any projected changes to the 5.7 Hemi in 2014?

20628 Views 137 Replies 43 Participants Last post by Mike V., Jan 16, 2013

Darkpaw

Discussion Starter · Jan 7, 2013

The 370hp is starting to feel kind of low compared to the "mid" versions of the Camaro SS and Mustang GT, both putting out over 420hp. Does anyone know if it's going to just keep the same ratings on the 5.7 cars in 2014? Even the trucks get 390hp (I assume because of dual exhaust?). With the horsepower wars seemingly on again, you would think that their most "common" version would be made to compete harder with the direct competition. It's been sitting at these numbers in the 5.7 quite some time now.

21 - 40 of 138 Posts

Darkpaw

Discussion Starter · #21 · Jan 7, 2013

"...As for the 3.6 with ZF, it accelerates very good..."

I wish there would be at least some teaser numbers thrown out by Chrysler as to what to expect with the ZF in the Hemi cars.

Surely by now they must have done performance testing with the new engine/tranny combo, since it's due to start in production soon.

Stratuscaster

· #22 · Jan 7, 2013

Darkpaw said:
Usability? That's your counter-argument? That Dodge makes a more usable vehicle? Though that be it true, it's hardly the thing to market a sports car. They're slower cars, period. They need to fix this, or they will lose customers.

Let's make sure we are comparing things correctly.

Are there people cross-shopping (and buying) Mustangs and Camaros over Chargers? I would say "no" - if you are cross-shopping large 5-passenger sedans, Mustang and Camaro are not on that list. Taurus and Impala are.

Challenger vs Mustang vs Camaro? Sure, we can logically cross-shop those all day long. And if someone decides that the 0.6-to-1.4 second 0-60 time difference is the tipping point between one or the others, I question that kind of decision-making.

Just from sitting in the cars - not even turning a key yet - I'd never buy a Camaro; ergonomically and space-wise it's sorely lacking. I could live with a Mustang. I could enjoy life in a Challenger.

But, to each his own. It's good to have a choice, competition spurs on improvement. I wouldn't say that "Chrysler doesn't care" - I'd say "some folks think Chrysler doesn't care and aren't working fast enough for them, thus causing them to question their Mopar loyalty for making them look bad with the boys on poker night."

See less See more

tazdevil

· #23 · Jan 7, 2013

Paccar (Kenworth/Peterbuilt) has been using compacted graphite /iron in their new engine blocks for a couple of years. Superb technology and power. Mr. Sheaves nailed it again.

Dave Z

· #24 · Jan 7, 2013

I'm still quite curious how the Ford aluminum engines that do not have cast iron cylinder liners will actually hold up over the long haul.

I believe Burke Brown talked about Mercedes' use of aluminum engines without liners. It required a hardening process in the cylinders, quite feasible, long-lived, etc., though not nearly as inexpensive as the liners. Perhaps Ford was able to cut the cost of that or a similar process, or perhaps they had an aversion to liners, or perhaps there's an advantage to doing it their way... or perhaps some executive just said Do it this way!

Darkpaw

Discussion Starter · #25 · Jan 7, 2013

"...Are there people cross-shopping (and buying) Mustangs and Camaros over Chargers? I would say "no" - if you are cross-shopping large 5-passenger sedans, Mustang and Camaro are not on that list. Taurus and Impala are...."

Well, they do. Having the number of doors is irrelevant to most people on non-Mopar boards. It's seen as a bonus, not a buying point.

I'm using Charger as an example because that's what I'm buying, but you can interchange it for the sake of example with the Challenger as far as acceleration goes, since the two are nearly identical. FWIW, I find that the Challenger has the same visibility problems (poor window locations) that the Camaro has, while the Charger does not.

"...if someone decides that the 0.6-to-1.4 second 0-60 time difference is the tipping point between one or the others..."

That 1.4s will carry over into the quarter mile, for the most part. And that is a whole lot of car lengths at 100mph. It's pretty significant, actually.

Mr.Source

· #26 · Jan 7, 2013

Let's begin by saying that a HEMI is a HEMI, everybody knows and respects a HEMI, no matter HP, when you tell people the car has a HEMI, inmediately they show respect, in fact I do think the HEMI has more respect in the industy than the Ford or Chevy engines, I'm able to tell you, that Chrysler keeps working very hard on powertrains, and don't be surprised to see in the near future a better HEMI and PENTASTAR.

The HEMI has been far more reliable than the Ford or Chevy powerplants, the same goes for the PENTASTAR.

Speaking about the Camaro, Mustang and the CHALLENGER, I'll have to tell you that even a blind person could tell you that the Challenger is a lot nicer, it's a sharp looking car, I can't even think to rather buy a "cheap and plastic" Camaro over the DODGE, just take a seat in the Camaro, it's 100% cheap plastic, ergonomics are terrible, the rear seat is a joke, look at the instrument panels, console gauges, etc. you have to be crazy to buy one instead of a CHALLENGER.

Speaking about the Mustang, this one is a lot better than the Camaro,it's still very small inside, it's not comftable at all, rear seat is also a joke, and the main problem with the car is that you'll always have to deal with the "hot air" coming inside the cabin, there is no way you can stop it, this problem is a pain when you are driving in hot weather.

The muffler sound is very nice, but it still lacks the personality of the CHALLENGER, the DODGE is a looker, and to be honest with you, who cares if the competition is a fraction faster, how many are buying the car to race it?

But again, just wait, Chrysler isn't resting, there is a lot of good stuff coming, but for all of you out there that you rather buy a Camaro because it's faster, be my guest and do it, you'll always have a car that came right out from a comic book.

If you want A CAR with a personality and presence, buy the CHALLENGER and of course A stick shift with a HEMI !!!!!

See less See more

Reactions: 2

Mr.Source

· #27 · Jan 7, 2013

Darkpaw said:
"...Are there people cross-shopping (and buying) Mustangs and Camaros over Chargers? I would say "no" - if you are cross-shopping large 5-passenger sedans, Mustang and Camaro are not on that list. Taurus and Impala are...."

Well, they do. Having the number of doors is irrelevant to most people on non-Mopar boards. It's seen as a bonus, not a buying point.

I'm using Charger as an example because that's what I'm buying, but you can interchange it for the sake of example with the Challenger as far as acceleration goes, since the two are nearly identical. FWIW, I find that the Challenger has the same visibility problems (poor window locations) that the Camaro has, while the Charger does not.

"...if someone decides that the 0.6-to-1.4 second 0-60 time difference is the tipping point between one or the others..."

That 1.4s will carry over into the quarter mile, for the most part. And that is a whole lot of car lengths at 100mph. It's pretty significant, actually.

So my friend, as of today, Chrysler is what it is, about the future we don't know, so if some or many are rather buying a Camaro or Mustang because they are faster, let's wish them the very best, and let's forget about them, Chrysler doesn't need those kind of customers, there is a huge market out there, there is a lot to buy, there are cars almost for every taste, so the ones that knows what a HEMI or a MOPAR product is, they'll always stay with the pros, they'll always say MOPAR.

Stratuscaster

· #28 · Jan 7, 2013

In my opinion, it's significant if one's paying job was drag racing cars. In the day-to-day world that I live in, where the posted speed limit on my daily commute doesn't exceed 50MPH, it means nothing.

I'll give you visibility on the Challenger at the C-pillar. I'll also note that my current Stratus sedan has the same blind spot. My major problem with the Camaro was that after I set the seat to where I prefer it, I was looking at the space between the sun visor and the headliner. If I lower the seat to actually see out of the windshield, it's not comfortable. All the horsepower and speed in the world can't fix that.

I would probably buy a Charger over a Camaro or a Mustang, too - but then again, I'd buy a V6 model and not a V8. I was quite happy with the old 3.5 Challenger as well - which simply shows that my needs and likes are not the same as others.

If someone says "I have $35000 to spend on a new car, and I'm going to buy the one that is the absolute fastest off the lot", great. More power to them, and I hope they enjoy it. I don't expect the fact that I think it's silly should stop them, let alone concern them.

See less See more

Mopar392

· #29 · Jan 7, 2013

5.7HEMI is a competent engine with a lot of potential.. You can get an extra 30-40hp by a less-restrictive intake & exhaust and a reworked manifold, but then you have to certify the engine for emission.. Which MONEY..
What is killing the performance of the L-cars is the weight. On the next generation when they the process of a roll-sheet as Viper, they will be able to reduce a lot of weight.. But cost might be higher..

To be fair:
The Coyote is a new engine, appeared in 2011.
GM LS3 is also relatively new. Appearing in 2008 as a Corvette base engine. So, it's made as a sport car engine.
5.7HEMI appeared in 2005, and then revised in 2009.. The engine is made for SUVs, trucks and family cars plus Challenger..

Darkpaw

Discussion Starter · #30 · Jan 7, 2013

It is what it is. I'm not saying that the current raw numbers will change me from buying a new Charger once they're available...I'm really just saying that I'm disappointed that they aren't keeping up with the competition.

Hopefully with the last revision of the 5.7 being in 2009, 2014 would be enough of a gap to make another change to it.

And yes, with minor mods it can be taken to over 400hp to the flywheel, and hopefully DS will fix their issues with the Trinity.

Moparian

· #31 · Jan 7, 2013

Mopar392 said:
5.7HEMI is a competent engine with a lot of potential.. You can get an extra 30-40hp by a less-restrictive intake & exhaust and a reworked manifold, but then you have to certify the engine for emission.. Which MONEY..
What is killing the performance of the L-cars is the weight. On the next generation when they the process of a roll-sheet as Viper, they will be able to reduce a lot of weight.. But cost might be higher..

To be fair:
The Coyote is a new engine, appeared in 2011.
GM LS3 is also relatively new. Appearing in 2008 as a Corvette base engine. So, it's made as a sport car engine.
5.7HEMI appeared in 2005, and then revised in 2009.. The engine is made for SUVs, trucks and family cars plus Challenger..

5.7 HEMI was in the 2003 Rams......

MoparJoe

· #32 · Jan 7, 2013

http://www.ontariostreetcar.com/2013/01/03/srt-6-2l-hellcat-hemi-to-start-production-april-2013/

is this real ???

Darkpaw

Discussion Starter · #33 · Jan 7, 2013

I think he meant that the 5.7 appeared in cars in 2005.

Mike V.

· #34 · Jan 7, 2013

Joe there is a thread already dedicated to that discussion.

AutoTechnician

· #35 · Jan 7, 2013

DaveAdmin said:
I believe Burke Brown talked about Mercedes' use of aluminum engines without liners. It required a hardening process in the cylinders, quite feasible, long-lived, etc., though not nearly as inexpensive as the liners. Perhaps Ford was able to cut the cost of that or a similar process, or perhaps they had an aversion to liners, or perhaps there's an advantage to doing it their way... or perhaps some executive just said Do it this way!

Mercedes used very high silicon aluminum in their blocks, sometimes called Alusil. It requires a special honing process with chemical etching to expose the hard and long wearing silica particles in the bores.

BMW used a technology called Nikasil plating. It's makes an extremely hard, extremely long wearing surface. However it is sensitive to poor-grade fuel that has high sulfur content.

Ford is currently using PTWA (Plasma Transferred Wire Arc) on some of their engines, Nissan has also using it for their GT-R. It uses a steel wire that gets vaporized by an electrical arc, and is then sprayed onto the aluminum cylinder walls.

Charger Red

· #36 · Jan 7, 2013

At the risk of speaking outside my area of expertise (materials characterization of organic rather than inorganics) when we're referring to "aluminum" for block construction, we're really referring to alloys (as opposed to the element), correct?

Of course the element Aluminum is inferior in every way. It's the alloys that have been developed and used which is what I was originally making reference to. Obviously it takes alot of extra resources to make an alloy block outshine iron for the desired attributes - which speaks to the validity of the cost argument which has been made previously.

Sir Moses Wellington

· #37 · Jan 7, 2013

Darkpaw said:
It is what it is. I'm not saying that the current raw numbers will change me from buying a new Charger once they're available...I'm really just saying that I'm disappointed that they aren't keeping up with the competition.

Hopefully with the last revision of the 5.7 being in 2009, 2014 would be enough of a gap to make another change to it.

And yes, with minor mods it can be taken to over 400hp to the flywheel, and hopefully DS will fix their issues with the Trinity.

They don't need to keep up, their ahead. Either you can have a solid and reliable engine with great power curves the whole way across the board, or you can have a peaky motor that has kinda sucky power curves and isn't designed for a car as it's main purpose. Chrysler can beat Chevy and Ford with numbers game, they did back in the 70s (albiet the numbers they gave were pretty conservative), they don't play that game anymore. Do you want something that works, or has high numbers and might break? Your choice, but Chrysler is going with the economical design, sell tons of reliable engines they don't have to fix often under warranty and the buyers won't really have to worry when the warranty goes out. Their not in it to be the leader, the leaders are pretty sucky most of the time. Toyota and GM have proved this time and time again.

The mere fact the Hemi is even legal for sale is a miracle, they did a lot to make sure it was able to be sold as a production engine. They balanced the numbers very well and gave it good curves. If I've learned anything in my education, especially the business part, it's that everything has a cost and everything has tradeoffs. Chrysler has always done it different, and it sells because of that. If you don't like it, go elsewhere, Chrysler is where it is and got this far because it's always been different.

See less See more

dakrt99

· #38 · Jan 7, 2013

IMHO, the Challenger doesn't need to "beat" the Camaro and Mustang. Look at the sales growth from, start to present, it has been steady and stable, even though it was out performed on the track (and the internet). The Challenger is an outstanding car and an excellent daily driver. The car is beyond the numbers. I am sure the 5.7 will get upgraded this year or next.

JoshMHam

· #39 · Jan 7, 2013

Charger Red said:
At the risk of speaking outside my area of expertise (materials characterization of organic rather than inorganics) when we're referring to "aluminum" for block construction, we're really referring to alloys (as opposed to the element), correct?

Of course the element Aluminum is inferior in every way. It's the alloys that have been developed and used which is what I was originally making reference to. Obviously it takes alot of extra resources to make an alloy block outshine iron for the desired attributes - which speaks to the validity of the cost argument which has been made previously.

You are correct, we are talking about aluminum alloys.

Tomguy

· #40 · Jan 7, 2013

Stratuscaster said:
Challenger vs Mustang vs Camaro? Sure, we can logically cross-shop those all day long. And if someone decides that the 0.6-to-1.4 second 0-60 time difference is the tipping point between one or the others, I question that kind of decision-making.

In the pony-car wars that's the only thing that matters - speed. Now we can all say "Well the Challenger isn't meant to be a pony car" when it really is - just a very large one compared to the MustMaro. I'd never want a Camaro or a Mustang but when those 2 sell for less than the Challenger, have more horsepower not just on paper but in real world use DUE TO weight savings, and are more "Tuneable" by the aftermarket, the Challenger will continue to be a niche-market car.

Now, if Chrysler keeps its niche-market car but ALSO has something much smaller & lighter to be in the same class as the CamarStang, then that's different. I don't think Chrylser needs to kill the Challenger, but they need Alfa's help in a smaller RWD sportscoupe/convertible.

And that last point's a sticker too - want a convertible Chrysler? 200 or nothing. No Chally convertible. Sad.

Yes, the Hemi is one hell of an engine, and puts out more power than the 5.0 in the Mustang pretty much anywhere on the charts, but the Mustang weighs a lot less than the LX cars! Curb 3,620 lbs for the Mustang G/T (Tested weight), 4,082 for the Challenger R/T (Dodge spec).
http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2010/03/inside-line-dyno-tests-the-2011-ford-mustang-gt-50.html
http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2011/03/dyno-tested-2011-dodge-charger-rt.html

See less See more

21 - 40 of 138 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.