well this doesn't seem to have anything to do with the original question and it's a stupid argument anyway. Who cares what wins. Do you like what you have? Then there is the best vehicle for you.

Besides, I would like to know, if you have as much power as you say, how did you get traction on wet asphault to get 0-60 in 7 seconds? I have a '79 Z28 w/350 and if the road even thinks it's wet I'll do nothing but spin.

 

Simple. My Durango R/T has 55's on all fours and it is all wheel drive. You can get all four of this fat Goodyears to break. I'm telling you, it is a slightly modified bad A$$ SUV.

 

Ok Ok! I'm assuming then you know that the 55 are not the width of the tire and wouldn't really have much to do with whether or not they will break loose in a straight line. That # is actually a ratio, but has mostly to do with the sidewill height. So, to get 7 sec 0-60 time you must have over 300 hp at the rear wheels with the weight of that vehicle. What all have you done to it?

 

I am sorry to tell you that awd drive does not mean 4wd. It only means that one of the front grips and when it spins and switches to the other front wheel, and I doubt that you have a locking differential on that Dodge to so that means has one pulling in back and one in front. So you actually have 2 wheels gripping. You have 55's on your Dodge!! How much of a lift did you have to put on it to fit those tires on there. I didn't even know they made that big of a tire. and for you beating mustangs HAAHA maybe v-6 mustangs. New mustangs suck. But there is no way you could beat a mustang or even a caddy it might put out less hp than your Durango but you would never beat one. The weight of the Durango puts it out of contention with almost any sports or luxury car. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img] thank you

 

I have an '88 Mustang and I'll put pinks down that I beat you by at least 3 seconds in the quarter! To bad you in Indiana, if your ever in Southern Cali or Pheonix let me know. I'll take your truck and sell it for a real truck.

55 series tires, not 55". Obviously you need schooled on how to read your tires (not you MXRACER, the Freak). Lets use some real tires as an example, say, umm, 275/40ZR17's. The first number indicates the width in millimeters (roughly 10.5" wide), 40% of the width is the height of the sidewall (about 4.25&quot, the ZR is the speed rating (I believe 159+), and the final number is the rim size. When drag racing you want a taller sidewall, this will allow the tire to "wrinkle," (you've heard of wrinkle wall slicks right? Oh wait, probably not, your Durango couldnt wrinkle a wet paper bag) and give you the most traction you can get from a given size. ZR's arent one of the better tires to use as the sidewall is extrememly stiff and your car (SUV as you call it but its just an El Camino with a lift kit) wont ever see 159+ anyways.

Like I said, anyday you want to race for something real. The only stock 8 cylinder Mustangs you could beat would be the '74-'84's. Any other V8 Mustang will take you, and I dont care what you stick on that brick wall with wheels, it aint going to happen.

Now MojaveRider250. I firmly believe you could take the Warrior. I would attempt launching in second gear, with high revs and some weight out back (assuming your on dirt) you should hook well and launch with very little wheel spin. If on asphalt you'll need to work the clutch a little bit. You wont be behind so dont worry about it.

 

This got real stupid real quick-What happened to the real topic? Durango R/T's are fast (not quite 7 sec 0-60 on wet aspahlt) for a 5000lb vehicle. Read these two articles by Car and Driver and I think you guys might let up a little. By the way madweazel, unless your Mustang is not stock, I would take that bet back-not a knock against you-but what hp was the 'Stang running back in '88-170 +/- at the wheels? In these articles you will see that the R/T is only 1 sec behind the Mustang in the qtr. 3 secs in the qtr is quite a gap. Hell I had a 4.3(stock) S10 that would run 16.67 in the qtr-thats less than 2 off.

http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caran...o&class=18

http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caran...g&class=22

 

i had a mojave back years ago, and i'll have to admit, i think that the warrior, stock to stock, would outrun it on the top end, but if you get a good takeoff, then the mojave would win in any drag race. in my opinion its bottom end is much much better than the warrior. and for trail riding or woods, go with the mojave over the warrior any day.

 

From my experience with Kawaski, the only atv that was fast was the famousTECATE-4. Mojaves run neck & neck with 300ex's & my 98 Warrior (stock) would be dead even with a modified 300ex until I shifted into sixth gear & play time would be over for the Honda. From that I would feel good by mentioning that a stock Warrior would beat a stock Mojave. Even with the uni-filter stuff....[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]


01 Raptor (stock)
01 GSX-R750 (stock)
98 Warrior gone,but always remembered!!!!!

 

freaky stone i wought just love to see your truck beet my dads bmw.

 

I bought a '99 Dakota R/T standard cab new in '99. I was so unimpressed with the performance I returned it a week later and got my trade in back. My LT1 Formula just ran 12.46 @113mph a few weeks ago..no N20, no charger and stock heads.