Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views 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
|
|
|---|---|
|
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. |
|
| Those Monte Carlos weren't ugly, just very bland - a two-door Lumina in every sense of the word. | |
|
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. |
|
|
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. |
|
|
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??) |
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
but I think there might have been a manual option in the '78-80 timeframe. At least, I know there was a 4-speed option for the Grand Prix...I think it was available for the Monte as well. Throughout the 80's, I think most of them just used lightweight Turbo-Hydramatic 200Cs, or the 4-speed overdrive variant of it. Sometimes the TH350 would show up behind the Buick 231 V-6 (my '82 Cutlass Supreme had one) but I think the Chevy engines got mainly the 200C trannies. I had an '88 LeBaron turbo coupe when I was married. It was actually fairly reliable up to around 90,000 miles. Then all hell broke loose, and about the only thing mechanical that hadn't died by the 115-120K mark was the tranny, and even it was leaking fluid. I think the LeBaron was definitely a looker, though, although when they went to exposed headlights for 1993(?), I thought that ruined the looks. I thought that style-wise, the Sebring was a bit of a step down, too, although I did like the styling of the '96-00 generation. After the '01 refreshening though, I like it less, and it just comes off feeling cheaper, somehow. I don't know if they actually cheapened the cloud cars for 2001, or the competition just got that much better. Maybe a bit of both? |
|
| There were manual 84 Montes sold in the Mexican market, of all places | |
|
An old woman who lived about four blocks from me when I was a kid had a super-strippo (not even a/c), light blue with light blue interior, '78 or '79 Monte with a four (or maybe three, or heck, maybe five, wish I would have checked more closely) speed manual on the floor, not sure what engine, but I'm guessing some sort of six. I can't remember if it had a bench or buckets, but I think bench. It's still the only one like it I've ever seen. Not sure if there's any way to find out how many like it were built. Back on topic, in reading through this, I guess I'm not the only one who thinks the title of this topic is more than a little off-base, considering what Chrysler did to the Charger name through the years. Of course, they're hardly unique in that regard. How many bastardizations has the (now dead) T-bird been through? |
|
|
A story in this week's Automotive News says DC is getting lots of mail from people against using the Charger name on a 4-door body. kcram Host - Wagons |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Daimler's abuse of the Dodge Charger legacy.
