Challenger officially revealed!

[ChrisV]

*I am angry at overrated car designs that are basically pure styling exercise with nothing new to offer under the skin.
*I am angry at people on this board who automatically have to coutner me whenever I criticize one of those lazy designs.

Then get angry at me, there's no reason on earth why EVERY CAR has to be an engineering marvel or advance the engineering of the automobile. We've gone far beyond what anyone needs in that regard as is. So let a couple cars be pure styling exercises for those that WANT that. Jesus, is it so fucking hard to  be an open minded enthusiast these days that you NEED to be a fucking douche about a car like this?????

[S204STi]

500 or 472. There was not a 502 (or a 501 for that matter), but for some reason people talk about them as if they existed all the time.

Huh, odd.  That must be how I thought about it...  500 is a nice round number though.

[SVT666]

I'd rather have the Challenger.

Me too.

[SVT666]

Hey Trep, this is hardly the same interior.  You're blind man.

[SVT666]

So they're targeting Mustang GT performance with a higher price?

That sucks, but they're gonna look really good doing it.

[Nethead]

Okay, this is gonna look like a wacko comparison, but here it is anyways:

1979 Coupe Deville: 4143 pounds, .35 CoD, 54.4 inches tall, 121.5 inch wheelbase

2008 Challenger SRT-8(: 4140 lbs, .35 CoD, 57 inches tall, 116 inch wheelbase.

And this is the kicker:

"Performance targets for the all-new 2008 Dodge Challenger SRT8 include a 0?60 mph time in the low 5-second range, 0?100?0 mph in less than 17 seconds, a ?-mile elapsed time of less than 14 seconds, 60?0 mph braking distance of approximately 100 feet, and a skid pad performance of 0.88 g."

I am going to make this car my goal to beat as I continue the Caddy project.

Soup DeVille:  Go for it, SoupDude!  You are puttin' the challenge to the Challenger!     WooHoo!

[Payman]

Hey Soup, if Leno can make a '66 Toronado destroy a Bentley Continental GT, I say go for it!

[Nethead]

God, Nethead.  Just buy a fucking Mustang and stop making me read about how awesome they are.

Raza:  RazDude, you should pop some sedatives before you approach a keyboard, or you'll be popping a blood vessel and checking out on us way before your time...Really...

Yeah, I'm gradually workin' up to a Mustang--there's a mall investment group talkin' to our people in Virginia Beach about some commercial properties we've put up for sale in an area where lotsa residential properties have gone on the market due to the mortgage crisis.  We would take their surprisingly good counter offer, but we know we can push 'em up still further because of the gleam in their eyes (I love the sparkle of greed in the eyeballs) when we bring up the bottoming out of the residential properties there and the location of our properties on the busiest two intersections in their preferred neighborhood. 

This is all pleasure money--we're not reinvesting a cent of it as we have for twenty-five to thirty years.  Half the proceeds will build the new home, and we split the other half for baubles & kicks.  First, the '66 Bronco buildup, which I've been planning since around 1998.  Then, the time will be perfect for the Mustang project--probably an '05 unless there's an even better-looking '09 or '10. 

The Hurricane/Boss/EcoBoost 5.0/Whatever engine should be out then, too, so there'll be a shitload of hot engines to choose from.

But I digress...This is a Challenger thread, after all, and my only real issue with it (the Challenger) is why in the Hell did the fools calling the shots not spend shitloads LESS  money by opting for a two-door Charger coupe instead of this, the heaviest ponycar in history?   I am certain that a two-door Charger coupe could have lost more fat than the measly 126 pounds that Chrysler trimmed from the Charger SRT8 when they cobbled up the Challenger SRT8! Somebody screwed the pooch here, and wasn't wearing protection while doing it!

[SVT666]

The Challenger is too heavy.  Yes.  Definitely.  But I would still buy one.

[SVT32V]

It may or may not.  But we also don't know if the Challenger will handle better than the GT500.

It had better with the IRS.

Bottom line:

GT500 and SRT-8 Challenger are direct competitors.

[SVT32V]

Those are the prices for Shelby GT,500s.  That is from one page of ebay listings, and only "buy it now" offerers are shown.  There was not one car auctioning below 42,000.  While throwing around MSRP numbers are nice, MSRP means nothing if you cant buy the car for it.  Every car listed was selling at least 12,000 dollars over MSRP, with some pushing 20,000 over.  Unless the same fate awaits the Charger, I can't see these two comparing in the real world, price wise at least.

Whew, that was a lot of work to prove what everyone on this board already knows, the GT500 is sold for more than MSRP.  One wouldn't expect Ebay to be the place to look for low priced GT500s anway.

Throwing around MSRP, please, they are set by the manufacturer not the marketplace.  So the Ford GT and GTR or even ZO6s for that matter are only to be considered by their market value and not by MSRP.  That doesn't seem very logical.

The GT500 is not a low production vehicle, over 10K units were produced in 2007.  2008 will be similar, at some point in the near future supply will at least equal demand and the price will drop.

Even if you had a legitimate point that MSRP should not be compared, in the future even the market value will probably even out.

[SVT666]

It had better with the IRS.

The GT500 is actually a pretty competent handler.  It's a lot better then most give it credit for.  Yes it understeers somewhat, but it's very stable, predictable, and tractable in corners.  It also weighs over 200 lbs less then the SRT-8.

Bottom line:

GT500 and SRT-8 Challenger are direct competitors.

If their performance goals are any indication, it's more of a Mustang GT competitor.

[JYODER240]

Okay, this is gonna look like a wacko comparison, but here it is anyways:

1979 Coupe Deville: 4143 pounds, .35 CoD, 54.4 inches tall, 121.5 inch wheelbase

2008 Challenger SRT-8(: 4140 lbs, .35 CoD, 57 inches tall, 116 inch wheelbase.


And this is the kicker:

"Performance targets for the all-new 2008 Dodge Challenger SRT8 include a 0?60 mph time in the low 5-second range, 0?100?0 mph in less than 17 seconds, a ?-mile elapsed time of less than 14 seconds, 60?0 mph braking distance of approximately 100 feet, and a skid pad performance of 0.88 g."


I am going to make this car my goal to beat as I continue the Caddy project.

There is no way this car will brake from 60-0 in 100ft. That's supercar territory and even then only a handful can achieve that.

[Raza]

There is no way this car will brake from 60-0 in 100ft. That's supercar territory and even then only a handful can achieve that.

Approximately is a vague word.  Depending on metrics, 150 could be approximately 100.

[Vinsanity]

Approximately is a vague word.  Depending on metrics, 150 could be approximately 100.

It won't be that big of a difference. A GMC Yukon goes from 60-0 in under 140 feet.

[Soup DeVille]

Hey Soup, if Leno can make a '66 Toronado destroy a Bentley Continental GT, I say go for it!

Leno's resources far outstrip my wildest imagination, not to mention my pocketbook.

And that Toro as awesome as it is, is little more than a body shell draped over a custom chassis.

[JYODER240]

Approximately is a vague word.  Depending on metrics, 150 could be approximately 100.

I'll be impressed if it can do it below 125.

[MX793]

I'll be impressed if it can do it below 125.

A Dodge Charger can stop in less than 125 ft.  There's no reason the Challenger wouldn't be able to given similar stopping hardware and weight (perhaps a little bit lighter).

[JYODER240]

A Dodge Charger can stop in less than 125 ft.  There's no reason the Challenger wouldn't be able to given similar stopping hardware and weight (perhaps a little bit lighter).

I hate the whole magazine racing thing but this is from an R&T issue:

Charger 132
Mustang GT 131
RX8 110
350Z 114
GTO 129

It's possible for the Challenger to average around 125 but I doubt it.

[Catman]

I hate the whole magazine racing thing but this is from an R&T issue:

Charger 132
Mustang GT 131
RX8 110
350Z 114
GTO 129

It's possible for the Challenger to average around 125 but I doubt it.

Plus I would imagine a parts bin brake package right off the Charger.  It is possible though.

[Soup DeVille]

I hate the whole magazine racing thing but this is from an R&T issue:

Charger 132
Mustang GT 131
RX8 110
350Z 114
GTO 129

It's possible for the Challenger to average around 125 but I doubt it.

LOok closely: testing procedures vary significantly between mags:andsomeeven do 70-0 tests andnot 60-0s.

Also, on a good set of summer tires, I'd bet the Charger could shave 15 feet off that number easily.

[MX793]

I hate the whole magazine racing thing but this is from an R&T issue:

Charger 132
Mustang GT 131
RX8 110
350Z 114
GTO 129

It's possible for the Challenger to average around 125 but I doubt it.

Edmunds and MotorTrend both got sub-125 ft stopping distances for the Charger in a 60-0 test.

[Catman]

Edmunds and MotorTrend both got sub-125 ft stopping distances for the Charger in a 60-0 test.

I don't doubt that.  The Charger's have excellent brakes.

[JYODER240]

Exactly, why I said I hate magazine racing. It's going to vary based on the driver, tires, surface, etc. But I'm still skeptical that the Challenger will be able to brake as well as the GTO or the Mustang.             

[Raza]

Exactly, why I said I hate magazine racing. It's going to vary based on the driver, tires, surface, etc. But I'm still skeptical that the Challenger will be able to brake as well as the GTO or the Mustang.             

I don't know what year GTO that was, but I do remember complaints about the 2004's brakes.  I obviously didn't perform any tests, but last I drove one, the brake pedal felt like yogurt, if that's anything hinting at an indication of actual brake performance. 

[SVT666]

Challenger R/T, V6 models to debut next month?
February10

This month, Dodge finally launched its widely anticipated Challenger SRT8 muscle car. Dodge chose to introduce the most expensive model first, with lesser variants arriving at another date. It turns out the basic V8 and V6 models of the Challenger might be unveiled a bit sooner than expected ? possibly at the New York Auto Show next month.

When asked when the R/T (V8) and SXT (V6) models would debut, Chrysler's Jim Press said, "Just wait until New York," according to Edmunds. He made the comment this week at the Chicago Auto Show, where the SRT8 model debuted.

The R/T is expected to offer a 350 horsepower 5.7-liter HEMI V8, while the SXT will make use of a 250 horsepower V6 motor. Both models will come without the "racing stripes" that are standard to the SRT8's paint job.

If the two less expensive models debut in mid-March, it would be somewhat sooner than originally expected.



I'm a little confused by the 350 hp V8, when the next Ram will have 380 hp from the same engine.

[Soup DeVille]

I'm a little confused by the 350 hp V8, when the next Ram will have 380 hp from the same engine.

It may have to do with different CAFE and emissions regs for cars and trucks, and it may have even more to do with not stepping on the SRT's toes.

[nickdrinkwater]

The exterior is growing on me.  Looks a lot better in dark colours and they help hid its size.

But what were they thinking with that interior?  The concept interior looks great, and really suits the car.  The production interior could be from any crappy Chrysler saloon.  People are going to be so disappointed when they go to the showroom to look inside a Challenger, and see that...

[Nethead]

Approximately is a vague word.  Depending on metrics, 150 could be approximately 100.

Raza:  RazDude, here's Motor Trend's July 2006 issue's facts on several performance measurements for the Charger SRT8 (only 126 pounds heavier than the Challenger SRT8 at 4266 pounds), the GTO (3777 pounds), and the Shelby GT500 (3990 pounds).  The comparo was done at the same location on the same day with the same drivers.  All three cars came with the standard factory OEM tires (the GTO and the GT500) or with regular factory option tires (the SRT8).  None of the three were convertibles, and the SRT8 was the lone automatic--the GT500 and the GTO were equipped with their standard six-speed manuals.

Braking, 60-0:
  SRT8: 124 ft.        GTO: 138 ft.        GT500: 110 ft.
Figure-8 in seconds:
  SRT8: 26.3 (.68G)    GTO: 26.8 (.66G)    GT500: 24.5 (.77G)
600-ft. slalom, MPH averaged:
  SRT8: 65.2           GTO: 62.4           GT500: 69.7
Standing-Start quarter mile:
  SRT8: 13.5 @ 106.3   GTO: 13.3 @ 105.9   GT500: 12.7 @ 116.0
0-100:
  SRT8: 11.9 secs      GTO: 11.7 secs      GT500:  9.6 secs
0-60:
  SRT8:  5.0 secs      GTO:  4.7 secs      GT500:  4.5 secs