Dodge Dart RallyCross: 0-100km/h in 1.9 seconds | CarAdvice

Car Advice
  • Home
  • »  Dodge Dart RallyCross: 0-100km/h in 1.9 seconds

Dodge Dart RallyCross: 0-100km/h in 1.9 seconds

By David Zalstein |
FIND DEALS

A mental 447kW RallyCross version of the new 2013 Dodge Dart will sprint from 0-100km/h in a space-time continuum-disturbing 1.9 seconds.

The all-business Dodge Dart has been put together by Dodge and SRT Motorsports to compete in the Global RallyCross Championships in the US. The only man alive crazy enough to jump in the driver’s seat, four-time Rally America Champion and 17-time X Games gold medallist, Travis Pastrana, will be behind the wheel.

The SRT Dodge Dart is motivated by a heavily re-worked version of the 137kW/231Nm factory 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbocharged engine fettled to churn out 600hp (447kW) with a Sedav four-wheel drive set-up left to deal with the 745Nm of torque.

While the new production Dodge Dart may be the spiritual successor to the original 1960s Dart, the left-hand-drive small sedan is the first vehicle developed under the new Fiat-Chrysler partnership and is based on the Alfa Romeo Guilietta platform.

The Global RallyCross Championship debuted at X Games 16 in 2010 and is a motorsport melting pot that combines circuit racing, off-road racing and rally into one format.

Competition in the series won’t be easy for either car or driver with other confirmed entrants for the 2012 series including 2011 Global RallyCross champion and three-time X Games Rally gold medallist Tanner Foust, two-time World Rally champion Marcus Grönholm, 2011 X Games Rally gold medallist Liam Doran, Formula Drift champion Rhys Millen, BMX legend Dave Mirra, and world-renowned slide-king Ken Block.

Although the image released is just a rendering the SRT Dodge Dart will make its official public debut at the New York motor show next month. Chrysler has previously indicated to CarAdvice that if right-hand-drive versions of the road-going Dart were made, it would certainly consider them for our market.

The first race of the Global RallyCross Championship will take place at Charlotte Motor Speedway in Concord, North Carolina on May 26. Good darts.

  • Robj

    0 – 400M time in 7 sec + thereabouts…

  • fbholden

    1.9 seconds?????  I’m sorry but the maths don’t add up.  It’s only got 600hp.  Not even a veyron does it in that time and I know the veyron is probably heavier but the power to weight is what it’s all about.
    And if Robj is right and it is a 7 second car, 7 second cars have alot more than 600hp and I dare say would weigh about the same.

    • Acfsambo

      Gearing. The veyron is geared to go 400km/h+, this would probably get to 250 at the top of 6th. Therefore 1st and 2nd and 3rd would be a lot shorter hence the faster acceleration.

    • JHP

      horsepower isn’t going to affect the acceleration rate, it’ll only affect the top speed.
      its torque that determines the acceleration of the car.

      • Zaki M

        This should be taught in every car mag..

        • Nick

          sorry guys but I have to disagree with everything you have said. This is a long explanation but as a physicist I believe I have some authority to comment on the science behind accelerating cars.  Bare with me and you will enjoy your new knowledge. 

          fbholden, power to weight is not the last word in acceleration – we must all remember that there will be only as much torque made into forward acceleration as there is grip between the road and the tyres.  There are many more variables than are initially obvious. So, for maximum acceleration the tyres must be as grippy as possible (think what would happen if a veyron had tyres made of ice).  

          The other thing apart from how sticky the tyres are that will affect the maximum possible friction between tyre and road is the weight of the car.  Frictional force is proportional to the apparent weight of the object, so the heavier the car the more friction between the tyres and the road.  This brings us to why the Veyron is so quick: lots of weight and lots of power and a big tyre footprint.  

          On the topic of footprint it is important to note that wider tyres aren’t always better.  I dont know enough about this to state facts but I suspect that while it is important to have enough pressure per unit area of contacting tyre  (achieved by not over-tyre-ing) that if the tyre is too narrow, it can be easy to exceed the effective temperature range of the tyre (which depends on type of tyre used, compound etc.), resulting in burning rubber to the ground essentially.  Static friction is broken in this process (wheel spin is an example of kinetic friction) and a huge amount of frictional force (while not all) is lost and therefore acceleration is very slow (think static burnouts).  Anyone ever wondered why porshces can accelerate so rapidly?  It is because all the weight (being rear engined) is centered over the back wheels giving them a huge amount of friction potential.  This basically means the car can use every last ounce of turning power to accelerate the car.  This is why they have SUCH wide rear tyres and narrow fronts (coming back to the proportionality aforementioned).  So to all those suped up commodore drivers out there:  with the same amount of power you could do the strip faster in a front wheel drive car.  THink about it for just a few seconds…Someone was right to mention gearing in that is is the link between what torque is outputted from the engine to what is applied at the edge of the tyre.  But we shouldn’t think in those terms because it really isn’t that straightforward and you certainly cant say it is all about power to weight because that is wrong (compare different cars and see for yourself) or that it is about gearing or about torque necessarily or about power.  

          • Nick

            So it is possible for this car to accelerate that quickly if it has been set up do so so.   For instance, if the weight distribution is 60/40 then 60 torque must be sent to front, 40 to rear.  Also tyre width must be spot on and they must be very sticky.  I think it would also have a good traction control program or torque sensing active diffs to get more torque to the wheel with most traction (frictional force)

  • http://twitter.com/holotropik Holotropik

    They are some series number to throw around. Better be able to back it up.

    • Duke

      I dont get what the big deal is, Ken Blocks Monster Rally Fiesta has been doing this since over a year ago!

  • Guest

    yes but at the finishing line, the car falls apart!

  • Robin_Graves

    The fiesta and fabia are definitely on the pace.  Millen needs to sort out the launch control on his veloster before it becomes competitive.  The WRX’s keep plodding away.  Will be interesting to see how this Dodge goes. 

  • Davej

    Pffff…. I call b@llshit.

    The only way Americans could make a car go sub 2 sec to 60mph is by pushing one off a cliff – and even then the bubble domes, cup holders, shag carpeting and tailfins would slow it down….

  • Gweedo

    Sorry Nick, but you have only a little knowledge regarding acceleration, particularly in relation to the 1/4 mile. The more horsepower a car has, the faster the terminal speed will be in the 1/4. The better the traction, suspension, etc etc. the lower the Elapse time. You are Not even close with suggesting FWD is faster than RWD, you obviously dont go to the drags. ALL !! cars throw their weight to the rear wheels on acceleration…FWD is naturally slower. 4wd is the best. As far as power to weight..a 500hp 1500kg car will be slower than a 500hp 1000kg car…Its called Physics…look it up one day. Note: this Dart is for the “Global” US ONLY Rallys, Not the Real WORLD RALLY CHAMPIONSHIP…typical self centred Americans ;) .

    • nick

      sorry, but you are just wrong – you clearly didnt read what I wrote properly because if you had, you wouldnt be calling me out on these points.  For instance, a car does not “throw its weight to the back”, it simply accelerates on the longitudinal plane thus changing the balance over the wheels (more to the back).  I do know a thing or two about drag racing – more than you obviously.  I mean, why do you think top fuel racers have the engine at the back?  DUh