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

[Joey D]

It's ugly, it's overpriced, and it's a Chrysler so therefore it's utter rubbish. Obliviously Dodge learned nothing from the Prowler...expensive cars based on a concept car are only novelties that people think look cool but do not actually buy. I'm willing to bet you'll see good sales for 2 years at the most and then Chrysler will discontinue it.

And I really can't hold out a ton of hope for the Camaro either, granted it will probably be cheaper and be screwed together better, but I just can't see a ton of people buying them.

Oh and for $38,000 I'll take a Infinti G Coupe or Lexus IS350.

 

[Tornado]

Obliviously Dodge learned nothing from the Prowler...expensive cars based on a concept car are only novelties that people think look cool but do not actually buy.

You seem to be grossly mistaken. Chryslers' "Concept, straight to production" cars sell remarkably well. The Cloud cars. The PT Cruiser. The Viper. The Prowler (which sold double what the Viper sold over the same period of time, so I don't get where you are getting your numbers). People, quite simply, buy them en masse. The only one that wasn't a marvelous success is the Crossfire, and even that didn't do that bad. It was Chevy and Ford who could never repeat the success, after the Blackwood, Thunderbird, SSR and Aztek failed bitterly.

I'm willing to bet you'll see good sales for 2 years at the most and then Chrysler will discontinue it.

Nonsense. It will cost Chrysler nothing to make, and it will sit in a segment that has just been given new life.

And I really can't hold out a ton of hope for the Camaro either, granted it will probably be cheaper and be screwed together better, but I just can't see a ton of people buying them.

A ton of people buy Mustangs every year. As long as GM and Chrysler keep it so there is a low level engine (thus avoiding the disaster that was the GTO), they will sell every one they make. Especially when people realize the Camaro and Challenger will probably be better than the aging Mustang.

Oh and for $38,000 I'll take a Infinti G Coupe or Lexus IS350.

You'd take an IS350 over a Challenger? Hilarious.

 

[TopHat]

It's ugly, it's overpriced,

Like a BMW?

Obliviously Dodge learned nothing from the Prowler...expensive cars based on a concept car are only novelties that people think look cool but do not actually buy.

The prower was a 2 seat convertible with no trunk whatsoever, they weren't expecting to sell alot of them. This is a 2 door coupe with 4 seats and a choice of multiple engines, they're gonna sell loads.

I'm willing to bet you'll see good sales for 2 years at the most and then Chrysler will discontinue it.

Why would they discontinue it? Its going to sell, and its based on the next generation LY platform destined for the next 300 and Charger.

Oh and for $38,000 I'll take a Infinti G Coupe or Lexus IS350.
Quote:

Why would anyone cross-shop those cars to the Challenger? Wouldn't one be looking at a Mustang or a Camaro? 💡

And I really can't hold out a ton of hope for the Camaro either, granted it will probably be cheaper and be screwed together better, but I just can't see a ton of people buying them.

The Camaro has to be the single most hyped car in the annals of time people have been talking about this car for 3 years. They'd really have to screw it up to turn people off.




This will sell well. Mind you its 38 grand for the SRT8. Thats a hell of a deal, considering you cannot get that from FoMoCo, and this is gonna be released before the Camaro by atleast 3 or 4 months, they're gonna be sold out for atleast halfway through the 09 model year.

 

[Joey D]

You seem to be grossly mistaken. Chryslers' "Concept, straight to production" cars sell remarkably well. The Cloud cars. The PT Cruiser. The Viper. The Prowler (which sold double what the Viper sold over the same period of time, so I don't get where you are getting your numbers). People, quite simply, but them en masse.

The PT has been going down the tubes, the Prowler was bought by an extremely small amount of people (11,702 to be exact) and is, as you know no longer built. If it sold well you'd still seem them on dealers lots under the Chrysler marque. Also you must include the Crossfire which failed pretty spectacularly as well...if I wanted an outdated Mercedes I would buy a used one. The Pacifica which isn't doing what it should in it's overcrowd segment (it's rubbish so I see why it fails) and the Compass sucks as well. All of these were concepts to production for Chrysler.

The Viper still doesn't sell in the numbers it should when you compare it to the Corvette, 911, and any other midlife crisis car in that segment. Even in Detroit you see 20 Vettes to every 1 Viper.

Nonsense. It will cost Chrysler nothing to make, and it will sit in a segment that has just been given new life.

Which will be closed in a few years when all the guys in their late 40's relive their childhood dream.

A ton of people buy Mustangs every year. As long as GM and Chrysler keep it so there is a low level engine (thus avoiding the disaster that was the GTO), they will sell every one they make. Especially when they realize the Camaro and Challenger will probably be better than the aging Mustang.

I don't think so, the Camaro died once to poor sales, I don't see why it couldn't happen again. Fuel prices alone will slow this segment down over the next 10 years.

You'd take an IS350 over a Challenger? Hilarious.

Actually I would take a Chevy Aveo over any Chrysler product...I hate the company that much. But at least with the Lexus it won't be in the shop every other week and won't be rusting within a years time.

 

[Solid Fro]

Why is the 5-speed automatic option getting so much hate?

 

[Joey D]

Like a BMW?

Yup sort of like that, but at least with a BMW you get a well made overpriced and ugly car.

The prower was a 2 seat convertible with no trunk whatsoever, they weren't expecting to sell alot of them. This is a 2 door coupe with 4 seats and a choice of multiple engines, they're gonna sell loads.

Doubt it, Chrysler had no concept of how to design a roomy car anymore. Ever since they ditched the LHS and that cab forward thing they've sucked at designing something roomy. We've had an Intrepid x2, a PT Crusier, and a Pacifica....all which didn't make great use of space. The PT was probably the best out of all of them however.

Why would they discontinue it? Its going to sell, and its based on the next generation LY platform destined for the next 300 and Charger.

I personally do not think the car will sell.

Why would anyone cross-shop those cars to the Challenger? Wouldn't one be looking at a Mustang or a Camaro? 💡

You wouldn't, I would.

The Camaro has to be the single most hyped car in the annals of time people have been talking about this car for 3 years. They'd really have to screw it up to turn people off.

Just because people think it's cool looking doesn't mean it will sell. People thought the SSR was a cool looking vehicle but it was terrible and no one bought it.

This will sell well. Mind you its 38 grand for the SRT8. Thats a hell of a deal, considering you cannot get that from FoMoCo, and this is gonna be released before the Camaro by atleast 3 or 4 months, they're gonna be sold out for atleast halfway through the 09 model year.

I still doubt it will sell.

 

[TopHat]

The PT has been going down the tubes

Thats because its ancient, that'll happen to any car.

, the Prowler was bought by an extremely small amount of people (11,702 to be exact) and is, as you know no longer built.

Like a Viper, but the Prowler was infinitley more affordable, also it was discontinued because it was outdated.

If it sold well you'd still seem them on dealers lots under the Chrysler marque.

They were going to make the Howler, but you can thank MB for the lack of that.

Also you must include the Crossfire which failed pretty spectacularly as well...if I wanted an outdated Mercedes I would buy a used one.

It failed because it was slow, unreliable, and people just went and bought a new SLK. Mercedes Short-changed Chrysler. Again.

The Pacifica which isn't doing what it should in it's overcrowd segment (it's rubbish so I see why it fails)

But its not rubbish, your family received a lemon, this happens to EVERY car maker. My dad received a lemon of a VW Passat, but it was still the nicest damn car he'd ever owned.

and the Compass sucks as well. All of these were concepts to production for Chrysler.

The Compass never had a chance, it was crap from the beginning, because MB never sent over any of its better designers over to Auburn Hills, its was like 2 totally different corporations operating then.

The Viper still doesn't sell in the numbers it should when you compare it to the Corvette, 911, and any other midlife crisis car in that segment. Even in Detroit you see 20 Vettes to every 1 Viper.

Thats because the Viper is incredibly uncivilized, costs alot, and is less efficient than the other two. Oh, and don't forget SCALDING SIDE SILLS.

Which will be closed in a few years when all the guys in their late 40's relive their childhood dream.

I've heard an awful lot of younger people longing for a Challenger, Camaro, or Mustang, because they're cool. Very very cool.

I don't think so, the Camaro died once to poor sales, I don't see why it couldn't happen again. Fuel prices alone will slow this segment down over the next 10 years.

It died because GM let it, it was a 10 year old design with a terrible interior, but it was still the fastest car you could buy short of a 'Vette. Fuel prices don't mean squat when you want to buy these cars.

Actually I would take a Chevy Aveo over any Chrysler product...I hate the company that much.

But the Aveo is trash. Horribly unreliable trash.

But at least with the Lexus it won't be in the shop every other week and won't be rusting within a years time.

The average age of a Lexus driver is comfortably above the senior citizen level, so I'll be sure to fetch your geritol on my way to CVS.

 

[Joey D]

But its not rubbish, your family received a lemon, this happens to EVERY car maker. My dad received a lemon of a VW Passat, but it was still the nicest damn car he'd ever owned.

Not true, after talking to several people who work at Chrysler dealers as well as other Pacifica owner the problems we had are very common issues. The only thing that I can see was our fault was the brakes wearing out early.

I've heard an awful lot of younger people longing for a Challenger, Camaro, or Mustang, because they're cool. Very very cool.

I long over a 911 (and now the Audi R8 ) but that doesn't mean I can afford one.

It died because GM let it, it was a 10 year old design with a terrible interior, but it was still the fastest car you could buy short of a 'Vette. Fuel prices don't mean squat when you want to buy these cars.

Everything I've ever been told by a GM employee is that it died because it didn't sell.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4182/is_20010926/ai_n10148436

The fourth-gen Camaro would last up through the 2002 model year, at which point production of the F-Body platform was stopped due to slow sales, a deteriorated sports coupe market, and plant overcapacity.[5][6]

But the Aveo is trash. Horribly unreliable trash.

So are Chrysler products, what's your point? I'd rather have a crappy rebadged Korean car that I know will break then an expensive American car that breaks that I know shouldn't.

The average age of a Lexus driver is comfortably above the senior citizen level, so I'll be sure to fetch your geritol on my way to CVS.

My boss owns a IS250 and he's in his early 40's. I rarely see old people driving IS series.

 

[Tornado]

The PT has been going down the tubes,

Yeah. Because it is 7 years old. But that does not mask the fact that it has sold stupid amounts for the first few years.

the Prowler was bought by an extremely small amount of people (11,702 to be exact) and is, as you know no longer built. If it sold well you'd still seem them on dealers lots under the Chrysler marque.

That is a heavily flawed statement and you know it. If Chrysler still sold the Prowler it would be 10 years old. And that is ignoring that Prowler sales were obviously high enough that it was worth rechristening as a Chrysler when Plymouth was dumped. And by the way, nearly 12,000 sales a year of a heavily impractical two seat roadster over only 4 years really isn't anything to cry about (just look at BMW Z8 sales). The fact that it didn't have Corvette sales means nothing at all.

The Pacifica which isn't doing what it should in it's overcrowd segment (it's rubbish so I see why it fails) and the Compass sucks as well. All of these were concepts to production for Chrysler.

Actually, the Pacifica was not. There was no amazing, show stopping Pacifica concept (and the Pacifica shares nothing with the Citadel concept, before you even bring it up). And the Compass was radically changed as to not resemble the original concept in the slightest anyways. Neither of those was concept to production anywhere near the PT Cruiser, Prowler and Viper were. They weren't even to the same level as the Cloud cars were in concept similarities.

The Viper still doesn't sell in the numbers it should when you compare it to the Corvette, 911, and any other midlife crisis car in that segment. Even in Detroit you see 20 Vettes to every 1 Viper.

You really have no clue do you? The Viper was never designed to match the Corvette in sales, so the fact that it doesn't shouldn't really be shocking.

Which will be closed in a few years when all the guys in their late 40's relive their childhood dream.

Again, is the Mustang still selling in high numbers?

I don't think so, the Camaro died once to poor sales, I don't see why it couldn't happen again. Fuel prices alone will slow this segment down over the next 10 years.

The Camaro died when the entire segment it was in died, with the Mustang being the only car alive in a segment that had contained a dozen cars 5 years earlier. Lo and behold, that segment is alive and kicking once again.

Actually I would take a Chevy Aveo over any Chrysler product...I hate the company that much. But at least with the Lexus it won't be in the shop every other week and won't be rusting within a years time.

You need to look past your flagrant bias at the facts.

 

[Joey D]

Yeah. Because it is 7 years old. But that does not mask the fact that it has sold stupid amounts for the first few years.

Yes it sold well in the beginning, the Challenger will too. Never doubted that.

That is a heavily flawed statement and you know it. If Chrysler still sold the Prowler it would be 10 years old. And that is ignoring that Prowler sales were obviously high enough that it was worth rechristening as a Chrysler when Plymouth was dumped. And by the way, nearly 12,000 sales a year of a heavily impractical two seat roadster over only 4 years really isn't anything to cry about (just look at BMW Z8 sales). The fact that it didn't have Corvette sales means nothing at all.

They sold 12,000 total in the production run...not 12,000 per year.

Actually, the Pacifica was not. There was no amazing, show stopping Pacifica concept (and the Pacifica shares nothing with the Citadel concept, before you even bring it up). And the Compass was radically changed as to not resemble the original concept in the slightest anyways. Neither of those was concept to production anywhere near the PT Cruiser, Prowler and Viper were. They weren't even to the same level as the Cloud cars were.

2002 Chrysler Pacifca Concept:
http://www.supercars.net/cars/384.html

Compass Concept:
http://www.dodgeboy.net/news/compass/index.htm

You really have no clue do you? The Viper was never designed to match the Corvette in sales, so the fact that it doesn't shouldn't really be shocking.

If you say so, if it wasn't out to match the Corvette then what market was it going after?

Again, is the Mustang still selling in high numbers?

I don't know.

You need to look past your flagrant bias at the facts.

Nope Chrysler's are 🤬 and will always be 🤬 in my opinion. If people can have a blatant hate for GM, BMW, Hyundai, for whatever reason I can do the same.

 

[TopHat]

Not true, after talking to several people who work at Chrysler dealers as well as other Pacifica owner the problems we had are very common issues. The only thing that I can see was our fault was the brakes wearing out early.

But a lemon isn't your fault, it is the manufacturers fault. You just drew the short straw.

I long over a 911 (and now the Audi R8 ) but that doesn't mean I can afford one.

35K dollars versus 100+. Fuzzy maths.

Everything I've ever been told by a GM employee is that it died because it didn't sell.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4182/is_20010926/ai_n10148436

It didn't sell because:

1) It was outdated!
2) The entire sport coupe market was dead, the only reason ford didn't stop because the Mustang was relatively new. When the Camaro left the picture, Mustang sales rose enough to redeem itself.

So are Chrysler products, what's your point? I'd rather have a crappy rebadged Korean car that I know will break then an expensive American car that breaks that I know shouldn't.

Me thinks there may be a slight bias in your opinion.

My boss owns a IS250 and he's in his early 40's. I rarely see old people driving IS series.

But thats not the ISs target market. They wanted the same people who idolized the Altezza.

EDIT: That Compass "Concept" is a PRODUCTION PR PICTURE. The "Second Edition" Is a poor photoshop. The lower picture is a obvious design study. Taking names and design qeues from concepts is nothing new. See: Corvette Nomad concept, Corvette Impala concept, Chevrolet Biscayne concept, so on and so forth. That Pacifica concept is a regular Pacifica fitted with fancier headlamps.

 

[Joey D]

But a lemon isn't your fault, it is the manufacturers fault. You just drew the short straw.

Being hard on the brakes is a users fault, not the car. And if ours is a lemon then there are hundreds of other lemons in the Detroit area alone.

35K dollars versus 100+. Fuzzy maths.

Fine I was a Lexus IS350 but can't afford it.

Me thinks there may be a slight bias in your opinion.

Eveyone's opinion is biased on this forum, what's new?

 

[Venom800tt]

Personally, I am confused about all this Chrysler bashing. I may not care much for many of their products outside of the Ram, Viper, LX, and now the Challenger, but I'm quite sure there are many cars worse than even the crappiest of Chryslers. Anyway I love our 2006 Dodge Ram 1500, and our 2004 Durango isn't too bad either. They just suffer from poor quality plastic in the interiors, but I can overlook that.

 

[Tornado]

They sold 12,000 total in the production run...not 12,000 per year.

So? My mistype doesn't really change the fact that the car wasn't actually unsuccessful.

2002 Chrysler Pacifca Concept:
http://www.supercars.net/cars/384.html

Regardless of which, sales were low due to high price. Sales rose after more trim levels were offered after the first year. That hardly means the Pacifica is a failure.

If you say so, if it wasn't out to match the Corvette then what market was it going after?

The Viper is a reborn Cobra, raw and evil handling, that starts at $85,000. The Corvette is a dentists car that starts at $45,000. Unless you seriously think a car that costs twice as much, was designed for a different niche and is far more difficult to live with should sell 30,000 cars a year, I suggest you try a different argument.

I don't know.

The answer is a pretty obvious yes. Or Chrysler and GM wouldn't have thought they could muscle in on a segment that already has both the Mustang and foreign competition as well.

Nope Chrysler's are 🤬 and will always be 🤬 in my opinion. If people can have a blatant hate for GM, BMW, Hyundai, for whatever reason I can do the same.

I merely ask that your obvious bias doesn't cloud the facts of sales figures like it has been.

 

[TopHat]

Being hard on the brakes is a users fault, not the car. And if ours is a lemon then there are hundreds of other lemons in the Detroit area alone.

Five internet monies says there one of the horrendously unreliable first year models.

Fine I was a Lexus IS350 but can't afford it.

I want every car, but thats not happening either.

Eveyone's opinion is biased on this forum, what's new?

It doesn't hurt to open ones mind and broaden your horizons. Also I'm not terribly biased, I take opportunities to hate every automaker. GM has peddled crap for the past... 15, 20 years, and they've reformed, Chryslers interiors are atrocious, and half their cars are ass ugly, but they've got wonderful motors. Ford..... I don't see alot terribly wrong with ford besides massive amounts of confusion between continents. The Fusion quadruplets are fine cars. Toyota is booooooooring. Lexuses are expensive, luxurious fast toyotas, Infinitis are overpriced, but damn nice discount BMWs, Acura.... is the closest thing to being perfect. Honda in general is. Holy hell did I just say that. I guess its gotta be true. Nissan's are overpriced, but very nice cars. BMWs are incredibly overpriced cars with unimpressive interiors, but drive like nothing else (lol hummer), Mercedes is... Mercedes. Hyundai and Kias are hit or miss. Either shockingly good, or shockingly average. VW's are... overpriced and unreliable machines, but they're some of the best put together in the business. (Sorry YSS.)



There. An attempt to prove my non bias.

 

[Joey D]

So? My mistype doesn't really change the fact that the car wasn't actually unsuccessful.

Still doesn't seem like stellar sales.

Regardless of which, sales were low due to high price. Sales rose after more trim levels were offered after the first year. That hardly means the Pacifica is a failure.

They practically give Pacificas away now, leases on them are something like $199 a month for one. People don't want a crappy Chrysler crossover thing that only seats 4 people...anyone says it seats 6 needs to go to ride in the way back for more then 10 minutes. I'm short and I don't even fit.

The Viper is a reborn Cobra, raw and evil handling, that starts at $85,000. The Corvette is a dentists car that starts at $45,000. Unless you seriously think a car that costs twice as much, was designed for a different niche and is far more difficult to live with should sell 30,000 cars a year, I suggest you try a different argument.

If that's the case why do they constantly pit them against one another in car magazines?

It doesn't hurt to open ones mind and broaden your horizons.

I've tried to like Chrysler's, I've tried to find something good about them but I can't find anything. They are trash. Call me biased, I don't care, but the next time someone goes ranting and shows a clear biased, I'm calling them on it.

 

[TopHat]

Still doesn't seem like stellar sales.

Once again: 2 seat convertible with no trunk that cost over 30 grand.

They practically give Pacificas away now, leases on them are something like $199 a month for one. People don't want a crappy Chrysler crossover thing that only seats 4 people...anyone says it seats 6 needs to go to ride in the way back for more then 10 minutes. I'm short and I don't even fit.

You can get it with a 5 passenger configuration. Also its so cheap because Chrysler has a glut of them, and there are better cars on the market frankly.

If that's the case why do they constantly pit them against one another in car magazines?

Power ratings and performance. The 'Vette always wins.

 

[Joey D]

Once again: 2 seat convertible with no trunk that cost over 30 grand.

That shouldn't make any difference if you are catering to a certain segment.

You can get it with a 5 passenger configuration. Also its so cheap because Chrysler has a glut of them, and there are better cars on the market frankly.

Guess that's a new thing. Ours is a 2+2+2 layout and it's worthless.

Power ratings and performance. The 'Vette always wins.

Not always, the Viper has a higher top speed and slightly better 1/4 mile time. Performance wise they are similar in the way the go around or down a track.

 

[Tornado]

Still doesn't seem like stellar sales.

And it didn't have to be, because they knew it wasn't going to get Corvette sales. It sold fine, and it obviously sold good enough that Chrysler went through the trouble of saving it from Plymouth's chopping block. If it hadn't been selling good, why would they have bothered?

That shouldn't make any difference if you are catering to a certain segment.

It actually makes an amazing difference if you are catering to a segment that hasn't any sales in the first place. The fact that it sold so well despite its shortcomings (no V8, no trunk, pretty much no wind protection with top down) speaks volumes for its popularity.

People don't want a crappy Chrysler crossover thing that only seats 4 people

Quite the contrary. Since they lowered the prices on them, both critical and consumer reaction has risen quite a lot. Regardless of if it is obviously the worst car ever.

If that's the case why do they constantly pit them against one another in car magazines?

Because the fact that they were designed with different philosophies doesn't make it so they aren't good competitors. I fail to see your point regardless. Whether they are compared to each other in magazines has nothing to do with how much they should sell in relation to each other, because they are quite plainly two different kinds of cars.

 

[TopHat]

That shouldn't make any difference if you are catering to a certain segment.

But there aren't alot in that segment to begin with?

Guess that's a new thing. Ours is a 2+2+2 layout and it's worthless.

I can understand why.

Not always, the Viper has a higher top speed and slightly better 1/4 mile time. Performance wise they are similar in the way the go around or down a track.

I'd chalk that up to more displacement and high end grunt. The 'Vette still wins the comparisons. Creature comforts FTW.

 

[Joey D]

[
Because the fact that they were designed with different philosophies doesn't make it so they aren't good competitors. I fail to see your point regardless. Whether they are compared to each other in magazines has nothing to do with how much they should sell in relation to each other, because they are quite plainly two different kinds of cars.

Yes it does, if they are similar in performance and are constantly compared then they probably are crossed shopped when people are looking to buy an American sports car. Just because there are different philosophies doesn't mean they don't compete in the same segment. If they aren't going against one another then what does the Viper compete against?

I'd chalk that up to more displacement and high end grunt. The 'Vette still wins the comparisons. Creature comforts FTW.

Have you ridden or driven a Vette? There isn't much in the way of creature comforts.

 

[TopHat]

Yes it does, if they are similar in performance and are constantly compared then they probably are crossed shopped when people are looking to buy an American sports car. Just because there are different philosophies doesn't mean they don't compete in the same segment.

When people start to cross shop, they sit in a Viper and say "This isn't what I want at all. Its terrible!"

 

[Tornado]

Yes it does, if they are similar in performance and are constantly compared then they probably are crossed shopped when people are looking to buy an American sports car.

Actually, it means nothing of the sort. Magazines constantly compared the Porsche 911 and BMW M3 to the Corvette C5. And I'm am quite sure both Porsche and BMW lost less than 1% of their sales to Chevrolet. Despite the Corvette occasionally coming out on top.

Just because there are different philosophies doesn't mean they don't compete in the same segment.

You have no clue why Dodge created the Viper, do you?

If they aren't going against one another then what does the Viper compete against?

NOTHING. For a brief period of time, maybe the Shelby Series One. But otherwise the Viper has no competitors because it is the only car in America sold today that is as raw and unforgiving as it is. Which is purely why Viper owners buy them, and why Corvette owners (aside from being dentists who can't risk chattering their teeth over the rough ride) stay away from them. Viper owners buy Vipers because they are like Cobras. Not because they are performance bargains, or because they are better than the Corvette. In fact, if there was no Corvette, I doubt Viper sales would go up much at all (or vice-versa).

Have you ridden or driven a Vette? There isn't much in the way of creature comforts.

You can cook eggs on the Vipers' hood and get burns from the exhaust that would make a biker proud. The Corvette has a whole hell of a lot more creature comforts than the Viper does.

 

[TopHat]

Have you ridden or driven a Vette? There isn't much in the way of creature comforts.

compared to

I am shocked at the lack of information you have.

 

[Joey D]

Actually, it means nothing of the sort. Magazines constantly compared the Porsche 911 and BMW M3 to the Corvette C5. And I'm am quite sure both Porsche and BMW lost less than 1% of their sales to Chevrolet. Despite the Corvette occasionally coming out on top.

Whatever, similar performance cars do compete with one another if only slightly.

You have no clue why Dodge created the Viper, do you?

I do but whatever I tell you you'll say it's wrong so I'll leave it.

I am shocked at the lack of information you have.

Neither one of them have creature comforts...the Vette is more comfortable but it's by no means "civil" inside...and I have driven and ridden in both cars (not the new LS3 Vette though).

 

[TopHat]

Whatever, similar performance cars do compete with one another if only slightly.

By that philosophy a Chevrolet cobalt SS competes with a Pontiac solstice.

I do but whatever I tell you you'll say it's wrong so I'll leave it.

Don't cop out. Continue the discussion.

EDIT: How in the hell is a 'Vette not civil? Its as civil you can get with 400 horses for under 50K. Its a normal interior.

 

[Joey D]

By that philosophy a Chevrolet cobalt SS competes with a Pontiac solstice.

Agreed, I would look at both cars if I was in the market for a sporty small GM as a weekend car.

EDIT: How in the hell is a 'Vette not civil? Its as civil you can get with 400 horses for under 50K. Its a normal interior.

You posted a picture of the interior from the new Vette, something I have not been in yet. Maybe it has changed but when I drove one (a C6) the car was uncomfortable and rather bland inside. I consider civil sitting in something that isn't loud, isn't uncomfortable, and doesn't rattle constantly.

 

[Tornado]

Whatever, similar performance cars do compete with one another if only slightly.

Yeah. In performance. But sales have so little to do with performance that I am amazed that you are still flogging the dead horse.

I do but whatever I tell you you'll say it's wrong so I'll leave it.

Than why did Dodge create the Viper? Because everything you have stated as to why the Corvette obviously competes with the Viper tells me that you have no clue why Dodge made it. You keep contending that Dodge made the Viper to both ruin the Corvette performance wise (which is did regardless) and outsell it because it ruined it performance wise. When they didn't.

Neither one of them have creature comforts...the Vette is more comfortable but it's by no means "civil" inside...and I have driven and ridden in both cars (not the new LS3 Vette though).

The problem with that, of course, is that very many people use Corvettes as daily drivers. So it must have some creature comforts (even early C4 'Vettes, with their awful interiors). Whereas the Viper has none.

 

[Joey D]

Than why did Dodge create the Viper? Because everything you have stated as to why the Corvette obviously competes with the Viper tells me that you have no clue why Dodge made it. You keep contending that Dodge made the Viper to both ruin the Corvette performance wise (which is did regardless) and outsell it because it ruined it performance wise. When they didn't.

It was designed as a "true" American muscle car and the Cobra of the 90's.

Also I didn't say the Viper was built to ruin the Corvette, they compete with one another and someone considering a Viper will probably look at a Corvette, especially now with the Z06 model.

 

[Tornado]

they compete with one another and someone considering a Viper will probably look at a Corvette, especially now with the Z06 model.

Which is 15 years after the fact, as the Corvette and Viper were on completely different wavelengths until the C6 Z06. A Corvette Z06 buyer may look at a Viper and vice-versa, but the normal Corvette and Viper are still separated by too much to be competitors.