Anything you DON'T like about the new Challenger
04-24-2007, 12:12 PM
#11
Senior Member
RE: Anything you DON'T like about the new Challenger
ORIGINAL: chill21genlee
For me, even though it would be completely impractical, I would have loved if they had done the full grill with the mech headlight covers, a la the 69 charger.
Don't get me wrong, she's still a beauty, but I was curious about everyone's input on the stuff they don't like, no matter how minute
For me, even though it would be completely impractical, I would have loved if they had done the full grill with the mech headlight covers, a la the 69 charger.
Don't get me wrong, she's still a beauty, but I was curious about everyone's input on the stuff they don't like, no matter how minute
I had cars with hide-away headlights and they are prone to malfunctioning.
04-24-2007, 05:14 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location:
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Anything you DON'T like about the new Challenger
Dual headlights are where its at on the Challengers.. Now the new Charger on the other hand should have the Challenger nose with Hideaways. It would much more of a seller.
04-24-2007, 06:37 PM
#13
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Anything you DON'T like about the new Challenger
That would be sad of there was no rectagular exhaust as that is what I had on my '73 Challenger.
__________________
For I know the plans I have for you," declares the LORD, "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart.
For I know the plans I have for you," declares the LORD, "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart.
04-24-2007, 10:14 PM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Anything you DON'T like about the new Challenger
ORIGINAL: Cuda340
Why would you want hide-away headlights? The original Challenger never had them.
I had cars with hide-away headlights and they are prone to malfunctioning.
ORIGINAL: chill21genlee
For me, even though it would be completely impractical, I would have loved if they had done the full grill with the mech headlight covers, a la the 69 charger.
Don't get me wrong, she's still a beauty, but I was curious about everyone's input on the stuff they don't like, no matter how minute
For me, even though it would be completely impractical, I would have loved if they had done the full grill with the mech headlight covers, a la the 69 charger.
Don't get me wrong, she's still a beauty, but I was curious about everyone's input on the stuff they don't like, no matter how minute
I had cars with hide-away headlights and they are prone to malfunctioning.
Apparently you didn't have a Toyota, the ones on my 90 GTS work just fine!
04-25-2007, 12:17 AM
#15
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location:
Posts: 4,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Anything you DON'T like about the new Challenger
What I don't like is the following:
1. the W5A580 5-speed being the automatic choice. I don't like foreign brand technology being used on a Chrysler product no matter whether that technology comes from Mercedes, Mitsubishi, or Hyundai. Plus it isn't cheap to build nor a very efficient design.
2. The LY platform being a modified MB E-class platform. Same reason as the automatic also because it makes it more expensive to produce and weighs a lot more as well.
3. 20 inch tires. It looks like it has been "pimped out" like that. I prefer Ralley Wheels no larger than 18 inches.
4. (If it is offered) 3.5L 4 valve per cylinder SOHC V6 as the base engine. Even though I like this engine and swear by it, a V6 version of the 5.7L Hemi is more appropriate for this class. This is supposed to be a heritage muscle car, not a high tech line. Heavier models are better fitted with OHV engines due to their torque characteristics are better suited for the weight.
Beyond that, I love it just the way it is.
1. the W5A580 5-speed being the automatic choice. I don't like foreign brand technology being used on a Chrysler product no matter whether that technology comes from Mercedes, Mitsubishi, or Hyundai. Plus it isn't cheap to build nor a very efficient design.
2. The LY platform being a modified MB E-class platform. Same reason as the automatic also because it makes it more expensive to produce and weighs a lot more as well.
3. 20 inch tires. It looks like it has been "pimped out" like that. I prefer Ralley Wheels no larger than 18 inches.
4. (If it is offered) 3.5L 4 valve per cylinder SOHC V6 as the base engine. Even though I like this engine and swear by it, a V6 version of the 5.7L Hemi is more appropriate for this class. This is supposed to be a heritage muscle car, not a high tech line. Heavier models are better fitted with OHV engines due to their torque characteristics are better suited for the weight.
Beyond that, I love it just the way it is.
__________________
"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
"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
04-25-2007, 08:36 AM
#17
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location:
Posts: 4,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Anything you DON'T like about the new Challenger
I knew someone would say that. I think we all would agree on that one.
__________________
"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
"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
04-26-2007, 09:46 AM
#18
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location:
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Anything you DON'T like about the new Challenger
ORIGINAL: Cuda340
Why would you want hide-away headlights? The original Challenger never had them.
I had cars with hide-away headlights and they are prone to malfunctioning.
ORIGINAL: chill21genlee
For me, even though it would be completely impractical, I would have loved if they had done the full grill with the mech headlight covers, a la the 69 charger.
Don't get me wrong, she's still a beauty, but I was curious about everyone's input on the stuff they don't like, no matter how minute
For me, even though it would be completely impractical, I would have loved if they had done the full grill with the mech headlight covers, a la the 69 charger.
Don't get me wrong, she's still a beauty, but I was curious about everyone's input on the stuff they don't like, no matter how minute
I had cars with hide-away headlights and they are prone to malfunctioning.
I said this b/c I am actually more of a Charger guy when it comes to the old muscle cars. But Dodge took a big dump on my new CHarger and made it a gloified Sedan, so I was jsut stating what my personal preferences would be. I also said in the original post that I know it was impractical and prone to malfunction, I just really loved the look of it on the old Chargers. Just makes the car look much more menacing when the headlights are hidden, in my opinion.
04-26-2007, 05:12 PM
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location:
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Anything you DON'T like about the new Challenger
I like it the way it is. It is a much better rendition of the original than the Mustang or the (gag) Camaro.[sm=yikesomg.gif]
04-27-2007, 02:15 AM
#20
Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location:
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Anything you DON'T like about the new Challenger
The shifter that they came up with for this car. I've commented on this before but you asked what I don't like. The trainy is also a poor choice.