Close

Results 1 to 2 of 2
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    140,502
    Rep Points
    42,507.0
    Mentioned
    2455 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    426


    Yes Reputation No

    Magazine GPS testing vs. real world drag strip testing as illustrated by the Ferrari 812 Superfast and Challenger Hellcat Redeye

    It can be annoying when fanboys cite magazine numbers as evidence of what a car should run on a drag strip. Why? Because a Ferrari 812 Superfast is not running 138+ mile per hour trap speeds anywhere other than the pages of a magazine.

    Click here to enlarge

    MotorTrend actually tested both the Ferrari 812 Superfast and the Dodge Challenger Hellcat Redeye using their VBOX GPS numbers and then took the cars to a drag strip in Arizona.

    The difference between the two types of testing is huge. Not to mention, magazines often get ringers for testing. Especially from Ferrari.

    Now, both of these cars are powerful but the Redeye is not 812 Superfast competition. A high revving naturally aspirated V12 is a completely different animal compared to a supercharged V8 and much more difficult to extract power out of. In the Ferrari you are paying for a certain level of engineering, exclusivity, and engagement.

    The Redeye on the other hand is just brute force American muscle.

    Here is how the two stack up:


    2019 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat Redeye 2018 Ferrari 812 Superfast
    DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT Front-engine, RWD Front-engine, RWD
    ENGINE TYPE Supercharged 90-deg V-8, cast-iron block/alum heads 65-deg V-12, alum block/heads
    VALVETRAIN OHV, 2 valves/cyl DOHC, 4 valves/cyl
    DISPLACEMENT 376.3 cu in/6,166 cc 396.4 cu in/6,496 cc
    COMPRESSION RATIO 9.5:1 13.6:1
    POWER (SAE NET) 797 hp @ 6,300 rpm 789 hp @ 8,500 rpm
    TORQUE (SAE NET) 707 lb-ft @ 4,500 rpm 530 lb-ft @ 7,000 rpm
    REDLINE 5,800 rpm 9,000 rpm
    WEIGHT TO POWER 5.7 lb/hp 4.9 lb/hp
    TRANSMISSION 8-speed automatic 7-speed twin-clutch auto
    AXLE/FINAL-DRIVE RATIO 3.09:1/2.07:1 4.38:1/2.76:1
    SUSPENSION, FRONT; REAR Control arms, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multilink, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar Control arms, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; control arms, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar
    STEERING RATIO 14.4:1 11.9:1
    TURNS LOCK-TO-LOCK 2.0 1.8
    BRAKES, F; R 15.4-in vented, grooved 2-pc disc; 13.8-in vented, grooved disc, ABS 15.7-in vented, drilled, carbon-ceramic disc; 14.2-in vented, drilled, carbon-ceramic disc, ABS
    WHEELS 11.0 x 20-in forged aluminum 10.0 x 20-in; 11.0 x 20-in, forged aluminum
    TIRES 305/35R20 107Y Pirelli P Zero 275/35R20 102Y; 315/35R20 106Y Pirelli P Zero (PZ4)
    DIMENSIONS
    WHEELBASE 116.2 in 107.1 in
    TRACK, F/R 65.6/65.7 in 63.5/64.8 in
    LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 197.5 x 78.3 x 57.5 in 183.3 x 77.6 x 50.2 in
    TURNING CIRCLE 38.9 ft 41.1 ft
    CURB WEIGHT 4,521 lb 3,845 lb
    WEIGHT DIST, F/R 57/43% 47/53%
    SEATING CAPACITY 4 2
    HEADROOM, F/R 39.3/37.1 in 37.0/- in (est)
    LEGROOM, F/R 42.0/33.1 in 44.0/- in (est)
    SHOULDER ROOM, F/R 58.5/53.9 in 55.5/- in (est)
    CARGO VOLUME 16.2 cu ft 12.0 cu ft
    TEST DATA
    ACCELERATION TO MPH
    0-30 1.8 sec 1.2 sec
    0-40 2.5 1.7
    0-50 3.3 2.3
    0-60 4.0 2.8
    0-70 4.8 3.4
    0-80 5.8 4.1
    0-90 6.8 4.9
    0-100 7.8 5.8
    0-100-0 11.8 9.5
    PASSING, 45-65 MPH 1.6 1.1
    QUARTER MILE 11.8 sec @ 128.0 mph 10.4 sec @ 138.6 mph
    BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 104 ft 99 ft
    LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.95 g (avg) 1.03 g (avg)
    MT FIGURE EIGHT 24.3 sec @ 0.82 g (avg) 23.3 sec @ 0.93 g (avg)
    TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH 1,500 rpm 2,200 rpm
    CONSUMER INFO
    BASE PRICE $73,190 $343,712
    PRICE AS TESTED $91,740 $474,489
    STABILITY/TRACTION CONTROL Yes/Yes Yes/Yes
    AIRBAGS 6: Dual front, front side, f/r curtain 4: Dual front, front side/head
    BASIC WARRANTY 3 yrs/36,000 miles 3 yrs/Unlimited miles
    POWERTRAIN WARRANTY 5 yrs/60,000 miles 3 yrs/Unlimited miles
    ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE 5 yrs/60,000 miles 3 yrs/Unlimited miles
    FUEL CAPACITY 18.5 gal 24.3 gal
    EPA CITY/HWY/COMB ECON 13/22/16 mpg 12/16/13 mpg
    ENERGY CONS, CITY/HWY 259/153 kW-hrs/100 miles 281/211 kW-hrs/100 miles
    CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB 1.22 lb/mile 1.43 lb/mile
    RECOMMENDED FUEL Unleaded premium Unleaded premium

    The Ferrari looks much, much quicker and faster here but that is because of traction. If you want to show what the Redeye can do, give it some proper drag rubber and take it to a prepped dragstrip.

    MotorTrend only does one of these things. Why no drag rubber? Seriously, they drive all the way to Arizona to compare numbers achieved with GPS in Fontana, California and they skip the most important part of the equation?

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by MotorTrend
    yours truly and Jethro Bovingdon staged up the Italian and the American at the Christmas tree at Arizona's Wild Horse Pass dragstrip to see what's what. Results: Too bad the Ferrari can't do a burnout. The best time I ran in the Superfast was 10.9 (10.852) seconds at 134.3 mph, compared to the 10.4 at 138.6 our Chris Walton laid down at our Fontana test site. There was simply no way to get heat into the tires before each launch. I'll tell you this, however: Wanna get the respect of a bunch of strangers at a dragstrip? Run in the 10s on street tires.

    The Dodge has no issue whatsoever burning its tires. As such, Jethro was able to preheat the meats and then pop off a 12.0-second run (11.998) at 125.4 mph, a deficit of just 0.2 second and less than 3 mph compared to our Fontana times. Although the Ferrari was the victor, the Redeye was able to achieve more of its potential. What'd we learn? Next time we'll bring slicks.
    Next time you'll bring slicks? All those years at MotorTrend and you just figured this out?

    Regardless, the Ferrari on the strip is 4.3 miles per hour slower than with GPS numbers. Running a 134 in an 812 Superfast is much more realistic than a 138. A spread of over four miles per hour is huge anyway and perfectly illustrates why magazine racing against the actual drag strip which uses timing beams is done by those who do not understand the difference in how the times are calculated.

    The Redeye does not do better either on the strip and it is off by .2 seconds of elapsed time and 2.6 miles per hour of trap speed.

    The bottom line is that there is a reason people respect timeslips more than magazine tests. They are more realistic and a more accurate representation as to what you can do with your own car. Not to mention, your own car is not going to be tweaked for marketing purposes by the manufacturer before you get it.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    104
    Rep Points
    45.9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    On the strip in bone stock trim (no slicks), the Red Eye will get beat by the M5, GTR & E63 (current model, and last model). It would have a hard time beating an Audi TTRS, or RS3. Let's not even talk about the street. The only thing it might have a chance in would be highway pulls from 60 mph.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •