Okay, so it isn't all new. The interior is still 100 percent stock (and pretty much mint and much of the paint is original as well (as is the vinyl top).But I did reclaim my 1970 Dodge Challenger R/T SE last week after some body work and mechanical upgrades that had it in the shop for the past three months. A few metal patch panels were put in near the wheel wells to fix the rust, and everything below the side stripes was repainted in the factory FC7 Plum Crazy shade of purple. Shortly after retrieving it I put on a set of American Racing Torque Thrust D 16X8 wheels, with 255/50 tires in back and 225/50 tires in front (replacing the 14X5.5-inch road wheels and 70 series, whitewall tires -- yuck!)...
I'm glad Chrysler is bringing this model back. If it gets even 25 percent of the attention the old ones generate Dodge will have another powerful image maker in their showrooms...even if it is just a modified Chrysler 300...which is itself a reworked, late 1990s E-Class. Oh well, it will look cool and have a Hemi. How many potential buyers will dig any deeper than those characteristics before buying?
By ahightower
on August 9, 2006
11:54 AM
Those new wheels and tires are a huge improvement. I guess I'm too young to appreciate the vinyl top. Not to be rude, but what is the point, really? Is it supposed to look like a convertible?
I just don't know if I would ever buy something like that. I was watching some Barrett Jackson and Dream Car Garage on TV last weekend, and thought to myself, for the same money, I could have a brand new Corvette.
Again, probably my age speaking. In 30 years I might be jonesing for a "classic" C5.
But then you have a GT40 too, so you have the best of both worlds. I just think if I had to pick ONE, and the price was about equal, I'd choose one of a number of modern cars. If you had to pick just one, Karl, what would it be?
By editor_karl
on August 9, 2006
03:40 PM
A fair question. I was seriously considering a new Shelby GT500 before I bought the Challenger. Total cost for both vehicles is essentially a wash. But I've decided I'm glad I went with the Challenger. Here's why:
1. You don't see a Challenger (in any form) every 10 minutes driving around L.A. Not true of the new Mustang
2. Neither the GT500 or the Challenger are going to be as fast as the Ford GT. My speed needs are already handled, so the GT500's performance advantage over the Challenger doesn't really matter to me.
3. The Challenger will likely go up in value over the next 10 years (especially when the new one hits in 2008 and more people become aware of the model's past glory), while the GT500 (like any new car) will lose value over the next 10 years.
That said, if you're looking to have a combination of excellent performance and real-world convenience and functionality, you simply can't beat modern performance cars by going after a retro model. There has to be something about the old cars that resonates with you, or you'll likely be disappointed with the overall driving/ownership experience they offer.
By navigator89
on August 10, 2006
09:17 AM
That's a really great picture of your Challenger up there. Karl, you really got to update your Carspace with more pictures of your vehicles!
By editor_karl
on August 10, 2006
09:34 AM
I just got the car back last week, but I do have better shots of the Ford GT and Triumphs, too. I'll have to make some updates.
By challergerguy
on March 5, 2007
10:54 AM
Interesting for sure. I'm a big fan of the GT500, but the mustangs are everywhere. I'm waiting for the New 2008 Challenger to come out though. I'm hoping it will be a little on the mass produced side.
2008 Dodge Challenger Info