I’ve been reviewing trucks for a new YouTube channel called, appropriately, Truck Central. Recently I spent some time with the new Dodge Durango SRT. The FCA folks seem content to Hellcat everything, but the Durango hasn’t received that love just yet. What it has received, however is the 392. That would be the 6.4-liter HEMI and here it’s cranking out 475 horsepower and 470 pound-feet of torque.
That transforms the Durango into a three-row SUV capable of blasting from 0-60 miles per hour in just 4.9 seconds. You can rip through the quarter mile in about 12.9 seconds as well. It’s not cheap. It’s definitely loud.
It’s absolutely a hilarious hot-rod of a sport utility vehicle.
Truck Central: Dodge stuffs the 6.4L Hemi in the Durango SRTand it's real real good
By Jeff Glucker
Feb 15, 2018
By Jeff Glucker
Jeff Glucker is the co-founder and Executive Editor of Hooniverse.com. He’s often seen getting passed as he hustles a 1991 Mitsubishi Montero up the 405 Freeway. IG: @HooniverseJeff
William Byrd
This is an SUV I could actually enjoy. In a couple of years, as a used model, once it’s depreciated through the floor.
That is pretty much how I feel about every single new car on offer.
…but then I remember…”Hey, I have a brain. A 475 bhp SUV is a joke. I don’t need that. I need 35mpg, 20-year reliability, and tires that last 50k miles.”
At $64k it is a big ask over the $45k (?) RT
I’d never pay new money for a car like this. Hell, I’d never pay $64k for any car. That said, I think it’s a hugely different car than the RT, which sounds good but doesn’t really GO.
Yes apart from the outright cost it will be big $$$ in depreciation.
I bet a fraction of $20k would solve any go issues with the RT. If you can only have one vehicle then I can see how an SRT would be the right answer, otherwise a performance SUV is too much of a contradiction in terms IMO.
Yes the depreciation is a pretty fair disincentive not to buy new. The RT does 0-60 in 6.7 sec or so, which is not bad for a normal type of vehicle, and should have enough reserve for towing.
True, but the SRT drops a couple of seconds from the 0-60 and, more importantly to me, improves the handling significantly. I don’t put much value on outright acceleration, but my guess is that the SRT is more entertaining to drive, even if the R/T is the better value. Depreciation is the only thing that brings either of these vehicles down to my levels of affordability, and I’m hoping the SRT has a steeper fall.
Bless FCA. If you can’t make a good car, at least make an interesting one.
good hit!