How bout that Charger??? [Archive]

TeeWJay426

03-23-2005, 09:14 AM

I may test drive one, just to see if it's any good. I have no intention of buying one, though. I'm sure it will be a quick, good handling ride. It's still ugly, and the name is just plain wrong. Plus, I have no use of a 4-door. If I'm gonna drop 35 large on a vehicle, it's gonna be EXACTLY what I want- NO compromises. This car falls way short on all accounts, plus, it's just plain ugly- it has all the style and sex appeal of a Volvo sedan with a truck grille. If a name was really just a name, DCX wouldn't be screwing up so many names for their heritage with what they've been tacking them on lately. "Corvette"- just a name to the Chevy faithfull? Hardly... calling this thing a Charger is just as insulting to Dodge fans from years past. And if you don't believe that, take a look at who actually LIKES and DEFENDS this car and the name.... they are almost all below the age of 35, and the ones that hate it for the most part are older than that. It all depends on what you remember and your frame of reference.... someone who didn't even pop out of his mommy until after the Omnirizon debacle wearing the name had already ceased production has no perspective or experience to make any kind of an educated judgement.

nickoman01

03-23-2005, 10:32 PM

ORIGINAL: jgralka
Here is my point about common sense. Just because it is old does not make it garbage. What year. or years of "old" chargers have you ridden in Nick? So you are also saying "old" Cuda convertibles are garbage as well? All muscle cars are garbage? Please how ignorant of a statement.

Joe

i don't know the year or care what year it is. all i know is that it isn't a piece of 80s crap. i haven't ridden in a Cuba convertible so i cant really say for sure, but i would assume so because it is old. i guess they all must be. perfect example: the ford mustang. you may think it is ignorant, but i do not, and I'm still trying to find what common sense has to do with anything.

TeeWJay426
If I'm gonna drop 35 large on a vehicle, it's gonna be EXACTLY what I want- NO compromises calling this thing a Charger is just as insulting to Dodge fans from years past. And if you don't believe that, take a look at who actually LIKES and DEFENDS this car and the name.... they are almost all below the age of 35, and the ones that hate it for the most part are older than that. It all depends on what you remember and your frame of reference

OK for starters i think the statement bout getting what you want is most important. this may not be the car for you, but don't ruin it for others who think it is. i give you credit though for no compromises. yes we the younger people like this car. we are the future though, so this just goes to show there is more of this to come, because we the future like it. I'm sorry. your last statement about what we remember and our frame of reference couldn't be more true. thats why you guys need to have patience with me. i don't comprehend whats so great about old cars, that makes you want new to be old. but thats why i believe in to each their own. when you find that car that is perfect for you, as long as it isn't a mustang, by all means go fro it. get what you want, but don't complain and ruin what i want and thats a 2006 charger r/t when i get the money.

BadStratRT

03-23-2005, 11:25 PM

i just cant justify the cost for a 4 door...its not that im opposed to a 4 door..i just dont need a big sedan....

SHAPman

03-24-2005, 03:45 AM

common sense n : ordinary good sense and judgment
According to Mr. Webster.

" don't know the year or care what year it is. all i know is that it isn't a piece of 80s crap. i haven't ridden in a Cuba convertible so i cant really say for sure, but i would assume so because it is old. i guess they all must be. perfect example: the ford mustang. you may think it is ignorant, but i do not, and I'm still trying to find what common sense has to do with anything."

My point is you make broad claims that have no basis. Which entails a lack of "common sense." Just because you don't like something does not make it garbage. For instance the new charger. I'm sure its a phenomenal vehicle. But I agree with teewjay, it has the visual stimulant of a Volvo. Does not make it garbage, just not a Charger. Intrepid, Coronet, Monaco maybe, but Charger? No. It will sell okay, but don't look for any sales records to be broken with this one. Unlike the new stang, and the GT500 version is even better to sell some more.

Joe

TeeWJay426

03-24-2005, 10:31 AM

ORIGINAL: nickoman01

OK for starters i think the statement bout getting what you want is most important. this may not be the car for you, but don't ruin it for others who think it is. i give you credit though for no compromises. yes we the younger people like this car. we are the future though, so this just goes to show there is more of this to come, because we the future like it. I'm sorry. your last statement about what we remember and our frame of reference couldn't be more true. thats why you guys need to have patience with me. i don't comprehend whats so great about old cars, that makes you want new to be old. but thats why i believe in to each their own. when you find that car that is perfect for you, as long as it isn't a mustang, by all means go fro it. get what you want, but don't complain and ruin what i want and thats a 2006 charger r/t when i get the money.

Nicko- Nice try, but the minute you critized me for MY choices and preferences, which you have, you left yourself wide open for me to do the same, so don't start whining about it now. And for the record, my criticism is directed at DCX and the car, NOT you. And if I choose to not practice blind allegiance to the car just because it says Dodge on it, too bad. Like MoparTodd said, some people are so blindly loyal to Chevy that you could put a bow tie emblem on a pile of dog crap and they'd buy it. There are some that feel the same toward Chrysler. I don't, and if DCX makes what I think is a bone head move, which in my OPINION they have with this car, I'm not gonna mince words about it- I'm gonna say so! Just because that opinion doesn't agree with yours, don't take it personally. And if I find a car that does suit me, I will buy it..... and if it's a Mustang, WTF is it to you? I'd mke sure to never leave it in a mall parking lot in Michigan where certain teens might stumble upon it, but if that's the choice I make, deal with it. Most likely, I'll go buy another 'sucky old car', and keep driving my truck, which was equipped EXACTLY as I wanted it. I suppose you'll have something to say about that too?

nickoman01

03-24-2005, 02:56 PM

ORIGINAL: TeeWJay426
Nicko- Nice try, but the minute you critized me for MY choices and preferences, which you have, you left yourself wide open for me to do the same, so don't start whining about it now. And for the record, my criticism is directed at DCX and the car, NOT you. And if I choose to not practice blind allegiance to the car just because it says Dodge on it, too bad. Like MoparTodd said, some people are so blindly loyal to Chevy that you could put a bow tie emblem on a pile of dog crap and they'd buy it. There are some that feel the same toward Chrysler. I don't, and if DCX makes what I think is a bone head move, which in my OPINION they have with this car, I'm not gonna mince words about it- I'm gonna say so! Just because that opinion doesn't agree with yours, don't take it personally. And if I find a car that does suit me, I will buy it..... and if it's a Mustang, WTF is it to you? I'd mke sure to never leave it in a mall parking lot in Michigan where certain teens might stumble upon it, but if that's the choice I make, deal with it. Most likely, I'll go buy another 'sucky old car', and keep driving my truck, which was equipped EXACTLY as I wanted it. I suppose you'll have something to say about that too?

i don't care if you criticize my choices and preferences unless it gets out of hand. i just don't want you people bitching to Chrysler and ruining this car for me. please don't start the parking lot **** again. i don't need to return to that yet. I'm still sort of being watched about flaming for starting that. your truck is a dodge, so why would i have anything except good choice to say to you concerning that. mustang = blocked its for my own good to hold back from saying certain things to you, that would get me in trouble. get another sucky old car see if i care, as long as it isn't a mustang. you people can have your old cars and enjoy them. just don't force old cars upon me or try to make modern cars old.

TeeWJay426

03-24-2005, 05:58 PM

ORIGINAL: nickoman01

i don't care if you criticize my choices and preferences unless it gets out of hand. i just don't want you people bitching to Chrysler and ruining this car for me. please don't start the parking lot **** again. i don't need to return to that yet. I'm still sort of being watched about flaming for starting that. your truck is a dodge, so why would i have anything except good choice to say to you concerning that. mustang = blocked its for my own good to hold back from saying certain things to you, that would get me in trouble. get another sucky old car see if i care, as long as it isn't a mustang. you people can have your old cars and enjoy them. just don't force old cars upon me or try to make modern cars old.

Nicko- lemme 'splain sumtin' to you. When you come here and say you don't like old cars (pre-1998), that's an OPINION. When you come here and say 'all old cars suck', that's just IGNORANCE. If you can't grasp that distinction, then your issues go way beyond your closed mind.

And explain to me how it is that you think I have the power to ruin this car for you??!!! I, and many other enthusiasts, have already bitched to DCX about it. And they as much as said that they don't give a rat's a$$ what we think. If they did, this thing would be called the Intrepid or Magnum sedan. And how was I trying to FORCE anything on you? Do I have some power to make you accept something you don't like? Or is this just you trying to pass off your wild opinions as facts again? I couldn't care less what you think. When you come in here and start attacking my opinions as if they're wrong because they're different from yours, THAT'S where I draw the line. Yours is no more valid or important than anybody else's , and you need to grow up and realize it.

nickoman01

03-24-2005, 06:37 PM

ORIGINAL: TeeWJay426
Nicko- lemme 'splain sumtin' to you. When you come here and say you don't like old cars (pre-1998), that's an OPINION. When you come here and say 'all old cars suck', that's just IGNORANCE. If you can't grasp that distinction, then your issues go way beyond your closed mind.

And explain to me how it is that you think I have the power to ruin this car for you??!!! I, and many other enthusiasts, have already bitched to DCX about it. And they as much as said that they don't give a rat's a$$ what we think. If they did, this thing would be called the Intrepid or Magnum sedan. And how was I trying to FORCE anything on you? Do I have some power to make you accept something you don't like? Or is this just you trying to pass off your wild opinions as facts again? I couldn't care less what you think. When you come in here and start attacking my opinions as if they're wrong because they're different from yours, THAT'S where I draw the line. Yours is no more valid or important than anybody else's , and you need to grow up and realize it.

I couldn't care less what you think
I'm calling you out on that. if that was remotely true, you wouldn't let me get to you like i do. its not that I'm wrong by any means, you just cant accept my opinion. my OPINION is that i don't like old cars, and that ALL old cars suck. thats 100% opinion. nothing at all to do with ignorance. it would be ignorance if i never had experiences with older cars, and have never seen any of the ugly ass ones. but i have, so it isn't ignorance.

Do I have some power to make you accept something you don't like?
if your bitching got this car altered in any way, yes you would.

Yours is no more valid or important than anybody else's
i do realize that, in fact i realize yours are as worthless as mine. see i can be proud though, that my opinion is equal to a 40?? something year old. YOUR OPINION IS EQUAL TO A 17 YEAR OLD.

STOP FLAMING. all i want is for you people to accept this car for what it is. just because it shares a name with an old pos should make me a disgraced for liking it. but a name is a word. IT IS A F*CKIN WORD, so i don't care. the past doesn't matter. who cares what Hitler did. it is done and over with, so there is no point of worrying or caring about it. the number of doors do not matter. so what if you only use 2 doors. does the other 2 doors hurt you. no. actually they are very nice to have for the one time you need to put **** in the back seat. "OMG lets freak out about the number of doors and the WORD attached to it." it doesn't matter, so all i ask is that you accept this car for what it is. this is 2005, not 1966. people in 2005 do not want to spend 30 grand for a piece of crap from 40 years ago. we want our moneys worth, and now a days our money is worth the new charger.

leave me alone and accept this car for what it is. it is the 2006 DODGE CHARGER

moderators:: this maybe a form of flaming, i don't know. all i know is that I'm not violating any groups of people this time, and i haven't personally attacked TJ. I'm calling for an end to the personal attacks by stating "leave me alone". i just want people to accept this car for what it is. is that to much to ask?

BadStratRT

03-24-2005, 09:48 PM

ok....i dont like the language being used here, or the tone and attitude....both of you settle down...period.

nicko like 4 door cars and thinks the charger is cool...he wasnt around (nor was i) when the 69 charger Was on the cutting edge of performance and comfort. to him, its noisy and uncomfortable, so to him, the new charger is an improvement. TJ was around when the charger was a premium car..a "highline", if you will...he has an appreciation for cars around him when he was when growing up....while i agree with TJ on the appreciation of the old charger, the fact of the matter is that you guys are no longer arguing about the 2006 charger,,,youre arguing about each other...

the people who have an issue with the name charger are people who have been waiting for ages for, in reality, a rounded off version of the 69 charger....people like myself and TJ wanted to see DCX do what ford did..take a classic, make the interior modern, and round the edges a bit...and call it a 2006...but instead...they didnt..its nothing like the original..so the people who have been waiting are dissappointed, with myself being included...nicko wasnt around for the "glory days" of the muscle car, and he is obviously more concerned with comfort than he is with "classic styling and performance", which is fine...

ya knwo what i want from DCX? why i wanted a coupe? and nicko, im sure, knowing your hatred of the stang, that you will agree. i wanted a 2 door RWD car..a "pony car"..so that the mustang pricks at the track and on the street stop making sedan comments..."lets see chrysler build a sports car"...the viper doesnt count, not with the pricetag it carries....thats why i wanted a coupe nicko...and if they dont want to call it the charger..thats fine...they can call it the turdmobile for all i care..so long as its a RWD coupe to put the stang in its place...as long as ive been racing..ive listened to firdbird, camaro, and stang turds go on about mopars lack of a "pony car"...thats why im upset..because i thought that this would finally be it...but yet i wait.

SHAPman

03-25-2005, 04:37 AM

Gotta agree with you badstrat, this car is a big disappointment for those of us looking for a Charger. Nicko, the problem is the market this car was geared for was around to see the 69's on the road. So they do expect some resemblance to the car they once loved. This car bears no dna with its older sibling. And don't get me wrong nick I know you like the charger, and thats great, but you are not the target market. Most 17-20 year olds are not in the market for a 30-35 thousand dollar sedan. Most drive used mommymoblies, or newer subcompacts. So if Chrysler wants to sell this thing to its target market it needs to make some major changes!

Joe

done

03-25-2005, 11:50 AM

jgralka

Are you not being presumptious to assume that you represent the target market for the new Charger. I would speculate that your opinion is only representative a few thousand, at most, of the potential buyers for this car. Mopar fanatics are not a large segment of the Mopar market, Dodge fanatics even less so. I think the new Charger will do well as it is designed.

You may not buy one, but for every one of you "fanatics" there will be either a young enthusiast such as Nick, or an old enthusiat such as me who buy cars for what they are, not what they used to be.

As a moter vehicle, the new Charger is a better car than the old one. You may prefer the styling of the old cars with two doors, but any new car built today is a better car than any comparable 40 year old car.

BadStratRT

03-25-2005, 02:08 PM

anyone who thinks that the "charger", just like the magnum, was not designed for a middle class man...age 30-50, married, with a few kids, is a JACKASS...the target market is NOT someone my age...its made for some 35yo guy whose wife wont let him buy a real sports car because its not practical, but he will think..."hmmm, a charger...when i was a young'un, chargers were cool...and i can buy this and still get little johnny to soccer practice, but still be 'cool' just like the guys who had real chargers back in the day..." so he gets his 340hp, he can put some borla exhaust on it, and rev his engine at stop lights agaisnt some young'un in a mustang..and feel good about himself....and his wife is happy...i like the magnum, and for a 4 door, i like the charger...but it simply isnt my market...ESPECIALLY with the price...i paid 26k for my car...i wouldnt pay 30+ for a big 4 door sedan at this point in my life..and honestly, i think i might actually buy the magnum SRT8 before i bought the charger...but i havent driven the charger yet...;)

done

03-25-2005, 02:58 PM

BadStratRT

Is it possible to discuss this issue without name calling and insults, even if they are not directed at another poster. I would have expected better from a "Moderator"

SHAPman

03-25-2005, 04:13 PM

Done,

The target market on the charger is "males 35-50 years of age making 50-90 thousand a year." Thats Chrysler's words, not mine. They replaced the family car (intrepid) with the magnum. This was suppose to be something different, but instead we got two family cars.

Joe

nickoman01

03-25-2005, 04:19 PM

ORIGINAL: jgralka

Done,

The target market on the charger is "males 35-50 years of age making 50-90 thousand a year." Thats Chrysler's words, not mine. They replaced the family car (intrepid) with the magnum. This was suppose to be something different, but instead we got two family cars.

Joe

they aren't replacing a 4 door sedan(intrepid) with a station wagon. they replace it with another 4 door sedan and add a station wagon. well I'm sure they are happy to know ti is appealing to younger then 35 year olds too.

BadStratRT

03-25-2005, 05:13 PM

i am not flamming, and in not flamming, i can state my opinion....would it be better if i used the word imbisile... or moron...how about this...anyone who thinks that the charger is not directed at the group i described is VERY VERY foolish. better?

charger or not...having driven a magnum, and based on the look/price of the charger, id MUCH rather have the magnum.

done

03-25-2005, 06:08 PM

ORIGINAL: BadStratRT

i am not flamming, and in not flamming, i can state my opinion....would it be better if i used the word imbisile... or moron...how about this...anyone who thinks that the charger is not directed at the group i described is VERY VERY foolish. better?

charger or not...having driven a magnum, and based on the look/price of the charger, id MUCH rather have the magnum.

That's better, in my opinion. People can disagree on many subjects, that is diversity. Not having the appearance of respect for anothers opinion is bigotry. I was just annoyed by the constant use of harsh words when all we are talking about is car. Everbody should lighten up a bit.

nickoman01

03-25-2005, 06:22 PM

i love this car, and when people trash it emotions get involved and it is hard to hold back. just understand that.

UBRam

03-28-2005, 12:03 PM

I know emotions get in the way of our fingers from time to time when we type but come on people! Either learn how to spell or use the spell check. It's bad enough to read these rants but to see the spelling and grammar butchered like it is,sheesh....
BTW, I like the Charger, didn't at first, but it grew on me, thank you, carry on.

chud298

03-28-2005, 01:57 PM

ORIGINAL:

Here is my point about common sense. Just because it is old does not make it garbage. What year. or years of "old" chargers have you ridden in Nick? So you are also saying "old" Cuda convertibles are garbage as well? All muscle cars are garbage? Please how ignorant of a statement.

Joe

Exactly. I'm 18, I live in the era of compact sport. I wish I could own an older muscle car. My dad owned tons of them and he still has one. If it wasn't a money problem I would take an old muscle car (preferably the 69 charger r/t ;) ) over any compact car. Yes some guys can get 500 hp hondas or something but a muscle car you can get the same and some for half the money. If anyone has EVER ridden in a nicely done up muscle car, trust me there's no turning back. My first experience was in a 69 camaro like this http://stropespeedshop.com/69_camaro.JPG
execpt he had a blower 6 ft tall and such big cams that it sounded like it was going to stall. This was when I was like ten but I understand what it all means now lol. He took off and I thought I was going to s**t my pants. It sounded so mean with dual exhaust headers cams. That thing moved. Trust these guys when they tell you "old garbage" isn't garbage

scatpackmopar

03-28-2005, 07:17 PM

Chrysler must be doing something right. They are making good profit with legendary names like HEMI, 300, Magnum and it will continue with the new Charger! Despite not looking like a 60's and 70's Charger.

done

03-29-2005, 02:16 AM

To add to the discussion, compare the performance figures in the following link to those of the Charger SRT 8

http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclecars/dodge-charger/dodge-charger-history.shtml

Now consider the handling, braking, ride quality, fit and finsh, rust reistance, electronics, convenince fetures, etc. of the old Chargers to the new one. Maybe two doors is your thing, but the new one is a better car.

wildbill

04-04-2005, 08:56 PM

I've been coming across some photos of the new Dodge Charger including the SRT-8. Personally, I really like the new look. Their is history behind this car but it even with the four doors I think it looks real nice and more practical. I’m looking forward to seeing one on the road...

TeeWJay426

04-05-2005, 10:25 AM

ORIGINAL: done

Now consider the handling, braking, ride quality, fit and finsh, rust reistance, electronics, convenince fetures, etc. of the old Chargers to the new one. Maybe two doors is your thing, but the new one is a better car.

If that's the criteria you want to use for comparison, a new Hyundai is a better car than the old Charger technologically. Doesn't mean that I want to drive one of them either.

nickoman01

04-05-2005, 01:00 PM

plum500

04-05-2005, 02:48 PM

You're funny.

wildbill

04-05-2005, 09:25 PM

I was reading up on this charger, can anyone explain to me what a multiple displacement system does and how it saves gas? Thanx.

nickoman01

04-06-2005, 01:30 AM

it works by shutting off 4 cylinders. so it saves gas by running off of 4 cylinders. it only comes in effect at cruising speeds on the highway, but it will instantly change back to 8 cylinders when the power is demanded.

wildbill

04-08-2005, 12:12 PM

Gotcha. Thats a cool idea. How much gas are we talking about here? Is it like only using 50% of the gas since only running on 50% of cylinders?

nickoman01

04-08-2005, 08:09 PM

you are supposed to get 20% better gas mileage

done

04-09-2005, 02:33 AM

ORIGINAL: TeeWJay426

ORIGINAL: done

Now consider the handling, braking, ride quality, fit and finsh, rust reistance, electronics, convenince fetures, etc. of the old Chargers to the new one. Maybe two doors is your thing, but the new one is a better car.

If that's the criteria you want to use for comparison, a new Hyundai is a better car than the old Charger technologically. Doesn't mean that I want to drive one of them either.

You are taking that statement out of context. The new Charger RT and SRT are also faster than the old chargers. Hyundai and Kias may well be better than the old Chargers except for size and power.

That still makes the new Charger a better car than the old ones. Two doors and style are only personal preferences, not measures of quality.

wildbill

04-11-2005, 06:05 PM

And I doubt many folks will be as scared with a Kia or Hyundai cop car driving up behind them rather than a Charger cop car.

You guys have seen the pics in the other thread right? What you think of the Charger possibily being used for police work? (actually is it a done deal that it will be a cop car or are they trying to sell it as an option right now?)

done

04-11-2005, 08:07 PM

The power to make your stomach tighten is not the cop car, it is the cop in the car. Cars don't make the arrest and you still can't outrun a radio.

SHAPman

04-12-2005, 03:43 AM

How can you say the new chargers are faster, only the srt can run with a hemi, and its almost the same.
"As an all-around performer, the all-new 2006 Dodge Charger SRT8 is capable of awe-inspiring numbers unheard-of in a muscle sedan: 0-60 mph in around 5 seconds, quarter-mile time in the 13-second range "

"Performance: 426 Hemi V8 425: 0-60 in 5.5 sec, 1/4 mile in 13.9 sec @ 105mph."

Now consider this, 30 plus years have passed, and the best that they got is the same numbers from 30 years ago. Also remember the 70 chargers weigh a considerable amount more. So with all the technology, electronics, and weight reductions they still can't beat the original. Yes I'm the sure the new one will handle better, and ride better. But in 30 years a 69 charger will still be a much more desired car than the current version.

Joe

BadStratRT

04-12-2005, 02:51 PM

come on joe..dont be silly...

the old charger didnt come with an option of 18 inch wheels...or a 650 watt system...or heated pedals or mirrors or a seat that massages your ass when you drive or whatever other worthless option that has been packed into this newest family sedan offered by DCX...

because we all know, beaing able to hear your system 2 blocks away, and having gawdy shiney rims and warm feet and a comfy massaged ass are far more important than the potential to go fast...:D

ManMuscle

04-12-2005, 03:17 PM

You guys sound so ridiculous its unbelievable. How fast do you want this thing to go? Its a street car and its a sedan, not a car made for the track. Do you want it to go back in time also? The old chargers rock, there should be no argument at all. But that was the 1960's, those days are over. This is the new Chrager. Its nice looking very muscular and the performance is great. If you prefer driving a 40 year old car than more power to you. Those cars are great. But they have a tub load of problems and good luck in bad weather. The advantage to a modern car is comfort which is important to pretty much everybody and safety, like better crash test results and esp,traction control, and abs. The new charger has one up on the old for that much. But both cars a really cool and fast and dodge puts out awsome cars so they kick everyones ass end of story.

done

04-12-2005, 04:04 PM

ORIGINAL: jgralka

Now consider this, 30 plus years have passed, and the best that they got is the same numbers from 30 years ago. Also remember the 70 chargers weigh a considerable amount more. So with all the technology, electronics, and weight reductions they still can't beat the original. Yes I'm the sure the new one will handle better, and ride better. But in 30 years a 69 charger will still be a much more desired car than the current version.

Joe

Joe,

Read the whole article and the descriptions for each model year and the variations, with times and HP ratings. Also note the production run numbers on the hemi's. The low production numbers are part of the high value of the old Chargers in today's market. I could not find a published weight on the old chargers, but my recollection is that they weighed less than the new ones.

http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclecars/dodge-charger/dodge-charger-history.shtml

If you wish to pay 6 figures for old, creaky, uncomfortable, unsafe car, to have two door and a style you like, have at it. The new charger is still a much better car on any technical or quality basis.

wildbill

04-12-2005, 05:04 PM

ORIGINAL: done

The power to make your stomach tighten is not the cop car, it is the cop in the car. Cars don't make the arrest and you still can't outrun a radio.

Yeah yeah... there is something more intimidating about the a charger rolling up behind you with lights flashing over the crown vicotria, IMO.

But seriously. If a cop pulled me over in the new Charger, I would be asking him all about it.

chud298

04-12-2005, 07:09 PM

ORIGINAL: ManMuscle

You guys sound so ridiculous its unbelievable. How fast do you want this thing to go? Its a street car and its a sedan, not a car made for the track. Do you want it to go back in time also? The old chargers rock, there should be no argument at all. But that was the 1960's, those days are over. This is the new Chrager. Its nice looking very muscular and the performance is great. If you prefer driving a 40 year old car than more power to you. Those cars are great. But they have a tub load of problems and good luck in bad weather. The advantage to a modern car is comfort which is important to pretty much everybody and safety, like better crash test results and esp,traction control, and abs. The new charger has one up on the old for that much. But both cars a really cool and fast and dodge puts out awsome cars so they kick everyones ass end of story.

Technically it is on the track. NASCAR uses it, don't they???

ManMuscle

04-12-2005, 11:41 PM

NASCAR doesnt use the 4 door sedan RT or Daytona Or SRT8 that they sell in the dealship. Common, I know you have more intellegence than that.

nickoman01

04-13-2005, 01:14 AM

ORIGINAL: chud298
Technically it is on the track. NASCAR uses it, don't they???

Nascar uses Tauruses also. let see one of those stock do 5 seconds.

done

04-13-2005, 02:35 AM

ORIGINAL: ManMuscle

NASCAR doesnt use the 4 door sedan RT or Daytona Or SRT8 that they sell in the dealship. Common, I know you have more intellegence than that.

The vehicles used in NASCAR only have a slight resemblance to a Ford, Chevy or Dodge. They share NO parts with ones that we can buy in the showroom. The difference between the manufacturer's represenative vehicles are really only front body panel deep, and not very close at that. Otherwise they are custom built by special race shops and can represent any brand with a body panel change. Come on, you should know that :)

ManMuscle

04-13-2005, 01:44 PM

I dunno if that was intened for me since you were quoting me, but thats what I was saying. That NASCAR DOES NOT use the factory cars.

done

04-13-2005, 11:26 PM

ManMuscle

Just wanted to expand on the good point that you were making.

SHAPman

04-14-2005, 04:12 AM

I know there were few hemis built. Just like there will be few srt-8's built. My point here was to show how little they actually accomplished here. How fast do I want it? Can you say mustang? Thats what most of us have been waiting for, a mustang fighter. Not another family-mobile. We have plenty of them already. How about a change for once.

Old and unsafe? Have you ever driven, or at least ridden in a restored mopar? Thats not how I would describe it. Yeah yeah I know new cars are easier to drive than the old ones. But you know what that creates? Morons behind the wheel. If the driver had to put more thought into driving than we would all be a bit safer.

By the way it appears you are correct the new one weights more than the old. How sad. Couldn't even do that right.

If they build it the right way, they wouldn't be able to build enough of them. (see ford mustang)

Joe

Jeffy_James

04-14-2005, 05:39 AM

Joe your the best guy on this forum hands down. Everything you have said, I have agreed. Keep up the great posts!!!!

- Jeffy James

futSRT8owner

04-14-2005, 02:37 PM

Hey Joe,
So you think having a safe car produces bad drivers? Bad drivers will be bad drivers no matter how well the car was built. Its just that today's laws and industry standards are more strict than they were back then. If your reasoning is true, do you want to go back to the first automobiles built w/ no seat belts, airbags, radial tires, etc. Then do you think this will create safer and more intelligent driver?

Also, do you know why the new charger is heavier, it all the new technology used on TODAY'S vehicles. Meaning computers, electronic devices, upgraded chassis...so for you to say that is a worse car b/c of the weight is not a good argument.

And you said most of us have been waiting for, a mustang fighter. I agree with a lot of people, in that this car should have been given another name instead of the the charger name, but the dealers and the current car buying market is demanding more and more performance oriented sedans. Just look at everyone else in the industry, BMW 5-series, MB E-class, Nissan Maxima, Infiniti M45, Toyota/Lexus GS, VW Pheaton....the list goes on. I agree the mustang is a good looking car, but that all Ford has right now to compete in the car segment with their lagging Ford 500, Freestyle, and Montego. Its like seeing it from a Ford guy, "why can't we have something like a crossfire or a PT cruiser". It all business and $$ oriented. And by the way, have you checked out the annual build numbers for the LX line, its doing pretty good. I'm sure DCX will create a cheap performance vehicle like a mustang in the near future, but right now, DCX is doing very well w/ the LX platform.

my 2 cents on the subject.

done

04-14-2005, 02:52 PM

ORIGINAL: jgralka

I know there were few hemis built. Just like there will be few srt-8's built. My point here was to show how little they actually accomplished here. How fast do I want it? Can you say mustang? Thats what most of us have been waiting for, a mustang fighter. Not another family-mobile. We have plenty of them already. How about a change for once.

Old and unsafe? Have you ever driven, or at least ridden in a restored mopar? Thats not how I would describe it. Yeah yeah I know new cars are easier to drive than the old ones. But you know what that creates? Morons behind the wheel. If the driver had to put more thought into driving than we would all be a bit safer.

By the way it appears you are correct the new one weights more than the old. How sad. Couldn't even do that right.

If they build it the right way, they wouldn't be able to build enough of them. (see ford mustang)

Joe

I am old enough to have owned and driven 60's and 70's cars when they were new. The good old days were only old. not good.

So the SRT8 is heavier, but still faster, and as a moter vehicle it is superior. Again, style and doors do not make quality.

DC is not having any trouble selling all the LX's they can build. Ford and GM should be so good.

DC is not likely to make a 2 door Charger so get over it and enjoy a fine car of today. There is no reason that you can't like the old ones and the new ones. They are different cars for different times.

SHAPman

04-15-2005, 03:42 AM

"DC is not likely to make a 2 door Charger so get over it and enjoy a fine car of today. There is no reason that you can't like the old ones and the new ones. They are different cars for different times. "

I am full aware that dc will not make a two door charger. But I do agree with your last statement, different cars for different times. Alas this car is no Charger. Just saw one at the plant today, a silver RT. Looked like it belonged in an enterprise rental lot. Heard that type of comment by several other co workers. I am sure this is a great car, but it is not a Charger.

By the way any LX without the hemi is NOT selling. Chrysler just put out an extra incentive to get the V6 models moving.

Joe

chud298

04-15-2005, 11:07 AM

ORIGINAL: nickoman01

ORIGINAL: chud298
Technically it is on the track. NASCAR uses it, don't they???

Nascar uses Tauruses also. let see one of those stock do 5 seconds.

Anything is possible...

LindaP

04-26-2005, 07:11 PM

Hi Everyone. My name is LindaP and I'm a Marketing Representative with the Dodge Information Center. I read through this thread and thought maybe I could add some insight. Would that be alright with all of you?

Rustypaws

04-26-2005, 08:47 PM

Tell us what you know LindaP

LindaP

04-27-2005, 12:48 PM

Thanks Rustypaws, I’ll try my best to clarify what I’ve read so far. First let me say that Chud298 is correct, anything IS possible. Saying that DCX won’t build a 2 door version of the Charger may be premature at this point. The vehicle hasn’t even hit dealerships yet and I have to keep with the position that talking about any future product plans would be premature as well. However, DCX has not came out and said that it’s an impossibility. So there’s always hope, jgralka. The feedback we’ve been getting with the new Dodge Charger is amazing. We appreciate anything our loyal customers and potential customers have to say and the fact that I’m responding to this thread communication is proof that we are listening.
There are 2 schools of thought with the new Dodge Charger. It’s either loved for everything new that it embodies or it’s disappointing to those who cherish the Charger for what it was remembered as being. I’ve said before, the memories this vehicle has instilled, is not lost to us. It is important to note as well that idea of a Dodge sedan was in mind long before the name Charger was mentioned. We want it to be thought of for what it is, innovative, bold and confident. The 2006 Dodge Charger looks aggressive, it’s powerful and functional and it’s priced competitively based on features, NOT the name.
Hopefully, I’ve shed a little more light on this popular topic and I’ll be around. Thanks again for giving me the opportunity to join the discussion. Keep the communication going! ;)

nickoman01

04-27-2005, 06:39 PM

ORIGINAL: LindaP

We want it to be thought of for what it is, innovative, bold and confident. The 2006 Dodge Charger looks aggressive, it’s powerful and functional and it’s priced competitively based on features, NOT the name.
Hopefully, I’ve shed a little more light on this popular topic and I’ll be around. Thanks again for giving me the opportunity to join the discussion. Keep the communication going! ;)

exactly, this is 2005, not whenever the hell time frame you people are stuck in. this is 2005 and this is what is the best avaible for 2005. grow up, embrace the present, and look forward to the future, but teh past is done and over wiht it, so deal with it. no matter what the hell it is called, it is a very atractive car, and with MODERN american muscle. i cant wait until i get through college, so i can get one myself. by then they will be 6 speed automatic, and with that trans, it would be the perfect car for me.

Welcome to teh site LindaP. glad to see DCX is listenign to the people.

SHAPman

04-28-2005, 05:19 AM

LindaP, as much as I'd love to believe you that a two door is still possible its just not feasible. Remember it was Trevor Creed that told us "coupes don't sell." Also he said besides the viper and crossfire we will not be producing coupes anytime soon. Plus an entire new platform would have to be developed for a coupe which would take quite a while to develop. And Nicko I don't know of anyone who was asking for a 300 with an ugly front end and an intrepid rear end. So I don't know who they are listening to, but they need to stop.

Joe

chud298

04-28-2005, 12:30 PM

ORIGINAL: nickoman01

ORIGINAL: LindaP

We want it to be thought of for what it is, innovative, bold and confident. The 2006 Dodge Charger looks aggressive, it’s powerful and functional and it’s priced competitively based on features, NOT the name.
Hopefully, I’ve shed a little more light on this popular topic and I’ll be around. Thanks again for giving me the opportunity to join the discussion. Keep the communication going! ;)

exactly, this is 2005, not whenever the hell time frame you people are stuck in. this is 2005 and this is what is the best avaible for 2005. grow up, embrace the present, and look forward to the future, but teh past is done and over wiht it, so deal with it. no matter what the hell it is called, it is a very atractive car, and with MODERN american muscle. i cant wait until i get through college, so i can get one myself. by then they will be 6 speed automatic, and with that trans, it would be the perfect car for me.

Welcome to teh site LindaP. glad to see DCX is listenign to the people.

I'm not saying that there's something wrong with it...I agree it looks good and performs great, I just think they should've called it something else. New muscle is different than old muscle...lets keep it that way.

I always had hope that they would make the SRT-4 2-door but it never happened lol :(

plum500

04-28-2005, 01:21 PM

ORIGINAL: nickoman01
exactly, this is 2005, not whenever the hell time frame you people are stuck in. this is 2005 and this is what is the best avaible for 2005. grow up, embrace the present, and look forward to the future, but teh past is done and over wiht it, so deal with it. no matter what the hell it is called, it is a very atractive car, and with MODERN american muscle. i cant wait until i get through college, so i can get one myself. by then they will be 6 speed automatic, and with that trans, it would be the perfect car for me.

Listen, dare I say "kid", I am a responsible 35 year old who owns a classic Charger, and was looking for a daily driver modern car with Charger styling. A modern Charger. My preference for such styling has nothing to do with a need to "grow up". Regardless of your notion that you have some magical insight or clue as to what my priorities should be, or in fact are, irrespective of your wonderous realization that the year is, yes, in fact, 2005.

Needless to say, I hardly believe you are going to be hauling around a family (if you get an '06), and will be using it to an end that matches your proclaimation of being so. For me, it's about preference in something with a real history, purpose to design, and the story behind the new product being sold; a meaningful and accurate relation to that history in product and promotion that simply hits the mark as already defined by the label and the expection it is obviously going to inspire. I don't need someone telling me I need to grow up, simply because I have not accepted any new styling which is inaccurately riding a reputation and design of a totally different car. Thanks.

I was *in* college while you were still being wiped off, after birth, so I'm well into the game of growing up.

You can build a school bus and call it a Charger, and you can like it. However, don't try to tell me I should simply like it for some unfounded and irrelevant claim that I need to "grow up". Don't tell me "it's almost" got any kind of styling. And don't tell me, simply because the year is 2005, that I should have any desire for something different. It's a simple preference for a different style car that shares the same badge. That's it, that's where the confusion and disappointment lies. Even better when the past is downright discounted and then cozied up to in the same sentence. It's the best. "Retro is bad....hey look at these hot retro colours."

The best is the "well, it'll outperform your old Charger". Yeah. Thanks. So could have an alternately, Charger-styled vehicle; and possibly more so, given an aerodynamic design.

It's done. I'm done. And who am I to say what DCX will/can produce and what they should call anything. It's up to them. But don't dismiss my negative reponse to the whole '06 fiasco with a remark about my maturity or priorities. It's a real piss off.

BadStratRT

04-28-2005, 01:31 PM

i dont like it either....we already had this "charger", but in a station wagon...it is called a magnum. thisn should be called the magnum sedan. :D

TeeWJay426

04-28-2005, 03:01 PM

DCX could save themselves a lot of grief and shut up all the naysayers with a simple name change. :eek:

chud298

04-29-2005, 01:01 AM

ORIGINAL: plum500

You can build a school bus and call it a Charger, and you can like it. However, don't try to tell me I should simply like it for some unfounded and irrelevant claim that I need to "grow up". Don't tell me "it's almost" got any kind of styling. And don't tell me, simply because the year is 2005, that I should have any desire for something different.

Well said lol

The best is the "well, it'll outperform your old Charger". Yeah. Thanks. So could have an alternately, Charger-styled vehicle; and possibly more so, given an aerodynamic design.

My opinion, that's highly, HIGHLY imporbable even though I did say anything is possible

ORIGINAL: TeeWJay426

DCX could save themselves a lot of grief and shut up all the naysayers with a simple name change. :eek:

YES!!!!! LOL

nickoman01

04-29-2005, 02:31 AM

thats very true, but it is to late to do anythign about it now, so resistance is futile

MG42pillbox

05-02-2005, 09:18 AM

The most ingorant thing one can say is that the Charger is just a Magnum without the "Back". Thats like saying all B bodies are the same, IE The 69 Coronet is the same car as a 69 Charger. The new Charger is much farther away from the magnum, than the older B bodies were from each other. THE Charger is, and will be the current flagship of Dodge Cars PERIOD. The Charger, rather you like the looks or not, looks more like a Charger than any car ever because it IS THE CURRENT CHARGER.

The Idea is to sell cars, and make customers happy. Looks like the Charger is gonna do this, If the Charger is half as much a success as the 300LX, then it will be a complete victory proving Dodge right 100%, and everyone trashing it will be proved wrong,

wildbill

05-02-2005, 07:26 PM

ORIGINAL: TeeWJay426
DCX could save themselves a lot of grief and shut up all the naysayers with a simple name change. :eek:

Seems like the majority of this name complaint is just from the charger having 4-doors. Does anyone think its actually cool to see a muscle car with 4-doors from dodge? The car has a lot of pluses like the weight distribution, multiple displacement, Hemi, etc... What about all those good aspects?

nickoman01

05-02-2005, 08:07 PM

ORIGINAL: wildbill
Seems like the majority of this name complaint is just from the charger having 4-doors. Does anyone think its actually cool to see a muscle car with 4-doors from dodge? The car has a lot of pluses like the weight distribution, multiple displacement, Hemi, etc... What about all those good aspects?

I'm excited because of a 4 door muscle car. it is like a better looking intrepid that doesnt have a ****ty enghine, and thats all i want

BadStratRT

05-02-2005, 09:11 PM

a muscle car by its most basic definition cannot have four doors...this is a four door performance car.

nickoman01

05-02-2005, 09:35 PM

ORIGINAL: BadStratRT

a muscle car by its most basic definition cannot have four doors...this is a four door performance car.

label it whatever you want, but im happy that we have a 4 door v8 power that looks great

MG42pillbox

05-03-2005, 04:07 AM

Exactly nickoman01, and many people already agree with you.

BadStratRT

05-03-2005, 02:58 PM

im sure they do..just lik the poll..but like nicko said...long live the family car....didnt dodge make this mistake before??

http://www.dodgeforum.com/upfiles/2745/EE445D8E2FB14912AE055D623E2C1FD4.jpg

wildbill

05-03-2005, 03:38 PM

ORIGINAL: nickoman01
I'm excited because of a 4 door muscle car. it is like a better looking intrepid that doesnt have a ****ty enghine, and thats all i want

See... thats exactly how I feel. The car seems to put together several pieces as far as the Hemi engine, 4 doors, ohh that cherry paint, the displacment system (though I don't know much about how it truely works since I have never experienced it, the idea sounds cool), the price point already released...help me out, there are a ton more. I am actually curious to know all the details to what makes this charger better or different beyond these basics than other cars since I have a lot of room for growth in my car-knowledge.

As far as look that some people are squabbling about, I think the SRT-8 is a fine upgrade though even the standard model looks mean.

MG42pillbox

05-04-2005, 07:30 AM

BadStratRT, This is a perfect example why you will never work for Chryslers Marketing group.... With that line you just ruined the statement of performance meets everything else. The New Charger is nothing like the old, and calling that car an aries and a total insult.

BadStratRT

05-04-2005, 01:59 PM

no..i will never work for chrysler marketing group because i wasnt a marketing major...

and believe me..if this new aries doesnt sell like you guys think it will...there wil be PLENTY of openings with DCX...

i mean, i would love to see the car sell well, but just because 3 guys on DF think its the coolest thing ever, doesnt mean that the rest of the world does. for instance, have a look at the poll at the right of the forum...i dont like it simply because i dont want a sedan...im just not in the market for one...i dont care what DCX calls it..i would like a RWD coupe...i was hoping this would be it, as were many other people...

my bottom line is that i just dont need a big sedan...and neither do the others that are bitching about it...i dont know why DCX bothered with the charger, because they already have the 300, and the charger is just a 300 with a different body, whether you want to believe that or not..it is the same chassis, and the same driveline...with a different body...i just dont see the point in making another sedan...

reliant K
aries k...

nickoman01

05-04-2005, 05:09 PM

i voted yes on teh pole, because i misunderstood it. i voted yes because there shoudl be a coupe version ALSO, and that woudl keep your peopels damn mouths shut.

BadStratRT

05-04-2005, 05:20 PM

im not saying that this car shouldnt exist..i just think that DCX should give those of us who would like a coupe an option...

MG42pillbox

05-04-2005, 05:36 PM

Dont matter 4 Door Coronet was on the same frame as the Charger in the late 60s. the 06 Charger Is THEEE CHARGER, Not a Charger, It is The Current Charger in the world.

BadStratRT

05-04-2005, 05:47 PM

well, whatever..i dont care..its just another sedan, that alot of people who dont need a sedan, dont want...oh well..i have a coupe..im happy with it. :)

MG42pillbox

05-04-2005, 05:56 PM

Well I am more concerned with real performance attributes, such as REAR WHEEL DRIVE, and 360 to 450hp American V8s, than I am about how many doors my cars has.

BadStratRT

05-04-2005, 08:40 PM

unfortauntely the charger isnt in that range...although i do see your point, but at the same time, those of you who just want big hp numbers and dont care how the big car handles, you will continue spending your time watching the tail lights of the lighter coupes like mustangs GTOS, and vettes get smaller and smaller as they effortless handle the turns, and the strip.

MG42pillbox

05-04-2005, 09:13 PM

LOL Maybe you see these tail lights more often than not. And seriously brush up on your math skills, the Charger more than qualifies for every attribute I just mentioned.

Range from 360 to 450, lets see,

Charger Daytona is listed at 350hp and really makes closer to 365 at the crank. I think thats in-between 360 to 450, And I dont even have to mention the Dayton because the Charger SRT-8 Is rated at 425hp and makes closer to 450+ HP LOL... Its not that complicated. 425 Is inbetween 360-450 Yet It really makes more HP. And with a few bolt-ons it will be 480 to 500hp range.

OHHH I almost forgot, the RT Charger Out handles the Stang GT Is the Slalom, So your way off on ever section buddy. This car isnt every in comparison to the Stang, Or Vett anyway and never was. Stop comparing apples to oranges. The new GTO is also not in the same class.........

BadStratRT

05-04-2005, 09:57 PM

oh..youre right...i was talking about sports cars...not over priced sedans...

350 is BHP...not WHP...i dont know where you get your hp numbers...and where did you get the info that although the charger is listed at 425 it makes more like.450? show me a dynop sheet of either...you need to stop paper racing, 'buddy'...your arguement is just non-sense that you have rehashed from whatever you read...its not like dodge would just happen to fail to mention that their new charger actually makes an extra 25 or so hp....:eek:

.it isnt like youve seen a charger run in person and beat a mustang..and while i hate the mustang, i will believe that when i see it in a non biased forum...while i think the auto stang may be slower than the charger...the stang GT with a manual is running in the mid 13s...whereas the charger is not, if it is, i want to see video, and a time slip.

the SRT8 doesnt exist to the public yet...when its out, you can talk about it...and "a few bolt ons" doesnt mean anything..."with a few bolt ons" my mirada runs mid to low 12s...

and what sports car do you have that has made you the written authority on racing? i imagine that you will spout off about how you have this and that and they both run 9s...youve just never mentioned it before...

and for the record, i dont spend much time looking at tail lights...i dont drive an overweight family sedan, or a truck...;)

plum500

05-04-2005, 10:12 PM

I love when the defense falls back to say all that is important is performance. Yeah. Not only is that not a conversation about a Charger, it's kind of odd for a discussion about any car to most. But anyway...

Simple fact is, they built a car and slapped the name on it and are using the history for marketting. That's the simple fact. They didn't set out to build "a Charger" as already defined by what the majority of folks remember as "The Charger".

So you can like the car all you want, and call it a Charger cause I'll be damned if that isn't the name on it, but it most certainly is not "The Charger" let alone whether one considers it "A Charger" or not.

BadStratRT

05-04-2005, 10:54 PM

my buddy's Cummins pulling truck has 400hp and like 900 lb/ft of torque..and it will also smoke mustangs...his best time is in the low 13s...but its still no sports car...and thats my whole point..

i dont care about the name...they can call it a freakin viper for all i care...i just want something small, in a coupe...id settle for a neon coupe.

MG42pillbox

05-05-2005, 12:33 AM

Delete this post.

MG42pillbox

05-05-2005, 12:42 AM

Why would DC Make a Charger of "Yester-Year" First off, Its called product progression. Chrysler isnt full of idiots, and would never just come out with a car that has already existed for years.

MG42pillbox

05-05-2005, 12:45 AM

ORIGINAL: BadStratRT

my buddy's Cummins pulling truck has 400hp and like 900 lb/ft of torque..and it will also smoke mustangs...his best time is in the low 13s...but its still no sports car...and thats my whole point..

i dont care about the name...they can call it a freakin viper for all i care...i just want something small, in a coupe...id settle for a neon coupe.

And your point is....????

But yes its obvious you would settle for a Neon Coupe, your not interested in performance or American style vehicles, you are just interested in how many doors it has.

BadStratRT

05-05-2005, 12:47 AM

i am interested in performance...thats why i have this...

and if dodge made an SRT-4 "neon coupe" im sure that it, like the sedan, would smoke magnum sedan....i mean charger...

local://upfiles/2745/A1894C2296F64E48ACB926F7B5A57CC8.jpg

by the way...you dont drive a sports car of any kind, so stand down junior...my "2 door mitsubishi" would hand your tired truck its ass. as would my mirada...and with a governed speed of 130 in the charger, my RT would outrun it on a long run...and since you evidently didnt notice..my mirada does run 12s...with a small block...

the SRT4 is a sedan under 30k, that will smoke the charger...

by the way...stop double and triple posting...thats why there is an edit button...

MG42pillbox

05-05-2005, 01:12 AM

LMAO!!! Now your comparing the SRT4 to the Charger, If you think thats a full size sedan, you have a long way to go. And Again like I said your 12 sec mirada has alot more than bolt ons, so your intial post about it is completely irrelevant.

"stop double and triple posting"

Its called a replyyyyyy, I dont know what else to tell ya. I make 1 reply for every 1 I receive.

Do you think you can have compared your cars to something other than my truck? Thats like Said My truck can go through the mud Much better than your cars..... Seriously man, you need to start comparing apples & apples.

It looks like you don’t wannt reply to my other psot.

So again is the Charger not in those #s, or isnt available yet ?? LOL

MG42pillbox

05-05-2005, 01:14 AM

ORIGINAL: BadStratRT

it isnt like youve seen a charger run in person and beat a mustang.

Yes it is like I have scene a Charger RT Beat a Stang in the slalom ,I work for Chrysler, and at ride & drives we compare all performance aspects.

350 is BHP...not WHP...i dont know where you get your hp numbers...and where did you get the info that although the charger is listed at 425 it makes more like.450? show me a dynop sheet of either...you need to stop paper racing, 'buddy'...your arguement is just non-sense that you have rehashed from whatever you read...its not like dodge would just happen to fail to mention that their new charger actually makes an extra 25 or so hp....

First off, who the hell was talking about WHP. where do you come up with these points? How could anyone expect you to know where you get my #s you dont even know they exist. LOL
For you lack of common Chrysler knowledge by not understanding that they commonly underrate their performance engines. Why dont you take a look here http://www.svtperformance.com./forums/showthread.php?t=177226&page=1&pp=25 If you would pay attention to things other than 2 Door Mitsubishi cars that have been re-badged to Dodge, maybe you have the slightlest clue. And BTW This 6.1 only had 300 mile on it, and was not broken in.

and what sports car do you have that has made you the written authority on racing? i imagine that you will spout off about how you have this and that and they both run 9s...youve just never mentioned it before...

Did I ever say I was an authority?? Maybe you just feel stupid.......????? But I dont assume or accuse like you, so I wont say If you feel that way or not. But it seems very possible.

and for the record, i dont spend much time looking at tail lights...i dont drive an overweight family sedan, or a truck......

Thats Funny, cause every top model "overweight family sedan" that Chrysler makes now would smoke your Mitsushishi 2 door like it was standing still even on its worse day.

while i think the auto stang may be slower than the charger...the stang GT with a manual is running in the mid 13s...whereas the charger is not, if it is, i want to see video, and a time slip.

Who ever said the Charger was faster than the Stang GT?? Again a meaningless proposition. Its amazing how you can say things like "Charger is not running mid 13s", But I am not allowed to say the SRT8 has 450hp.. its called Hypocrisy.

.the SRT8 doesnt exist to the public yet...when its out, you can talk about it...and "a few bolt ons" doesnt mean anything..."with a few bolt ons" my mirada runs mid to low 12s...

BAHAHAHAA That is the most ignorant comment I have ever heard... The Charger RT isnt available to the public yet either, It hasnt landed yet, so I guess your initial statement of saying "unfortauntely the charger isnt in that range" was made from no relovancy what so ever. LMAO
Which is it??? Is the Charger not in the range? Or is it not available yet?? I guess you can pretend to stay in 2005 the Rest of your life to make that part mean something. And what does a 12 second mirada have anything to do with this??? Does DC Make the Mirada anymore, no so you cant talk about it BAHAHA Not to mention you must be smokin some good stuff if you think a stock Mirada can get into the 12s with bolt ons. I will move on to the future while you will be left behind.

oh..youre right...i was talking about sports cars...not over priced sedans... ...

Ok well, as soon as you name a Sedan that has that much capability safety and performance for under 30K, you let me know.

Is there anything that you can say without completely jumping to an empty conclusion, or to state something relevant, or at-least make a statement without assuming?? Im ready to hear anything meaningful. Have you paid attention to Chrysler at all in the last year or so?? If so, you have fooled me.

BadStratRT

05-05-2005, 01:35 AM

you told me to name a sedan...you didnt say what kind of sedan...that would out perform the charger..so i did..the SRT4...

and like i said..plain and simple...
when you can show me a charger that puts out 360 stock hp, when it advertises 350...i will believe it...i am sure that you went to some displays where the charger outran some high performance cars...but when DCX is holding a display, of course the charger is going to win. your numbers are all conceptual...until we have someone on here, or elsewhere that is not a DCX rep or C&D or MT editor stating power numbers, none of them are really valid. that my entire point. the numbers you are stating are biased. do you not agree with the fact that DCX tests are biased to their own vehicles?

nickoman01

05-05-2005, 02:52 AM

i hate this f*cking thread, no ones minds are gonna be changed. the old people live in the past, and the youth embrace the present. simple as that. i gave up this arguement a while ago, as well as the bastards i was argueing with. now the next group is going through teh same old sh*t. just lock this damn thread and save everyone the trouble. and yes this is THE CHARGER. to me this is all there is. screw the past, just look at it, so ill argue the point because of my age this is THE CHARGER to me. since again thsi is teh car of my dreams because it is a good looking powerful big sedan, i dont apreciate it when you f*ggots trash it. end this thread before i get more pissed. it is like me telling patrick his car is garbage because it is a mitshubishi that just has a dodge name on it. it isnt american, or even a chrysler product. im not doign that, but as an example, he wont liek that very much, at all. so lock this thread it needs to end and the bashing needs to end. if you wnat to live in the past so be it, but dont ruin teh present for us.

DISCLAIMER: i swear when im pissed, and Patrick, just an example, no offense intented. it isnt a stealth or anything. you drive a very nice stratus.

MG42pillbox

05-05-2005, 06:39 AM

ORIGINAL: BadStratRT

you told me to name a sedan...you didnt say what kind of sedan...that would out perform the charger..so i did..the SRT4...

and like i said..plain and simple...
when you can show me a charger that puts out 360 stock hp, when it advertises 350...i will believe it...i am sure that you went to some displays where the charger outran some high performance cars...but when DCX is holding a display, of course the charger is going to win. your numbers are all conceptual...until we have someone on here, or elsewhere that is not a DCX rep or C&D or MT editor stating power numbers, none of them are really valid. that my entire point. the numbers you are stating are biased. do you not agree with the fact that DCX tests are biased to their own vehicles?

You asked me to prove my #s about the SRT8, and said that Chrysler wouldn't underrate an engines power, and denounced my claim, I proved myself right and you wrong in both ways, that is why you side stepped the subject... Kind of a pathetic try, but I don't blame you. You have dug yourself a very deep hole in this thread as far as your knowledge of the new LX Platform...

About the Sedan comparison, I am not saying I didnt ask for a sedan of any kinda, but it shows where your mind is when you compare an SRT4 to a Charger RT. Just proving my point even better, its just like most of your other comments on this thread, irrelevant in all reality insulting for a company that is finally making wonderful cars.

And again, check the link I provided if you need a dyno reality check.

plum500

05-05-2005, 11:19 AM

ORIGINAL: nickoman01

i hate this f*cking thread, no ones minds are gonna be changed. the old people live in the past, and the youth embrace the present. simple as that. i gave up this arguement a while ago, as well as the bastards i was argueing with. now the next group is going through teh same old sh*t. just lock this damn thread and save everyone the trouble. and yes this is THE CHARGER. to me this is all there is. screw the past, just look at it, so ill argue the point because of my age this is THE CHARGER to me. since again thsi is teh car of my dreams because it is a good looking powerful big sedan, i dont apreciate it when you f*ggots trash it. end this thread before i get more pissed. it is like me telling patrick his car is garbage because it is a mitshubishi that just has a dodge name on it. it isnt american, or even a chrysler product. im not doign that, but as an example, he wont liek that very much, at all. so lock this thread it needs to end and the bashing needs to end. if you wnat to live in the past so be it, but dont ruin teh present for us.

DISCLAIMER: i swear when im pissed, and Patrick, just an example, no offense intented. it isnt a stealth or anything. you drive a very nice stratus.

Chill man. You can like the car all you want. Hell, buy as many as you want. I'm simply arguing that the name is not appropriate for the product. Or they "redefined" the name for a new purpose, and all the marketting references to the past are out of place. And, that it is even more odd when DCX themselves disrespect the past incarnations of a vehicle with that name, and all that surrounds it, and then try to leverage it in the same sentence.

The magnitude of the fiasco surrounding the use of the name on the '06 itself, to me, says that someone made a marketting boo boo. And if it was calculated (and expected) collateral damage, then I think that is even more deserving of a C grade at best. Not only are they telling two different stories at the same time, they are contradicting each other and simply have created a mess.

Should have had a single story, design, and product which nailed the bullseye more accurately and without causing a confusing path of destruction along the way.

If the car is so hot on it's own, and in fact disconnected from the past, there should not have been any trouble coming up with a suitable name, graphics, story, etc etc.. and even could have made generic references to a muscle car past, simply because of the power plant -- would have been more appropriate.

I agree that the Magnum Sedan is not the correct term when you look at the sheet metal, because it is not simply a Magnum without the wagon, but it is an appropriate label for the requirements and product slot that it is filling.

I live in the present, it has nothing to due with time. It has to due with simple preferences. Those preferences which would have been more closely met by a modern rendition of a car that already has the Charger name. Not this. If I want another classic Charger, I will go buy one. That;s not what this is about. I was hoping that by the talk of a Charger I would have a totally different vehicle to trade up to from my Corolla, not this. Though I should have simply felt that wave of disappointment when I saw that first green sketch, and moved on. But the name has some pretty strong attachment.

Charger name has been "re-used". What the hell, can't do anything about it, and I'll give it up. But you can't tell me it is "a Charger" and in the same sentence, as DCX, admit it has nothing to do with past design. And I'm sure as hell not going to agree when you try to call it "THE Charger".

I'll likely look at a 300 or Magnum when the time comes. Or maybe they'll do a stylish rendition of a modern E-Body coupe that will fit my bill. Though, if the same route is taken with that rumour (if in fact true), that will be the nail in the coffin.

chud298

05-05-2005, 12:01 PM

ORIGINAL: nickoman01

i hate this f*cking thread, no ones minds are gonna be changed. the old people live in the past, and the youth embrace the present. simple as that.

I would have to disagree with that. I'm 18 and by no means do I embrace the present, I love the past and I wish I could've lived in the past so I wouldn't have to deal with the bulls**t about bringing back the names of great cars and making them sedans...I'm not trying to argue with you, I'm just trying to show my opinion...

I would have to agree with Pat with this...pillbox I think you are twisting his words really badly, just read what he's posting is pretty damn clear. I agree with all the logics that pat does, I'm not going to restate them I'm just going to say I agree

BadStratRT

05-05-2005, 12:05 PM

i dont care about the name...and when i see these chargers rip off amazing 12 second QM runs, ill believe it...im not skirting any issues...i simply dont believe that DCX is underrating their new cars performance amidst a horsepower war...

so by your claim pillbox, all you care about is performance, so if DCX built a 400hp minivan, you would just as into that as you are the charger?

i just dont need a big family car...if i did, i would buy a 300C....plus, the charger prices are going to be way marked up...my arguement is prefectly relevant...there is nothing wrong with this new charger, its just another car that i dont have any use for, based on its size...even if they had what people have PS'ed, and made this LX platform car intoa 2 door..it would still be a huge ass 2 door...and there is no stick shift...basically what dodge gas done was gone and made themselves their version of the GTP grand prix. its fast...its got big HP numbers, but its big, and has no stickshift...so its a performance car for every middle age man whose wife wont let him buy a corvette...or for everyone who cant drive a stick..

nicko, im by no means an "older guy"...i didnt want a charger that looked like the old one,.....hell, if dodge would make something sporty, and smaller, they could call it the damn volare for all i care...the charger is a fine car...for those who want a bigger car...but i want something small...i would rather not drive a neon, but when i go to buy my next car...im more interested in out and out performance than i am "fastest mid sized sedan"...

not to mention the fact that this entire arguement, as long as it has been going on amuses me...and i can, from time to time stir the embers and get it going again...although i couldnt give a damn less..i made that aries thing just to piss people off, and it worked to perfection...:D