You are here: Forums Automotive News & Views Daimler's abuse of the Dodge Charger legacy.

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

Messages Page 7 of 67 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 67 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#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.
#60 of 659 by john_324 Oct 25, 2004 (6:08 am)
I always liked those 1980s Montes Carlo...yeah, I know they sported the weakest V8 engine this side of a Mustang II, but the styling was pretty good I thought, and the car seemed like a total anachronism in the heyday of small, fwd coupes that favored turbo 4s for performance.   Current version seems bland indeed...I think the only thing keeping it going is the NASCAR faithful for whom it's as close as they can get to what their racing heroes drive.
#61 of 659 I had an '86 Monte Carlo... by andre1969 Oct 25, 2004 (6:22 am)
and it was a pretty nice car. My Mom bought it brand-new, and gave it to me in early 1998. It was just the base 305 V-8, no SS or anything. For the time, and for what it was, I don't think it was a bad performer. I didn't look at that 305 as being weak so much as being held back. Unless you got an SS, the 305 in midsize cars had a restricted exhaust, or something restricted, that cut horsepower down from the 165 that it had in full-sized cars and pickups. And the gearing was something really loafy, like a 2.56:1 or 2.73:1. Heck, maybe it was even a 2.41:1? I know all three of those ratios were pretty common.   It would do 0-60 in about 10 seconds, which was about on par with the competition at the time. A V-8 T-bird only had around 140-150 hp at that time, even with fuel injection. I think Ford tended to use quicker gearing, though. And the closest thing Chrysler would've had in '86 to the Monte Carlo would've been the LeBaron/600 coupe. And witha Turbo-I/automatic, they were only good for 0-60 in around 9-9.5 seconds, stock.   Chrysler really made a resurgence in this type of market in '87, with the sleek new LeBaron coupe/convertible. I think that was one of the most beautiful K-cars ever built! (and I'm not trying to damn it with faint praise!) It's kind of a shame that Dodge didn't get a version of that. For the timeframe, it wouldn't have made a bad basis for the Charger. In a way though, the Dodge Daytona filled that slot. It was smaller, but still a K-car, and used the same dashboard as the LeBaron and many of the same interior bits.
#62 of 659 by john_324 Oct 25, 2004 (6:36 am)
Did the 1980s Montes ever have a manual available? I've never seen one, but you never know...   I always liked the sytling of the LeBaron, and thought the Sebring's design was a step down. Loved those headlight covers, and have a weird soft spot in my heart for that bizarro Maserati/Chrysler TC thing (who couldn't love those porthole windows that came on the hardtop??)
#63 of 659 No manuals... by driftracer Oct 25, 2004 (6:57 am)
the most powerful of the '80s Montes was the SS, with only 190 hp, I believe, which translates to 150-160 at the wheels...   The last manual Monte Carlos were the first gen.

Messages Page 7 of 67 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 67 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Automotive News & Views Daimler's abuse of the Dodge Charger legacy.