B-Man, well said. You've addressed several issues that I thought should be addressed. Especially the thing about the "incessant supercharger whine".

cia-agent, you respond to many posts and your points are often valid. This topic however does not appear to be your forte.

Does everyone know how to spell SRT ? AMG. I know that AMG has nothing to do with DC but Mercedes knows how to promote a line. By offering a version done by AMG. That's exactly what DC is doing with their seven SRT offerings, promoting the lines.

I'm a ford guy just like most of the people on this site but DC is doing a he!! of a job in the performance department. If you don't think the SRT10 fast enough the SRT8 300C looks like it'll hold it's own on the strip and not have the same issues hooking up. I wish Ford had the same idea but they don't. Who knows, I could end up in a DC product if Ford doesn't offer up something good in the next few years.

As far as which truck is faster, I couldn't tell you. I do know that judging a vehicle by the HP numbers may not be too accurate. But I guess if all you can do is read the specs, that's all you have to go by.

 

Point well taken Wittom--

I don't own either vehicle, but I can read- and I know what I've read (which most of us do- since it's safe to say that most members on this board don't own Lightning's.. ) And, if a reputable magazine like Car & Driver, Motor Trend, etcetera, can be accused of lying to win favor from other manufacturers, or promoting an agenda- isn't it MORE likely that one would encounter the same on a pro-Ford website? So please, can we dispense the bull?

I am unbiased in this- I love Fords- but I have to call them like I see them...
____________________________________________

My, my- I think I'm learning never to say anything less than Ford is the best- huh?
________________________________________

More gas for the flames...

While it's true that the SRT-10 regular cab is not recommended for towing, the SRT-10 Quad cab can carry a payload of 2,000 lbs and tow 7,500 lbs.

It has 500 HP, and 525 lb feet of torque...


You guys claim the Lightning puts down 420 HP at the fly wheel, and roughly 365 at the wheels. If that's true, in HP wars- why doesn't Ford claim that? Why say 380 if you're making 420- especially when, at the time, they had NO competition in the segment...
_________________________

And, let's be realistic folks- if you truly need a truck to two and haul and do what most trucks can do- you wouldn't get a lightning for that. Someone mentioned going into the woods with one...

(Laugh's like Fire Marshall Bill)

Are you telling me that Lightning's can go off road now? I mean, any car can drive through the woods, as long as the road is paved or dry (if it's a dirt road).

About the whine, I heard it all the time, even at 40. It was like having a radio installed that you didn't have filters on, and every time your engine revs, you can hear it in the speakers... That kind of whine... I didn't like it; I'm not knocking it for you guys, I'm just saying I didn't like it... I also don't like the clang of 7.3L powerstroke diesels... (The 6.0 is much better though)

Guys, I said that in the real world, the Lightning is probably quicker than the SRT-10 due to it being so simple to drive- but I also said that with two good drivers, the SRT-10 will walk the Lightning... And, whether you lose by a millimeter, or a mile: a nano-second, or a minute- you still lost.

The thing about most manuals is that to get good performance out of it, you have to drive it like you hate it. This is why many newer performance cars are slightly quicker with an automatic than with the manual... Auto-tranny's are no longer the handicap they were once. Examples: New GTO, 1993 - 2003 Z-28's & Trans Am's (Not counting the Ram Air, or SS variants)... They said the auto's could handle excessive amounts of torque better than the manuals could...

Sticks will always be more fun, but for day to day, gimme an automatic any day... The SRT-10 Quad cab is an automatic...

0-60 5.3, 1/4 mile 13.6 @ 103 MPH (Quad cab)
0-60 4.8, 1/4 mile 13.2 @ 108 MPH (SRT-10 Regular cab)

I guess on certain days- they can get better numbers- One SRT ran 5.1, but the best time was 4.8 for the manual.

I didn't make up the numbers folks, I just posted what's there for any and all to see, and for the manufacturers to dispute- if they thought it was fraudulent or misrepresentative of their product.

 

I understand where you are coming from and some of it is just not knowing the facts. We all see that, we read things and tend to believe what is written, just like in politics, don’t matter what side of the fence as it don’t matter what brand of vehicle. Articles by any body, including Car and Driver are just that, a simple article that is not reality in everyday life but for that one day with that one vehicle they tested.

The numbers above in your quote just are not true, in reality, in every day life. They have yet to pan out. SRT-10 are running an average of 13.8 – 14.0 and up in the Ľ mile. They get spanked on a consistent basis regardless if the driver is professional or not. A few will get lucky and get along a Lightning that just can not hook well and they get a win.

Yes, it is true that Lightning’s are putting out approx. 420hp at the flywheel and an average of 360hp to the rear wheels. That is a fact and not speculation, just read many post and view many dyno sheets (corrected of course) and you can see the truth for yourself.

The standard for hp loss is 20 – 25% on an automatic and 10 – 15% on a manual. The Lightning is more efficient and has been reported to be only losing approx. 15% through the driveline. If your getting 360hp to the rear wheels that translates into 420hp at the flywheel. If the Lightning was losing 25% through the drive train they would be putting out approx. 480hp at the flywheel so you can choose if they are putting out 420hp or 480hp at the flywheel since it has been established what they “really” put down at the rear wheels.

Why doesn’t Ford advertise the truth? Maybe to keep insurance prices down for owners or more likely because it would make the Mustang Cobra look weak as a car. The Cobra is Ford’s center piece for performance so they most likely don’t want to show it up with a truck. It wasn’t until they put a blower on the Cobra in 2003 or 2004 that they could actually beat a Lightning. Before that the Lightning’s were beating Cobras…

Like it or not the Lightning is still the king of performance trucks and the SRT-10 isn’t. It’s a performance vehicle that may deserve mention in a magazine but since it can’t do what a regular truck can do and cost over twice what a Lightning cost to me is not real impressive and actually very disappointing, especially since it will get walked every day of the week and twice on Sunday by a Lightning (stock vs. stock)…

Granted, every now and then an SRT-10 will get lucky and beat a Lightning (stock vs. stock) but it won’t be because of performance but rather luck. The facts are out there but people can’t be afraid to go out and find it…

 

The lightning I looked at was $36,000, in Sonic Blue.. Although loads vcheaper- it's not half the price of an SRT-10. Besides, I get discounts on Chrysler products through my wife's job!!

I almost got it, but at crunch time I could not see parting with my Expedition and gettign a rgular cab pick-up. Even if it was the @$$-kickingest truck on the road at the time...

Maybe if I had an "L" I would believe what these drivers post on here too- but, since it's obvious that they may be a little biased as well- I can't put a lot of stock in that either...

I agree, performance will vary from vehicle to vehicle. One Lightning may be 3 tenths quicker in every performance aspect than another Lightning; maybe even a second quicker. Everything matters- including, tires, factory vs aftermarket wheels, tonneau, no tonneau, driver weight, launch RPM, altitude above sea-level where tests are done, etc..

I for one, am GLAD dodge brought out the Ram SRT-10. A little competition never hurt anyone... Where Dodge screwed up is with the manual tranny- a problem that is corrected in the Quad Cab. I tell you what- I will definitely be giving the Adrenalin a test when it comes out. I drove a new SSR- and it's pretty snappy (5.3 sec's to 60 with the new 390 HP Vette engine)

For most of us with families, and not enough resources to have three vehicles with payments, the Ram SRT-10 or the Harley is a better fit than the L would be for everyday living...

But man; if I were single- I'd probably have a Lightning too.. A white one; or silver..

Ah, whom am I kidding. If I were single and making what I make today, I'd have a BMW 7-series downstairs waiting for me, and the climate control would be prepping my cabin for me- right, about.....now...

 

The SRT-10 is a badass truck. But it doesn't compare to the lightning. The L is MUCH more well rounded than the SRT will ever be. Granted it has more power...it is heavier which almost negates the power advantage. I think it's a combination of the HUGE wheels, heavy body and manual tranny that makes them so difficult to gain noteriety as the trucks they have the potential to be. I also heard recently that Dodge will be derating the SRT-10's due to trans problems. Sound familiar? Looks like dodges manual trans can't handle the 500hp number either. I just think Dodge is doing a very poor job w/ design these days. The new Charger is the perfect example. 4 doors? Front end looks like a Dodge Ram?

 

my opinion is ill take on any SRT 10 anytime in a 1/4 mile and win every time. Period

 

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/compa...7/page004.html





http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/compa...7/page004.html

 

Nice write up but it doesn’t measure up to reality, real world facts…

In some print the SRT-10 might be considered king, but in reality and in the real world the Lightning is still king and nobody has been able to take that title away...

 

You are pretty funny. LOTS of folks here post their dyno sheets, 1/4 mile times, 60 ft. times, etc. and the VAST MAJORITY of these figures correlate. Yet you still choose to believe magazines? As if their one time down a track with a brand new vehicle is more meaningful than hundreds of postings by REAL WORLD drivers of Lightnings. Explain this:

John Hennessey puts together a $80,000 SRT-10 and it can't beat Johnny Lightning's truck, BEFORE the recent mods. GIVE ME A BREAK !!! That V-10 is over-rated, the truck is over-rated, and no matter what you do to it, it will still be a Dodge.

If it is so damn awesome, where's the competition for Ruslow? SVT_KY ? Remember, Dodge touts the SRT-10 as a "handling" truck as well...

I am not saying the Lightning is unbeatable. I am not saying the Lightning is the best vehicle ever. THE FACTS say the SRT-10 cannot blow the Lightning away, yet you still talk ***** on here.

Buy your SRT-10, come around here, and I know 15 Lightnings that will gladly hand you your @ss, for way less than $50,000, mine included...

With ALL my mods (4lb. lower, CAI, Magnaflow Catback, Predator tune) I put down 57 horsepower more than the truck did stock. Yet, with my "underpowered Ford" I managed to spank 2 SRT-10's, both from a dead stop and from 20-30MPH rolling starts. Not by a half-length - I could see them in my rear-view mirror. How could that be, seeing as you said that 500 HP beats 380 HP from where I'm sitting? (I only have 387 RWHP, according to the dyno I had it tuned on).

BTW - My L tipped the scales at a little over 5,000 lbs....

Stop watching the commercials and reading magazines - go to a drag strip. You can see the truth quite plainly there. Go to the SRT-10 forum and look at how many of them can't get into the 13's. I guess them posting that makes them as inaccurate as all of us Lightning guys here, right ?

I'm beginning to think you got hit on the head with the HEMI hammer !!