[Driver72]

European fuels are wonderful compared to US fuels. Try to remember the 199mph is what FCA said was a two way average into the wind and with the wind on their test track. Think of it as a minimum FCA would publish. Like 707 hp. Chrysler previously manufactured "C" body police cars that were guaranteed to go 150mph in "slick top" versions. In 1969-1972.
Some went faster, but none slower. In that context, and considering there could be a + or - 10 per cent manufacturing tolerance in power output and resultant top speed, it is within the realm of possibility, that the car tested was the best of the best and could have been capable of in excess of 199 + 19.9 mph. 214.4 is believable. Not likely in every case, but not unrealistic.
Then again, it is late, I am old, and haven't had my ice cream yet tonight.....

Yup, the European gas is better (higher octane) that was one of the reasons I said that.
Also, there is absolutely no way there would be a +/- 10 percent manufacturing tolerance in power output.
That would mean there could be 70 hp differences between cars. I don't think that would be the case in the 60's engines much less the computer spec'd and balanced engines of today.
Maybe a 10-12 hp variance, none of which could be much less than 707 hp, all can be more.
I think the Hellcat engine is certified for 714 hp, some may make 720 and some as low as 705.

As for the top speed, the 199 mph FCA states is in fact a two way average, you are correct.
With a tail wind, it was probably 202 mph, and FCA may not have had a road long enough to gather a few extra mph, so they played it safe and called it 199.

If they had a strong running Hellcat with 10-12 extra ponies than most, give her Europe's higher octane pump gas, drive in the direction of the wind, and if that happens to be the same direction that the road is running downhill, then maybe 214 is possible. It would take a while (probably an extra 2 miles) to get that last 15 mph out of her though.

 

[Driver72]

Hellcat cannot go 214. I don't believe it, miss communication maybe, typo - 204, not 214.

It's possible with high octane gas, a tailwind, and a downhill slope I'm sure.

 

[Driver72]

I gotta admit, those numbers are impressive, but I too feel something is not right.

0-186 mph in 22.9 seconds??

Car and Driver tested the Charger Hellcat in absolutely perfectly cool weather with a great DA, and did
0-170 in 23.1 seconds.

I don't see how in Europe they could get the Hellcat to go from a standstill to 186 mph (16 mph faster) in .2 seconds LESS time than the 0-170 mph here. That extra 16 mph would take about an extra 8 seconds. That 0-186 mph time should be right around 30.5+ seconds.
Consider, in Car and Driver's test it took the Hellcat they tested 7.3 seconds to go from 150 to 170 mph (20 mph increase). Going that extra 16 mph from 170 to 186 would easily therefore take 8 seconds, since the faster you go, the slower it will accelerate.

And like others have said, for the acceleration of those supercars to drop off faster than the Hellcat from 124 to 186 mph, when many of them have equal or better power outputs, equal or less weight, and equal or better aerodynamics?

I love the Hellcat and it's a beast for the money, but it's no light weight and it's not the best aerodynamically.

Either that Hellcat has a little special sauce in it, or the supercars in Italy are detuned compared to the supercars here.
Physics just can't be magically overcome. Many of those supercars have better power to weight ratios and better aerodynamics, so unless they ALL have super tall higher gears compared to the Hellcat, I'd need to see some real video proof to believe it. Though I'd be thrilled if it was true. LOL