Originally Posted by GXP Venom
The whole rear end is hideous. And the ultra rice wing turns it into a nightmare. What are they thinking. Same idiot must have put those tires/wheels combo together. They look like the GXP spare. IMO Mopars V-10 is a monster size POS that can only find 500Lbs of Torque from its 600+HP. And the interior? Pure cheap plastic Spartan appointments. $62,000 for this???
What a joke. For exactly the same money we can have THIS. Putting down 50 more pounds of torque in a much smaller and refined engine package. With awesome styling and appointments that show your not an idiot spending your $62K.
Only 7 Viper SRT10/ACR'* made? I can believe it. They knew they couldn't sell any more and one even made it to eBay with 3 miles on it.
I agree that the Viper is overpriced with a cheesy interior and and the CTS-V is better in nearly every way. However, I can't help but notice this torque/horsepower comment you've made. First of all, the Viper makes 560 ft-lbs of torque, 4 more than the CTS-V. Not sure where your 500 number came from.
But beyond that, I don't think you're properly understanding the concept of torque and horsepower because it'* not logical to make the argument you're making based on torque alone. A better question iwould be why can the CTS-V make only 556hp with 551ft-lbs of torque?
The horsepower comes from a combination of torque and RPM. The amount of torque and peak RPM both are byproducts of engine design, manifold design, valvetrain design, etc. The two are combined to create a single number which represents the engine'* ability to do work over time - horsepower
hp = (torque (in ft-lbs) x RPM)/5252
Comparing the two engines:
556 bhp (415 kW)@6100rpm
551 lb·ft (747 N·m)@3800rpm
The CTS-V creates all of its torque at lower RPM'*, and therefore is unable to make a lot of power in the upper RPM range. This might be more ideal for street driving (usually lower RPM'*), but in a pure performance sense you'd want to maximize both torque and RPM for the most horsepower. In this case even though peak power is at 6100 RPM, torque at that point is only 478ft-lbs. If that 551ft-lbs was made at 6100 RPM, the engine would make 639 horsepower, almost 100 more than it currently does. You might like the low end torque of the CTS-V on paper, but it isn't really taking full advantage of its torque when it'* at such a low RPM. This torque won't benefit you in a race like it would at higher RPM'* because the end result - torque, at the wheels, at a set speed - will be less.
8.4 L V10
600 bhp (450 kW) @ 6000 rpm
560 lb·ft (760 N·m) @ 5600 rpm
Right away it'* apparent that this engine, although not perfect, takes much better advantage of the torque it creates. It takes it'* extra 9 ft-lbs of torque and makes an extra 44hp. It'* torque is available much higher in the RPM range creating much better power. It has 560 ft-lbs available at 5600 RPM and 525 ft-lbs available at 6000 RPM. Remember the CTS-V only puts out around 480 at that point.
The V10 is designed for maximum torque on the top end of it'* RPM range while the CTS-V wastes its peak torque at lower RPM'*. The end result is an engine with more power in the Viper and ultimately faster acceleration once gearing is taking into account. The shape of the power curve and area under the curve is important to consider as well, but it doesn't vary much that much between these engines.
Sorry for the long post.