Dodge's claims for Durango 392 4.4 sec 0-60 / 12.9 sec quarter: TESTED

[RetiredFirefighter]

I know you 'Cat guys will probably yawn (LOL), but I was interested to see if I could match Dodge's NHRA claims for the Durango 392:

https://media.stellantisnorthamerica.com/newsrelease.do?id=25188



Using Performance Pages (verified accurate with my Dragy on previous runs) here's what I got:

Vehicle - ~20,000 miles / 100% bone stock
Outdoor Temperature - 57°F / 13.8°C
Fuel - 1/2 tank Sunoco Ultra 94 octane
Road Conditions - flat unprepped surface
Driving Mode - TRACK / Power Brake only
Location Elevation: ~ +350 ft

0-60


1/4 mile


Dodge's claims ... VERIFIED!

 

[vortecd]

Nice
I have seen 12.7 so yeah should be in the 12s

 

[RetiredFirefighter]

12.7? Wow. I thought I was rocking it with my 12.9! lol

During the Summer on 70 deg nights, my best quarter was a 13.1 run.

I might be able to get a 12.8 if I dropped to a 1/4 tank of fuel and had negative DA, but I 'm not sure about a 12.7 sec time.

 

[vortecd]

They got a 12.88 out of this one. Some people may take seat out and get the weights down but like you tested, for sure can go 12s.

 

[drag racer]

yep, 392 Durango ran 12.80's all day long at Firebird, hot lapping, in the usual terrible air, at Sick Death Week last fall, including a lot of extra cargo weight to boot

 

[DGatzby]

I got a 4.2 don’t know the conditions. But I can wait for a cool morning and go see if she has better and maybe even run a quarter for us. They are some impressive runners. I’m in it right now and love it.

 

[RetiredFirefighter]

Nice replies guys, thanks.

My 12.9 was on a road that I knew was level, as confirmed by a previous run I made there with my Dragy.

And once I verified the accuracy of Performance Pages with my Dragy, I seldom use the latter anymore as it usually needs to be charged up.

Lastly, I just want to say that I made a huge jump from being a long time Ford guy to getting the SRT 392. But unlike my tuned Explorer ST (ran 13.1's with the Ford Performance Tune) the 392 has three things the Ford didn't: 1) the sound 2) the looks 3) the reputation

Sure, the 392 cost me 10k more used than my ST was new, but it's in another league.

 

[Bobo]

Some of the most driving fun I and the wife have shared was slalom run at Radford in their 392 SRT Durangos. Man, those things can haul ass around a track too! She has wanted one ever since and still tells me to this day.

 

[DGatzby]

Nice replies guys, thanks.

My 12.9 was on a road that I knew was level, as confirmed by a previous run I made there with my Dragy.

And once I verified the accuracy of Performance Pages with my Dragy, I seldom use the latter anymore as it usually needs to be charged up.

Lastly, I just want to say that I made a huge jump from being a long time Ford guy to getting the SRT 392. But unlike my tuned Explorer ST (ran 13.1's with the Ford Performance Tune) the 392 has three things the Ford didn't: 1) the sound 2) the looks 3) the reputation

Sure, the 392 cost me 10k more used than my ST was new, but it's in another league.

#4 Torque

 

[RetiredFirefighter]

#4 Torque

The Explorer ST I had with the factory Ford Performance Tune netted me 430 hp @ 6,000 rpm and 467 lb-ft @ 3,500 rpm.

That's very close to my SRT 392's 475 hp @ 6000 rpm and 470 lb-ft @ 4300 rpm.

So a few things come to mind when comparing a bone stock SRT 392 to the Explorer ST with the factory Ford Performance Tune:

1) the Explorer ST weighed 500 lbs less than the SRT and therefore performed admirably achieving a 13.1 Dragy run
2) the Ford Performance Tune (if installed by a dealer) retained the 3/36 Bumper-To-Bumper warranty, but you lost the 5/60 Powertrain Warranty
3) with the SRT 392 not only did I retain the 5/60 Powertrain Warranty, I even purchased an extended factory warranty

 

[DGatzby]

That is why in my seat of the pants all of those turbo six’s feel like they just run out of power up high. I like a peak torque higher up in the range for real pulling like ours (from the factory) plus the HP number demonstrates there is no substitution for displacement in a non boosted engine.

I’m going to take my tuned REWB for an extended cruise today and enjoy the fall colors and have some real torque on tap. Going to take the Durango out some cool morning soon and see what it can rip in a quarter. She seems like a quick one.

 

[1971demon]

Some of the most driving fun I and the wife have shared was slalom run at Radford in their 392 SRT Durangos. Man, those things can haul ass around a track too! She has wanted one ever since and still tells me to this day.

Whadda waitin for,,,get her one..C'mon now...don't be a chump..

 

[Bobo]

Whadda waitin for,,,get her one..C'mon now...don't be a chump..

If Stellantis would get rid of Carlos and stabilize our future then maybe I would. I did recently look at a HCDD because the price difference right now is not that much.

 

[RetiredFirefighter]

My Durango 392 is the nuts, no question. At the same time, I'm impressed the 30k cheaper Explorer ST ran a 13.1 with the FORD factory tune.

But as I said, the big negative was that even the factory tune voided the 5/60 Powertrain Warranty.

 

[vortecd]

My Durango 392 is the nuts, no question. At the same time, I'm impressed the 30k cheaper Explorer ST ran a 13.1 with the FORD factory tune.

But as I said, the big negative was that even the factory tune voided the 5/60 Powertrain Warranty.

13.1 with upgraded Ford tune not bad. Have a few stock ST's here running around 14 flat. Easy to get more power when you have turbos. There is a fusion 2.7 ecoboost with a tune running mid 12s. There isn't a lot of power to be had with a tune on the 392

In the next year or 2 I will be looking at a used durango. I would like a 392 but for 10-15k less I can get an r/t. Have to see when I get closer to buying one