a drivers race.

But, but, but cars.com lol

No comment on the beatdown at VIR? Hhahahhahahhaha conveniently ignored as it doesn't fit your narrative.

[URBAN LEGEND]

Originally Posted by Can'tHave2MuchHP

That's what I'm saying, but after reading 3 pages of this with Hellcat talk, it seems most people did not know it in this thread.

And no, not all car guys know this. My dad is a car nut, been wrenching on them and busting knuckles since he was 12 years old. He can frame of restoration just about anything, could tell you every part of a car. But he wouldn't know that hellcats are underrated.

Oh.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

One hero run on a NHRA drag strip in perfect air with gallons of PJ1 on aired down tires is a fair comparison? What did cars.com run in the CTS-V that day under those conditions? That's what I thought. When the big 3 performance sources test their cars using the same standards, the results are a drivers race.

But, but, but cars.com lol

No comment on the beatdown at VIR? Hhahahhahahhaha conveniently ignored as it doesn't fit your narrative.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm still waiting for your 11:00s slip for the CTSV, heck I will even throw you a bone, show me one from an owner who claims to be stock. I won't even hold you to the independent review standards. It's been out for over 2 years, surely somebody has run the number. I mean you claim it is faster right?

VIR no doubt the CTS V is faster, but that isn't what we are talking about here are we?

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by newmoon

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm still waiting for your 11:00s slip for the CTSV, heck I will even throw you a bone, show me one from an owner who claims to be stock. I won't even hold you to the independent review standards. It's been out for over 2 years, surely somebody has run the number. I mean you claim it is faster right?

VIR no doubt the CTS V is faster, but that isn't what we are talking about here are we?

The proof has been posted - you lost. All three major test reviewers showed it was a drivers race from a dig. You're trying to build a case around a single hero run under ideal conditions. Typical Mopar desperation syndrome.

You assume luxury sedan buyers hang out at drag-strips and post pinks online for bragging rights? All we know is under standardized testing conditions the ET's are virtually identical from a dig. Once the first turn happens the Failcat is hopelessly beaten.

[96MrBass]

It's my opinion but with all this 1/4 mile talk. It's only a matter of a few tenths with hellcraps and most of them the driver mod better be engaged. A matter of tires, tune or a pulley change and everything changes " YES IT'S MODDED " then but those are the small mods needed. Now after the striaght line stuff they aren't even in the same ballpark. So l ask which car is really better?

[Can'tHave2MuchHP]

Originally Posted by 96MrBass

It's my opinion but with all this 1/4 mile talk. It's only a matter of a few tenths with hellcraps and most of them the driver mod better be engaged. A matter of tires, tune or a pulley change and everything changes " YES IT'S MODDED " then but those are the small mods needed. Now after the striaght line stuff they aren't even in the same ballpark. So l ask which car is really better?

No question that the CTS-V or ZL1 is better than a Hellcat. Unless you're straight line roll racing or something. I drove a 16 CTS-V for a week or so, it is on another level with al cantara (sp?) wrapped everything, glorious Recaro luxury racing seats (They combined both into an amazing ass holder), tremendously quiet and smooth ride, and it's a freaking Cadillac that can haul ass with the best of them.

[96MrBass]

I personally think it's a lil to early to say the new ZL1 can't handle a hellcat in a DIG/REAL drag race. Hellcats definitely benefit from roll racing with most blowing the stock tires off from launch. Can't wait to see more line up vids and who knows maybe the ZL1 still lags behind.