Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Dodge Challenger 2008 and Later
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I wish DCX hadn't done such a carbon copy clone to the '70 Challenger. I would have appreciated some forward styling to go along with a design that paid it's respect to the original. Remember the concept Charger of 5 years ago ?, that's what I'm talking about, it was undeniably a Charger, yet it was fully modern in every way, it took Dodge forward, not backwards. Where is that innovative design on the Challenger ?
I agree with this guy brysok, fast forward to '09, and the sheet metal styling on Challenger will be 39 years old. For some, that's 100% what they will want, for others, it's not. Whatever you like, I'm sure there are enough mature Mopar fans out there to keep Challenger alive for at least 4 years, just like the original. Score one for Dodge.
On the other hand, a lot of us think GM leapt ahead in the design of the Camaro Concept. It's undeniably a Camaro, but it's not a carbon copy of a '69 Camaro, and we wouldn't want it to be either. The Camaro has forward styling themes that will still be fresh when this car debuts in 3 years. It sets a new direction for Chevy that hopefully will find it's way into other cars too,
such as the Impala, Monte Carlo and Malibu.
The Camaro Concept breaks new ground for GM and for the pony car market, if GM does this right and builds it without screwing it up !
I can't call this Camaro Concept car "retro" in the same vein as a Mini Cooper, New Beetle, Ram pick-up, or the Challenger. For me, it simply does not fit into that mold. The Camaro already has 35 years of muscle car history under it's belt, so it doesn't need a pure retro design to succeed.
I agree with you, it's a no brainer that both cars will be fully modern underneath and on the inside, and they will both help to create a revival of a modern day muscle car era.
But for me the Camaro Concept is a quantum leap forward in pony car design, better than both the icon's Mustang and Challenger. The Camaro Concept is positioned to compete better in the year 2009 than the Challenger is. And we all know the Mustang will be freshened by then too !
If the Challenger were on the street right now, today, it's a grand slam home run. Three more years from now without any advances to the design, it's a single, double at best.
I can agree that an enthusiast would be disappointed that these cars do not have a rear drive platform, but I'd hardly refer to them as a failed effort.
We can't just throw comments like this as if they're fact...or as if you personally know something that the rest of us don't. Unless your magic 8-ball told you something, you're comment is all just speculation. You are completely untitled to your opinion and I appreciate hearing it but the Challenger isn't a failure because you don't like it, or because it's retro. I can't remember a car design that appealed to absolutely everyone. There will always be critics, it will do fine.
Then there is the rest of the car, which as you said, is perfect. ;-)
Best Regards,
Shipo
That sounds like pure speculation to me..... :P
----------------------------------
I like the Challenger design. I think it captures the spirit of the old Challenger the same way the Mustang does. My concern is this...will it be too big, too heavy and too expensive? I'd much rather see a 3200lb Challenger with 300hp for 25k than a 3800lb Challenger with 400hp for 35k.
Read between the lines of your own words. Do you think a car company strives to produce a car that would be the equivalent of a "single"...or "double" at best? Obviously not. In those terms, any product mereley being compared to a single or double would not be profitable business...what would you call it...a success?? It's not all in what you say, more as how you say it.
And twain yea I agree with you completely, I'd like to see a smaller car that maybe didn't have to rely on such a large displacement engine. But with that said the SRT8's both Charger an 300C weigh the same and perform amazingly. I hope they do find a way to shave off weight here and there, but I don't think it'd be the end of the world if the Challenger emulated the performance of the SRT8's. I'm just stoked about it either way.
Well, they were not exactally smallish cars back then either.
I don't know if anyone caught the Chicago Auto Show on WGN last night, but the Camaro and Challenger were the stars of the show. They definately generated more buzz than anything else on the floor.
Seems to me American's could fall in love with American cars all over again if these two machines are any indication of where we're going.
'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
No, I'm merely trying to say that it's too bad Challenger isn't available right now, 'cause if it was I don't think DCX could build enough of 'em. Three more years will give consumers an all new Camaro and a freshened up Mustang to choose from too. Just more in the mix for muscle car crazy American's to choose from, that's all.
Have a nice day !
For me, I'm still leaning towards the Challenger. To me it just has that "look", that "feel". But as many said, the real determinates will be:
1. Will it really make it to production (from Dodge's past record, most likely it will)
2. What will / won't make it to production or will be changed and make it horrible in some way
3. Price / options
4. Dreaded dealer markup -
That Caliber SRT-8 was getting some looks as well, mostly for the hp rating. Not a bad little run about. The rest of the show was a bore to me.
Reason I ask is because the company I work for has Impalas as the mainstay fleet car, and Venture/whatever the new van is as people/box hauler throughout the NA locations. Our HQ here just got an '06, so looks as though we'll be rotating those in.
FORD:::
the old new ponies are the best looking Cars on the Road again. Great Job Ford :shades:
The New Challenger looks good, as does the Camaro. Just lower those doors if possible. The whole cars now-a-days look too bulky. And one note of caution, or is this another note on the same line, beware of the Challenger being too retro, as in replica, plastic car reproduction look.
One more thought. What would have happened if people in 1970 did opt to buy a 1935 styled car? Now that would have seemed strange. That said, the mid-60's thru earliest 70's cars did stand out as real classics with enduring graceful lines which do stand the test of time.
Loren
Brad
Here's one for sale (1970 Challenger R/T) -- heck they'll even deliver it for slightly over $200K:
http://www.bibliauto.com/store/proddetail.php?prod=Challenger70&cat=173
Also, the recent Barret-Jackson auction had a couple...
http://www.barrett-jackson.com/auctionresults/common/collector.asp
If DCX management intends to insult true Mopar enthusiasts by serving an Egg McMuffin again, after showing us a Sirloin Steak, they can keep it.
Regardless, I think its beautiful even if they called it a Meadowbrook!
Regards,
Dusty
----------------------------------------
The Cuda was always better looking than the Challenger anyway. But Plymouth is gone now and that was 35 years ago so maybe no one will notice.
This is a good thing, because they were great in a straight line, but handled like a tank in the corners and on back roads. In snow, well take a bus to where ever you wanted to go to get there.
If Dodge builds it, then they will sell. With the technology of to day you should have a car that not only will go fast but handle and ride much much better then in the 70's. The gas mileage should be double of what we got back then.
Yes i had one in 1970 and that Cuda only got 10 miles to the gallon on the hiway and lucky to get 4 when you were pushing it hard. It was a sleeper with 340 in a black stripe down the back quarter panel, but that orange body had a 440 with the six pack, four speed and 4.11 gears.
Sure wish i still had it to sell on e-bay so i could afford to buy the new one when it comes out.
Not quite. I had a 1970 Challenger, my best friend had a 1970 Barracuda, and other than the two ends, the Challenger had a 2 inch longer wheel base (110" vs. 108") and was 4.6 inches longer overall (191.3" vs. 186.7"). Also note that the accent line on the side of the Challenger was an "S" curve (which by the way is also on the "New" Challenger) while the line on the Barracuda was straight down the side. IIRC, the only place where you would really notice the difference in the length (unless they were parked side by side) was in the rear seat foot well.
Best Regards,
Shipo
Wish they would make a smaller and lighter Challenger, and a new sedan and coupe car on a platform size of say a BMW3 at around 3,000#. And give the Challenger the 3.5V6, which I assume they will. Would be a cool car for around $21K, give or take.
Loren
2006 Jetta (L * W * H): 179.3 x 70.1 x 57.4
2006 Jetta (Weight 6-Sp): 3,230
2006 Jetta (Engine): 150 HP 2.5 liter I5
So, I'm afraid that you can wish all you want for a 250 HP, 3,000 pound, $21,000 Challenger, but it ain't gonna happen. Sorry about that.
Best Regards,
Shipo
The V8 Mustang is around 3,500#, and I am sure it is not state of the art for weight reduction. Chrysler should be able to shed some pounds when producing performance, more sporty cars. Better gas mileage and speed.
Loren
2) I may or may not get a six cylinder. Since they have a 250HP one at Chrysler, it would make a good base engine. They can also offer a V8.
3) Balance before HP rules in handling. The closer to 50/50 weight distribution the better. The 300 is a job well done. For gas mileage, cost, and to sell more cars, I say make it smaller and more agile than the Charger. Standard wheels as 16" and 18" to wagon wheels, if ya need'em as optional sizes, and for the V8 macho cars.
4) With parking spaces and roads, so narrow, do we really need a 78.6" wide car - no!
5) The New Stang is getting fat too. It is already 73.8" in width now, and 3,373# on the scale in V6 form. Not a bad car and something to consider. Personally, I will wait for the bugs to be worked out, or would just get a nice 2004 GT, which are selling at a good price now. New Stangs, especially the GT is starting to suffer price creep. I guess the demand is still high. But really, some GTs selling for $30K and the Saleen for $47K - really now, is the world crazy?
It seems the Chrysler 300 luxury mobile is reasonably priced at $28K for the Touring Edition. No reason the Challenger can not come out in a base form for those wanting a lean and fun machine without paying the big bucks. Base $21k or less and fancier ones in the $25K or more. And those in need of the Hemi, which would be fun for straight-away speed, they could make a version under $30K.
Loren
:shades: Loren
This concept car looks so good, true to the original yet updated in technology.
Chrysler, please, just get it into production as soon as possible. I am having trouble concentrating on work, I can't wait! And, make enough to go around, there's going to be a lot of takers!