Repair-It

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/196 ... est-review

This was from the era of factory-sent cherry testers. But even factoring that in, this was definitely a quick car. On bias plys. Then again, for all the huffing and puffing with what is regarded as one of the most powerful engines in the 60s, it's no faster than my CTS-V. 425hp was definitely under-rated, tough. It's a bit heavier than my CTS-V with a bit more power, and it trapped the same. But wait! That power was gross HP, not net. So yeah, it probably had almost 425hp net.

Apparently this time was an abnormality. A more realistic time which is inline with the other mags, would be a high 13 or low 14 @ 103 or so. Also, further reading in the comments reveals that the best performance you could realistically expect from a showroom floor vehicle, even in the late 60s, was high 13s @ 104, which means this Charger was pretty much at the top of its game.

The understeer sounds positively terrible though.