109 thoughts on “Challenger SRT8 vs 340 Six Pack Challenger T/A – Old vs New – 1/4 Mile”

1. old

2. New

3. The 70 T/A is a way cooler car from every aspect but I am sure the new one will outrun it !

   1. Bingo!

4. New

5. Well i watched a race same kinda cars and the old won

6. HaHa.. Old School kicks it in either lane.

7. What an embarrassment. New can’t hold a candle to the original.

8. The ’70 is a drag car folks. The stock version of the ’70 couldn’t beat the 6 cyl version of a new challenger. Look it up.

   1. You’re hundred percent right that 70 car definitely had a lot of work done to it far from stock because They don’t run 11 and 12 stock that’s for sure

   2. A stock 340 came with 275 Gross HP. Using todays hp rating standards, it had just a shade over 200. A new stock 6 cyl has around 300. A new 6 cyl Challenger would give an old 440 Challenger a fit on a drag strip and easily out run it on top end.

   3. Amen their Bob. No stock 340. 6 pac will run in the 11s. Infact boot even 12s. So why do these fools want to say old it new. I think both Bei g stock the set 8 would win hands down. I’ve got a new 2018 sxt 8 speed auto that will run 14 s all day . The difference is that new cars have a truer h.p. and torque reading to the real wheels than the old cars

   4. The new SRT8 is 475 true HP as you say. It should run at least in the upper 11s to lower 12s all day long.

   5. I got a v6 rated at 305 hp. Haven’t tried too hard but 0-60 I got 6.3 seconds. From an idle.

   6. Yeah Gary, cars have gotten steadily faster and faster over the past 4 to 5 decades. Most folks don’t realize that there are many new 300 Hp grocery getters out there today that would smoke about any STOCK muscle car from back in the day. Case and point, my 3.6 L 4 door 2013 Impala is rated at 305 net hp. It is also capable of 0 to 60 in 5.8 secs. with a weight of about 3600 lbs. By comparison my ’71 454 Chevelle in stock trim is supposed to go 0 to 60 in 6.2 secs. By the way, the Chevelle weighs less than the Impala. Cool factor, the Chevelle rocks it. For power, comfort, and economy, the 21st century rides are literally decades ahead in more ways than just youth.

   7. Stock 392 hemi challengers/chargers hit mid to high 12’s/low 13’s..although it takes very little to get them in the mid 11 range. A hot tune and drag radials would get them in the high 11’s with a good driver..the current 5.7 challengers/chargers struggle to break 14’s/high 13’s.

   8. Yup the 70 is far from stock but even today’s rubber on a 70 car would be good for a few 10ths in the quarter. This one clearly has some sort of 4 link or other traction aid and is geared somewhere around the 4:10 range ( nor sure what the Danas had for gear). Stock, the 3 two barrels badly needed some “tuning” but the real “kicker” here is the SRT8 weighs about 4100 -4200 lbs at least and the 70 with a 340 was probably around 3400-3600 lbs. That missing 500-600 lbs is like 100 hp right there. That and the guy who ran the SRT8 in the first four races bogged, and didn’t know how to shift. ( guy in the 70 missed banging 2nd or 3rd there once too).

   9. Probably the SRT8 was running street tires as well so the “bogging” was probably his car running up against the traction control. I also didn’t see a burnout from the new one. Either way, a stock ’70 340 even with a 6 pack has less than half the net hp of the SRT8 so the 500 lbs or so weight difference is probably not that significant.

   10. Does anyone actually believe that a stock six pack TA would run a 12 flat? Max wedge cars did not run that. Good grief

   11. FYI folks, 1970 Challenger 340 six pack performance specs, 0-60 mph 7.0 secs, quarter mile 15.2 seconds. A modern stock Challenger SRT8 runs high 11s to low 12s.

9. That 340 motor is one bad ass small block. I had a buddy that had a 71 cuda 340, 4 bbl, he put some big tube hooker headers and electronic ignition, it was really fast.

   1. But they won’t turn 11s. Stock. I’ve seen too many run yes their bad ass not that bad ass stock.

   2. I had a friend that worked at a high performance shop. He told me that the 340 motor was a great motor, modified to make good power.

   3. 340 was chosen for T/A for a reason

10. Gear ratio, Along with some other Mods.
    If I remember the TA dipped into the 11s on a pass.
    Far from box 1970 stock

11. I’ll take the old hands down!

12. That’s what muscle cars were all about.

13. COOL

14. My money is on the new Hemi

15. There is no way in h— that a stock 340 6 pac will turn in the 11s in the quarter. So what was fair about this race. Oh I believe the srt8:was stock but not the 340. Let’s compare apples to apples ok!

    1. And what rear gears in each car ?

    2. Put it up against a 440 six pack Cuda!

    3. Looks like the driver in the SRT8 laid-back

    4. Thank six pack is not stock!! Ray Charles could see that!!

    5. In that car the 6 pk was stock

    6. I know the 6 pack came from the factory , iam saying it’s had some serious tuning on top of.

    7. The T/A 340 was far from stock. a reinforced 4 bolt main block, 10.5 pistons, 1050 cfm carbs, were just some of the stock upgrades. They only made around 2200 of them tho.

16. Old!

17. So the old guy still has it….

18. jeff j

19. New wins it

20. A 340 six pack? The new one will win

21. New old was a boat anchor compared to today’s

22. You must be kidding. The old one wouldn’t even win with a worked 426 Hemi in it.

23. Old school

24. I seen a 340 Carter thermal qued 4 brl 4spd that made pretzels out of driveshafts when it wasn’t snapping the yoke on the rear end. Left front always left the ground and it owned the quarter mile @ 109-112 mph

25. I didn’t know there was a 340 six pack. I thought they were all 440.

    1. Na, 340’s were small blocks

    2. 340s. Are Badass.

    3. yeah the T/A quite rare 70-71

26. Awesome

27. Bullshit ! My grandma must be driving the srt8

28. My 3.7 mustang will do 14 in a quarter! That srt8 must need a driver mod. If not then that’s a really unimpressive car lol

29. Somebody needs to learn to shift.

30. Sweet!!

31. They need two drivers for sure

32. So they cost that money and suck for speed.

33. Put the 340 six pack up against the demon!!

34. Guys, if you’ve ever been in or driven a 70 Challenger with a fresh 340 – you would not doubt this video for a minute! I knew that new sh** couldn’t beat a 340, Haha! What a slug… too bad

    1. Amen to that people who think differently are to young and or obviously know nothing about a real 340 they are bad to the bone

35. So the old kicked total ass great job

36. Allyson Barbay

    1. Are you seeing the comments though?

37. Go back and ck the et 112. For the 70 that’s a bought wright

38. Ummmm …yeah. No. I like the old school car better,but that 340 was NOT stock,& the new one was

39. the old scholl wins!!!!!!!!

40. Old hands down

41. Sounds like we have a bunch of wet behind the ears that don’t know shit obviously

42. R/T =340 …. Not a SRT…. Not a Equal Match Up

43. 3 Ducks smallblock singing that sweet song and could do this easy with just a bolt in cam

44. Some people all pretty gullible if they think a 340 Challenger will run in the 11’s.

    And even more gullible if they think the 6.1L 425hp SRT8 will only run mid 14’s. Heck a V-6 Challenger will run upper 14’s.

    My ’15 R/T Plus 375hp will run 13.54sec in the 1/4 mile with Nickelback playing through the sound system via Bluetooth from Pandora on my iPhone.

    1. 😂😂😂 nope your v6 in a brick shithouse will do no such think, stop reading off the 1/8 mile time sheet.

    2. Jarl Nieminen My wife had a ’15 V-6 Challenger and it run the 1/4 mile in the upper 14 second range.

       It’s obvious you’ve never driven an old muscle car or a new one either.

    3. Jarl Nieminen Here’s my ’15 R/T Plus Hemi w/ 6-speed stick.

    4. Jarl Nieminen Here’s one of my Spyder GT.

       414 cubic inch stroker 351W 525hp@6,300RPM’s.

    5. anecdotal mate…2 tonne v6 does not do 14sec quarter

    6. it’s obvious you have some nice pictures but are a bullshit artist.

    7. Jarl Nieminen Holy crap dude! Have you ever owned a muscle car?

    8. Jarl Nieminen Apparently not. Your profile says you live in Australia.

    9. Jarl Nieminen Driving the Spyder.

    10. Test drive. Running a little rich and needing more timing.

45. But depends if they know how to drive it right

46. Old is better

47. The 340 was the best small block ever, period.

48. The 340cc

49. Here’s a thought folks in 1970 a 340 six pack had J heads 11.00 to 1 compression ratio a factory purple stripe cam in the 4 speed cars ans a 3.90 or 4.11 gear ratio and with a power tune and jetting the carbs and a real good driver they would run in the 11s with good headers and exaust! They were no joke I had a 1971 Demon 340 4 speed that was just wicked

    1. I agree the 340 was the best small block out there you could do so much to those motors

    2. Yes Sir after lots of modifications my 71 Demon ran 11.80s and 11.90s all motor

50. Old is gold

51. The old six pack win again

52. Some of those 340 swingers ran really strong back in the day

53. I really don’t think the Challenger had a driver that knew what he was doing…

54. Anyone notice the srt does 104 every time??

55. Old Challenger

56. 340

57. My dart had a 340 6 pac
    And it was a monster
    Good luck to anyone

58. Love old school

59. Well you are comparing a computer to American Muscle…..so?

60. This is why I like the 340s

61. Bs that SRT 8 would have smoke that old charger everytime. Put some real drivers in those cars

    1. The hesitation of the new one at the start every time. Like they were sandbagging

62. Old school rules…win or loose

63. The (Original) challenger hammered the new one all day long .. old is gold

64. Seth Mayabb

65. Srt8

66. That isn’t a stock 340. I had 70 Challenger with a 340 four barrel that would only run at best 14 flat in the quarter.

67. New one is faster. Old one will last longer

68. The old one

69. That depends on the driver

Comments are closed.