Straightline

Despite its ghastly weight, the Challenger sounds like a winning combination. As far as price is concerned, it doesn't matter what MSRP is, dealers will upmark the hell out of these things. Dodge might as well get as much money out of it as they can. Remember the GT-R?

Probably the Challenger, as it's a newer design and does the kind of things a big, honkin' RWD smokin' V8's supposed to do.
 
Meanwhile, I'll dream of owning an affordable GT-R hatch variant. Perhaps if Nissan bought enough of Chrysler they could adapt a
Mopar engine line to build more GT-R motors.

I'm curious as to why a manual transmission would make the Challenger better. I love MTs and have them in all my vehicles, but they also all are small. A large muscle car like the Challenger should be a lazy drive, just kick back and floor it when needed. Auto trans would be just fine. This thing is a muscle car, not a sports car.

i agree with desmo,
if it has a descent automatic, which it does, the autobox is fine for the big heavy muscle car

Whichever one gets better gas mileage.

The automatic works fine 90% of the time, but three things will make the manual better during those 10% times when you really want to have fun: A real LSD (not that buzz-killing BLD), an even better launch from the 3.91 rear-end, and no automatic short-shift from first to second gears to quell wheelspin -- it even did that when ESP was fully disabled. Besides, that pistol-grip shifter will be way more manly, but unfortunately, it will also have one of those 1-4 skipshift solenoids that the aftermarket will take remedy five minutes after the car goes on sale.
-CW

They got 14.5 mpg in the Dodge, and 17.3 in the Ford. Not that this buyer cares much.

I'm sorry, but what is a 1-4 skipshift thingy?

The GTO had a limiter that prevented you from shifting from 1 to 2 if the revs were too high (forcing the lever into 4). I'd imagine this is the same thing.

Don't you mean if the revs were too low, estreka? For example, if the car thinks its driver wants to leisurely accelerate, it prevents him or her from shifting into second gear from first. If the driver were to go WOT in first, he or she would be able to shift into second.
 
Huss, it's a (dumb) way to improve fuel mileage on thirsty vehicles. I know previous V8-powered F-bodies (Camaro, Firebird) used it on their six-speeds. I think C4-C6 Corvettes have gearboxes with it, too.
 
Somebody please help us. I've never driven one of these cars. I always dreamed of owning a 4th generation LS1-powered F-body...until I heard about the WRX.

So what if you are driving slowly up a hill in traffic? You would then only have the choice of 1st or 4th gear?

"Somebody please help us. I've never driven one of these cars. I always dreamed of owning a 4th generation LS1-powered F-body...until I heard about the WRX."
 
Ive driven several versions of the F-body cars, Z28s, SS, WS6, TransAm. All were fast and the drivetrain is clearly the best thing about the cars.
 
Things like material/build quality, shifter quality, steering feedback, suspension composure, chassis feedback obviously took a back seat for straight line performance. Speed and power are great but I want the chassis to be able to back it up.
 
The one thing I REALLY REALLY hated about the F-Body cars was the seating position in relation to the dash. The cowl was rediculously high and it was hard to place the front end of the car.
 
Gladly todays version care clearly better "muscle cars" like the G8 GT, Challenger, Mustang GT and the upcoming Camaro.

So how exactly does the skip-shift lockout work, hondacura4?
 
I probably could Google this. LOL

Yes, please google "1-4 skipshift" and see what all the complaining is about.
cw

Ha! Thanks, Chris!

It looks like I was correct for the most part.
 
Why can't I edit my previous comment to update it? Sylvia?