Edmunds CarPool

I'll pass. On both of them.

38k
 
thats reason enough to pass on the Challenger

Is this the downside of Platform sharing? Everything has to be tooled for the Fattest Common Denominator?

Those are some cool pics. Seeing it side by side with an original makes me appreciate the styling of the new one a little more. Karl, your original is gorgeous.

I agree the original looks better but isn't that always the case?
 
I'll wait for the light cheaper RT version with a manual.

The styling looks great, but it's too big of a car. It looks more like Dodge is trying to compete with the Buick Riviera than the Ford Mustang.

Love the Plum Crazy color and the torq thrust Ds on your ride! Much sleeker looking than the new Challenger. Doesn't the 38K sticker price this out of the intended market? For that price, I would be shopping for a nice version of your 1970 model instead.

The $38k price tag is only for the top model. There are two lesser models that will be cheaper. The R/T will not be the volume model so I don't know why there is so much talk of the $38k price. The base HEMI model has more than enough power and will save you thousands.
 
The new one definitely looks better, BTW.

1487- i think you mean the SRT-8 won't be the volume leader. I still think plenty of people will buy the V6 and standard Hemi versions just like many people buy the Mustang V6.

This is one of the big problems with the Chrysler/Dodge offering (excluding the Sebring/Avenger which doesn't even register). They all look HUGE and HEAVY and they are supposed to be sports cars. The Challenger weighs 4,140 lbs!

PS- anyone that likes the Charger should love the Challenger. I'm not really a fan of the Orange paint job but the car looks pretty good by modern standards. There's more to the two door world than 335s and G37s so I'm glad that alternatives are becoming available. If I had money, it'd be nice to have a less responsible manly toy to use during days off or on the weekend. Isn't that the entire point to owning a coupe? If you are in the market for a performance two door, I doubt you're worried about rear seat room. When you create a swoopy coupe from a sedan platform this is the result as seen in the G37 and 350Z- high weight, inefficient use of space and a tiny trunk.

I can't even begin to list all of the cars that I would rather spend $38,000 on than this barge, and that's just the base price! With options and dealer markup, the mid-forties are more realistic. The 335i, G37, Boxster, Vette, or a CPO M3 are just the tip of the iceberg.

BTW Karl, your Challenger looks loads better.

chavis,
 
yes SRT-8 is what I meant.
 
"I can't even begin to list all of the cars that I would rather spend $38,000 on than this barge, and that's just the base price! "
 
Wrong again. The "base price" will likely be in the mid 20s. The SRT model is loaded and has few options.
 
I dont think this is a true sports car. Its just a very fast sports coupe. I dont hear anyone criticizing the XK or 650 for being too heavy. The Challenger is simply a cheaper version of the same GT coupe concept. Its fast and handles reasonably well but is not a true sports car. Its kind of like the recent pontiac GTO.

The new Challenger looks close to the old one. Got buff and heavy. For $ 38,000.00 you can choose the Charger if you are planning to take some friends with you and if you need leg room! Next is the new camaro? Put your bets how heavy is going to be! So far the Mustang is winning by far the Pony wars with a basic simple car.

To be honest, it really doesn't look that much bigger to me. If you gave the new one 15" rims I'd imagine they'd be sitting pretty close to each other. The new one definately looks filled out, though. And the weight is unacceptable. Dodge had better make an ACR version. Venom Challenger, anyone?

38K and no vinyl roof??? LOL
 
Doesn't do a lot for me. Prefer the original. It'll be more interesting to see the lesser models. I'm a bit over big wheels on cars and I think that it may look better on smaller 18" rims.

1487 is right. This is a big heavy fast car. It is not meant to be a super star flat out corning car. It is muscle. The winner of the proverbial stop light race. I'm certain a WRX will out handle an SRT-8 on the track. But my hope is that real life 1/4 mile times are very close. I also want to see an ACR version too. Just because.

"Doesn't do a lot for me. Prefer the original. It'll be more interesting to see the lesser models. I'm a bit over big wheels on cars and I think that it may look better on smaller 18" rims."
 
Dodge has released pics of the base models and the car doesn't look right with smaller wheels. There is way too much airspace between tires and fender on the base car. I saw it at NY in person.
 
Camaro should be lighter than G8 so I would expect it to be in the 3600-3800lb range. A G8 GT is about 3900lbs I believe. Mustant is lighter but I am willing to bet its nowhere near as rigid as the Camaro will be.

(Let's see if anyone takes the bait...)
 
I was just thinking, the XK and 650 are way too heavy. (Both are lighter than the Challenger, by 10% and 5% respectively.) I don't disagree that they are more "GT's" than "sports cars". Not to split hairs here, but the Challenger strikes me as more of a "muscle car" than a "GT" even. And I've yet to see anyone compare the Challenger to either of these, in terms of classification or performance. I'm not saying the Challenger isn't a good deal (much like the G8...), but I wouldn't quite put them in the same league with high end luxury performance coupes. Not until someone famous signs one and auctions it at Barrett-Jackson, anyway.

1487, I also thought the Camaro looked a little bit smaller than the G8. The Camaro I seen at the auto show this year is nowhere near as big as that challenger looks. Size wise it looks like it’s in between the Mustang and the Challenger.
 
I’m definitely not a Dodge guy, but I think that new Challenger is a sharp looking ride. I think Dodge did a hell of a job copying the original. I personally think the new one looks better than the Karl’s older challenger.
 
  The new one looks HUGE to me!!!! The challenger has got to be one of the biggest two door models on the road right now. There’s no doubt that the challenger is a straight line muscle car, and not some rally car. That thing looks as big as the ’77 Olds Toronado I used to drive when I was a kid.

"Dodge has released pics of the base models and the car doesn't look right with smaller wheels. There is way too much airspace between tires and fender on the base car. I saw it at NY in person. "
 
I guess it's all a matter of personal taste, I just googled the 2009 Challenger SE and the blue one I saw looks good to me on 18" rims.

This was a really cool and informative post Karl. Thanks!
 
I can't believe how heavy this new one is.

I do not understand all the critique and irony. What did you expect exactly? Impreza figther made out of LX platform?

No-one expected an Imprezza fighter. And knowing it's an LX, no-one seriously expected a Mustang-fighter, even. The problem is that there is a disconnect between the image of the vehicle and what it's actually made of: The looks, and the way Dodge has only marketed it in the racing orange, makes it seem like it is part of the Mustang/ Camaro class, and original Challenger. BUT the size and heft place it more with the larger "personal luxury" coupes of the 70s and 80s, like the Thunderbird/ Cougar and Monte Carlo/ Grand Prix/ etc., and the original Dodge Magnum and Chrysler Cordoba, to pull from Chrysler DNA.

Other then the weight it has nothing in common with the "personal luxury" cars you mention. They are all ill handling, under powered barges.
 
Every road test I have read about the Charger SRT8 have shown it to be an amazing performance car for the price. No reason to believe the Challenger will be anything less.
 
Other then the height, old and new Challengers are almost the same size.
 
As for the weight, name any car that hasn't porked up in recent years.
 
Also, IMHO, the RT with smaller wheel looks much better then the SRT8 with the 20's. I don't like oversized rims and they don't suit the image of a retro car. 17's would look much more with the image.

The Challenger will probably whip the original in any performance category you chose in spite of its mass. I wouldnt be too concerned about it being sloppy just because its heavy. Lets remember the SRT LX sedans handle well and weigh about 4300lbs. The M5 weighs over 4000lbs and does just fine in handling as well.
 
Based on the performance of the 300 SRT I would expect the Challenger to be good for a 4.5 0-60, .9gs on the skidpad and a sub 170ft stopping distance from 70mph.

"I dont hear anyone criticizing the XK or 650 for being too heavy. "
 
1487 No one criticizes the XK for being heavy because it weighs 600lbs less than this thing. The 650 weight 400lbs less. They're both in a different league technology and refinement wise as well. This car is a fat pig.

"Wrong again. The "base price" will likely be in the mid 20s. The SRT model is loaded and has few options."
 
This post was about the SRT-8 and clearly states the $38,000 base price, but the 'wrong again' was a nice touch. Obviously the V-6 models will be cheaper, but the last thing I would want to do is drive around a 4,000lb car with an underachieving engine and atrocious interior.

"This post was about the SRT-8 and clearly states the $38,000 base price, but the 'wrong again' was a nice touch. Obviously the V-6 models will be cheaper, but the last thing I would want to do is drive around a 4,000lb car with an underachieving engine and atrocious interior."
 
what options are on the Challenger SRT-8? Other models come loaded and this should be the same. $38k is hardly a lot for a car with this much power. A corvette is at least $8k more than that. It has an "underacheiving engine"? Even you should know better than to write something that silly.
 
"They're both in a different league technology and refinement wise as well. This car is a fat pig."
 
Its good to know you have driven all three. None of the articles I have read thus far have called the Dodge unrefined. When you consider the high price tags on those two coupes I would hope they can offer more refinement than a Dodge. "fat pig"........such articulation.

"It has an "underacheiving engine"? Even you should know better than to write something that silly."
 
Again, the personal remarks are a nice touch. I referring to the V-6 as underachieving, but the HEMI's fall into that category as well. 415bhp from 6.1 litres is hardly pushing the bounds of what's possible

According to edmunds data the SRT is 4140 pounds. The smaller 650 is about 3800 and the R/T Challenger is likely to be in the same ballpark.

sabastian: "the HEMI's fall into that category as well. 415bhp from 6.1 litres is hardly pushing the bounds of what's possible"
 
400+ hp and a bottom end to match at a price point that can show up in cars under $40K new sure sounds like pushing the bounds to me.
 
Judging an engine by its displacement makes about as much sense as judging a transmission by the diameter of the torque converter.

'Its good to know you have driven all three. None of the articles I have read thus far have called the Dodge unrefined. When you consider the high price tags on those two coupes I would hope they can offer more refinement than a Dodge. "fat pig"........such articulation.'
 
1487 I believe your quoted words above are an example of what they call a self refuting argument. Perhaps you should try reading your response aloud, as well as the quote you were replying to.
 
Benson didn't say the Challenger is unrefined. He said it was in a different league in regards to technology and refinement, as they should be, as luxury coupes. You said yourself that at the price bracket you hope they offer more refinement than a Dodge. I fail to see the point you're trying to make. I don't think anyone is expecting the Challenger to be on that same level.

This is my personal CoTY. I would put down 40k in a heartbeat- if I had 40k to put down.

"Again, the personal remarks are a nice touch. I referring to the V-6 as underachieving, but the HEMI's fall into that category as well. 415bhp from 6.1 litres is hardly pushing the bounds of what's possible"
 
I see what your saying about the V6. The HEMI is hardly underacheiving with 425hp. It needs 6.1L because its not a DOHC motor. I'm sure you understand that OHV engines have lower specific output than DOHC engines. It's nothing new and thats why we rate cars on hp and torque and not displacement. It's all about the output. for an OHV engine the HEMI's output is more than acceptable. GM's 6L V8 produces 361hp in the G8 and 367hp in the Silverado.
 
bbechtel,
 
I know what I said. The initial discussion pertained to weight as Benson and others were talking about how heavy the Challenger was and how it was too heavy to be a sports car. I was saying its similar in CONCEPT to the 650 and Xk- i.e. its not a true sports car in the mode of the Corvette. I was then told that the cars I mentioned are not overweight and furthermore they were far more refined and advanced. I was wondering how we can determine how unrefined the Challenger is relative to those cars when there have been few complaints about the car's crudeness. EVen if it was somewhat more crude it would be expected considering it's low price compared to those cars. There may be a large refinement gap, but nothing I have read suggests the Challenger is raucous and unruly so I don't know what basis sabastian has to make such statements.

"Obviously the V-6 models will be cheaper, but the last thing I would want to do is drive around a 4,000lb car with an underachieving engine and atrocious interior."
 
The V6 car wont be 4000lbs. The V6 Charger/300 is about 3800 and the Charger should be less than that. The V6 car should be in the same weight class as the CTS and G8 with V6 engine.