Daimler's abuse of the Dodge Charger legacy.

659 messages, Last post on Jun 21, 2006 at 2:03 PM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Dodge

Outline

Messages Page 6 of 66: 1; ...; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; ...; 66; Prev; Next; Last

#50 of 659 It runs with the rally classification, by driftracer Oct 20, 2004 (9:08 pm)
as the most common rally class is the 4-door group sedan...also most easily translated into real world vehicles.
#51 of 659 If I were rich or nuts enough by emmanuelchoke Oct 23, 2004 (10:45 am)
I'd buy an 05 Chrysler 300C, remove the body and somehow drop a 68-70 RT body on it. The best of both worlds. By the way, my first car was a 68 Charger.
#52 of 659 Since both cars are unitized... by andre1969 Oct 23, 2004 (12:23 pm)
you might be able to actually get the suspension components of to mate up to the undercarriage of the classic Charger. With enough money and perseverance, that is! The new Hemi would fit in the engine bay, no trouble at all. Because while it might look pretty impressive compared to most modern engines, it's downright dainty and feminine-looking compared to some of the monsters that used to end up under the hood of a Charger! As for the tranny, I'm also guessing that the Benz 5-speed is physically bigger/longer than the old Torqueflite 727, so you might have to modify the tranny hump. At least, I heard you had to do that when putting in the 4-speed automatic overdrive from the trucks, which used to be a somewhat popular thing to do to somewhat modernize these old beasts (and probably plunge their durability too, as those old Torqueflites were one of the most durable parts of the car!)
#53 of 659 Maybe I've seen too many episodes of Monster Garage. by emmanuelchoke Oct 23, 2004 (1:06 pm)
A few years ago Jon Moss did put a Monte Carlo body on a Z28 chassis as an engineering experiment. Went from FWD to RWD, 406 ci, 6speed manual; the car hauled. Chevy toyed with the idea briefly. More of a what if than a why.
#54 of 659 Why ? by andys120 Oct 23, 2004 (2:13 pm)
would anyone bother putting the goofy fwd MC body on a Z28 chassis? Why???????
#55 of 659 G.M thought America might want a 12 second M.C? by emmanuelchoke Oct 23, 2004 (3:44 pm)
It was a show car designed to gauge interest. Apparently America's reaction was similar to yours. It was just one of over a hundred vehicles Moss Frankensteined with. Why a Monte Carlo... I couldn't guess. I can appreciate his imagination though. I don't want to sidetrack the original topic, so back to the Charger.
#56 of 659 by grbeck Oct 24, 2004 (6:47 am)
With the current Monte Carlo, the first thing you do to improve the car is throw away the body! The current Monte Carlo has to be one of the most awkward looking cars on the market. Money would be better spent bringing one of the sharp 1970-72 Monte Carlos up to modern specs.
#57 of 659 by fintail Oct 24, 2004 (7:19 am)
With the retro craze hitting everywhere, they should try to remake the old Monte. The new one really is an ungainly design, sags and bulges in every odd location. Blech.
#58 of 659 The Fool Monte...? by emmanuelchoke Oct 24, 2004 (7:37 am)
The article I am refering to is from the August 1996 issue of Motor Trend. The car doesn't look half bad, metallic green, rear 335/45ZR17 tires. This is back when Earnhardt Sr. was driving a Monte Carlo race car, so that may explain some of this. Back to topic, the most blatant abuse of the Charger name happened in the mid 80's, with the release of the FWD version. A double disgrace when Shelby allowed his name to be used.
#59 of 659 by grbeck Oct 24, 2004 (8:10 am)
Those Monte Carlos weren't ugly, just very bland - a two-door Lumina in every sense of the word.

Messages Page 6 of 66: 1; ...; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; ...; 66; Prev; Next; Last

To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Search Forums

Browse by Vehicle

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic

View All Topics

Today's Chats

Chat Schedule