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
|
Replying to: xtec (Feb 08, 2006 2:59 pm)  But yes it's a very cool car and isn't going to be off my test drive list when I decide to buy. Good Job Dodge !!!! Rocky |
|
|
Well I find the Charger an awkward looking version of the 300, and not a sporty car. First of all what works in styling for the 300, when hacked to make the Charger comes off all wrong. Secondly, the weight of the car is to high on the scale. Needs to lose 600#s or so. -Loren |
|
|
First of all the Charger is by far more sport looking then the 300.The 300 is more luxury.As for weight the 70'cuda with a Hemi weighed 3800lbs.That was a small car so to say that these care weight to much is wrong.My Charger has the V6 and has no problem moving this car.What do you drive?I bet I'll to you its not as good as the Charger.Thats why they call it opinion,but I backed mine with facts.
|
|
|
that the Charger is about the size of an Intrepid, but RWD and beefed up, I don't think it's really all that heavy. What, around 3700-3800 lb for the V-6 and around 4,000 for the Hemi? And if it's any consolation, the last time Chrysler made a car on a wheelbase of 120" or more, was 1978, and it weighed around 4600-5000 lb!  Now if a Charger handled really sloppily, accelerated like an automatic Mini with 4 people on board and the a/c running, or was a guzzler, then I'd be tempted to gripe about its weight. But despite that weight, it's rated something like 19/27 with the V-6, does 0-60 in around 8-9 seconds, and is a great handler, I'd say the additional weight is almost a non-issue. There's an old cliche about light weight being its own reward, but it can also be a punishment. Notice that some of the more highly regarded small cars, like the Mini and the BMW 3-series, are porkers for their size classes. A Mini weighs about what a Corolla or Civic does, and a 3-series weighs in at around what midsized cars do, there must be something to the added weight. |
|
|
Replying to: xtec (Feb 10, 2006 3:08 pm) with a Hemi weighed 3800lbs.That was a small car so to say that these care weight to much is wrong.My Charger has the V6 and has no problem moving this car.What do you drive?I bet I'll to you its not as good as the Charger.Thats why they call it opinion,but I backed mine with facts. -end quote- I am not sure I would classify the difference in looks between the 300 and Charger as "sport", but then-again as a pure definition of the term, yes indeed. The 300 as sort of a Bentley classic style, does hit the mark. I don't think 1970 performance standards is what Chrysler needs to achieve in 2006. Less weight equals better cornering, best gas mileage, and faster zero to sixty. Seems your 0-60 is no better, or worse than a '96 Miata I owned last year. And that is no powerhouse of an engine. The 3.5V6 is a good choice for powering the Chrysler, and should be the base engine in the 300. The gas mileage is good, and if they made a smaller and lighter Challenger, and Charger car, the 0-60 would go down a second, while MPG would go up a couple. Tires last longer and the cornering improves. Those are facts. Would I consider a 300 - yes. Should it be lighter, and not so aggressive with the stability control to allow faster cornering - yes. For the weight, the 3.5V6 mileage is pretty good. The 5 star crash rating is a plus. Another RWD car with good crash test scores is the Mustang. And yeah, I know it is 3500#, and a bit porky too. Not sure why you are curious as to what I am driving, but here is the answer: PT Cruiser. Loren
|
|
|
that the new Challenger will weigh much less than the Charger. After all, it's based on the same platform. All they really did was take 4 inches out of the wheelbase, all of it in the back seat. So you still have a car on a 116" wheelbase. FWIW, that's still a longer wheelbase than most other cars out there, even the bigger ones. And it's not any narrower, as far as I know. When you take a big car and make a smaller derivative of it, usually you don't save that much weight. Unless you do so much restructuring and redesigning that you practically end up with a new car, anyway. As for the 1970 Challenger, it was an awesome performer in its day. Now sure, none of the panty-waists at Consumer Reports would have liked it. Heck, if they had their way back then all cars would have been small, 4 or 6-cyl pillared sedans that would do 0-60 in about 20 seconds! Probably the biggest detriment to the Challenger's performance was the wheels, tires, and transmissions of the day. They most likely rode on bias ply tires, and even if you could get radials, they'd be crap compared to the radials of today. The wheels were probably 15x6, which is compact terrritory today, or Buick Century at best. And the trannies were limited in their number of gears. The automatic only had three speeds, and I think the manual was a 4-speed. So you could gear them for a great 0-60/quarter mile time, or a high top speed, but not both. I've had a few old Mopars from the 70's, and these were just generic full-sized cars. But swapping the standard wheels for some 15x7 road wheels, or better yet, the copcar wheels with the wider offset, really improved handling a lot. And nowadays I'm sure they're using something wider than 7" for high performance jobs like the Hemi Charger or Challenger.
|
|
|
Replying to: m1miata (Feb 11, 2006 11:02 pm) Rocky |
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Feb 12, 2006 5:23 am) The 300 is a pretty good value too!
|
|
|
Replying to: m1miata (Feb 19, 2006 11:26 pm) Rocky
|
|
|
does seem a bit wide for the Challenger, considering the 300 and Charger upon which they're based are only around 74" wide. Honestly, unless you're trying to make a car where you can get 3-across seating, I don't think there's any need for a car to be 78" wide! And I don't think 5-passenger seating is top priority for cars like the Challenger!
|
|
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
