Jeremiah 29:11

Would you still buy the Challenger if the TransAm, Mercury Eliminator, GTO, or Barracuda or concept were introduced?

If no, which would you buy and why?

RLSH700

I'd still probably buy the Challenger, unless the Barracuda was made and cost about $5000 less for about the same price.

$5000 for the same quality car that looks about as good, why not!

bored out

I would purchase a Cuda over the Challenger if they were being produced, because of the strength of the name to me.

Can someone tell this Mopar noob why the Barracuda has a stigma about it, many believe that it is the baddest car to come out of the muscle car era. Why not the challenger? Were they not cousin cars? Were they way less Cuda's made than challengers?

RLSH700

Well it is simply that the Barracuda was made longer and from the beginning of the pony car area. I think the Cuda was know for being the badest since it was Plymouth's flagship performance car for so long, just as the Charger was for Dodge. When people think classic muscle from Plymouth, the first thing they think of is the Cuda. When people think classic muscle from Dodge, they think the Charger. The Challenger was the same car it justed didn't start as soon as the Cuda did. That is my explaination.

1 Bad Mirada

the reason that the cuda is still the "more desired" model is because it was introduced WAY before, like RLSH700 said.

when plymouth caught wind of the pending release of the mustang for 1964.5, they hurried and released the cuda. it was originally an a-body, so it was nice and light, and they had a wide variety of available high performance engines, and the late 60s cudas were BIG favorites for the super stock class, because that little car, packed with a hemi, was one BAD mamma jamma...overall, the cuda ran from 64-74, and i personally would buy a cuda-styled new dodge in a second over the challenger...IMO, the cuda had more aggressive styling during the e-body years, and i prefer them.

i dont know what a mercury eliminator is..? the camaro or zeta lite GTO dont interest me...

71ChargerRT

I would stiil buy the Challenger for the simple reason that I have never liked the "E body" Cuda, and have never liked anything from General Malfunction. As far as the Cougar Eliminator goes, I don't think Ford will make it, but I would take a look at the Shelby GT500.

TechmanBD

I wouldn't buy any of the GM cars. It would all boil down to price of the Cuda and Challenger, which ever one was less expensive. If the same price, then I think I would have to go test drive each and see which I felt more comfy in. And see what colors are offered.

bored out

Thanks for the explanation, but the cuda the badest car of the era??? What about the Judge, 442 or the Chevelle SS, many non mopar people still would pick the cuda. Must be a special machine.

1 Bad Mirada

the shovel SS was a bad ass car, but it was only par with the e-body hemi cudas...as car reviews go, the cuda was slightly quicker. but they were both around 13.1xs...

the 442 would be over a half second slower, with a reported stock time of 13.88.

you can also argue that the COPO cars were the best, but i think that if youre going by reported performance numbers, the quickest of the late 60s cars would be either a 426 hemi dart or cuda...a tiny car, with no accessories, and a TON of power. they were capable ot tens, "STOCK".

RLSH700

Patrick is right. Those cars were good but not the bests. There is a reason why the HEMI won so many NASCAR races, and in the Cuda, it was in a lighter car. This is why it is so tough to beat. The 442? That was a mile stone for Luxury performance, but not the fastest car in that era per say. More cubics didn't always guarantee victory, but it didn't hurt either.