DaPurpleRT

Guess you're all running deep, deep 10s or 9s then huh? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, neither are the R/T's. We can also run 10's on the stock pcm... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You stated that "we" (Silverado SS owners) don't worry about R/Ts, yet there are R/Ts that quick, I'd assume since you guys don't worry about any R/Ts ya must all run those times. Simple deduction.

Are we mainly talking 4.7s or 5.9? I would hope 5.9s. Can't help you on the 4.7. But if you really lack any serious hp from our SIX whole cubic inches more compared to the 5.9L, then I would guess it is either due to a design problem or it is trying to meet CAFE standards, or something. Once you remove all the factory restrictive BS, you basically have nearly the same block and lower end. Then add all the go-fast stuff (same stuff we would) and the weight difference plays a major factor in how fast you end up without changing the lower end. Bottom line, if I put my engine in your truck I could easily go in the low 11sec area, but couldn't come close being in my truck. It is not the stock lower end, but the same general principle applies. That is why IMO, if you wanted to compare, then your weight class would be a S-10/Colorado/Canyon. You guys definitely reign supreme there, unless you find one with a V8 (not currently a factory option). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> S10s and Rangers weigh WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY less than Dakotass. Dakotas are much clsoe to Silverados weight-wise.

A SS is 5250lbs. If we are talking SSs on the SS site. According to you R/T guys in this thread a RC weighs 4000 and a CC weighs 4400. If every 100lbs is a tenth, that's pretty significant. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I referenced the trucks in general since the conversation had shifted to the Silverados in geenral. IE RC 2wd to RC 2wd, 4wd CC (or QC) to 2wd CC, etc.

PS: Your full size trucks are only a few hundred lbs at most more than a Dakota, not enough to really be considered in a different class. RC 2WD Rams and new F150s weigh over 5klb for example....

Guess you're all running deep, deep 10s or 9s then huh?

bout 4000 for a RC, bout 4400 for a CC.

are you able to read or do you have poor dodge syndrone? really modified. stock they are garbage and get spanked by the 4.7s Let's try YOUR reading Shall we? I think the majority here agree the SSS and the Dakota R/T run times that are VERY similar when dead stock. Midsize-truck vs large truck, 2 wheel drive vs 4 wheeld drive, etc etc aside. The SSSSilverado runs from (not often) high 14s to (more often) low to mid 15s. A Dakota R/T runs from (not often) high 14s to (more often) low to mid 15s. Both the Dakota R/T and the SSSilverado are in the same ballpark as far as dead stock 1/4 mile times. Are you following me yet? Now, if a "stock Dakota R/T was .... GARBAGE as you put it, then I'm going to have to assume you know you are pointing out the stock SSSilverado's times are also.... GARBAGE because they run near identical times. ARE YOU CALLING THE STOCK SSSilverados "garbage"...? The 4.7 Daks are quick, but they will neither "spank" the Dakota R/T or the SSSilverado, in my opinion. A 4.7 that runs well can beat either an average SSS or Dakota R/T, but it's not a "common occurance". You have twisted insulting views! You also have twisted insulting flares on your truck, but we'll talk about that another time.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> yep, my fares are what you describe them as even tho they are factory. no the R/T is a joke , you cant compare it to the SSS of which the weight isnt even close. tests havebeen done, proof has been there and stated the 4.7 is actually the truck to get for racing and the 5.9 R/T was the one you wished you had bought for pulling. and i dontcare what mopar motor is out there for your trucks why do they get such lousy MPG? ...........answer is junk setups <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Whew, I can give up on this guy now, that last statement about getting the 4.7 over 5.9 for racing sealed the deal x10!

yes for pulling not for HP unless you really modify them. a few years ago i thought of getting one when i was young and dumb lol but did seraching adn seen how poor the intake setup was and that a 4.7 magnum walks the the R/T <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What's impressive for you? 360 R/Ts w/ bolt-ons (stock H/C( have gone 12.9, quickest heads/cam only NA R/T is 11.3@119, driven an hour to and from the track. He has a two stage nitrous system setup for it too. Tons are running deep 13s on bolt ons now, deep 12s/11s on heads/cam. I guess you must run at least 10s NA on and under 400 cube engine right?

who you beating? hell rams with a side of snake are by far the best tasten' trucks around. the owners have such small manhoods, all you hear is i have a viper motor :blah::blah::blah: get with yourselves ive seen a few of them run nothing more then high 14s and they were RSCB <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That's called a horrible driver. LOL A RC SRT10 can run high 12s stock with agreat driver, low 13s with a good one.

Do most Silvy SS' run 14s stock? A RC Dak R/T DRIVEN WELL (Key words) will do a high 14s, most CCs will or at least do very low 15s. Also add Hemi Rams as a RC 2wd (espeically with 17s) can do high 14s/low 15s stock with the 3.92 SG rear.