Dodge Charger Concept...

Post by **TheStig** » 10 Jan 2005, 09:08

what is up with the us car makers... did they loose all their imagination??

their are only rebuilding classics/icons!... and doing a weewee poor job at it!

this looks horrid... it is a family saloon... it has nothing going on....

sad... real sad

jacoja06 · Post by **jacoja06** » 10 Jan 2005, 09:51

But I really love some of their other retro's, including the Ford GT40, and the Cobra, by Ford, or Shelby or whoever it was.

boganbusman · Post by **boganbusman** » 10 Jan 2005, 09:57

Yeah the Cobra concept was done by Ford, and Carroll Shelby was part of the development team.

jacoja06 · Post by **jacoja06** » 10 Jan 2005, 10:05

thanks boganbusman. I just got a mental block. Daaa...

Just Me · Post by **Just Me** » 13 Jan 2005, 12:50

I took some time to look at the new Charger, but it looks awfull.

Front: Viper look a like headlights, and the grill is a rip off the RAM 1500 pick up.

Back side: Looks like the Vauxhall/Opel Vectra. FUGLY

If they call this useless waste of metal a Charger, then Chrysler wants to return to there post Daimler period. Writing red numbers.

Drewb99 · Post by **Drewb99** » 13 Jan 2005, 21:46

Just Me wrote: Front: Viper look a like headlights, and the grill is a rip off the RAM 1500 pick up.

It's a Dodge, of course they're going to use styiling elements from the other Dodge cars. It doesn't share anything in common with the headlights either aside from the fact that they're both black. The car looks perfectly fine to me, and being the first actual car that's not $30k+ to use the new Hemi definitely isn't something to scoff at. IMO, Dodge is shooting for the market segment that the new GTO's holding on to now.

EmptyWords · Post by **EmptyWords** » 13 Jan 2005, 22:58

i dont understand nascar... all of the cars bodies are exactly the same, and yet they label it like, dodge or chevy. theres practiaclly nothing that makes it look like a normal car...

Just Me · Post by **Just Me** » 13 Jan 2005, 23:01

Yeah oke, but at least make a car that reminds you off the original model, or at least its history.

Look at the Ford Mustang. Its even lower in price, looks mighty fine, and pays hommage to the name Mustang.

This is just a cheap marketing trick to lure "fast & the furious" people that can barely remeber the name to the dealer.

Futher more, the 300C also is a Chrysler family car, but for some reason it doesn't share the "Viper" headlights.
(In Europe the Viper was sold as Chrysler Viper, and not Dodge Viper.)

Front grill: okay, thats true, but at least change it a bit to follow the lines of the car. Don't make it look like a "last minute slap on"

Post by **TheStig** » 14 Jan 2005, 00:11

Drewb99 wrote:
It's a Dodge, of course they're going to use styiling elements from the other Dodge cars. It doesn't share anything in common with the headlights either aside from the fact that they're both black. The car looks perfectly fine to me, and being the first actual car that's not $30k+ to use the new Hemi definitely isn't something to scoff at. IMO, Dodge is shooting for the market segment that the new GTO's holding on to now.

I rather see them shoot the car itself... and while they are at it.. the designer...

it is a big piece of american Bullsh*t

Just Me · Post by **Just Me** » 14 Jan 2005, 11:37

Second to that, take a good look at the new SRT 10 Viper, and then look at this Charger. The headlights off the Charger are bit larger, but very similar to me

Drewb99 · Post by **Drewb99** » 14 Jan 2005, 21:42

I count two lamps on the Charger, three on the Viper. The Viper's reflectors are at a 45 degree angle, the Charger's are vertical. The Viper's lamps aren't the same distance from the front of the car, the Charger's are flat. Sorry, there's nothing really similar about them except for the color and maybe the fact that they both have an 'eyebrow' over them.

Supra-man · Post by **Supra-man** » 19 Jan 2005, 09:07

ive already seen it, and im not too impressed......

but that viper is nice!

Mustang90 · Post by **Mustang90** » 21 Jan 2005, 00:14

Its not a bad looking car. It looks nothing like an older charger, except the tail lights,,, sortof. 4 doors is a big minus. The dodge cross grille isn't that good looking. I think a new charger would be nice if it looked more like an older one.

_nacho_ · Post by **_nacho_** » 15 Feb 2005, 09:01

the production charger is god awful, this is almost as bad when they came out with the front wheel drive chargers in the 80's, i predict this car will do very badly and chrysler will be forced to make a big styling change. like cmon a 4 door charger that would be like seeing a mustang cruising down the street with 4 doors being front wheel drive and bosting a electric motor. why must they put a bad name to charger. whyyyyyyyy i ask you.

Corolla GTS · Post by **Corolla GTS** » 15 Feb 2005, 13:39

I bet t won't sell well, or it'll sell a few at least for people who haven't ever heard of the legendary Charger back in the day. BUT< now for my other opinion on the car-
! They shouldn't produce it. What's up here? Charger + four doors = ugly hunk of metal

Drewb99 · Post by **Drewb99** » 15 Feb 2005, 14:25

It has more power stock than most origional Chargers. Its platform is infinitely more solid at handling. How isn't it a good successor? Fvck looks, it's RWD V8, which should be as good a selling point as any.

Just Me · Post by **Just Me** » 15 Feb 2005, 22:41

Sure it's a good selling point. But how many people would you know that would buy a car because it's a RWD V8. If that's your main issue, you could also buy a 300C or a Mustang, or a Vette etc etc.

And the new car has more power then the old ones? Yeh, there's a 30 year gap between the 2 models. So naturally they have invented better engines with more stock HP.

The point is (well at least my point) if you're going to bring back a (legendary, is open for debat) name of the past make sure people can identfy at least some bits off the original. Again look at Ford and their latest Stang.

This is could just as well be a 300C Special Edition with an allround ugly styling.

But then again it's my opinion, and I must say that I like the "muscle" design style a lot more then modern day styling. With some few exeptions off course

Drewb99 · Post by **Drewb99** » 16 Feb 2005, 00:15

It IS a 300C, basically. Same chassis, only slightly different engine than the SRT-8 in its highest trim. And you probably should've told Dodge not to make a car different than its predicessor beforehand

Just Me · Post by **Just Me** » 16 Feb 2005, 21:21

Gulp, ehhhhm eehhmmm, damm! Point taken!

Compared to that sorry exuse for a waste off steel the current car is like million dollar improvement.

Seem I've got the do some catch up on the cars Dodge made with the Charger name.

Hecubus · Post by **Hecubus** » 18 Feb 2005, 11:57

It's fast, it's RWD and V8, and it should handle half-decently (for a large sedan weighing 4000lbs). That seems good enough. I'm not crazy about the looks, although they aren't bad. I admit, I don't entirely get why the R/T has the chrome grille, when the body coloured grille looks better. Still better than the Chargers from '71 onwards though. And the whole four-doors thing is fine. There's not enough of a market for coupes to justify it (just look at the Pontiac GTO). I'd like to try driving one, with the traction and stability control off, though. I've driven the 300C and Magnum, and although they're fast, they end up understeering once the electronics kick in. Safe, but not very entertaining.

Nuts4Ford · Post by **Nuts4Ford** » 18 Feb 2005, 14:50

This car would have been great...

If they didn't name it Charger.

Maverick2K4 · Post by **Maverick2K4** » 23 Mar 2005, 07:54

Yeah. I'm upset that it's a sedan and not a coupe like the original once was.

Hecubus · Post by **Hecubus** » 23 Mar 2005, 18:47

But, what's the big deal that it's a four-door? It seems like anyone who says this can only back it up with "well, the original Charger was a coupe." Yeah, and? The Charger in the 80's was a FWD four-cylinder. Grow a pair of balls and accept that we're either getting a four-door Charger, or no Charger at all, because no one buys coupes anymore, except for a couple of anomalies. Just because the Charger has four doors, it doesn't make it any less capable of melting the rear tires, which is really what the Charger is all about.

MIGUELIX · Post by **MIGUELIX** » 23 Mar 2005, 19:10

IN MY OPINION THE BEST CHARGERS ARE THE OLD ONEÂ´S

Supra-man · Post by **Supra-man** » 23 Mar 2005, 21:11

MIGUELIX wrote:IN MY OPINION THE BEST CHARGERS ARE THE OLD ONEÂ´S

agree!

NFSUnlimited.net

Dodge Charger Concept...

ewww