[*]The Golf GTI, Mini Cooper S and Mazdaspeed 3 are not high horsepower cars. Especially when compared to a 425BHP car.
No but they are fast cars, a car does not need to have a lot of horsepower to be fast unless you are some sort of ignorant redneck who thinks V8's and Van Halen is all you need to go fast.
[*]Those cars? Yeah, they are pretty small. The 300C is a Mercedes S-Class sized sedan, and the Challenger won't be much smaller. Do I need to explain why that is a retarded comparison?
The only car that I mentioned that is small is the Mini Cooper S, the Mazdaspeed 3 and GTI are both 5 door hatchbacks that can easily fit a family of 4 with all their crap.
But that isn't the point of what we are talking about, we are talking about fast cars that also get fuel mileage. I never mentioned anything about size. And if the Concept Challenger is anything to go off of it's really not that large.
Length: 197.8” (5025 mm)
Wheelbase: 116.0” (2945mm)
Front Overhang: 38.9” (989mm)
Width: 78.6” (1997mm)
Height: 57.0” (1449mm)
Track, Frt/Rr: 64.0”/65.1”
Couple: 31.5” (800mm)
(source:
http://www.stockmopar.com/2008-dodge-challenger.html)
It's roughly the size of the 2 door Blazer.
[*]Your standards for fuel efficiency are still those of an idealist who is thoroughly unconnected to reality. Big cars weigh more. High weight lowers fuel efficiency. As does high horsepower. Combine the two, and it shouldn't be surprising that you don't get that much efficiency. It isn't as simple as "make the cars lighter" no matter how many times you repeat yourself.
You do not need heavy vehicles, there is so much extra crap on cars now a days that doesn't add anything at all. Dodge could easily make the car weighs less by first putting in a V8 that isn't the size of the moon, seriously a 6.1L V8 is ridiculous...and before you say it so is the Z06's 7.0L.
And yes it is that simple to make cars lighter and it will give you better fuel economy. Did you pay attention in physics at all?
And how many Challengers would you expect Dodge to sell if it was sold with a pissant Turbo 4? Or the Camaro, for that matter? You are missing the point of a reborn muscle car, I'm afraid.
No I'm not missing the point, a bunch of middle aged men think they can be kids again. I just think this "borne again" muscle car bs is stupid to be doing right now. Companies have their head up their ass if they think what the world needs is an inefficient, gas guzzling car. We need higher mileage cars or ones that burn something that does not require fossil fuels.
No, it doesn't, actually. Unless 18MPG is over 20MPG.
Wow you are so wrong on this it's funny 
. Even the Z06 gets 24mpg on the freeway and if you average out a base Vette you would be getting 21mpg in mixed driving. Are you going to argue with Chevy now?
(source: http://www.chevrolet.com/corvette/specifications/)
You would also see either less safe vehicles or far more expensive cars. Car companies don't make their cars fat by choice. They have to make them fat to fall under government safety regulations. Mazda blew a huge wad of money making the current Miata as light as possible, and it is still heavier than the original. Ditto to cars like the Lotus Elise. Lightweight metals are far more expensive than normal metals, and that cost would be transferred onto a buyer that has 10 or 20 options in any one market.
So, you will either have a rolling 70's deathtrap equivalent or a $60,000 compact car.
Government regulations do make cars weigh more, but this is where engineers need to get off their ass and instead of just half assing the project they can actually use their brains a solve the problem.
Wrong, heavy cars aren't safer, that's what a vast majority of the idiots driving SUV's think. Mini seems to do just fine when compared to bigger, "safer", vehicles.
(source:http://bridger.us/2002/12/16/CrashTestingMINICooperVsFordF150/)
And the only reason lighter materials cost more now is they aren't used as much, if car companies start using lighter material you would see a drop in the price of them...once again simple economics. Make cars out of plastic, Saturn used to do it.
So you want what is essentially a me-too vehicle to invent a segment? Are you crazy? I also find it pretty ridiculous to say that the only way Chrysler can become good again is by reinventing the wheel. Especially when reviews of the new Caravan are mostly positive, and that other recent attempts to make segment busters by the company have crashed and burned.
When you have a failing company you need something big to pull you out of a hole. If GM is sucessful with the Volt it will help the company out quite a bit seeing as they will be one of the bigger companies to mass produce an electric car that is affordable and available.
Chrysler needs something like that, say a hybrid that actually works well and looks good or an ethanol vehicle that doesn't fail at life. They don't have to build a super efficient sports car, but do something for christ sake since the area I live in can't keep dealing with thousands of lay offs.
And the new Caravan is rubbish, all American vans are. Why anyone would buy a Caravan over a Sienna, Quest, or Odyssey is beyond me.
Actually, you know nothing of the sort. For one, this is the first new Chrysler in non-Mercedes hands. Second, you are clearly letting your one-sided bias cloud your judgement to the point of not even giving the car a chance. It is not the buyers who are mis-informed. It is you.
[/quote]
I'd be careful when you say I don't know anything because obviously you overlook quite a few things yourself *cough* Corvette Fuel Economy *cough*...you aren't a hypocrite are you?
$40,000 will buy you quite a nice car, I would probably have a BMW 335i Coupe for only $705 more as a starting cost. Once we factor in dealer markups I could probably look at something a bit better than the 335i.
I fully believe the Challenger will be junk and only people in America will ever like it, the rest of the world will just laugh because they are actually driving cars that don't epically fail. You can like the car all you want but I'm pretty sure the only reason you like it is because I do not and your life wouldn't be complete if you didn't disagree with me all the time .
[/sarcasm][/tongue-in-cheek][/totally-not-serious][/joking][/meant to be funny]
The fact that you would choose the Challenger last out of the three is hardly an informed decision based on the car's quality, either.
Maybe because it won't have nearly as much competition in Chicago?
