2015 mustang vs Challenge Hellcat

[GT]

The Mustang is in production now!!! They have the numbers now!!!

Sponsored

 

[ChefBorOzzy]

I see nothing deceptive about the charts (59.9k. Whoopty doo. Let's find something else to whine about).. Sounds like butthurt. All three monsters are great cars. SRT Hellcat, GT500, and ZL1.

 

[Brent302]

I see nothing deceptive about the charts (59.9k. Whoopty doo. Let's find something else to whine about).. Sounds like butthurt. All three monsters are great cars. SRT Hellcat, GT500, and ZL1.

Yes when you post your very very best numbers against the competitions worst reviewed numbers is being deceptive. That's your selling point of the vehicle.

Those charts show a .6 second gap between the Hellcat and GT500. In reality if you compare best possible numbers is a .2 second gap. Which is huge in quarter mile terms.

Dodge is notorious for posting Professional numbers, under perfect conditions, which were done once out of 100 passes. Then people troll the forums saying they can't get the advertised number. Yes that's deceptive but yes continue down your childish route of calling people butthurt for calling Dodge on padded numbers. Garbage.

 

[ChefBorOzzy]

Dude.. What are you talking about? The SRT Challengers with the 6.4 time over time get the posted Dodge numbers and better.

It clearly states "Fastest Muslce Car Ever with a NHRA-certified".. Ever think it is the fastest NHRA-certified and if Ford and GM do have NHRA certified times, they are the ones listed?

This car is freaking sweet. I swear I read a thread with you whining about people posting on other forums, but you're no different on here.

Hellcat wins this round as it should. Dodge obviously came around later and knew what they needed to do as GT500 has been around since 2013 (662hp version) and ZL1 since 2012.

 

[mustangletback]

Yes when you post your very very best numbers against the competitions worst reviewed numbers is being deceptive. That's your selling point of the vehicle.

Those charts show a .6 second gap between the Hellcat and GT500. In reality if you compare best possible numbers is a .2 second gap. Which is huge in quarter mile terms.

Dodge is notorious for posting Professional numbers, under perfect conditions, which were done once out of 100 passes. Then people troll the forums saying they can't get the advertised number. Yes that's deceptive but yes continue down your childish route of calling people butthurt for calling Dodge on padded numbers. Garbage.

i hear you on that,Garbage Motors does the same thing.I would like to see the fatcat on a dyno to see how much hp it had when it did that 11.2 run.:lol:

 

[scottpe]

It clearly states "Fastest Muslce Car Ever with a NHRA-certified".. Ever think it is the fastest NHRA-certified and if Ford and GM do have NHRA certified times, they are the ones listed?

No I can almost guarantee that the other cars listed are NOT official NHRA times. Notice that the NHRA logo is only next to the Challenger, and the way they worded the heading. I think they cherry picked the worst published times from the other cars to pad their numbers a bit.

As already mentioned, the way they show the graphic is a also bit misleading too. They show "11.2" and "$59.9K" together, as if the base-priced car can run that quarter mile number. It can't. You'll have to pay more to add the automatic, and any other options they may have had on that car to achieve that performance.

This car is freaking sweet.
Hellcat wins this round as it should. Dodge obviously came around later and knew what they needed to do as GT500 has been around since 2013 (662hp version) and ZL1 since 2012.

Agreed. I for one am not trying to argue that it's not faster than the competition. I just think they are taking some liberties with the way they are presenting the information to pad their numbers and make it seem like more of a 'bargain' and a bigger performance gap than it really is. All in all, not that uncommon in the industry I suppose, but that fact doesn't make it any less annoying.

Bottom line, as I mentioned in another thread on this topic, it is a very cool car. But realistically it appears it's going to easily be in the $70K+ range when all is said and done, and that's a lot of money for a one trick pony.

 

[Brent302]

Dude.. What are you talking about? The SRT Challengers with the 6.4 time over time get the posted Dodge numbers and better.

It clearly states "Fastest Muslce Car Ever with a NHRA-certified".. Ever think it is the fastest NHRA-certified and if Ford and GM do have NHRA certified times, they are the ones listed?

This car is freaking sweet. I swear I read a thread with you whining about people posting on other forums, but you're no different on here.

Hellcat wins this round as it should. Dodge obviously came around later and knew what they needed to do as GT500 has been around since 2013 (662hp version) and ZL1 since 2012.

Challengertalk.com you might as well head there if you want to continue to be blinded.

Here let me break it down Barney style for you kid.

I advertise a vehicle for 59,995.
I leave out destination charge of 895.
I claim it does 11.2 for 59,995.
The competition isn't even close.

..oh so it's actually 60,890 With mandatory designation charge.

..oh you need the auto in order to post 11.2..So it's actually 62,890 to achieve those numbers.

Plus a drag pak for 2500 so it's actually over 65k to achieve our claims.

Competition runs 11.5 stock but the advertised gap was larger.

D E C E I V E

"(of a person) cause (someone) to believe something that is not true, typically in order to gain some personal advantage."

I agree with Scottpe the car is awesome but don't pad your numbers and lie to try and be better on paper.

 

[ChefBorOzzy]

Kid? Grow up. Who ran 11.5 with the GT500?

I'll agree with you that it's deceiving not including destination in the Challenger price, but is on the GT500. The rest, blahhhh.

Don't waste your time crying, I'm sure Ford will come out with something faster really soon.

 

[ChefBorOzzy]

Btw, you should tell Ford not to lie on paper.. You know, like the mpg claims on a few of their cars.

 

[JoeDogInKC]

"Starting MSRP excludes destination/delivery charge, taxes, title and registration. Optional equipment not included. Starting A, Z and X Plan price is for qualified, eligible customers and excludes document fee, destination/delivery charge, taxes, title and registration. Not all vehicles qualify for A, Z or X Plan. Price ranges based on MSRP on base model to top model and do not include optional equipment not included on those models, destination/delivery charge, taxes, title or registration."

Where'd I get this from? http://www.ford.com.

OMG, they "lie" too!

"420 @ 6,500 rpm (5.0L V8)*" - advertisement

"*Using 93-octane fuel." - fine print

More "lies"...

 

[Brent302]

Kid? Grow up. Who ran 11.5 with the GT500?

I'll agree with you that it's deceiving not including destination in the Challenger price, but is on the GT500. The rest, blahhhh.

Don't waste your time crying, I'm sure Ford will come out with something faster really soon.

You sound like a 10 year old playing Call of Duty....Next.

Btw, you should tell Ford not to lie on paper.. You know, like the mpg claims on a few of their cars.

That could have been a mess up with the EPA you know...the people who test the mileage.

Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. —Mark Twain

 

[GMAN6]

I think it will be an awesome car regardless of time, but if you are going to say it runs 11.2 stock, then at least 40% of drivers should be able to go to a track and run 11.2.

I don't see it happening.

Can't wait till they spend 70K, go to the track and get it handed to them by a GT500...lol

NHRA certified? What does that really mean? I suppose it means that the car Dodge brought them that day ran a 11.2. I imagine they are certifying that the time they ran that day with THAT car is accurate and has nothing to do with certifying ever Production Hellcat that comes out will run 11.2 nor that the car was actually 100% stock. I mean really, how can they certify that the car was stock and that the tune or some other aspect won't be altered before production?

 

[EXP Jawa]

That could have been a mess up with the EPA you know...the people who test the mileage.

FWIW, the tests are performed by the OEM - not the EPA - who then submit the results to the EPA for approval. The EPA has neither the manpower or resources to test anywhere close to 100% themselves, so they only audit the OEM submissions. Ford tests in a lab, on a dyno, and correlates the data to wind tunnel testing to account for the aero drag. The story, as I understand it, is that Ford screwed up the wind tunnel correlation.

I couldn't say if it was a calibration error, miscalculation, bad torque cell, etc, or if it was done intentionally. Obviously, it looks suspicious in light of the previous C-Max MPG claims and correction, but I'm still willing to give benefit of the doubt. I have some experience with lab and vehicle testing and I know that it isn't nearly as simply as outsiders want to believe. Mistakes happen and data is only as good as the assumptions made and how the test is set up. Garbage in = garbage out...

 

[PsyopGoat]

I think it will be an awesome car regardless of time, but if you are going to say it runs 11.2 stock, then at least 40% of drivers should be able to go to a track and run 11.2.

I don't see it happening.

Can't wait till they spend 70K, go to the track and get it handed to them by a GT500...lol

NHRA certified? What does that really mean? I suppose it means that the car Dodge brought them that day ran a 11.2. I imagine they are certifying that the time they ran that day with THAT car is accurate and has nothing to do with certifying ever Production Hellcat that comes out will run 11.2 nor that the car was actually 100% stock. I mean really, how can they certify that the car was stock and that the tune or some other aspect won't be altered before production?

They also went on the high side of typical GT500 times, and they're comparing automatic transmission to manual.

You are correct that we don't know if that Hellcat was a ringer, and aside from that we don't know what kind of prep was done, if any. By prep I mean things like under inflating the rear tires, over inflating the front tires, icing the air intake, etc.

The Hellcat may very well live up to the hype, and it came in a lot cheaper than I thought it would. I'm just not going to be fully convinced until independent third parties start testing production models.

 

[Brent302]

"Starting MSRP excludes destination/delivery charge, taxes, title and registration. Optional equipment not included. Starting A, Z and X Plan price is for qualified, eligible customers and excludes document fee, destination/delivery charge, taxes, title and registration. Not all vehicles qualify for A, Z or X Plan. Price ranges based on MSRP on base model to top model and do not include optional equipment not included on those models, destination/delivery charge, taxes, title or registration."

Where'd I get this from? http://www.ford.com.

OMG, they "lie" too!

"420 @ 6,500 rpm (5.0L V8)*" - advertisement

"*Using 93-octane fuel." - fine print

More "lies"...

Lets observe the GT500 Price on the Slide. $56K but oh...wait

MSRP $54,995, including a destination charge of $795. A 2014 Shelby GT500 will run you $55,445

So yes it is a lie. You cant compare your car against the competition by considering adding in destination/ delivery and Automatic Transmission making it $56,645 (56 on the powerpoint) when the price you put up is minus Auto and minus D/D. Common Sense buy some.

Damn you guys want to defend the Hellcat so bad have at it. Go buy one.

Sponsored