View Single Post
Old 04-14-2006, 01:50 PM
  #18  
RLSH700
Super Moderator
 
RLSH700's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location:
Posts: 4,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Real Challengers?

I'm not crazy about the styling but comparing it to an Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera/Ciera is just cruel and unusual, believe me I had one (I still have a special place in my heart for those, that is where my hate exists). I have never been a fan of rebadged cars made by other manufactures.

Sorry Patrick, but I can't stand the thought of buying a rebadged Mitsubishi when there is nothing in the powertrain that was designed or built by the Chrysler group. When I want a Dodge, I want a Dodge not a Mitsubishi. I know the LX cars and the upcoming Challenger is built on a Mercedes E-Class platform and are using a Mercedes 5-speed, but the difference to me is the fact that the engines are Chrysler designs and the cars are built in Chrysler plants.

This car is not a true Challenger in my opinion and should have been called something different. The "Charger" from the 80s was the biggest disgrace to the badge ever, it wasn't a bad car just nothing even remotely like the original. The current Charger at least is large, like the original, has powerful V8 options, and looks tough. I'm perfectly fine with the badge "Daytona" on that car from the late 80s to earily 90s. The fact is it didn't have the name "Charger Daytona" so I can't see how that could even be associated to the Charger Daytona. I liked the Daytonas.
__________________
"To Debate and Moderate" since 2006

College Graduate:
B.S. in Marketing
A.A. in nothing

The first 426 Dual Quad member.
The first to 2000 posts