Added: 2 years ago
From: mpgomatic
Views: 91,671
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (270)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Auto also

  • IDK why everyone is talking down on this car's 0-60 when it's really not all that bad if you compare it to let's say most V6's from a decade ago and even 15-20 years ago.

  • wow i watched my watch and it was like 9 seconds. im srry thats sad. they need to put the new v6 in it.

  • I counted 8 seconds...

  • your just slow my 2007 v6 does 0 to 60 inn 6.7 and its an auto

  • even the 2011's with 290hp and a six speed or whatever are slow as piss... too heavy a car with like 200 hp can outmatch iit

  • Pretty awful. My stock Ford F-150, Lariat 5.4L gets from 0-60 in 7.6 seconds. My Dad had one of these V6 Challenger's. Really underpowered.

  • @TheTerminator310 agreed

  • slowest v6 0 to 60 time ever recorded by men.

  • @jkldeer dude my corolla does 0 to 60 in 8 seconds... this is pitiful

  • That's gotta be the most boring looking dash ever.

  • could 2nd gear be any taller?

  • Why is it so hard for Chrysler to put 6-speed transmissions in their vehicles? I hate 4 speed.

  • lol, this car goes from 0 to 60 only half a second quicker than a 2005 Honda Minivan XD

  • Some people cant afford a V8 :(

  • It's a 4speed people dam ,the 5 speed is quicker,

  • wow my stock 2002 chevy impala 3.8L v6 is faster than that... either u didnt step on the gas hard enough or that car is just slow.. idk, i don't get it.

  • can u do 0-60 on a charger? and an SRT8?

  • my v6 challenger will and has raped this stock ass cow and omg what a difference in aftermarket parts! 1swt gear is 60 for my and sooo much quicker :D

  • I run this in a quarter mile with my HYUNDAI. That transmission is what really slows this thing down.

  • woa.. that is slower than a Corolla and Honda Civic. Sad.

  • The 2011 Acura TL is faster than this blaahh!

  • If this car wasn't so damn heavy, the V6 might be able to actually get it going!

  • those guages...

    cmon Dodge, this is a 2009 car.

  • The new Pentastar V6 with the 5 speed automatic is so close to the performance of the 5.7 hemi. Go test drive one if your not sure. It is very fast. Also - no EGR valve, no exhaust manifold (built into heads) - dual catalytic converters, no freeze plugs to leak, a/c and alternator directly bolted to engine (no brackets) and one easy to replace fan belt. Oil filter is now a slim cartridge that comes out on top of engine, and is designed not to make a mess. It's worth a look.

  • its sad but true, I've driven v6 mustangs and those things are fast for some reason Dodge builds their cars in a fashion that forces you to get the v8 if you want any decent performance

  • Its the weight that is bogging down this great looking car.

  • woooow.... Y'all know that this is the fuel economy version. and the car is heavy as shit. If your gonna get serious about a challenger refer to a V8.

  • 9 seconds? my grand am does 0-60 in like 9.22 wtf?

  • Lol damn someone wanted to trade their 3.5 challenger for my charger r/t....was thinking about it till i saw this vid

  • just bought a 2011 SE. Very impressed with it. New engine... 3.6 , dual overhead cams, true dual exhaust = 305 hp.

  • No wonder i smoked this car in a 2003 chevy cavalier coupe

  • wat speed is the challenger governed at?

  • The 2011 V6 Challenger is still slow! 0-60 in 7.3 seconds with 292hp/260tq. Dodge failed with this car because of the 4,000 lbs it carries. How does a 2-door weigh as much as a 4-door anyway???

  • @LogoRifle it does alot faster than that, i have a magazine that says 6.4, what hurts these cars is the poor gear ratio 2010 (2.87) the 2011 has an option with 3.07 gears and it does alot better

  • @LogoRifleThe 5.7L HEMI V8 is rated at 5.9 seconds 0 to 60 (see consumer reports). The 2011 V6 Challenger is 305HP and if you're right about 7.3 seconds, that's 1.4 seconds difference. Not much difference unless you are racing for pinkslips - you might be looking at the JEEP specs, which are under 300 for this same engine.

  • thats horrible. my truck gets that and my truck only has 210 hp. i raced my friends mustang and she obliterated me and she only has 215hp. my truck beats her in torque by almost a 100 though. and she stilll won. this is a big downfall to this car.

  • a little under 9 seconds. how fast does a cop car go?

  • Dang until I seen this video I thought no matter what engine if it was a Challenger they'd smoke my 5.0 Explorer. This shows otherwise,the power to weight ratio really is a big factor in the 0-60 time.

  • omg my old 2001 Intrepid RT would smoke that challenger and they basically have the same everything even with more hp from the challenger

  • wow my 91 firebird is faster than this

  • I'd rather have the Srt8 version of the challenger. I wouldn't want this v6 challenger

  • i will stick to my srt8

  • wheres teh v12?

  • wow... comparable to my z71 Avalanche.....hauling a trailer :P

  • Hey, I'm 12 and when i turn 16 i understand the price will go down. Do you think this will be a good car when i'm 16?

  • @aerocrash253 no.

  • The SE is listed as having a 8.1 0-60. That is soooo slow! My four door economy sedan, 2009 Ford Fusion V6, can beat this "muscle car" by over a second. And it can probably out handle the Challenger too, seeing as how its not a boat.

  • heavyest of the 4 muscle cars with the weakest v6...that dosnt go together.

  • @ilovecats748 The 2011 Challenger V6 will have 305 horse power, the 2010 Mustang had 210, the 2010 Challenger has 250.

  • @Darkherooftheday 2011 mustang v6 has same power figures as challenger v6 , but really? what do you think will happen :P mustang will still wreck

  • the only point in getting this would be to say you have a challenger. lol

  • I Think the V6 would be Better if they would Ditch that 4 Speed Automatic for one with More Gears....say a 6 Speed.

  • @form109 Check the description ... game changes again for 2011 ...

  • @form109 And weren't trying lug around an Aircraft carrier with a pencil sharpener engine. That 3.5 is crapola. Good thing Pentastar is coming.

  • @form109 it would be better if they would start production of a more modernized Inline 6. The 3.7L v6 barely even out preformed the 4.0L I6. In the real world comparison the 4.0L i6 would kill the 3.7L v6 easily. I know, because my old 92 Cherokee out ran my friend's Liberty.

  • @form109 does this 4 speed come with the auto/stick or is it just a straight automatic?

  • My Civic Si would pwn this thing

  • @desimunda116 Your civic loses in the main category, character and looks. Please don't try and compare an eco box to an American classic, you'll just look silly with every attempt.

  • 9 Second ! nice

  • 2011 v6 the r putiing a 3.7l and 6.4l hemi for the v8 with 5 or 6 speed

  • holy cow.. my Toyota Corolla is faster than that.. no seriously.. it's faster.

  • 0-60 in like 9 seconds???? 4 speed automatic???? wft.....

    i have a 2004 elantra and does 0-60 in 9.5 seconds, it a 4-cylinder car and has only 138 hp and 127 pound-feet of torque...... this challenger sucks!

  • OMG that was slow! I got in and rode in and drove the R/T version recently with my uncle (he works for Chrysler and gets to drive em all the time) and that thing is STUPID QUICK! We were up to 110-115 on the highway in about the same time it took this V6 to get to 60, no joke! U gotta be careful when drivin it cause the slightest tap on the accelerator in the V8 version will send u flying off lol! Its a blast tho!

  • @ATRichard lol for real dude, challenger has to be the r/t... BUT, new v6 camaros and mustangs have same times as the r/t wit better braking, handling, and mpg! i got a manual v6 camaro a few months ago and ive embarrassed some r/t's :)

  • Ouch 8 seconds flat

  • The v6 Challenger is still sweet! Yes it comes off the line slow, but it is no slouch once it's moving. I'd love a v8, but my v6 has been great! If you plan on racing, THEN you buy a v8.

  • 4 speed auto is primitive now a days . no wonder Chrysler was on the skids . 

  • they now have the se in a 6 speed manual, i test drove it yesterday. the pickup was quicker then the 4 speed auto for sure. the salesman even smoked the tires in the back lot

  • Is the redline at 6,000RPM on this car?

  • 9.34 seconds

  • I just dont understand why people would waste the money on a V6 challenger just to have one new,i mean if youre a girl,or you dont care,thats fine,but if you want performance,why not wait a year or 2 and get one with a V8 you know? people are just to obsessed with having a brand new car. Im happy with my 13 year old car cause its 10X better than 99% of new cars lol.

  • @rockerdude29 lol, agree most V6 family sedans are faster then this. I much rather have a 7 year old Vette that would smoke this. 

  • The 3.5 is a 7 second range 0-60...

    5.7 Hemi is a 5 second flat 0-60..

    6.1 Hemi 4.5- second 0-60..

    I sell them,had demo's drove them mastered them,thats what they do..

  • this realy need 6 speed auto this 4 speed auto is realy sick

  • get the srt8 the 6.1 L V8...The v6 blows for a challenger

  • wow was that really 0-60 in 9 seconds... this video proves if you get a challenger GET A V-8!

  • @baghead727 Looks like it's 8.75 on the original file. The 2011 should be significantly faster with the new Pentastar V6. With any luck, we'll get to test one soon.

  • @mpgomatic Dan, you had a chance to drive a Pentastar equipped Grand Cherokee yet? You should do a review on that, if you can get a hold of one! Excited about Chrysler first new V6 in years? Be nice to replace the 2.7, the 3.0, 3.3, 3.8, both 3.5s, and the 4.0 all in one fell swoop.

  • @rudolphna54 Haven't driven the new Grand Cherokee yet. Need to get one on the schedule, ASAP.

  • @mpgomatic yes please do. Im waiting to see the 11 Jeep GC

  • @baghead727 lol if you buy any sports car, get the v-8 package, whether it be a mustang camaro charger challenger ect.

  • @baghead727 get a gt500

  • i love american muscle cars

  • Still quicker than a 318 E-body Challenger.

  • I had a Cavalier that did 0-60 faster with half the horse power. Some one should put a twin turbo in that mofo.

  • bout 9 seconds

  • lmao why are they slow its 2010

  • 5 spd Auto is going to help on mpg too!

  • lol of course there is bad power to weight ratio on this car... are you guys fucking stupid? It doesn't matter if you have a 4-speed or a 6-speed, if there is not enough "power" to push that heavy cow then it's not going anywhere! The v6 camaro weighs about the same but has more torque and horsepower, hence the reason it actually performs.

  • what would the 0-60 times be on an 2008 with the v6 automatic?

  • Leave it up to the idiots at Chrysler to use the same 1960's technology from the old Challengers lol. The days of the 4 spd automatic transmission are long gone, 5 or 6 gear ratios allow for much better use of an engine's torque. It's kind of sad that they can't get it through their heads when they are being beat out by imports and even Ford and GM. It's sad people actually put down their money on one of these.

  • @7477238 - Dodge is using a five-speed automatic in the current Challenger SE. Only the early models used the four-speed.

  • @mpgomatic do they, or do they plan to put in the 6 speed manual on the V6 like they have on the r/t? i want a stick shift but not sure i can afford the V8

  • @creamyfilling102 - Haven't seen anything on that yet ... a manual with the new Pentastar V6 would be a good move.

  • V-6 are ok, but its funny to hear people with V-6 stangs brag that its faster... Who cares, that like hearing one special ed beat another at the special Olympics! The V-6 version of these cars are not for 0-60/1/4 its to look great at a budget. Now I am not trying to be a jerk becuase I dont have the baddest car ever but I wouldnt purchase one of these if my life depended on it. R/T or SRT8. There is no point, just buy those gay Avengers then.

  • @Albee213 The 2011 V6 mustang is beast as shit 0-60 in 5.1 secs and 1/4 mile in 13.7. those are great numbers and to an srt-8 challenger it does 0-60 in 4.8 secs and 1/4 mile almost the same and the mpg on the v6 stang is really good and its only $22k. Its probabley worth buying the v6 or the new v8 difference really is only .6 sec 0-60 and like .8 sec 1/4 mile. Doesnt seem like thats worth a $10k difference v6 is pretty good now

  • @XSoulscarz53X Amen, that V6 is golden.

  • @XSoulscarz53X I have been on mustang forums, and the best stock time I have seen is 0-60 in 5.4. The 5.1 is most likely in perfect conditions, but I don't trust the car magazines. Go on the forums and see what real life people get, they are not getting 5.1 lol. If they are getting that stock, show me the car and the timeslips.

  • @jmcle884 I think for some magazines they take the cars to the track and have perfect operation conditions. theres no way you'll get 5.1 on the street in real life.

  • @XSoulscarz53X You will be paying at least 28k plus.

  • this is sad stock 99 stangs beat this.

  • This is pathetically slow! Sports cars should be able to reach 0-60 in at least seven seconds at the slowest! My V6 Mustang is like a rocket compared to this! haha

  • @Planeguy13 You're right.......This is not a sports car. I don't know what it is llloooool

  • @Planeguy13 a mustang is more understandable but compare it to lets say my g35 sedan and even that beats it....imagine sitting at the lights and it turns green and you are left in the dust of a japanese SEDAN

  • @Planeguy13 a mustang is more understandable but compare it to lets say my g35 sedan and even that beats it....imagine sitting at the lights and it turns green and you are left in the dust of a japanese SEDAN

  • 0-60: 9.1 sec, terrible, especially for a sports car. i just watched a grand caravan with a 4.0 liter hemi that did 0-60 in 8.4 sec

  • @junktoyota This car wasn't designed with a V6 in mind, it's just thrown in there to make the car considerably cheaper and open up the market to people who just want the Challenger's looks, not performance.

  • @junktoyota

    ...Caravans don't come with a 4.0L Hemi option... Dodge/Chrysler only uses the 5.7L Hemi V8 and the 6.1L Hemi V8. There is no Hemi v6.

    But yeah, this sucked. a 05 Ram Hemi Quad gets 0-60 in 7.0 seconds. Far better than this crap-ass car.

  • thats sad. such a great car with such a slow engne. i have a 2008 avenger R/T with the 3.5 V6 and my car would rape this thing.

  • @fastlane2112

    slow engine? .... I sure would hope that your LIGHTER FWD car with the same engine as this as well as an updated Chrysler 6 spd. auto would beat this thing.....

  • @fastlane2112

    slow engine? .... I sure would hope that your LIGHTER FWD car with the same engine as this as well as an updated Chrysler 6 spd. auto would beat this thing.....

  • I can't believe they only put a 3.5 in this thing.

  • my 2000 4runner would beat this lol

    i clocked it at 9.1 consistantly...

    oh well...at least it comes in a v8

  • @natejo91 I timed this thing at 8.67 with my stopwatch. Sounds like that would beat a 4 runner!

  • ive been getting right around the 8.7 mark. i think it would take a 4runner lol what an ass clown that guy is

  • yeah ive been gettin right around 8.7 seconds give or take each time. judging by my calculations...that faster than 9.1. what an ass clown huh...lol

  • @natejo91 Its 9.1 seconds to 60? I clocked 8.5 seconds. Thats weird.

  • @natejo91 Thats weird. Just like tsblair95, I timed 8.7 seconds to 60. I think it will be as fast as the 4Runner. Im sure of it.

  • well hey. anyhtings better than the 2.7 BLECK! Those engines have SO many issues..the biggest being its extreme lack of power.

  • i really do think the 2.5 altima is faster lol

  • lol this is slow my 2.5 nissan altima is faster lol

    the 3.7 is a pretty significant improvement tho:P

  • Look you guys have to step into reality. I clocked this at about 8.7 - 9.0 multiple times. Now I know you guy hate to see your favorite car perform less than expected but those are the numbers. A 2.5l Altima with a ATX gets about 8.6 - 9.0. My Mazda 6 2.3l stock got 8.6 - 8.8. I'm just saying. Stop bashing this guy for more than likely being correct lol =] It's all fun though, im not trying to make anyone mad.

  • 250hp/250 lb-ft are more than adequate output figures, 3800lbs isnt "too" heavy.

    I dont blame the engine or car's weight, what's slowing down this car is that heavily outdated 4-speed automatic.

  • @4MATICbenz

    yup. these cars dyno 170-180hp at the wheels (with 4 speed) which is quite a big loss.

  • Hell thats as much as honda vtec 4 bangers put at the crank!

  • @4MATICbenz: I beg to differ with you. I have a 4 speed in my near 6000 lbs truck..301 hp to the wheels and it does 0-60 in 5.3 seconds. The tundra has a 6 speed and puts about 310 hp to the wheels and does it in 6.5 seconds. The two weigh about the same. Look at the drag cars..Most have a 3 or 4 speed. The more gears you have, the more power loss you will have...usually (unless it's a VERY well built one).

  • Yeah but the Tundra's 5th and 6th gears are overdrive gears. For Maximum Fuel economy.

  • @4MATICbenz 15lb/hp is not anywhere near adequate for a coupe car today. Even the civic si is faster and thats just sad.

  • @4MATICbenz Agreed. Those are some pretty competitive numbers. IIRC, the Toyota 3.5 puts out close to that amount of HP, but due to its much better transmission, can reach 60 in the 6 second range.

  • @4MATICbenz 250 hp and 250 lb ft of torque are more than adequate? Not really, those aren't great numbers, so don't be surprised at the low speed. The car is massive dude, 16.5 feet long, and more like 4200 lbs. I would blame both the engine and the stupid 4 speed, but for the price, i don't think it's too bad.

  • WOW that's slow! Mini vans are faster than that!

  • The 4-speed automatic is seriously hampering this car. 2nd gear is good for what, 80mph? That's ridiculous.

  • @ the top of second it hits 90 mph lol

  • Dodge Rocks ! ! !

  • Timed it at 7 seconds. I test drove one the other day - its needs more hp under the hood - like 270 at least. Not bad, but not great. To the guy with the Kia comment - your just an idiot. Enjoy driving your Kia jack ass!!!!

  • that was actually 9 secs, where u get 7, it start at 9 sec and get there at 18 sec. and yea i got a stock civic wit a 1.8 that does it in 9 sec, so thats pretty slow for a challenger

  • You should have put on some performance mods before you made this video. My 05 lacrosse 3.8 would stomp this car.

  • @buickman85 this is my bros profile but he is doing it to show you, if he wanted performance he probably wold a bought a rt or srt8

  • I counted 10sec. to 60. And I thought my 9.5sec Kia was slow. Well at least now I know I can beat a Challenger with my 4cyl. Makes me feel like I have a fast car. LOL

  • I find it laughable that you actually timed a KIA anything at 0-60. Who did you think you where going to impress with your KIA

  • i bet u cak beat the srt8 challenger

  • my moms stock 4dr civic is faster lmao

  • can you post a video with the 5 speed auto so we can see how much faster it is?

  • the toyota aurion is a 3.5v6 and its in the same class except it actually makes decent power. 286hp with no boost. just good japanese technology. i think its a good comparision to against how behind american engine tech really is. DUAL VVTI!! qaud cam

  • WOW i honestly thought these cars were pretty quick. My Inline 4 Altima coupe 2.5S does 0-60 in about 7-7.5 seconds......i dont understand why american cars make the cars so heavy but dont put enough power to hold itself up. I mean the altima coupe 3.5 V6 does it in about 6 seconds. I would rather get a camaro v6!! PEACEEE

  • not bad at all for a v6 in a big car

  • not bad at all

  • pentastar is the shape of chryslers emblem that has been used since the early 60's. They just named the motor after it which I think is cool!!

  • The really good news is for the 2010 model year and on the excellent Mercedes W5A580 5-speed automatic has FINALLY been made standard across the board on ALL Challenger models, and it brings a significant improvement in acceleration, refinement, and fuel economy with the SE model's 3.5L SOHC V6 over the crappy old 4-speed automatic(good riddance). For 2010 the SE is now rated at 19 mpg city and 27mpg highway which is much better than last year's 17/25 EPA rating with the old 4-speed auto.

  • haha Camero V-6 is WAY faster. GO CHEVY

  • Camero? More liek Camaro.

  • It wont be when the they put the new Pentastar co-developed with Mercedes it will improve this cars performance Chrysler's 3.6-liter, DOHC, 24-valve Pentastar V-6 with dull variable valve timing will deliver 280 horsepower (209 kW) at 6,400 rpm and 260 lb.-ft. (353 N•m) of torque at 4,800 rpm

  • The Penta-star is a pure chrylser engine. No mercedes involvement in the development.

  • back in the day pentastar motors were built by mitsubishi

  • no your thinking of diamond star motors.Pentastar is the named after the chrylser/dodge emblem that has been used since the early sixties.I learned this from reading lee iacoccas 1984 biograghy

  • Hmmm. I can only think of two engines, and they were rubbish.

  • Yup, and when they pair the new Pentastar with the 6 speed auto instead of the old 4 speed things will be a lot better.

  • Should give the Camaro a run for its money then, Chevy's 3.6 V6 pumps out 304 hp, for a base model, thats pretty impressive.

  • yeah but not by that much

  • I counted 9 seconds to 60. That car is just to big for that V6.

  • Its more so the trans. than the engine, but 250HP is a bit weak for a 4100 lb car.

  • This car only gets 250hp out of a 3.5?

  • Better than the mustang, which because it uses such an old design, only gets 210HP from a 4.0L V6. Not that it's a bad engine mind, but the power/liter is less than even this. Though the mustang has much less weight to haul around.

  • Yet the Mustang you undermind is about two seconds faster.

  • Thats exactly what I was thinking lol! Those 4.0's are pretty quick, but then there's the V6 Camaro.

  • I think there could definitely be more power unleashed in the 4.0 V6 from Ford. They have had 210HP coming out of the engine for the last 12 years. Time to get up to at least 270HP or so.

  • that wud be to close to there v8, they need to upgrade th ev8 first

  • @parsley0120 That's why the new 3.7 will have 305hp in the 2011 V6 Mustang.

    The 4.0 is a turd. 2 valves, iron block and no high rpm power at all. 5700 redline...Lol.

  • Why? They just replaced it with the 3.7L V6 with over 300HP.

  • Yea fords new V6 for 2011 is a 3.7L making roughly 315HP

  • 305 out of a 3.7 in 2011

  • there gonna swap it out for a 3.7 v6 pushing around three hundred fifteen

  • If your buying a v6 challenger your buying it for the "Look" not for the power. This car has way to much body weight for that engine... thats why its 0-60 is ass slow.

  • Ha my chevy colorado with a 3.5 5 cylinder goes to 60 faster then that

  • wow, this is kinda embarrassing. My daily driver saturn (01 sl2) gets to 60 in 8.5 sec, this doesnt look much faster. though Id still take this over the saturn anyday.

  • you also gotta realize this is the dinky version.. a saturn SC2 can outrun a V6 muscle car because muscle cars weigh to much to have wimpy engines like a V6. If this was the 6.1L V8 Hemi you would probably shit your pants at the difference.=O

    its weight ratio heavier cars need bigger badder engines. Thats why I laugh when i see tough guys driving V6 mustangs and challengers I just laugh and blaze by them in my Shitbox 99 Sc2 with half their horsepower.

  • hahaha, that is stupid slow for 2009.

  • That's pathetic, my old 92 SHO 5 speed would kill this piece of garbage. Cars like this should only be V8's.