Re: 500 hp @ 4000 RPM??????

Discussion in '2000 Dodge Viper GTS-R Concept' started by Guibo, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. #2 Type S Personality, Aug 9, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Thank you for the insightful post sparetire( no sarcasm) but if you read road and track you will notice that the tests almost always say the handling is sloppy and the cars feels "tied together" instead of as one piece. The only test the've liked it is in the topspeed tests where it only went around a broad oval. Also although this car has a "broad powerband" as you say, it is quite torquey.....this plays out to a car which can easlily spin its wheels which equals a uneasy drive in the corners...which makes it hard to drive. This has been an issue for the racing vipers. The reason the high revving cars are good ( i'm not all japan cars rock and into civis and skylines and euros i love all cars) is because, say if a car revs to.. oh i dunno 8000, you enther a corner, at high revs, where the power is, instead of easing out of the corner and being off the gas you can shift up and keep the revs held(of course letting off the gas for a bit) at say 6000 rpm where u can downshift out of the corner and keep the revs building till the next corner shifting up)...where as in a low reving car you have to more or less back off the gas, letting the revs drop...and i doubt having to shift more hurts the performance of the drivers if the've reached that calibre of racing...and i guess the low revving vipers have not held them up either in all the wins the've collected...anyways i was jsut expressing a thought and people always bring up skylines, vipers, diablo's or mclarens.....and this is causing ppl to not like those cars for that reason...the're all great cars...hate the ppl who generalise that one car represents one nation of cars. heres a pic of the racing version of the viper above and some stays heres the site
    : http://www.dodge.com/inside/news_awards/news_vipercc.html

    Type and Description: 10-cylinder 90-degree V-type, liquid-cooled
    Displacement: 505 cubic inches
    Construction: 356-T6 aluminum alloy block with cast-iron liners, aluminum alloycylinder heads
    Bore x Stroke: 4.03 inches x 3.96 inches
    Valve System: Two pushrod-actuated overhead valves per cylinder with roller-type hydraulic lifters
    Fuel Injection: Sequential, multi-port electronic with individual runners
    Compression Ratio: 9.6
    Power (SAE net): 520 horsepower (est.) @ 5600 rpm
    Torque (SAE net): 540 lb.-ft. (est.) @ 4600 rpm
    Max Engine Speed: 6100 rpm


    Equipped with well over 500 horsepower and 500 lb.-ft. of torque from the stock 505 cubic-inch 2003 Dodge Viper RT-10, this Competition Coupe delivers enormous amounts of power for a production car. Its coupe-shaped composite body is based largely on the Dodge Viper GTS/R concept car shown at the 2000 North American International Auto Show and its track-ready chassis is based on the new 2003 RT-10 convertible.




    <!-- Signature -->
     
  2. Agreed, gearjammer.

    (However, the last Viper had IRS as well...) <IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif">
     
  3. i meant the viper i drove the viper. the tvr speed 12 is a not a concept i assure you however. it has been tested although the one i found was not successful. it was scheduled to race in lemans but later withdrew becasue FIA limited its horsepower level to 500.

    why is not high rpm power not better than low end power on the track. is this not the reason why racing vipers produce high end power, although delivering a walloping low end response as well?

    i cede to your facts about the skyline and viper. hmm.
     
  4. The Viper makes peak hp at 4000rpm because the engine has a long stroke. Its stroke is 3.88" which is why it cannot rev as high as the Japanese cars. They have bigger bores and shorter strokes which alows them to rev up very high. This explains why a big rig with a diesel has a rev limmiter at 2200rpm because of the long stroke it has.
     
  5. that is part of the reason. in addition a pushrod is unable to handle exceedingly high revs. you must admit this.
     
  6. OK i know why this car cannot rev very high already....the smaller the parts the faster they move, transport truck engines do not rev high because of their tuning and mainly, the size of the engines
    yes the viper is a big engine too...thus it does nto rev as high as indycars, whose pistons are about the size of your middle finger and thumb joining to form a circle.. my shop teacher showed me an actual transport truck piston and its about 4 1/2 or 5 inch diameter.....just huge<!-- Signature -->
     
  7. your an idiot. all racecars have a high rpm horsepower you #$%#ing dolt. dont embarass yourself with idiot comments again.

    this car could not rev that high in the first place, or it COULD but not too much higher, because of its pushrod technology. 2 valve/cylinders is good for bottom end torque, which is the reason why this car makes its horsepower in such a low range. 2 valve/cylinder tech does not work well in high rpm ranges where efficiency gets down and the pushrod is not able to handle this capability.

    horsepower = torque x rpm/5252 you #$%#ing idiot (referencd to guy who posted above me) revving isnot just for your ears. i can't believe this guy can even post. high rpm operation ensures for quick response and the ability to achieve more hp/L, reducing the need to having a large engine which makes suspension tuning more difficult to compensate for.

    however a road racing viper is not entirely out of the question. the oreca team viper LM is very adept at handling, however it is not street legal.

    a standard viper cannot match a r33 skyline which has 150 less hp on the nurburging track. says something about stock vipers. good for straight line, not for track.
     
  8. naw, need hi revs, ie highr rev more seed u get like the spoon civic type r has 13000 rpm, coool eh<!-- Signature -->
     
  9. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from am6ERIC9a</i>
    <b>reving the car does nothing but make sound, end of statement</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->twat<!-- Signature -->
     
  10. i said of course better tech is better. i'm all for the viper having a lot more horses. i just dont think dodge would ever do it because it would make thier production costs so much this car would be unaffordable. also it goes against stupid american 'tradition'
     
  11. Reving the car does nothing but make sound?

    THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN DOING WRONG!
    lol :)<!-- Signature -->
     
  12. #13 Guibo, Aug 9, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from blaze4eva</i>
    <b>a standard viper cannot match a r33 skyline which has 150 less hp on the nurburging track. says something about stock vipers. good for straight line, not for track.
    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    A SUB-STANDARD Viper (with only 411 DIN PS and NO anti-lock brakes) is some TWENTY-SIX SECONDS <i>faster</i> than a 350-hp Skyline GTR V-Spec.

    Don't think so? Take a look:
    http://www.skylinegtr.co.uk/articles/1997/october1997.htm
    http://www.nurburgring.de/?rubrik=rekorde&lang=eng

    Notice that the Ferrari F355 and NSX beat the Skyline in that test. How do those cars compare to a Viper? Look below.


    BTW, when your car is already making 500 horses at 4K rpm, why would you necessarily say that's bad? Since you can't reach top speed at any track short of Le Mans (where the Viper enjoys a considerably nice racing record), the 6 speeds it comes with are more than enough. And in racing terms, there's not much difference between a car with that much power down low vs. a high-revving engine with no low-down torque (and one that is only really useable between 6000-8500 rpm).
     
  13. This isn't a japanese car. go look at all American cars Camaro/Firebird 330hp @5200 RPM. American cars rev lower. Then of course someone has to try to say the Skyline is better. I'm glad someone else put links up to show that OPINION means nothing. Its all in the numbers.
     
  14. Not sure if its right but aint it something like higher displacement engines usually have low revs for power and torque or something?
    not sure on this
     
  15. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Type S Personality</i>
    <b>500 hp at 4000 rpm seems like a fairly low rpm to reach peak hp. This is s low rpm to develop peak hp and seems like it need more tuning. This car would run out of breath quickly, would not be a very good track car for this reason.....any comments?
    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Yes I have a comment, your a dumbass ric3boy.

    You only need to rev an engine to a rediclous RPM if you can't make power at a useful one.

    And running 200mph is hardly what I'd call "running out of breath".

    Spyder757
     
  16. 500 hp @ 4000 RPM??????

    500 hp at 4000 rpm seems like a fairly low rpm to reach peak hp. This is s low rpm to develop peak hp and seems like it need more tuning. This car would run out of breath quickly, would not be a very good track car for this reason.....any comments?
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  17. reving the car does nothing but make sound, end of statement
     
  18. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from blaze4eva</i>
    <b>your an idiot. all racecars have a high rpm horsepower you #$%#ing dolt. dont embarass yourself with idiot comments again.

    this car could not rev that high in the first place, or it COULD but not too much higher, because of its pushrod technology. 2 valve/cylinders is good for bottom end torque, which is the reason why this car makes its horsepower in such a low range. 2 valve/cylinder tech does not work well in high rpm ranges where efficiency gets down and the pushrod is not able to handle this capability.

    horsepower = torque x rpm/5252 you #$%#ing idiot (referencd to guy who posted above me) revving isnot just for your ears. i can't believe this guy can even post. high rpm operation ensures for quick response and the ability to achieve more hp/L, reducing the need to having a large engine which makes suspension tuning more difficult to compensate for.

    however a road racing viper is not entirely out of the question. the oreca team viper LM is very adept at handling, however it is not street legal.

    a standard viper cannot match a r33 skyline which has 150 less hp on the nurburging track. says something about stock vipers. good for straight line, not for track.
    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    You seem to be the fu*king idiot.

    Pushrod engines work equally well at high RPMs. The valve size, not the cam configuration will determine how well an engine will breath. Both top fuel and NASCAR engines turn as high as 9,000rpms.

    There was a guy with a RWD 1st gen Ford Probe that used a 351W destroked to 302ci, it had NO turbo, NO supercharger, NO nitrous, and it ran 8s in the 1/4 mile. You won't find an import that can claim that.

    As for the Viper's handling, yet again you are showing your ignorance.

    The Viper has claimed the FIA GT world championship for the past FOUR YEARS in a row.

    Something the Skyline ISN'T doing.

    Please go spread your ric3boy myths to stupid 14 year old girls and the 24 year old Honda Civic driving high school drop outs that date them because your shit doesn't fly around here.

    Spyder757
     
  19. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from 98Cobra2512</i>
    <b>Reving the car does nothing but make sound?

    THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN DOING WRONG!
    lol :)</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    What? Please explain? I've got 4 Lotuses that all reving high! Nothing wrong with them!<!-- Signature -->
     
  20. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from pedern</i>
    <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from 98Cobra2512</i>
    <b>Reving the car does nothing but make sound?

    THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN DOING WRONG!
    lol :)</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    What? Please explain? I've got 4 Lotuses that all reving high! Nothing wrong with them!</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->if u cud spell, maybe that wud help<!-- Signature -->
     
  21. As an aside to Spyder's comments, the Viper has won the last three out of four 24 Hours of Nurburgring, dispatching the Skyline in the process. And this year's Zakspeed Viper had only 450 DIN PS vs. 550 for the Skyline.

    Back to the point of this thread, perhaps the stats on this site are wrong, considering that the STOCK Viper is making peak hp at about 5200 rpm.
     
  22. Stats are definitely wrong - if the peak hp was at 4000, the torque at 4000 would have to be over 650 lb/ft. Real rpm must be a lot over 5000.

    And the starter of this topic has SERIOUSLY flawed assumptions. Horsepower is what determines the performance. Peak hp at low rpm is BETTER for a track car, as the engineŽs torque curve is relatively flatter and thus the power band is also relatively wider. Furthermore, if thereŽs two engines with 500 hp, other 8.0L revving to 5000 rpm and other 4.0L revving to 10000 rpm, the higher revving engine will have TWICE the internal loss in acceleration to max rpm to reach the same hp than the 8.0L engine, even if itŽs internals were half the weight of the 4.0LŽs, which they by the way are not. As to cope with the high rpm, the 4.0L needs reinforced internals and complicated valvetrain to extend itŽs powerband to comprise off-idle over to max rpm. So the 4.0L will in the end be about as heavy and much more expensive, complicated and prone to failure than itŽs 8.0L counterpart. It will also most likely be less fuel efficient.

    Guibo, that 1st chart is weird. If IŽm reading it right, it compares a Firebird Formula (with mod, bored/stroked to 383 ci) with a Viper R/T 10. Both have about 430 lb/ft of torque, which is no big deal for the 383 ci (at crank that is), but I would expect more from the Viper. IŽd say that is crank hp/torque for the 383 and rear wheel hp/torque for the Viper. Where did you get that chart?
     
  23. Stats are definitely wrong - if the peak hp was at 4000, the torque at 4000 would have to be over 650 lb/ft. Real rpm must be a lot over 5000.

    And the starter of this topic has SERIOUSLY flawed assumptions. Horsepower is what determines the performance. Peak hp at low rpm is BETTER for a track car, as the engineŽs torque curve is relatively flatter and thus the power band is also relatively wider. Furthermore, if thereŽs two engines with 500 hp, other 8.0L revving to 5000 rpm and other 4.0L revving to 10000 rpm, the higher revving engine will have TWICE the internal loss in acceleration to max rpm to reach the same hp than the 8.0L engine, even if itŽs internals were half the weight of the 8.0LŽs, which they by the way are not. As to cope with the high rpm, the 4.0L needs reinforced internals and complicated valvetrain to extend itŽs powerband to comprise off-idle over to max rpm. So the 4.0L will in the end be about as heavy and much more expensive, complicated and prone to failure than itŽs 8.0L counterpart. It will also most likely be less fuel efficient.

    Guibo, that 1st chart is weird. If IŽm reading it right, it compares a Firebird Formula (with mod, bored/stroked to 383 ci) with a Viper R/T 10. Both have about 430 lb/ft of torque, which is no big deal for the 383 ci (at crank that is), but I would expect more from the Viper. IŽd say that is crank hp/torque for the 383 and rear wheel hp/torque for the Viper. Where did you get that chart?

    And as you seem to be a mod now, could you enlighten me why isnŽt the "last posts" function working in the user description page (with any user from my browser). IŽd need to use it to myself - as I never remember where IŽve been posting lately.
     
  24. Hi, Bearing. The chart for the Viper is a conservative one for a stock Viper, rear-wheel figures are given for both hp and torque. They can range from 385 hp to about 424 (as shown in Motor Trend's Detroit Muscle article, wherein the stock RT/10, Cobra R, and Z06 were all measured on the dyno), with about 410-420 being the average.
    And even though this Viper is kinda low at "only" 423.6 lb/ft, that still translates to about 497 lb/ft given the standard Viper driveline loss of 15%. Well within the factory claim of 490.

    Regarding the last post issue, yeah, I'm bummed to see that feature missing as well. Imprezawrx14 brought this up in the Moderator Forum, but no one answered him. Perhaps a peek into the Website Discussion Forum (and a question there) might bring some light into this issue.

    For anyone else wanting to see how a stock Viper compares to a stock S2000 (and even a modified Comptech supercharged one), see below.

     

Share This Page