meet a bump, your car will be out of commission

WHY PAY THAT MUCH FOR THE LOOKS WHEN A VETTE WILL WHOOP IT ON THE STRIP NOW...?

This car isnt meant for bumps nor is it meant for the strip it is a track car. It will be very very very fast im sure.

Looks like this thing is poised to go toe-to-toe with the high end vettes and the new Nissan fare. It's too early to say which one will be king at the track but they're all in the same price range and they're all capable of providing supercar performance for a fraction of the cost. The current trend in the Auto industry I call the 2nd muscle car era, and like the first such era the consumer is really seeing some great buys. Detroit is really representing well in this segment.

I just wish ford would stop trying to make fast mustangs and actually come out with a true performance car.

Hunter:

WHY PAY THAT MUCH FOR THE LOOKS WHEN A VETTE WILL WHOOP IT ON THE STRIP NOW...?

^^ The name, the wording...the caps, don't you just love Nascar fans?

To answer Hunter's question: Yes, it's because it looks like testosterone on wheels. I caught a glimpse of a blue/white GTS the other day, it pulls heads like no Corvette can.

Never been a fan of vipers but that just looks sexy

Ah yes, sweet memories of Skip Barber Driving School when they had these before they switched to RX-8s. Not dogging the RX-8, but Viper ACRs are ANIMALS!

too bad they're so darned expensive and suck down gas like there's no tomorrow.

Fun has it's price, I guess. Viper ACRs cause stupid ear to ear grins after a drive :-)

RAW and AMERICAN
A GAS PIG FORSURE
AMERICA SPITS ON THE WORLD AGAIN !!

America Raw:
RAW and AMERICAN
A GAS PIG FORSURE
AMERICA SPITS ON THE WORLD AGAIN !!

yes, because ALL americans drive cars with fuel economy like the viper...25 city/35 highway 2002 rsx-s, thank you very much. watch your blanket statements. they do nothing for moving things forward for a better future.

"America Raw:

RAW and AMERICAN
A GAS PIG FORSURE
AMERICA SPITS ON THE WORLD AGAIN !!"

riiiiiiiight, and where do you live? perhaps you live in Europe where porsche and ferrari are kings to name a few? 12 mpg highway for ferrari's and porsche's. hmmm...just as an example C5 vettes get 30+ mpg and are one of the cleaner burning cars...period. C6 vettes get 27+

"America Raw:

RAW and AMERICAN
A GAS PIG FORSURE
AMERICA SPITS ON THE WORLD AGAIN !!"

riiiiiiiight, and where do you live? perhaps you live in Europe where porsche and ferrari are kings to name a few? 12 mpg highway for ferrari's and porsche's. hmmm...just as an example C5 vettes get 30+ mpg and are one of the cleaner burning cars...period. C6 vettes get 27+

:skadeet:

?? According to the EPA, the C5 managed a best of 28mpg. This was with a manual transmission and highway mileage. Any monkey can say their C5 get 30 or 40 or even 50 mpg....

As an example, my Corolla regularly gets around 2000mpg. That's correct, Two Thousand miles per gallon. Some other people have had the same thing happen with their Corollas. Because I said it, does that make it true? Do you think I may be lying? (I'll tell you now, I am lying)

Like previously stated, this is the ACR version of the Viper. Dodge produces these cars for the American Club Racing events. Although it's practically a race only vehicle(sans the roll cage, it seems), This car was meant for people who also wish to drive it down the road on occasion to get a Slurpee. Maybe even a Big Gulp.

Oh, we spit on the world, alright. And you had better be thankful for it!

thats pretty sweet how the red stripe goes onto the steering wheel

Dodge Viper 71.43 hp/liter
Chevy Z06 72.14 hp/liter
Honda Accord V6 76.57 hp/liter

For $100,000 I expect the car to be more efficient than a Honda

CS:

Try calculating it like this HP/MPG and tell me who's more efficient.

"I just wish ford would stop trying to make fast mustangs and actually come out with a true performance car. "

Ford does...the Ford GT. The Mustang will sell a lot better than the Corvette, and is a bit more practical than the Corvette. Except for the rich, who seem to be the majority on this site, a 2-seat sports car isn't the best option for most people. The Mustang, and even the new Nissan GT-R are coupes...making them very attractive for people that may want a "small" backseat or a little more storage room.

isnt that the same company that was cutting the lemons?
Will be niche franchise soon.......of Geely

It's amazing to thing that Dodge continues to make this drop dead gorgeous car, and the entire rest of their line-up looks like it was designed by stacking cardboard boxes on top of each other. Since very few people will be able to afford this, I'm awaiting what ever comes out of the Demon concept. A light-weight, RWD, 300HP SRT-4 Demon should hit the spot nicely.

Mike: The Ford GT has been out of production now for over a year. It never kept up with the competition either, it beat a Ferrari 360 Modena in straights but the Modena could catch up then cut ahead on the corners. It was close, sure, but which car would win (barring a soccer mom in one car, Michael Schumacher in the other) was pretty much up to how long the straights were and how many turns there were.

As far as Skyline versus Corvette versus Viper ACR, the Viper ACR will easily post better track numbers than the Vette, and barring the course is one giagantic turn, I'd imagine it'd easily hand the GTR its ass. The Corvette Z06 and GTR are both street vehicles, and the ACR is a track vehicle thats been made pretty enough for the street. A track version GTR or Z06 though? That'd be a tough race. I'd imagine the ACR would still have the advantage, but the GTR does not yet have its performance powerplant (the 470 hp engine is its base engine, a 530hp+ variant is expected in 2009), and the Z06 will soon be eclipsed by the ZR-1.

Once we have both of those out, I expect the ACR to once again the car with with big engine numbers, and little to show for it.

Holy hell. 1.5g? 600 naturally aspirated hp?

And it's lighter than a 350Z.

Porsches and Ferraris are nice and all, but sometimes you gotta look at which cars put their money where their mouth is in the form of racing results and you just gotta love american peformance.

Just look at how even 1st gen Vipers and Z06s completely dominate SCCA Class A; F40s, GT2s, etc in the competition not withstanding.

One thing that concerns me though is that the current Dodge Viper has to much torque and no rear differential to handle it. I mean it has one, but everyone who has reviewed it says its still uncontrollable. What happens when you come out of a turn, trying to smoke the punk kid who through an exhaust on his moms Accord and thought he was straight out of "The Fast and the Furious," and you accelerate and lose traction? Unless your good enough to drift the turn, you lose.

Here it comes again, the horsepower per liter debate.

We all know American cars have a ways to go in the HP/L department. But hey, they're a heck of a cheap way to get a 4.6L V8 into your garage.

Welcome to the real world, you can't have a motor put out double power, and move all that extra rotational mass to handle that power, and still be more efficient that an amazingly well optimized smaller motor. variable timing, variable intake, spark plug position, more valves, there's only so many things you can do to create more efficiency (higher compression.)

I'm amazed the big blocks are even that close to the honda. You should be bowing down.

Before saying they're "even that close to Honda" realize that he compared a Dodge & GM RACING engine to a ho hum V6 put in a grocery getter. If you want to see what Honda is capable of just look at their F22 or K20 and you'll see WAY over 76 hp/ltr closer to 110 or 120.

I do however agree that at some point, there's no replacement for displacement if you're staying N/A.

Either way, this Viper looks to be a real beast.

People need to remember to respect and enjoy different points of view, this whole "It's a dodge/ford/chevy so it sucks" attitude is getting lame... This coming from a Honda fan.

HP/L?

How about trying this calculation: HP.

Allen: you wouldn't lose control smoking that kid in his moms poor Accord, all you'd have to do is let off the clutch and idle it through the light while hes trying to rev a stock Accord to 9 grand and bending valves... and probably making LESS horsepower by going beyond the peak that the engine was optimized around as far as intake velocity is concerned.

Even when my car was stock and making less power than this thing I could smoke first and short shift to second and third at like 3-4k RPM and by then the F&F kid has already given up :)

As for the comment about the ford gt it was faster then the modena by a huge margin I mean a huge margin. Seen both on the track and the modena is a much slower car. As well as the ford gt was never built for racing its not involved in any racing leagues so you cant really call it a race car. And not everyone likes to drive econoboxes that get 32mpg. An accord v6 isnt a fast car either so who cars about the hp per liter. My car can get 10 hp per liter but that doesnt mean its slow there is alot of things that go into what makes a car fast. This car is on league like a porsche 911 gt3 rs or a lambo gallardo scudiera or a ferarri competicioni. Its not meant for the streets its a race car that is street legal thats it dont compare this car to sports car or even econoboxes because its not on the same league.

"Try calculating it like this HP/MPG and tell me who's more efficient."

/agree. Having a small engine does not guarantee good mileage. Horsepower takes fuel. In physics, the conservation of energy states that "the total amount of energy in any closed system remains constant but can't be recreated, although it may change forms". In other words, a 600HP engine is going to chug fuel like a freshman at a frat party.

An engine is an air pump. It won't matter much if you're using a 8 liter V-10 or a 2 liter four banger with 50 pounds of boost. The volume of air moved, combined with fuel at roughly 14:1 ratio, will be roughly the same. Hence, similar power output, and similar mileage. The main difference is weight vs. reliability. I don't care what you like, all you fanboi's out there need to learn this before you talk about engine architecture.

Vipers are not my favorite, but they are badass. This Viper and the Blue Devil Vette are the fastest you can go for under 100 large. A race between the two would be VERY interesting.

Why are we complaining about fuel economy on a car they'll make no more than 4000 per year (all variants included) AND will log no more than 250,000miles collectively over the next 5-6years.

These are toys. You don't have 400million people driving these things. Just a weekend warrior. Oh, and having driven a 2003 mostly hwy for a week, i was getting about 8.6 litres/100km @ 120kph. Not bad for 8.3 litres of displacement and mayham.

Agree with Kell, who cares which one is ultimately .001 seconds faster to 100kph or 1.2seconds faster per lap. It's rude, its mean, it doesn't appologize and it will kill so fast if you have no respect for it...

...Just like a proper muscle car should :D

Using the HP/L comparison my rotary makes 411.35 HP/liter so I guess we should stop making piston engines. Even the stock RX-8 motor makes 180HP/L...

Also the Chrysler V10 is actually a small block not a big block. It's more or less the old 360/5.9 w/ an extra two cylinders and recently re-stroked and bored.

I've all the engines that I've come across and to the person that thinks his RX-7 is hot s#@t, I believe this engine takes the cake for the horspower/liter war: The Bonner engine makes 456 hp at 10,000 rpm from 600 cc. That equals some 760 hp/Liter displacement. Our military is looking at specific applications for this motor. I can envision some applications. Think exotic mini cars with this engine.

Who cares about gas mileage... what is this things 0-60 time?

Global warming and high gas prices would make this vehicle very wasteful. I also think it will never be as good as Corvette. :)

You see Chris, thats why I like smaller engines though: the dual turbo imports of the world all have their peak torque down in the 2000rpm range or so, or at least in the bottom fourth of the RPM range. that means I can downshift, keep my foot on the gas through a turn then upshift immediately on exit. With the big blocks, there is so much torque up top you have to idle through turns otherwise you get sideways way to quickly.

Thats one of the reasons (among others) Japanese cars have been better handling traditionally, they were quicker out of the turns. Now if there was a straight with plenty of length right after the American cars could catch up, but not to many tracks are like that, or even roads (unless you race on the interstate, which is dumb anyway).

Ben: oh. my. god. Just leave. Leave now. Before you get bitched out.

And to unknown: what weed are you smoking? Road and Track, Car and Driver and Top Gear all reviewed the GT saying that with the exception of straights it was inferior to the exotics from Europe. Only so many could lose to that thing (Gallardo, anyone?).

@Jason

Yes the EPA might have rated the C5s at 28 mpg but that doesn't mean its the best it can manage. They rate my Cobalt at 24 mpg city. But I've never gotten below 26.

I've talked to plenty of Vette owners, both C5 and C6, who say they get over 30 mpg highway. With the T56, at 80 mph you're turning less than 2000 rpm. That's awesome. I've even talked to a guy who put a supercharger on his C5 and with tuning, had 500 rwhp at the track and 35 mpg on the highway.

My dad's 2002 Trans Am WS6 with the 6-speed gets 27 mpg. And a Vette weighs far less than it.

I test-drove a viper SRT-10 once. Its just another butt-ugly car with a cheap interior and very uncomfortable to drive . The ride is so harsh you start out thinking that at least it must be able to take a corner well, except that it can't at all. Its crazy how much the pedals are offset from the steering wheel. you'd need to visit a chiropractor after driving this car more than a few miles.

When ever will a US car company ever actually make a gentleman's GT car that does corners, has an interior that doesn't feel like its made out of recycled tupperware, and that gets notice because of its beautifully styled elegance, not its brutally garish colour scheme.

I don't think Ford or Dodge would even have a clue where to even start.

@Kell:

Thank you. I love all these idiots who think that a 400 hp 2.0L engine is still going to get 30 mpg. I've met guys with 10 second Civics. One I met told me he couldn't go from Orlando to Tampa on a tank of gas. It's a 2 hour drive.

A guy I know with an 89 Camaro and he just put a built LS1 in it with a T56 tranny and 4.11s will still probably get 24-25 mpg highway. My old 89 with a carbed 355, T56, and 4.11s got 20 mpg. 10 in the city but if I haven't stuck such a big cam in it, it'd have been better. Also I needed a mechanical secondary carb instead of a vacuum secondary one since with vacuum secondaries, they're always open slightly. Mechanical secondaries only open when you hit the pedal enough for them to open. With more tuning I'd have gotten it up. And an LS1 will get far better mileage than my car did.

Kell:

Most excellent post.

Allen:

Lol. Actually the old school big blocks are the opposite. They have abundant torque down low because large piston + tiny single valve = high port velocity even at low RPM. Up top though it starts to drop sharply past the peak as the drag and turbulence of that large volume of air goes supersonic trying to suck through that tiny valve. The very reason that push rod (or 2V engines in general) have great torque down low is also their nemesis up top.

With a DOHC engine it's the exact opposite; no port velocity down low, but you can breath better up top and flow the same volume without having intake stream problems.

But seriously, you can't expect every car to drive the same. Different cars with different engines have to be driven difference ways. Push rod big blocks command respect for the 'gas' peddle.

But it's not all about too much power, it has a lot to do with the car being setup properly as a system. You can find say a Lamborghini that has more HP or toque at any RPM then say a Mustang GT, but it has no problem keeping the power on the ground. Only recently have American companies started paying attention to balancing handling and power in the cars where the cost of doing so justifies the added sticker price (Like the '03 Cobra, SVT spent more time tuning the suspension and track capabilities than they did the engine, but all that goes un-noticed even though skid pad and slalom are better than a M3 of the same year).

Before recently it was just: "how much power do you want and how low can we make the price?"

But even then I've seen '70 Challengers with upgraded sway bars and stuff pulling the G's like you wouldn't believe and staying glued in the corners with 400+ HP big blocks. All comes down to money as always.

David:

Guess they haven't seen the mileage of a Sti or a Evo lately...

Horsepower isn't free no matter how big or small your engine is. Whether you burn two molecules at once, or one molecule but twice as fast, it's going to make the same power with the same fuel.

However their is a difference in that with a boosted small displacement engine is that you are only using the power when you get in boost instead of pumping raw fuel out of your exhaust while you idle. You get the fuel economy of a 2L engine when you stay out of boost, but still have the passing power of a 6L engine when you get on it. A supercharger or turbo in that regard is basically the same thing as the variable displacement stuff GM is doing.

That said I guarantee you that anyone with a Evo or Sti is in boost 90% of the time they are driving. If not they are lying. It's irresistible. And in that case, my last paragraph is rendered irrelevant anyway.

That looks like crap. When will americans learn how to design cars.

Give me a GTR any day.

I spit on the viper..................................

AWD FTW

That looks like crap. When will americans learn how to design cars?

Give me a GTR any day.

I spit on the viper..................................

AWD FTW

agraph:

Not my taste either and thats purely opinion.

But I have to ask what do you think of the FD RX-7?

I do like the GT-R, but at 3800 lbs. and 400-something HP it's in another car class. It's apples and oranges.

agraph:
If you were to try to spit on a Viper ACR from your GT-R, you'd be spitting into the wind :P

My 400whp '97 Eclipse GSX got approximately 15mpg in the city and if I really stayed out of the gas I'd be lucky to get that up to 25mpg on the highway. Keep in mind that this is a perfectly tuned turbo 2.0L engine.

When it comes to (real world) gas mileage/HP there is nothing that can beat the big motors. For those of you who actually care about KNOWING about how engine dynamics relate there are some good sites out there. For those of you who would rather make uninformed posts that are obviously skewed by your blind love of all things not-american....the rest of us will continue to ignore you and not value your opinions.

Bravo to all those intelligent posters here. Best informed comments I've seen in a while with just a few exceptions.

ford gt nurburgring time. 7:42 with a average speed of 160.5 kph
lamborghini gallardo Superleggera 7:46 with a average speed of 159.1
normal gallardo 7:52 with a speed of 157.1
ferarri 360 modena 8:09 with a speed of 151.6
Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale 7:56 at 1:55.7
Chevy Corvette z06 7:42 at 160.2
all cars that are just about as fast as each other look the 2 fastest ones are american makes ya think
lets turn the heat on find cars faster then the gt
Lamborghini Murcielago LP640 7:40 at 161.2
Porsche Carrera GT 7:39 at 161.3
Koenigsegg CCR 7:39 161.6
Pagani Zonda F 7:32 at 162.7

@David

Fair enough, my Corolla should be getting around 30 mpg according to the EPA, but usually hovers around 28 or so with my driving. A lot of it has to do with driving style, and I see far more old people driving Corvettes than people my age. I'm not saying all old people drive slow.... but... let's say cautiously...

@RX-7 Guy

C'mon, maybe you can fool some of the kids at saying the rotary engines are ony 1.3 liters and makes so much hp compared to a reciprocating engine, but some us of are a bit smarter. The 13B, 13B-REW, and Renesis are actually relative to 2.6 liters when compared directly to a piston engine.
With a handle like that, I'd at least think you wouldn't try and fool people into believing that nonsense.

I see while I've been gone the typical talking down of imports has been happening.

First, to those who say that with an LS1 and 4.1 gearing they are getting 25mpg highway: bullshit. I've BUILT these engines and cars before, and I call bullshit. You Corvette owners are over-estimating your gas mileage. All you American-lovers seem to be capable of is saying shit that simply isn't holding up in the real-world: no ten second car, import or domestic, is getting over 20mpgs without serious weight reduction (probably to the point of no longer being street legal). Unless of course you drive like an absolute moron or an old person and let your car IDLE to cruising speed, your Corvette is not posting 30mpgs any day of the week.

I find it so funny that you are willing to talk down whats been proven time and time again on the track, that American cars, save a few strenous examples that borrow more from foreign cars than American, are not on par with the foreign cars.

I keep hearing bullshit like "beats an M3" or "my 70 Challenger posts better numbers than your 350z" (that one is on another site) when simply put, that would make you the only person out there doing that.

Hell, I had one looser redneck kid tell me his Trans-Am beat a Porsche 911 Turbo, and his Trans-Am was stock. Unless the other drive fell asleep or blew a clutch all over the road, or was nailed to the pavement, thats simply not happening.

And I love how someone posts that two America cars post better numbers than some foreign cars on the Nuremburgring, yet the Corvette doesn't quite post the times of a GT2, GT3 or Turbo 911, and then goes onto list some of the rarest exotics on the roads of the world today as if American vehicles have been anything near what those are in terms of performance these days.

Carter: I love how you pretend you own a Eclipse. Say, what cams are you using? Who made the turbo? What setup blueprints did you use? Oh you just bought it right? Right....

Also, its commonly accepted fact that a proper turbo setup actually INCREASES, not decreases, gas mileage. See Saabs inline 5 engines, or some turbo JDM engines. Of course, overdoing it does still kill your gas mileage, but if you want me to believe you are getting 15mpg in city driving, your going to have to show me a video on youtube where you drive like a maniac downtown and weave in and out of traffic madly, or (if you do even own the car) show me how in the hell you managed to get the Eclipse to leak gas fast enough that idling along in stoppd traffic gets you 15 mpgs. Remember, the turbo only kicks on once there is exhaust filling it, and if your dead stopped in traffic or lazily accelerating during rush-hour gridlock, its not going to do much for your performance.

Also, those good sites your talking about, I know of them, they are full of more xenophobic import bashers such as yourself, who come out here and pretend to own cars they know nothing about with engines they know nothing about splurting the excuses of the aging, falling-from-grace GM engineers, who also seem to know little about cars these days. PS: GM High Tech Performance Magazine is NOT someplace you can go to get the truth. Want that, you need to read more than Detroit marketing statements.

Chris: one we are not talking about old-school big blocks, two no they didn't. Sure, if you got a 454 or larger than yeah, but it makes sense that something that big would have torque like that.

But look at the DOHC engines of today: for all the shit you talk on DOHC (save yours, of course), most make their power far below the halfway point in the RPM range. Examples? Lets take truck V8s for starters: Nissan Titan and Toyota Tundra both build more torque than Domestic V8s (even Chevrolet's 6 Liter engine) and do it at lower RPM! Save the 6.2 in the Escalade, but its still in high RPM.

What about in cars? BMW does it at 1800rpm but its dual turbo charged (so much for high revving junk huh?), Mercedes 3L and 3.5L V6 is making torque at 2400rpm, and its 5.5L V8 is doing so at 2800rpm. Naturally aspirated.

And with most japanese engines that build torque in the high range, most of it is available in the low range anyway.

And somehow, everyone seems to think you must spend oodles of money to increase these cars performance. You don't HAVE to, but a few thousand dollars easily nets 200hp performance increases out of most of these "jap junk" engines you talk down to. Hell, K-series Honda engines have done it without nitrous or forced induction. Just engine internals and new exhaust and intake manifolds. Want more? Add a turbo for a grand and get more. Read Import Tuner Magazine, an ever-increasingly common build has been the "Under $6000" build on the new Civic Si, and thats