I was going to try to make this an objective question and not bias the question....but....I just can't dot dot dot (I do this a lot; please be patient).

To me, it makes not a wit of sense at all, for the least powerful offering not to have a manual transmission. This harkens back to more than one thread regarding this topic (one in later october 07).

To me if CAFE standards are raising, shouldn't you offer manual trans on anything you offer? Especially, since manual transmissions typically get better mileage?

 

Personally, I can't wrap my head around the Challenger having a V6 to begin with... (notice the dot dot dot) somethin' just don't seem right about that whole idea... (did it again)

 

Well I don't know how to drive stick but they should sure as hell offer it. I seriously doubt only offering it on the R/Ts and SRTs is going to make V6 buyers spend extra money for a manual. If you're buying a V6 it's because you can't afford the R/T or SRT in the first place!!

 

Manual for sure.

 

They should offer manual trans on all levels.

Additionally, they should consider offering an option/upgrade to that dual disk clutch technology that is supposed to be a hybrid of a manual and automatic cars (dual shafts for torque multiplication) and lightning quick shifts - interesting.

Does anyone remember the work they were doing with the "ClutchFlite?" It was a Torqueflite trans for quick shifting, but a manual clutch disk so you can dump it an launch. Guess with the need to keep pump/hydraulic pressures in the trans for response, disconnecting with a clutch may not have worked out.

Eric

 

Obviously, you're not out of the 1970s. The original Challengers offered an inline 6-cylinder. Part of the reason the E body design existed was that it could accommodate EVERY engine Chrysler made. Personally, the more I think about insurance and gas prices, the better and better the V-6 looks. Either that or buy an R/T (definitely NOT SRT) new, then hope the V-6 Challengers make their way into rental car fleets and buying one of those at a reasonable price for daily driving.

 

I know, I know... they had the bullett proof 225 slant six in those days... had a few of them over the years. Fairly good in the power department, nice torque, and as I recall the '69 Barracuda I had got 25 mpg to boot. Also knew I was setting myself up for editorial commentary when I posted my comment. I can also understand why practical, consciencious people might want a V6, but I guess the Challenger really dosen't speak practical to me...

 

Yes. As I have heard the slant six was one of chyrsler's best offerings. I know it was offered in Darts and Pick Up trucks; the people I knew who had them raved about them. Must have looked funny under a Coronet hood. That cavernous area makes 440's look remarkably smaller.

 

The slant six was a straight six tilted 30 degrees. There was tons of room to work on the engine- you could literally stand in the engine bay. Also, it was a very simple engine to work on with only a single jet Carter carb and no emission controls in the early years (101 hp). It lasted until 1983.

 

Ahhh... the "leaning tower of power" as it was called. Ever notice the old Aimsoil and oil additive companies used to use these motors almost exclusively for thier "durability" test. A good choice on thier behalf...