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
First of all you people come on this forum trash talk the Charger ,but I'm not suppose to defend I car I own and think its one of the best cars out there.Why do you people even care about the Charger if you don't like them? Stay on your own forums and talk about your own cars or are they to boring to talk about. 
|
|
|
Replying to: xtec (Dec 06, 2005 2:32 pm) I really like the new Charger. I have been defending it. But don't be alarmed if someone else criticizes the Charger here. Check the title of the discussion. |
|
|
just don't say "rice" in these forums. The hosts hate it when you say "rice". And to be fair, yeah, considering the forum title, some Charger bashing is to be expected here. Now if it were a Charger OWNERS' forum, that would be different, although even there things could get heated. I remember about 5 years ago, things got nasty on the Intrepid owners forum. There was one guy who had nothing better to do than slam the car all day long. And he either had multiple personalities (and multiple IDs) and would post so that he could carry on conversations with himself, or he'd get his buddies to jump on and rag on the Intrepid, too. And then, of course, you'd get the owners defending their cars, and it just got to the point that even when someone came on with a legitimate complaint about the car, some of the owners would jump on the poster, thinking it was that guy trying to stir up trouble. Admittedly, the Charger does have its job cut out for it. Not only is it going to get ragged on by people who just hate this type of car (big, domestic, muscular, etc), but also by the die-hards that think the only way it would be a "real" Charger would be if it were a Hemi coupe with a stick-shift option. Heck, I'm just glad they're building the thing! Even if it's not everybody's idea of a perfect car, at least it's something different. If you want a competent but somewhat generic, roomy FWD car, there are plenty to choose from...500, Impala, and any number of Japanese models. At least the Charger gives us some more variety. |
|
|
Replying to: xtec (Dec 06, 2005 2:32 pm) As for the "opposition", don't let them get you down too much...so far, nobody has been able to offer any compelling reasons other than the 4-door thing as to why it's not a proper Charger. Andre, did this guy really carry on conversations with himself, via different accounts/screennames?! Wow...in the realm of internet lameness, that takes the cake... 
|
|
|
Replying to: john_324 (Dec 07, 2005 6:31 am) He would send a message ragging on how horrible his Intrepid was, and how horrible the Intrepids their police force had were, and how they were looking forward to getting replacement Impalas in. Then a few seconds later, someone from supposedly the same police department would post a message agreeing with everything he said. If nothing else, it beat the heck out of Jerry Springer and all those dumb TV courtroom shows. It could get entertaining. Oh, and a lot of us were called stupid, retarded, etc, for buying Intrepids. So hang in there Xtec, you're not alone! 
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Dec 07, 2005 6:45 am) The various "marque" forums out there are pretty scary sometimes...I'm often utterly amazed at the venom of some of the residents of these boards. |
|
|
Replying to: john_324 (Dec 07, 2005 6:31 am) My perspective on this is: 1) I never bought the "its a 4-door so it can't be a charger". The Charger I most remember was ~71 model which was a giant V shaped 2-door body that was larger (and I assume heavier) than many/most of the sedans on the road today. Besides - I need a 4-door for use as backup family vehicle (would love to go 3 cars at some point but not yet). And for similar practical family purposes the autostick instead of a manual is okay by me. I do think it is still a cool car to have that much engine in a reasonably priced family sedan. However, what I do think are legimate reasons that it might not be a charger: 1) Styling - The "Brand Marketers" apparently won out big time on this car's design. Instead of carrying retro cues from the old cars on the front grill - it gets the current Dodge (truck?) type of grill. The back end is even worse - instead of something like a retro "C H A R G E R" across the back you get the tiny corporate sized logo "Dodge" on left and "Charger" or "Charger R/T" on right. If you look quick you are not sure if it says Charger or Stratus ....... - They definitely styled it to keep with their current modern brand cues, not to have retro touches (that the new Mustang does so well). 2) Victim of the 300 success. Car was made to be too much of a clone of the Chrysler 300 with slightly different sheet metal for a few less dollars. My main complaints on this are around emphasis on family sedan features over sport sedan features. The option sheet is even almost identical - probably a good practical move but lost the ability to make this target a sportier market/crowd looking for something a little smaller, lighter,... 3) Due to #2 above, the Charger keeps the 300's long 120 inch wheel base, its high seat position, its high door sills, its 18" but only 60 series all season tires, and of course its ~4000 weight. All of which fight against it as capability to be a sports sedan. 4) Lack of emphasis on performance in marketing the vehicle. Yes, despite the 340HP/390lb engine, 5 speed auto,... the R/T model still came with the 60 series family tires. Worse, the R/T model with the R/T package (which seemed almost a hidden option, mostly the Daytona package version of it with the orange or yellow color schemes were empasized - their web site options package didn't even list the R/T package for may weeks) you still only get 235/55/18 that are nominally high performance ( all season) tires. Where is the true high performance summer tire package with 40 or 45 series tires. This is best they can do with the R/T package on the R/T model? Yes, the SRT-8 does address this but for large add. $$ and 20" wheels/tires does not seem optimal for performance given unsprung weight versus just wider 18" tires (looks over perf.). Overall, I can see how the styling and similarity to the 300 sedan would turn off the charger loyalists and I think those are much more legitamate beefs than that it has 4 doors. For my own decision process, I was willing to overlook the corporate styling for bang for the buck but it was the lack of performance sedan thinking beyond giving it the Hemi engine that turned me off. I owned a Coronet 318 as a kid and previously owned one of the 300M's that I liked as well. So I still can't believe that with a 340hp hemi, rear wheel drive, 5 speed autostick package they couldn't turn out what I was looking for in a reasonably priced performance sedan. It now sounds like the Challenger may do what needed to be done to make a smaller, lighter, more performance oriented package out of what seems like a great engine/drive train package (and fix the retro styling I hope as well). [In the meantime, I ended up with the '05 Infiniti G35 w/234/45/WR18's, Limited slip, high perf. suspension, ..... that I love and is great. - Sorry Dodge, you had plenty of chances...]
|
|
|
Replying to: tlmurdock (Dec 09, 2005 6:44 am) I do wonder though how long "retro" styling is going to cut it in the marketplace. After all, the generation that's going to be buying such cars in the not-too-distant future will have no meaningful memories of the "classics"...so the styling may not have any special appeal to them. With the current Mustang for instance, there's some concern that though it does look quite good, the styling is designed to basically go after the babyboom generation one final time, right as they retire and still have disposable income. A good choice by Ford to be sure, but the price is that the up-and-coming demographic is finding the styling "old". This has led to speculation that if Ford keeps the retro styling too long, it's going to alienate potential buyers. I dunno, but it's something to consider. |
|
|
First, it's obvious that some of the people responding to this particular discussion didn't read the title. Yes, were here to bash the new charger, or at least grieve for the death of the 1999 concept charger r/t, that didn't get built. Let's talk about that concept. It had a roofline that looked like a 69. It had windows shaped similar to a 69. It had door indents like a 68/69. I would have definately bought one, even though it had, that's right, four doors. It didn't look like it had four doors, it looked hot! Now, as for some other arguments I've heard in favor of the new charger. I own and drive daily, a 69 dodge charger. It has a trunk that is huge, bigger than most modern cars. I have a wife and 2 kids, and my 10 and 12 year olds don't mind folding the seat forward to get in the back. They call it dad's race car. The boys at Dodge admitted publicly that the name charger was used for marketing only, and that they had no intention of building a "retro muscle car". They went to the public did tests where different car names were said, and people had to identify them as dodge or not. Charger was the most recognized car name that people knew was a dodge. Gee, I wonder why? The Dukes of Hazzard maybe, or a movie called Bullit? The dodge boys also admitted that they had no intentionof running ads with the new and old versions togeather, because they didn't want any confusion or to tick original mopar fans like me off. Also, they aknowledged that putting a 60's era charger next to one of these might cause dis-interest in the new ones and more interest in the old ones, and that doesn't sell cars. It's all about money. The other big argument by pro-new charger guys and dodge, is that two door coupes just don't sell. Of course that was before they saw the sales figures for the 05 mustang. I honestly think that if it had come out in 2004, the charger might have come out as a 2 door with a more retro look. And thus we have the challenger, which dodge appears to be doing the right way. I can only hope that successful sales of the challenger and drop offs of this new charger will cause a restyling of the charger into something more like what most of us anti-new charger guys relaly want, a modern charger that still IS a muscle car. I've seen a total of four new chargers in my town. Two were obviously on test drives, and when the drivers saw my car they stared and stared, their toungues hanging out, drooling. The third pulled into 7/11, and again paid more attention to my car than he did his own. The fourth had the balls to park his car next to mine at the movie theater, being really cool, or so he thought. Funny thing is, I walked out, up to my car got in, and only then noticed the hemi badge, and turning to look saw it was a "new charger". It just blended into the parking lot like every other "modern" car. It didn't stick, or jump out at me or anyone else. I recently read that charger sales aren't as high as 300 sales, and that dodge was surprised by this. Now, the car itself doesn't deserve any bashing, because, for what it is, it isn't a bad car. I even told dodge when I emailed them the 5th or 6th time that I'd buy one if they called it something else, like polara or dart or something. So, in essence were not bashing the car, but the designers, marketers, and execs at dodge/ddc, for giving it the charger name. P.S.: My wife was going to buy a new mustang till she saw the challenger concept, now she wants one of those. I'm so proud I've converted her to mopar! |
|
|
What works for the 300, doesn't translate well as a so-called Charger. The 300 look better, and correct. The Charger is a modified 300 which looks like a modified job done by customs shop. I am sure they tried there best to transform a 300 into a sporty muscle car, but it is in reality impossible to do. For sporty, I'd take the 300M any day, but it is long gone now. I owned a '65 Stang many years ago, as in '70's, and have mixed feelings about the latest rendition. It looks good, though it is almost too retro. A car can start to look like a replica car if you get too caught up in drawing the same old lines. The interior and some of the exterior lines I feel were actually just fine in the previous Mustang. A new stronger chassis and all, is welcomed, but I would trade the retro gauges, and such for a more modern inline 6 and better gas mileage in both the 6 and 8s. I hope Chrysler makes a cool modern day looking Challenger, with sporty lines, the 3.5 V6 engine as standard, and does not go too retro. The Challenger is a beauty. Just restore the old ones, and make something with styling hints of days gone bye, yet modern. Same goes for the Camaro. The Charger I don't really get at all. And for goodness sake, drop the door window sills on cars. New car are getting army tank looking. Are these armored cars?  Loren
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Daimler's abuse of the Dodge Charger legacy.
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
