SRT-10 and Lightning Review

svt_ky

Do you think the review was fair to compare
a $60,000 vehicle with a $28,000 vehicle?

When you consider the Dodge has 120 more HP, I
would actually expect it to best the Lightning
by more than teh measealy 3 mph on the top end
and the .2 in the quarter mile.

A mere chip and a pulley in any F150 Lightning
is enuff to smoke the SRT anywhere. Not bad for
a 5 year old platform, eh?

And another thing.

Just wait til the SRT-10 boys find out how much
perfromance VIPER parts cost. LOL

See you on the STREET and STRIP, Hemi-Lovers ...

2bscrewed

If these writers are supposed to be professionals how on earth could they have a harder time launching a 450lb ft automatic than a supposed 500+ ft lb stick. Dodge can do whatever it does to keep getting these reviews, but on the street the real story will be told. Hope the dodge owners keep believing these so they wont be shy on the road.

dustyk

...the two previous posters just couldn't get past the headlines. Too bad. Obviously depression has hit the Ford division of the chest pounders league. Maybe they're Chevy converts.

First let's address a few of the misstatements:

The SRT is not a $60,000 truck and costs about $45K, thats $12K more than the SVT.

The Dodge is .4 seconds faster than the SVT in the quarter, and 5.7 MPH faster. The Dodge is .4 seconds faster in the 0-60 time.

It's unfortunate that the first two pro-Ford (or anti-Dodge) comments were so terribly reactionary, because in my opinion the SVT can keep a lot of respect. But "my truck is better than your truck" ego will consume this respect by Ford apologists comments like these.

(Which makes the previous comments about speed all the more humorous. Would anyone like to take any bets that if the wheels were turned the other way that there would be significant satisfaction taken that the Ford was ".2" seconds faster?)

The Edmunds review clearly details why the Dodge was selected to be number one and it wasn't based on mere speed alone. The 330 pound heavier Dodge out performed the Ford in every performance category, except braking, where it came in with the same numbers. Whether marginally or not, the issue is moot. The previous two posters seem to prove that for some ego is the issue and just having better numbers for bragging rights is what it's going to be all about.

Ford and Dodge took two different approaches to get to the same result, a fun-to-drive hot-blooded truck. Yes, the Dodge is $12k more but it appears that it is also a much more individual departure from the standard RAM than the SVT is from the now aging Heritage F-150. The RAM SRT took a more enthusiastic approach and gave their version something distinctive. Anybody can intercool and supercharge a current engine and throw in some unique seats and side-exiting exhaust. Dodge, to their credit, took a broader look at their platform and met the more succinct definition to the word "performance."

I actually like the idea that Dodge and Ford took two different avenues. We have the benefit of a more civil day-to-day driver versus one more heavier ladened with character. Choice is nice.

Dusty

kg11

Went into the Lightning's 2 valve 5.4? Absolutly NONE! It's the same engine as the 260 hp F150 with an Eaton blower bolted on top.

I wonder what the Dodge V10 puts out with forced induction?

It wouldn't be an engineering marvel for Ford to bolt a supercharger to thier V10, or put existing 4 valve componants on thier V8s or V10, but it'll be cheaper to re-work the same old... on the 3 valve 5.4. What a shame.

dustyk

...Dodge doesn't crate motor the Viper engine. Only a bare 10-cylinder block is available from them.

(Gee, the grapes are particularly sour in the Lightning camp nowadays.)

cito

Is anyone really that impressed with a truck that costs that much more than the Lightning and really barely beats it stock-for-stock?

I expected a lot more from Dodge.

dustyk

>>>Is anyone really that impressed with a truck that costs that much more than the Lightning and really barely beats it stock-for-stock?
<<<

I'd be careful with statements like this. How much will Ford ask for the next generation Lightning assuming that it'll beat the Dodge in any aspect? Have you seen the projected retail price?

I think the term "barely" is an exaggeration in understatement. Since when is .4 sec better time than 5.8 from zero-to-sixty been categorized as "barely" when the quarter-mile speeds are 98.5 plus. And like most juvenile sufferers, little boys will not admit that numbers always mean something until they get beat by something else that's just "barely" faster, then everything about the other guy is unfair.

Since that big 'Ol heavy Dodge SRT beats the Lightning in every performance category except braking -- where it matches it -- it just ain't right, I tell you. I mean, what right does any body have in beating a Ford, much less than lowly Dodge? So the Lightning boys need to find everything possible to denigrate the Dodge, even at the risk of destroying their own credibility by exaggerating their case. In doing so they may be sticking their feet in there mouths somewhere down the road.

Of course, I'm just a "retard," but judging from the immature and egotistical commentary from the Lightning camp I think I'd be swayed more by the more thoughtful and more total execution of the SRT regardless of the $12,000 higher price. Of course, if I were to buy the Lightning I could use the $12,000 for buying things like new Nike's and testosterone supplements.

kg11

What's wrong with Nike? My wife runs marathons and wears out about 6 pairs of $125 Nikes a year. I guess she could wear something cheaper but there are health risks associated with running 50+ miles a week. Why not buy the best, most protective and comfortable gear you can get? Even if it's a little over priced.

I suspect the longer, heavier Dodge SRT is more comfortable and safer (but who cares?) than the Lightning.

I also suspect that there's a 14 year old boy reading this and suspecting that I'm a retard

dustyk

KG,

There was no offense intended against Nike at all, just expensive shoes don't buy you maturity.

According to the Edmunds article, the RAM SRT didn't ride as nice as the Lightning. But of course, that explains why Edmunds thought it was one more reason the SRT was the better performance vehicle.

Bests,
Dusty

kg11

I was just joking with you.

If I was looking for a serious performance vehicle it would'nt be a pickup. It would be something that would out corner and out accelerate my wife's Roush Mustang; but if I were to choose between the two it would have to be the SRT. The Lightning is almost maxed out with it's marginal high performance and the Dodge, which is already better, can still be improved with off the shelf parts.

kip

dustyk

Of all the cars that I see on the road, the Mustang is, I think, one of the nicest looking on the road today. Didn't always think so. Some of the older designs just didn't take to my eyes. If I wanted a convertible today, it would be the Mustang.

Bests,
Dusty

jc1

IF YOUR GOING TO DO A COMPARISON DO IT WITH A FAIR START LIKE 6 SPEED IN THE DODGE AND A AUTOMATIC IN THE FORD COME ON NOW, HOW ABOUT THE GEAR IN THE REAR-END AND ALSO YOU SHOW HORSE POWER AT LOW-END SMALL-BLOCKS HP DON'T EVEN COME IN TILL 6 OR 7 THOUSAND RPM NOW LETS RACE A QUARTER MILE WITH SOME WHAT OF A MATCH WITH MY FORD I'LL GIVE YOU SOME HANDICAP BUT COME ON NOW.

jc1

HEY CHEVY BOYS WERE YA AT DODGE STEPPED UP ARE YOU TAKING A BACK SEAT ON THIS ONE.

PF_Flyer

jc1, just a request to hit that caps lock key and use some lower case letters. As a general rule ALL CAPS is considered "shouting" and is somewhat more difficult to read... Thanks!

PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards