2015 Challenger SRT Hellcat spec oil info released

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
8,856
Location
Texas
Originally Posted By: artificialist
I'm surprised by the compression ratio. I'm not used to seeing 9.5:1 compression in supercharged engines without direct injection.
You just answered your question about the Hemi (sorta...) heads. The dual plug modified Hemi head with two quench areas is much more compression-tolerant than the old Hemi, or most wedge heads. Its a step in a series of design choices. And a dash of marketing, too, but the Hemi does have some actual engineering advantages. There's no yawning chasm of superiority or inferiority compared to the GM wedge design, but all the little bits and pieces work together. The Hemi is also a lot easier to work with today since they put the cam so much higher in the block with the third-gen Hemi. The pushrod geometry, while funny looking because the pushrods are nearly horizontal, is actually a lot better than in the old Hemi or even a canted-valve engine like the Chevy 454. And the pushrods are shorter than a GM LS-series so the valvetrain mass is quite low for a pushrod engine.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
164
Location
PA
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
GM's supercharged 6.2L small block was making 638 HP in the Corvette ZR1. Chrysler better hit at least 670 HP to make it worth the trouble. Carrying the name "Hemi" requires that it be a cut above the rest.
No it doesn't you need to compare to the GT500. No Challenger will be ZR1 money. The GT500 is 5.8L with 662hp and 631TQ. the rumor is the new GT500 will get a new engine as the 5.8 is a hold over from the 5.4 just to give them time to develop the new engine. With the GT500 starting at 55k, I expect the Challenger to be 54-57k starting price.
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Messages
19,705
Location
Sunny Florida
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: artificialist
I'm surprised by the compression ratio. I'm not used to seeing 9.5:1 compression in supercharged engines without direct injection.
You just answered your question about the Hemi (sorta...) heads. The dual plug modified Hemi head with two quench areas is much more compression-tolerant than the old Hemi, or most wedge heads. Its a step in a series of design choices. And a dash of marketing, too, but the Hemi does have some actual engineering advantages. There's no yawning chasm of superiority or inferiority compared to the GM wedge design, but all the little bits and pieces work together. The Hemi is also a lot easier to work with today since they put the cam so much higher in the block with the third-gen Hemi. The pushrod geometry, while funny looking because the pushrods are nearly horizontal, is actually a lot better than in the old Hemi or even a canted-valve engine like the Chevy 454. And the pushrods are shorter than a GM LS-series so the valvetrain mass is quite low for a pushrod engine.
Lets face the facts. The modern Hemi is a bit dated, and had issues with emissions, thus the dual plug design. It works well, and delivers excellent power and efficiency when compared to almost any other V8 design. But Gm's design is likely better in ways that may not be readily apparent. Plus it is cheaper to manufacture, which is always the bottom line. Chrysler does have a history of rating their engine's horsepressure under the WORST possible conditions, which means they likely make more than advertised power most of the time. My cars trap speed and curb weight indicate about 25-35 more HP than the rated output for a 6.1.
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Messages
9,605
Location
Canuck - moved to —> California —> Texas —> ???
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
What?? They don`t spec 0W20?? Won`t the engine be destroyed by startup wear with that thick as molasses 40 weight?? grin
Not to mention all that extra piston ring wear. These engines will grind themselves to death with lack of lubrication and flow! Don't Chrysler engineers read BITOG for crying out loud?! They should've known better LOL
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Messages
19,705
Location
Sunny Florida
Originally Posted By: Mach1Owner
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
GM's supercharged 6.2L small block was making 638 HP in the Corvette ZR1. Chrysler better hit at least 670 HP to make it worth the trouble. Carrying the name "Hemi" requires that it be a cut above the rest.
No it doesn't you need to compare to the GT500. No Challenger will be ZR1 money. The GT500 is 5.8L with 662hp and 631TQ. the rumor is the new GT500 will get a new engine as the 5.8 is a hold over from the 5.4 just to give them time to develop the new engine. With the GT500 starting at 55k, I expect the Challenger to be 54-57k starting price.
Until Ford raises the content of the Stang it really is not as much of a GT as the LX/LC series cars. Drive them both and you'll see, the Challenger is much larger and heavier, put them both on a lift and the LX/LC wins every time on content. The new model GT500 is not completely revealed to me yet...
 
Joined
May 28, 2014
Messages
1,920
I figured some of you Dodge fans would like to see this video. Pay no attention to the oil smoke @ startup. wink
 
Joined
May 28, 2014
Messages
1,920
Originally Posted By: Clevy
That's not burning oil smoke. It's excess fuel.
Blue smoke for oil burning. White smoke for antifreeze (such as blown head gasket). Black smoke for too much gasoline or not enough air.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
164
Location
PA
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: Mach1Owner
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
GM's supercharged 6.2L small block was making 638 HP in the Corvette ZR1. Chrysler better hit at least 670 HP to make it worth the trouble. Carrying the name "Hemi" requires that it be a cut above the rest.
No it doesn't you need to compare to the GT500. No Challenger will be ZR1 money. The GT500 is 5.8L with 662hp and 631TQ. the rumor is the new GT500 will get a new engine as the 5.8 is a hold over from the 5.4 just to give them time to develop the new engine. With the GT500 starting at 55k, I expect the Challenger to be 54-57k starting price.
Until Ford raises the content of the Stang it really is not as much of a GT as the LX/LC series cars. Drive them both and you'll see, the Challenger is much larger and heavier, put them both on a lift and the LX/LC wins every time on content. The new model GT500 is not completely revealed to me yet...
Not sure what you are trying to say here? that the Challenger is heavy/bloated? We know that.
 

LFN

Thread starter
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
36
Location
TX
Some more info.. The supercharged 6.2-liter HEMI V-8 powering the Challenger SRT Hellcat shares just 9 percent of its componentry with Dodge’s 6.4-liter V-8. Its cast-iron block features unique water jackets to deliver optimal cooling and inside there’s a forged-steel crankshaft with induction-hardened bearing surfaces, allowing it to withstand firing pressures of 1,595 psi. High-strength, forged-alloy pistons are coupled to powder-forged connecting rods with high load-capacity bushings and diamond-like carbon-coated piston pins. The cylinder heads are also heat-treated for improved thermal conductivity and sodium-cooled exhaust valves feature hollow-stem construction and special steel-alloy heads that can withstand temperatures as high as 1,472 F (800 C). The new twin-screw supercharger, sealed for life with premium synthetic oil, boasts a drive ratio of 2.36:1 and a maximum speed of 14,600 rpm. The 2.4-liter blower features integral charge coolers and an integrated electronic bypass valve to regulate boost pressure to a maximum of 11.6 psi. After leaving the engine, the now superheated gases are directed rearward via a 2.75-inch, straight-through, twin-exhaust system with an electronically controlled valve to control the sound. The fuel system keeps pace with an in-tank pump that accommodates variable pressures, half-inch fuel lines and eight high-flow injectors that can drain the car’s 18.5-gallon fuel tank in just 13 minutes when the engine is running at full power.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
15,424
Location
Kendall, FL
Originally Posted By: LFN
Some more info... The new twin-screw supercharger, sealed for life with premium synthetic oil...
What does this mean? Sealed as in how a late model automatic transmission is?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
8,170
Location
Michigan
Originally Posted By: LFN
...half-inch fuel lines and eight high-flow injectors that can drain the car’s 18.5-gallon fuel tank in just 13 minutes when the engine is running at full power.
I'd like a chance to prove that for myself. wink
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
8,170
Location
Michigan
Originally Posted By: wemay
Originally Posted By: LFN
Some more info... The new twin-screw supercharger, sealed for life with premium synthetic oil...
What does this mean? Sealed as in how a late model automatic transmission is?
This is typical of modern superchargers. The rotor phasing gearcase is filled for life. Every Eaton supercharger built today and since I don't know when has a closed sump. Since the closed lube system of the supercharger is never exposed to the products of combustion, there is no need to change the oil.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
43,595
Location
'Stralia
Looking at the Eaton on my Caprice, it went (probably) 15 years without a change, and it was at the right level first time I checked it. My local Holden dealer didn't stock the oil, and hadn't sold a bottle in 5 years, so I'm guessing that they don't change them much either...extrapolating that to the number of supercharged V-6 badges that I see around town (some, not heaps), and the various states of disrepair, I think that the majority are "sealed for life"...and that seems to be over 150,000 miles.
 
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
43,595
Location
'Stralia
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: LFN
...half-inch fuel lines and eight high-flow injectors that can drain the car’s 18.5-gallon fuel tank in just 13 minutes when the engine is running at full power.
I'd like a chance to prove that for myself. wink
Sounds impressive, but If the engine is remotely well tuned, then 0.5lb per horsepower hour should be ballpark...let it ride at 0.55lb/hph. 600hp, for an hour, at that heat rate should consume 330lb (switch to metric), 150Kg. 150Kg, is 200L, or 53.5 gal. It should consume 53.5 gal per hour at full noise. 18.5gal should last at least 20 minutes, sounds like this beast is a gas hog.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
28,136
Location
MA, Mittelfranken.de
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: LFN
...half-inch fuel lines and eight high-flow injectors that can drain the car’s 18.5-gallon fuel tank in just 13 minutes when the engine is running at full power.
I'd like a chance to prove that for myself. wink
Early AM math works out to approx 56lb or 550cc injectors static flow, not small but not large either. Thats about right for 600 HP 8 cylinder with SC at 80% duty cycle. These are actually on the small side for the Hemi. They have Bosch units that go as high a 200lb for these engines (highly modified) with 52-60lb as drop ins. GM runs the same 56lb in the LS9.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
If the engine is remotely well tuned, then 0.5lb per horsepower hour should be ballpark
Edit: Shannow use 0.60 for SC engines and 0.65 for turbo not the 0.50
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
8,856
Location
Texas
Originally Posted By: Mach1Owner
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Until Ford raises the content of the Stang it really is not as much of a GT as the LX/LC series cars. Drive them both and you'll see, the Challenger is much larger and heavier, put them both on a lift and the LX/LC wins every time on content. The new model GT500 is not completely revealed to me yet...
Not sure what you are trying to say here? that the Challenger is heavy/bloated? We know that.
No, he's saying its a stiffer and more solidly built chassis with a more advanced suspension system. Its size and weight is what won me over compared to the Mustang, which (great though it is) feels like it belongs a model range down-scale compared to the Challenger. I still love the convertible Mustang, though... It really is a case of different strokes for different folks. The markets overlap, but they're really aimed at different people who will use the car differently. I bought the Challenger in part because I'm a Mopar guy, but in even bigger part because its a car the wife and I can toss a week's worth of luggage in and drive across the country in comfort. In addition to blasting around town or playing at the track. Is it the fastest American muscle car? No. But unless you own a Veyron, there's ALWAYS something faster so I couldn't really care much less. Its FAST. It has a great balance of speed, manners, and comfort- better rounded IMO than the others. And that combined with everything else about it is what made it right for me.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
8,170
Location
Michigan
.60 might be about right for the lower compression supercharged HEMI. (I'm sort of calibrated on modern high compression NA V8's at .55 bsfc at max power.) Taking Chrysler's numbers for gospel, if the engine can empty 18.5 gallons of fuel in 13 minutes, that's 529 lbs/hr mass flow. 529 lbs/hr / .60 lb/(HP*HR) is 882 HP. I don't believe this. I think somebody goofed saying the engine can empty the tank in 13 minutes. 18 minutes would be more like it.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
28,136
Location
MA, Mittelfranken.de
I figured 6lb for a US gallon (maybe thats my error). Now i have to sit down and do it again because it came out right within margin at 550cc. 882 HP would be 100% static flow correct? -20% to get to 80% duty cycle brings it 705 HP which would be closer
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Messages
19,705
Location
Sunny Florida
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: Mach1Owner
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Until Ford raises the content of the Stang it really is not as much of a GT as the LX/LC series cars. Drive them both and you'll see, the Challenger is much larger and heavier, put them both on a lift and the LX/LC wins every time on content. The new model GT500 is not completely revealed to me yet...
Not sure what you are trying to say here? that the Challenger is heavy/bloated? We know that.
No, he's saying its a stiffer and more solidly built chassis with a more advanced suspension system. Its size and weight is what won me over compared to the Mustang, which (great though it is) feels like it belongs a model range down-scale compared to the Challenger. I still love the convertible Mustang, though... It really is a case of different strokes for different folks. The markets overlap, but they're really aimed at different people who will use the car differently. I bought the Challenger in part because I'm a Mopar guy, but in even bigger part because its a car the wife and I can toss a week's worth of luggage in and drive across the country in comfort. In addition to blasting around town or playing at the track. Is it the fastest American muscle car? No. But unless you own a Veyron, there's ALWAYS something faster so I couldn't really care much less. Its FAST. It has a great balance of speed, manners, and comfort- better rounded IMO than the others. And that combined with everything else about it is what made it right for me.
Thank you. Spoken like someone who has actual seat time in BOTH cars. I do, and I would choose the LX/LC any day over a Stang. Maybe that's why the Challengers fly off the lot at full price around here? Then there's the additional issue of a Stang on every corner and at every light. But the real reason it is popular is its pricing. The car has tremendous bang for the buck value, and is proving to be durable as well. But actually I would call the GT500 bloated, as it is a whale compared to a regular Stang IMO. I am amazed that anyone looking for a two door sports car would even consider a Challenger, as it is a Charger minus a few inches. It is LARGE. Stiffer torsionally than a 911, and far more comfortable with lower NVH. One heck of a track car, too, it surprises folks all the time. Different strokes for different folks...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top