Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Dodge Charger 2006+

1246719

Comments

  • fastback1966fastback1966 Member Posts: 4
    Hey thanks. Another big thing that the new Chargers will lack is the coolness aspect.

     

    When driving my old Chargers people love them, I get lots of stares, thumbs up, smiles, rubbernecking, etc. That is one of the most fun things about driving the old Charger, no matter what kind of horsepower it has, even if it has a 318.

     

    The new Charger will not generate this kind of interest from people when you drive it around because it is not interesting. The design style is boring, and it looks like a grocery getter.

     

    Again, Dodge was way off the mark with the styling, as I have shown. And again, I hope the car goes down in flames, and a few responsible people get fired for it.
  • ambullambull Member Posts: 255
    I agree with a lot of what has been said, with a few exceptions.

    1) Hidden headlights are passe (witness the new Corvette)

    2) There is some resemblance to the 66 in the side and 3/4 rear views.

    3) 2-doors are just not selling enough to justify a new model.

    4) They shouldn't have called this car Charger. The best name is probably Intrepid, since it is not really a retro design.
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    " 4) They shouldn't have called this car Charger. The best name is probably Intrepid, since it is not really a retro design. "

    That would NOT be fair the the Intrepid, which was really a slick looking design. Front, side and behind, all views looked much more sporty in the Intrepid design in comparison to the Charger / 300. As for the '66 Charger, my bet is that the last years of the Charger are what most people consider as the best style wise and thus would like to see once again in some retro/modern version. I liked the Corvette with the hidden lights, and find it attractive on most sports cars. On larger cars, it can work, but it would look rather silly on a truck front like the new Charger will have.
  • dustykdustyk Member Posts: 2,926
    "Magnum" was used on a number of big-block wedge Mopar motors in the sixties and seventies (383-440). It was also a Dodge car model in the seventies sharing the same platform as the Chrysler Cordoba.

     

    In '63-66 there was a 361 Commando in the Dodge 880 and Polara series. I think there was a 383 Commando in '61-62 Dodge and Plymouth cars.

     

    Dusty
  • xmf314xmf314 Member Posts: 154
    After seeing the Charger at the Los Angeles auto show, it is evident to me that that sucker is not going to sell on styling - it is a homely beast. However, I think the Hemi model would make a great police car, and I'm sure the Dodge boys have had the same thoughts.

     

    I've read that DCX was considering introducing a police package for the Magnum. However, I have sat in a couple of Magnums and the rear visibility appears to be compromised because of the pinched rear windows. The boys in blue need a clear 360 degree view while watching for evildoers, and the Charger provides this better than the Magnum.

     

    As well as police package Magnums, I expect there will also be taxi packages. I think this vehicle could put a big dent in Crown Victoria sales in these two areas.
  • stratochargerstratocharger Member Posts: 1
    Expect to see these supposed 4 door Muscle Cars in fleets as dodge announced the small six cylinder will be avail for fleet sales in the ..."Magnum Sedan".

     I guess they will have to sell them as taxis since the car replaces the front wheel drive Intrepid, and most folks seem to think it's ugly.

     Maybe the fleet car will be called Coronet, as to not further drag the Charger name through the mud.
  • jtrikjtrik Member Posts: 11
    I love the old styling, but guys at the risk of being flamed...I love the new one too. Other than the obvious 4 doors and the front fascia, the silhouette is darn close. I for one would seriously purchase this Charger. The side by side comparison actually kinda really peaked my interest...so thanks for that.

    And just to let you guys know, I'm 39, own my business, drive a 5 series BMW. But my other auto is a 66 New Yorker with a 440...love that beast, just don't want to drive my family in it... ;-)
  • jimhemijimhemi Member Posts: 223
    Just call it a Polara and end all arguments. This is not a Charger. It never will be. Look at the pics for comparison's sake. A 4 door Charger is like a 4 door Mustang or Vette, it doesn't make sense. For those that say "There is no market for a 2 door, or 2 doors just don't sell", has anyone seen the 2 door sales for the BMW's and Mercedes or how there is a waiting list for the 05 Mustang? Thought 2 doors don't sell? Then we all must be crazy.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,147
    While all comments about this vehicle, negative & postive are welcome, you might find more comrades in the Daimler's abuse of the Charger legacy discussion. We've kind of beat the heck out of that conversation in here, but the other topic seems custom-design for it.

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • crackcheckercrackchecker Member Posts: 32
    I have not looked into it very well. Is it front wheel drive or rear wheel drive?

     

    I have to agree that the looks are nothing special until you invision aftermarket accessories. If you were to play around with the wheel/tire packages availaible and lower the stance a little it might just be a looker.
  • rik4rik4 Member Posts: 90
    since 2 drs do not sell well. Even though they spent 100 millions to produce the viper that sells in very low volume. Maybe they should add two more doors and have a 6 dr or 8 dr car. just think of all the familys with 20 kids that would love a 6 dr car. THe main reason 2 dr cars have not sold well is the god awful design of the 2 dr cars. There was a time when all the hot cars were 2 dr. Then they decided to have cookie cutter cars that you need a magnifying glass to tell the difference and that was the end of the 2 dr and most of the american brand market. If you design a decent if not hot 2 dr it will outsell all other brands . But if you build a lame 2 dr you will reap what you sow. The 2 dr mini seems to sell well but it was a big mistake should have been 4 drs and it would have really sold. Design and price sell cars as well as reliabilty and performance. Put it all together and you have a winner just ask Bill ford. Try and get a GT mustang not too easy and you will not get much if any of a discount. NOw the new charger will have rebates within 3 months.
  • rik4rik4 Member Posts: 90
    I think the new dodge should be called cowabunga. It looks like the flubadub machine from howdy dowdy so why not give it a howdy name. Seems like the sex crazed drug dealing rappers love it so call it the cowabunga dude. It is great that chrysler has decided to cater to the rap group. you should be able to pick one up a drug seized auction cheap. so why pay list just wait. hehehe.
  • andyman73andyman73 Member Posts: 322
    with real bullet holes, not those decal ones! LOL
  • gsemikegsemike Member Posts: 2,272
    Since this car is just a rebadged 300, DC does not have the development costs of a completely new car to recover with the Charger. Even though the sales do not come close to that of their sedan bethren, you do see enough 2 door Accords and Camry Solaras (even though the Solara is about the ugliest thing on the road). It must be profitable to offers these cars or Honda and Toyota would not bring them back every year. You even see 2 door Grand Prix's and butt-ugly Monte Carloes.

     

    The 4 door Charger is just going to canabalize sales from the 300 and Magnum. Since it will probably be a little cheaper than the 300, it may pull in some buyers that otherwise would have gone elsewhere but most buyers will be deciding between the bare bones bruiser that is the Charger, the pimp psuedo-luxury of the 300 or the utility of the Magnum.

     

    You don't make money be cannibalizing your own sales, you make money by expanding your market. If this car were a 2 door, they could go after the NASCAR dads and secretaries that are buying the above mentioned coupes. There has to be at least a couple hundren thousand people left that equate two door with sporty.It would expand their product line and customer base.
  • mr_hemimr_hemi Member Posts: 4
    One aspect of the new Charger has with the 1966 Dodge Charger is that it is a derivative of another body style AND that it is VERY EASY to tell. The 1966 was considered a fastback Coronet and sales were poor. The 1964-1/2 Barracuda looked like a Valiant with the fastback stuck on. Sales were poor. Ford by contrast totally reskinned the Falcon and had a huge hit. Same car underneath and the Barracuda was probably a better car, but didn't sell anywhere close to the Mustang. I think DCX will have this in common with the Old Chrysler Corporation. The NEW Chrysler seems to thrive on the love it or hate it designs. I think this group falls into the HATE IT category, or at least RENAME IT.
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    300 and Magnum designs overall (and, I assume, the new Charger), I wish that the window openings were taller...they seem squashed, and they reduce visibility IMO...I had a loaner Magnum last week while they repaired my Ram 1500, the car performed well, very comfortable seating, hugged the road very well, but, aside from the Magnum sloping roof that makes one feel claustrophobic, the windows seem to close in on you, and side visibility, both left and right, are diminished... why can't the windows be taller, or, conversely, why are the inside door sills made much higher than any other car I have been in???...instead of just resting my left arm on the door/window sill, I actually have to raise it up to an uncomfortable position, reducing bllod flow and increasing nerve pinching, just to place it on the sill...that is the only poor design but it is so major it would prevent me from buying one of those cars until they redesigned the window design...
  • gsemikegsemike Member Posts: 2,272
    You are 110% right. I checked out the Magnum at a show and although I think it's pretty cool, I said no way after sitting in it for about a minute. There is no way that I'd own and drive this car everyday in an urban setting. In addition to the slits it has for windows, the rear pillars are about two feet wide. You can't see anything out of it. I guess that they want that chopped look to recall the hotrods from the 50s, but it's not practical.

     

    As far as DCX recycling one platform, do you remember how many versions of the K Car were running around in the early 80s? I think that platform accounted for almost all of their passenger cars and even was closely related to the original mini-vans. Sometimes people just can't learn from their mistakes.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,891
    Is there any big volume manufacturer that does NOT recycle a platform? If it weren't for that, vehicles would be much more expensive than they already are.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • gsemikegsemike Member Posts: 2,272
    Everybody recycles platforms, but when a manufacturer tries to build an entire line out of one platform, or fails to give the cars distinct personalities, it's a problem. It makes the product line seem stales fast.

     

    Nissan does a good job with the Alt, Max and Murano all based on the same platform but with each car seeming different. The 300, Magnum and Charger all seem like different versions of the same car. Again, how old did the K-car platform get when there were 20 or so versions of it?
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,891
    ok, i can understand your point a little better, but I do want to point out that the 300 and Magnum are the same car, yes, but one is a wagon and the other a sedan. So, to me, that is no different than another manufacturer who does the same thing, but just doesn't rename it. In other words, your complaint wouldn't exist if it was a 300 sedan and 300 wagon, you see? So, really, they are doing nothing different than when the Accord was available as a sedan, wagon, and coupe, or any BMW, for that matter. The only difference is that Chrysler is giving them different names and selling them through different dealerships. Now, that's NOT to say they won't make a 300 wagon and really screw my whole explanation up. ;)

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "...Now, that's NOT to say they won't make a 300 wagon and really screw my whole explanation up. ;)"

     

    Errr, it seems that they already do, it's just that they don't sell it here.

     

    Check out this link: Chrysler 300C Touring

     

    Best Regards,

    Shipo
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,891
    i'm taking a guess here, but that's because Dodge only sells the Viper there, no? So its still just the one wagon offering.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • gsemikegsemike Member Posts: 2,272
    "In other words, your complaint wouldn't exist if it was a 300 sedan and 300 wagon, you see? So, really, they are doing nothing different than when the Accord was available as a sedan, wagon, and coupe, or any BMW, for that matter."

     

    Ummmm... where is the coupe? We've all been ranting here for weeks about how the Charger should be a 2 door. The Charger and 300 are about as distinctive from one another as the Ford Granada and Mercury Monarch.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,891
    the car isn't here yet, so i can't help ya with that. I'm not much for arguing about what a car might be. Production vehicles have been known to change up till the 11th hour.

     

    Hey, I'd like to have the Accord Wagon back. We can't have everything we want.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • happy_go_luckyhappy_go_lucky Member Posts: 5
    To me, Chrysler has laid a serious egg with the Charger in its current style. Daimler Chrysler is going to be lucky if the Charger makes it past 2 years without some major body redesign.

    Historically, Chrysler has always come out with good looking cars; radical designs that people liked; Stealth, Intrepid, Concorde, LHS, Sebring, 300M, Viper, etc... For a company with a history of innovate styling, the Charger is a big disappointment.

     

    Unless the Charger is going to be $5000 less than the a comparable 300, the only reason I could see anyone buying a Charger is if it has a HEMI but even then I'd still pick a 300 Touring over the Charger. The 300 just looks better.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,891
    that's why not everyone drives the same car. Not everyone has the same taste.

     

    I just got my Autoweek last night with the Charger in it. I think it looks pretty good. The retro rear fenders are an interesting touch.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • turboshadowturboshadow Member Posts: 338
    ...it doesn't look too much like that horrible Super8 Hemi concept (although you can see hints of it).

     

    Turboshadow
  • coronet68coronet68 Member Posts: 18
    Kirstie - Any update on availability of a link to the transcript from Burke Brown discussion yet?
  • dustykdustyk Member Posts: 2,926
    Recycling a platform is not a bad idea. All manufacturers do it...heck, GM's probably recycled more platforms than any two or three manufacturers combined. Having completely different platforms for sister/brother cars doesn't make economic sense. And having three different platforms in the same market segment doesn't make economic sense, especially for a company the size of Chrysler.

     

    And like someone else just said, if the car in question had a name other than "Charger" I don't think we'd be hearing complaints.

     

    Dusty
  • gsemikegsemike Member Posts: 2,272
    It's not like GM is knocking down the fences with distinctive auto designs. As a matter of fact, it's their recycling that going to kill Saab.

     

    Every manufacturer recycles platforms. It makes no econimic or engineering sense not to, but the cars can still have distinct personalities which the 300, Magnum and Charger do not.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,147
    Good question - I just asked about it and I'll let you know as soon as I get a response.

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,147

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • dustykdustyk Member Posts: 2,926
    I'm not sure how you define "personalities," but there is a distinct difference between the Magnum and the Charger and/or Chrysler 300. They may be on the same platform, but the Magnum is unique with it's psuedo-stationwagon look.

     

    I agree that the Charger and 300 have little distinction. But Dodge Division probably wants a straight sedan that's built off that platform. Since 300 production is limited and Dodge needs something to build in a factory that no longer builds a phased-out model. What Chrysler is doing with Charger is not abnormal in the auto business. I would speculate that Chrysler thinks they can increase market share in this segment with a Charger that's akin to the 300. I think they may be right since, at least around here, 300s are is high demand and short supply.

     

    Dusty
  • m1miatam1miata Member Posts: 4,551
    Thanks for posting the Chat Transcript. I found this one line quote entertaining:

    BoomCharger asks: I'm liking the idea of a real 'sports sedan' coming onto the market rather than an old-dude car. Is the Charger too sporty for a guy in his 40's?

     

    Now that is funny. Too sporty? Try too bland. I am heading toward 52 years of age, and whould not consider the images of the Charger as anything sporty. Not saying that it does not have what it takes to satisfy people wanting something that is a bit more sporty than a checker car, and goes very fast. I recall all the cars that had to be shaped like a rectangle back in 1965, so maybe square is in... again. The 300M or an Intrepid are closer to sporty in my eyes. I'll get an eye exam soon!
  • gsemikegsemike Member Posts: 2,272
    I don't think that it's whining, but rather rueing an opportunity lost. As Charger fans, it is acceptable to hope that the name be affixed to a special car rather than a Magnum sedan/300 clone.

     

    If this car was closer to the orginal concept car, Charger traditionalists would be lining up to buy it, 4 doors and all. As a Magnum sedan, it's fine but as a Charger, it's a dissappointment.

     

    As far as recycling platforms, DCX managed to give the 300M, Intrepid and Concorde more unique personalities than the Charger/300C, Magnum. All three of those cars have virtually identical stances, dimensions and powertrains. Would it have been a bad idea to give one model windows that you could actually see out of?

     

    All three cars come from the same plant, so one more Charger on the lot will mean one less 300 on the lot across the street and besides, these cars are in no short supply in the NY area. Once they devalue the nameplate enough, they will make good cabs and cop cars.
  • turboshadowturboshadow Member Posts: 338
    "Once they devalue the nameplate enough, they will make good cabs and cop cars. "

     

    ..and good, cheap road scorchers on the used car market. <rubs hands gleefully> I can't wait to pick one up after they get a couple of years depreciation under their belt. Aftermarket parts ought to be readily available then, too.

     

    Turboshadow
  • gsemikegsemike Member Posts: 2,272
    That's a good point. Let's see if they've truly whipped their reliability demons. I could go for a year hemi 300C from Hertz for $19,500
  • jimhemijimhemi Member Posts: 223
    So now that Mother Mopar is building the SRT versions of the 300C and Magnum, we know that the Charger won't be to far off. What's the deal with the lack of a stick with 425 hp to play with? Does Chrysler really think that the automatics can hold up to the torque and power that will be coming through those slushboxes? A Charger with 425 horses and 425 ft lbs of torque and a computer controlled auto that changes the gears.(YAWN) The autostick is a joke and for those that say you can shift it manually with that you can, but when you hit the redline, the trans will automatically override you and upshift. Just goes to show that Chrysler is missing the boat again. Any of the true Mopar people here will know that the A508 that will be backing up the power from these 6.1 Hemis will not stand up and you'll be spending more time at the dealer getting the trans fixed then you will driving it. That is if the people that pay the $15k over sticker will actually drive these SRT beasts.

    Rumor is that Dodge will build a Challenger and possibly a Daytona(based on this Crapbox Charger) The Daytona is expected to be the SRT version of the Charger, Minus the Huge Wings and slanted nose. The Challenger is supposed to be a 2 door Stang chaser. Seeing is believing, after all the 99 Concept Charger was the car 99% of us in here wanted. Deiter comes aboard and gives us the bean-counter parts bin special dubbed Charger so we can only imagine what a Challenger may look like.
  • jimhemijimhemi Member Posts: 223
    Thanks!

    Anyone can read the infomercial that Burke Brown put on for us. I like some of the "lob ball" questions(Guest1, could it be Chrysler?)that just set the stage for answers that the corporation printed for him.

    Guest1 asks: I've always been concerned about how RWD vehicles handle in wet or snowy weather. How has Dodge improved the RWD technology to be safe in these driving conditions?

     

    Burke Brown: Today's Dodge Charger has ABS brakes, traction control, and electronic stability program all working together to make sure that the car stays in the track that the driver points it. Today's tire technology is also a part of the equation giving us very good wet and snow traction. Our near 50/50 weight distribution also contributes to the improved the handling, compared to the older cars that didn't have a lot of drive axle weight (think E body Cuda and Challenger).

                         OR This one

    Guest1 asks: I'm interested in the HEMI® V-8, but concerned about fuel economy. Have you had any success in increasing the gas mileage?

     

    Burke Brown: The HEMI® in the new Charger as well as the 300C and Magnum RT has our MDS system. We get a significant fuel economy improvement by shutting down 4 cylinders while cruising. In 40 milliseconds all eight are back firing. You can't tell it's happening except when buying fuel.

    I wish the banter from the rest of the guys could have been included in that, I think it was safe to say we all had a great time. Hope Brown's ego has heeled by now.
  • turboshadowturboshadow Member Posts: 338
    The transcripts were edited? I thought those questions and answers weren't very indicative of what I've been reading.

     

    Turboshadow
  • jimhemijimhemi Member Posts: 223
    Not edited Turbo, but they only have transcripts of the actual q&a with Burke Brown. I thought they would have had the whole convo from everyone in the room talking amongst themselves, basically the true Charger haters telling it like it is.
  • jae5jae5 Member Posts: 1,206
    I would by that in a heart-beat. No question!! That embodies the Charger and the 60s muscle-car era. Putting the Charger nameplate on the four-door is as bad as Chevy sticking SS-badges on everything or bringing it's great names back and sticking them on also-rans (Monte Carlo (2-dr Lumina), Impala (4-dr Lumina). Doggone shame.
  • rsx-sfanrsx-sfan Member Posts: 15
    No. I'm sorry I don't agree. I know that the Charger is a classic, but just because it's a four door doesn't mean it's a bad thing.
  • jimhemijimhemi Member Posts: 223
    I'm happy that you will buy one of these. You and many more like you probably will. I will await the SRT Magnum hitting the dealerships. I never thought I'd buy a wagon but Dodge made it cool and unique with its low roof and tiny windows. This Charger is not unique. It takes a Magnum and removes the hatch. Tweak the nose and you have yourself the homiligated rules special for NASCAR. This was one of the reasons they went with this instead of the 99 concept. The Biggest reason was cost.

    Sorry, but most of us agree that this car is not a Charger despite what Chrysler has called it and never will be a Charger. It will live in the back of our minds as the 80's "Chargers" and we will continue to forget about them. Just like the Mustang fans of today feel about the Mustangs of the late 70's, the followers of the Charger will not consider this a true Charger either.

    The SS stands for Super Sport. So it was not one model of a car but simply several kinds that received that option, similar to the R/T(Road and Track) of Dodge's glory to what they offer now as their RT options. The RT Durango, offered body clad bumpers, wheels and tires along with some suspension upgrades. RT and SS offer packages and are not the models. Suppose GM brings back the Firebird, Trans Am and Camaro with 4 doors?
  • rsx-sfanrsx-sfan Member Posts: 15
    I guess your right. I can't imagine seeing a Firebird and a Camaro with 4 doors. I just hope that Dodge will make a coupe. I also agree that R/T and SS have lost their meaning. I have a book on muscle cars and today's R/T and SS don't compare with the ones of the 60's and 70's. I just like having an open mind about design, which might not always be good.
  • jimhemijimhemi Member Posts: 223
    Chrysler has a real nice concept(please make this and don't screw up like the Charger concept) of the Firepower. http://www.chrysler.com/autoshow/index.html

    To me, if you look at this and picture it, this almost can be what a Modern Day Charger would have evolved into. If you look closely, the Firepower has the similar "Coke Bottle" shape of the 71. Long mean nose with a short tail. If Dodge built this for 40K and called it the Charger they would have a waiting list that criss crosses the country. 425 Horses would hurt the egos of Vette owners across the country.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,147
    Yup, one of our enthusiastic members has already started a discussion about the Firepower.

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • turboshadowturboshadow Member Posts: 338
    ..to a 69 Charger is the Crossfire. At least from the B-pillars forward ;-)

     

    Turboshadow
  • jimhemijimhemi Member Posts: 223
    Ahh, true Turbo and look at the 1971, trust me I own one and that's what I thought when I first saw it. See, this is what Dodge should have called the Charger. Burke Brown are you reading these?
  • jae5jae5 Member Posts: 1,206
    Umm, jimhemi, I think you may have misread or misunderstood my post. Did you read my post thoroughly? I was replying to your post #102, with the link to PHR's website with the Charger 2-door concepts (maybe you got confused because that post was a few weeks ago. Thought I should read before posting so I wouldn't be redundant.). I was definitely talking about THAT, NOT the 4-door. It is definitely NOT a Charger! I won't even bring up the Monaro-GTO (same thing happened to me as you on that site)!! In agreement with you people 100% in that this is NOT a Charger!

     

    In terms of the SS, you're right in a sense. Remember, the SS became its own model after 1962-3, and you couldn't get a 4-door SS after that, only 2-door. I currently own a 66 Impala SS hardtop. Anyway my point was SS, as with R/T, was always a step-up from a regular model. Yes, when first intro'd in '61 the SS was a trim-package and could be had on the 6-cyl all the way to the 348/409, but again it was something more. As with the Chevy II-Nova SS, Chevelle Malibu SS Z-16 and later 396/402, 454, Camaro SS, on and on. Just as with R/T, the name meant something more, mostly performance-wise. Hell, even if you want to get technical, the very first Chevy SS, the Zora Duntov Corvette SS races of the late '50s, again something more; hence the SS-badge always being tied to performance (as with k-code or FE-series Ford engines; L79, L88, LT-1, LS6 Chevy motors; GS and Type-T for Buicks; "Magnum" & "Max Wedge" for Dodge / Chrysler / Plymouth; W-codes for Olds and Ponchos (also Pontiac SD engines), etc.)

     

    As with the Dodge dudes and dudettes with this Charger I don't recognize the Impala, MC, and GTO as being "true". Or the Mustang II either, though they are what Iacocca wanted, something that took the Mustang from being a behemoth back to a secretary's car.
This discussion has been closed.