Dodge Challenger News: 2009 R/T and SE Models Debut

[V1P3R]

Why do they even bother having it covered while driving?

 

[JCE]

There was a fast Caravan at one time. In 1989-1990 there was a turbo model that was reasonably quick for being a people carrier. I've seen these boosted and hitting really quick ¼mi times for what they are.

http://www.turbovan.net/van.html

 

[Gil]

There was a fast Caravan at one time. In 1989-1990 there was a turbo model that was reasonably quick for being a people carrier. I've seen these boosted and hitting really quick ¼mi times for what they are.

http://www.turbovan.net/van.html

I wouldn't trust it!
My slow driving, soccer mom, wife blew up the top end of our N/A 2.2 on a drive to St Louis, from KC. (vehicle had about 30,000 miles on it)

The bottom end went about 30,000 later, and again at 160,000.

I put about $7,500 in the motor in 160,000 miles, not counting oil changes at 3-5000 mile intervals, and tune-ups. That's almost 2/3 of what I paid for the thing in the first place.

The point is, I wouldn't trust a Turbo-charged 2.2. The repairs would be sure to be more often and costlier.

The best thing I can say about the Voyager, is that it prompted me to buy another brand of vehicle.

Friends may not let friend drive drunk. I try to keep my friends out of high mileage (over 40,000) Chryslers.
It doesn't always work as my in-laws drive a very nice Grand Voyager.
I'm still a bit trepidacious. My bad experience has left me a bit gun-shy.
But I'd still be somewhat willing to give a 6.1Liter Hemi Challenger 'vert a home for a while.

 

[YSSMAN]

Chrysler's 6cyl engines are rubbish. The HEMI V8's only sound good but don't produce enough power per litre for my tastes. And this is considering they've had AMPLE time to design and impliment some high output variants before they resurrected the HEMI name. But, being fair GM and Ford aren't doing much better in that department. I think its lazy and costs them little money to do it this way. "oh, lets just increase the displacement to get a little more power" Drives me up the wall sometimes.

I completely disagree. Even Ford's "advanced" modular V8s can't hold a candle to the GM and Chrysler OHV models, both of which are cheaper to produce, smaller in size, and at least with the small-blocks from GM, a helluva-lot more reliable.

I completely agree that Chrysler could have done a lot more to make the HEMI a lot better, but it wasn't as though AMG was going to fly over from Germany and show them how to do it. The big question will likely be over Chrysler's ability to adapt the HEMI in the future; Be it with direct-injection (like GM) or with DOHCs (like Ford), or outright scrapping the program and introducing an all-new line of V8s (nevergonnahappen.com).

Leave GM to do their OHV stuff, they know what they're doing. Ford wants to play ball too with the 'Hurricane" V8, but they never seem to know exactly what to do with it. Chrysler just needs money, plain and simple, and I have no idea if Cerberus is willing to foot the bill just yet...

 

[JCE]

I completely disagree. Even Ford's "advanced" modular V8s can't hold a candle to the GM and Chrysler OHV models, both of which are cheaper to produce, smaller in size, and at least with the small-blocks from GM, a helluva-lot more reliable.

I wasn't directly comparing Ford to GM, I was stating that all three American manufacturer's are lazy in desiging their V8's--which they are. I'm sorry but give a German engineer 7 litres to play with and they would easily dump out more than 505bhp. Infact, the CL63 AMG has 6.2L and 525bhp. So I'm not that far offbase am I? (source)

Infact, I'd say that GM, Ford, AND Chrysler are all equally as guilty as being lazy. Oh, and I also disagree that the current 3V/4V Modular is an unreliable engine--it is infact quite reliable. Maybe you're thinking about the 2V Modular--which had certain "cracking" issues with a manifold. *cough*

 

[YSSMAN]

Interesting you bring up the AMG/GM comparison; There was an article about it in Car and Driver this month. Unfortunately that issue is sitting in the front seat of my car, and thusly I can't reference it directly, but I can give the lay of the land.

What it came down to for Cerse was that while AMG's engines are indeed similar in weight and output, the actual sizes of the engine are tilted mostly in GM's favor, and furthermore, the price difference was SHOCKING. I believe they compared the 7.0L LS7 against the 6.2L AMG M156, by which the Chevrolet is available over the counter for $15K, the Mercedes mill in excess of $50K. Thats enough to buy yourself a Pontiac G8 GT and have change leftover to buy a used Camaro to stick the engine in. So while GM may in fact be "lazy," you really can't deny the fact that they know they've got to build well over a million of these per year (thats all the small-blocks, not just the LS7), so they're going for efficiency and cost-effectiveness in design.

...Granted, the LS7 is hand-built just like the M156, but it is still based on the same basic design...

The good news is that GM is still adapting their engines to meet these different standards. The Gen V engines should be debuting by 2009 (ish), presumably with DIG (direct-injection gasoline) setups, moving power upwards by a decent margin on every engine.

Consider this: The 6.2L L92 V8 found in the Cadillac Escalade produces 403 BHP in standard form. Test vehicles that are DIG equipped are making "more than 450 BHP" on regular fuel, reportedly more with bio-fuels such as E85. That would close the gap significantly on the M156 (in C and CLK spec), and given that the L92 is a truck engine, the effects may be even more dramatic when applied to the L76, LS3, and LS7.

Dollar-for-dollar, pound-for-pound, no matter who a given V8 is coming from, they're going to be hard-pressed to top a GM small-block. The design is bullet-proof, its plenty powerful, and my guess is that it is here to stay for a long, long time.

We may want to wait for further comparison when the "Ultra" V8 debuts under the Cadillac banner. Reports keep flying that its going to make over 400 BHP with less than 5.0L, without DIG (these were initial reports). That may bring a bit more respect to GM's V8 game. We'll see what happens with that, that is, if GM does a "cheap" version for the rest of the kids...

 

[JCE]

Too bad GM doesn't have a true luxury brand to compete with the Germans, otherwise they could of spent more money in development at had the 7.0L output somewhere in the 700bhp-ish area and THEN put it in a GT car. Think about it, if the XLR had a 7.0L V8 with 700bhp, a better interior, and a better suspension don't you think it would possibly sell more? I do.

Again, you know I like me some LSx series V8 goodness (LS2 FTW!) but I still maintain that the American automakers are lazy. They don't want to spend the money to develop more power from either the exsisting displacement or smaller displacements. If you go price per price of course MB will lose that arguement--but you can't deny the MB powerplants put out some decent amount of power. Minus the 7.3L V12--which should have more power in my opinion. All I'm trying to say is (which is offtopic I suppose), the Ford Modular, Chrysler HEMI, and GM LSx series COULD have ALOT more power if they spent more time in the development stages. A SEVEN LITRE V8 needs to have more than a naturally aspirated 505bhp, honestly. Would ZO6 owners pay the extra $20k-ish for TWO HUNDRED more BHP? I would suspect they would of in a nanosecond. Same with the Viper, imagine the 6.1L HEMI with even 200bhp more?

 

[YSSMAN]

I'm not willing to call it laziness on their behalf, but certainly there is more that could be done, but its questionable whether or not it is a bonus to consumers. All across the board GM, Ford, and Chrysler engines are over-sized for their output, but these are all engines that are purpose built and designed, evolved over (in some cases) decades of development.

I still like the fact that they're cheap, powerful, and easy to operate... Thats something that I wish the other companies could do with their engines.

 

[JCE]

Well, at least you somewhat get what I'm trying to say. They could of done more. But, lets get back on the topic at hand.

Lets bash the Challenger some more! j/k

 

[YSSMAN]

I'm waiting for Cerberus to say it will be offered only with a slushbox because thats what the market demands.

Afterwards, I completely write Chrysler off as a relative company...

 

[JCE]

The Challenger NEEDS to have an optional 6spd manual if it expects to be taken seriously as a sports car.

 

[YSSMAN]

ZOMG! Its Official!

Chrysler revealed the production Dodge Challenger to dealers in Vegas last week, and while we're certain it banned all manner of cameras from the event, saying something's banned and enforcing said ban are two entirely different things. Let's just say that they failed on the enforcement part, because OntarioStreetCar.com has phonecam pics of the car, and it is very true to the concept, overall. The main changes are the presence of a b-pillar under the side glass, a small lip spoiler on the trunk of the SRT8, and a slightly extended rear bumper to meet crash test requirements.

OntarioStreetCar reports that the Challenger arrives in March as a 2008 model. That first run of 5500 cars will all be 6.1L SRT8s equipped with automatic transmissions priced at $38,000. Starting in July, the MY09 Challenger will begin production, and the range will expand to include the 3.5L V6, the regular 5.7L HEMI, and of course, the SRT8 with the 6.1 HEMI. And finally, the best news of all: on the '09 Challenger, both HEMI flavors will be available with the T56 6-speed manual transmission. We'll see the car in person at the Chicago Auto Show. Welcome to the 21st century ponycar wars. Buckle up and enjoy the ride.

Yes!







Well, there is a B-Pillar, and some of the looks had to be altered a little bit... But overall, not too different from the concept!

I'm still under the assumption that the "sweet spot" will be the 5.7L Model with the T56, as the SRT-8 version just seems far too expensive. I mean $38,000 for a sports coupe? Who are they kidding? Yes, I realize that the rich MOPAR guys will love it and probably gobble them up, but thats just not a territory I'd want to put the car in, particularly when Cobras are there with an extra 75 BHP, and the Camaro will likely offer the same amount of power for $8-10K less...

 

[High-Test]

Is it just me, Or am I viewing a Dodge product without that infernal crosshair grille?

I like it. The front view screams: "I'm right behind you. speed up or get out of my way."

 

[TopHat]

Is it just me, Or am I viewing a Dodge product without that infernal crosshair grille?

I like it. The front view screams: "I'm right behind you. speed up or get out of my way."

Yeah, it doesn't have the crosshair! Looks mean. I want one.

 

[Venom800tt]

The Challenger makes me wet myself

 

[exigeracer]

When will retro be over? The rest of the design world (not only automotive) has been laughing at American automakers for a while now.

 

[TopHat]

What about Jaguar? The S-Type was retro.

You guys are just mad you're not getting any.

 

[Keef]

It should have the crosshair. On the concept it was tiny and and inside the grille. Looks to me like this one is just in the shadow.

 

[Race Idiot]

It looks mean, but that kind of mean thats been eating all the pies.

 

[Tornado]

The rest of the design world (not only automotive) has been laughing at American automakers for a while now.

Am I mistaken, or did the Fiat 500 and MINI Mk. II just come out? Oh, and the New Beetle is still sold as well, isn't it? Not to mention the Jaguar XJ and S-Type. Then there was that lovely waste of space that the Lamborghini Miura concept was last year. Who makes those, again? Americans?


Anyways, I'm glad they cleaned up the messy details on the front of the car (crosshairs) and that they managed the same effect with the taillights even after pulling the ridiculous ones the concept was sporting off. That being said, it is starting to look as lumpy as the Mustang did from concept to final product.

 

[The Vanishing Boy]

-> I've seen these pics earlier before I logged on to GTP. But somehow the rear made me naucious a bit:

^ The rear bumper looks too big and out of proportioned.

^ I was looking for a style similar to this one above. What a dissapointment.

 

[ND4SPD]

Oh my god, I need new underwear, new pants and a new computer chair! Thank god they fixed the rear lights! This is absolutely kickass, I wish I had the money for an SRT8 with a T56.....

 

[McLaren]

I'm still under the assumption that the "sweet spot" will be the 5.7L Model with the T56, as the SRT-8 version just seems far too expensive. I mean $38,000 for a sports coupe? Who are they kidding? Yes, I realize that the rich MOPAR guys will love it and probably gobble them up, but thats just not a territory I'd want to put the car in, particularly when Cobras are there with an extra 75 BHP, and the Camaro will likely offer the same amount of power for $8-10K less...

I really think that's a typo on someone's part.

 

[bennyrrr]

Mclaren, forgive YSS, hes so blinded by the GM light that anything thats worth the money like the Challenger just makes no sense.

 

[Tornado]

Mclaren, forgive YSS, hes so blinded by the GM light that anything thats worth the money like the Challenger just makes no sense.

There isn't a single car in then entire Chrysler portfolio (barring, of course, the SRT-10 quadruplets) that is worth anywhere near $40,000. That is including the 300C. If the Challenger SRT-8 starts at $38,000, the Mustang GT500 (which admittedly are still sell for far more than the $40,000 or so MSRP) and whatever Camaro there will be (which will probably be much closer to $30,000 than $40,000) will destroy it in sales. $38,000 is BMW 335i money, for crying out loud. That is as much as the larger Charger SRT-8 is now.

 

[bennyrrr]

BMW dealers are selling 335is for damn near $45,000. The GT500 cant handle due to it being designed by dinosaurs and the SRT8's are nice cars for affordable prices.

 

[Gil]

Dollar-for-dollar, pound-for-pound, no matter who a given V8 is coming from, they're going to be hard-pressed to top a GM small-block. The design is bullet-proof, its plenty powerful, and my guess is that it is here to stay for a long, long time.
...

I will say that you are probably right.
But GM is due for some serious updating in the small-block department.
I hope they prove to be as bulletproof as the Ford 4.6.
I also hope they don't make the same mistake as Ford and put underpowered v-8's in their larger trucks
and SUVs.

On topic:
While $38K seems a little much for a Challenger. But if you go to the Dodge/Mopar website and build yourself a nicely optioned out Charger or Magnum, you will go over $40 grand, and easily.
Wait and buy a lease return and save about 5-6 grand.
I'd also give them a year or two to work the "bugs" out. Even with the lifetime warranty, going to the dealer all the time for the little first year of production problems would be a time-consuming pain in the butt.

 

[Tornado]

BMW dealers are selling 335is for damn near $45,000.

That's nice and irrelevant. They MSRP for 38,900. Hell, the Charger still MSRPs for 38,900, and that is most likely going to be a much larger car. And what happens when GM brings out the V8 Camaro for around 30 grand and the car is faster despite a massive horsepower deficit?

The GT500 cant handle due to it being designed by dinosaurs

So, we will be able tell that the Challenger will be before we know anything about it? Because I tell you right now, the SRT-8 Challenger will weigh a whole hell of a lot more than the GT500 Mustang does, if the SRT-8 Charger is any indication.

and the SRT8's are nice cars for affordable prices.

Until you sit down in them.

 

[exigeracer]

Am I mistaken, or did the Fiat 500 and MINI Mk. II just come out? Oh, and the New Beetle is still sold as well, isn't it? Not to mention the Jaguar XJ and S-Type. Then there was that lovely waste of space that the Lamborghini Miura concept was last year. Who makes those, again? Americans?

None of these manufacturers base their entire lineup on retro designs. The Beetle is from when retro was fashionable, Jaguar never went retro, they always stuck with old design, and look where they're heading now. They're totally phasing out their historic design (and have been for a decade in the form of various concepts).

So much American automotive product is based on retro, marketed entirely as retro specifically to sell as retro. You can't deny that Americans are leading the automotive design world in using old design. It is zero progress.

 

[Tornado]

None of these manufacturers base their entire lineup on retro designs.

Quite coincidental, because no American companies are doing such a thing anymore either. I would go on a limb and say, other than a brief period at Ford that has since passed, none ever did.

So much American automotive product is based on retro, marketed entirely as retro specifically to sell as retro.

An awfully large amount of European designs are as well.

You can't deny that Americans are leading the automotive design world in using old design. It is zero progress.

I can easily rattle off a few European cars that I wouldn't beat with a stick for fear of making them look ugly enough to cause death to us all. On the whole, I fail to see how retro, as much as I may dislike it (and I do, as I have gone on the record many times as saying so), is anywhere near as bad as the completely ass-ugly that a few companies seem to think is the future of car design.