That marketing myth has pretty much been de-bunked. It would seem that Chrysler under rated the SRT-6. Not unusual for them. They did the same thing with the SRT-4, Cummins 5.9 TD, SRT-8 etc. I have done the math of plugging in 1/4 mile times, trap speeds, car weight, drag coefficient, head wind, humidity etc. These calculations gave me a Rear Wheel Horsepower figure of 285-295. Now figure a 20% drivetrain loss and the flywheel HP number is actually closer to 355-360 HP. The Crossfire actually usually runs BETTER than its MB counterparts in 0-60 and 1/4 times. I attribute that to it being a little lighter and more aerodynamic.

I seriously don't think that MB would have taken the time to re-engineer and test another set of cams for such a short production run. It would have cost too much money, and why mess with something that is already perfected and proven. Just doesn't make sense. RennTech is the basis of this "story" and I think they were just trying to sound smart by coming up with a speculative mechanical reason for the stated HP difference. I've heard that someone actually pulled the cams from both cars and there was no difference at all. I also don't think the ECU is all that different either. If it was that much difference I don't think the many MB tuner programs out there would transfer over the Crossfire as transparently as they do.