Concept Charger
 

Now this car would have gotten all my money but DCX went the other way.

[IMG]local://upfiles/9/AF21EDCF17B24DD3AD33E476AB5BE13B.jpg[/IMG]

RE: Concept Charger
 

Yep, I agree. Then I wouldn't have to see you do [:'(] to my Mustang.:D

RE: Concept Charger
 

Peace my friend :D

RE: Concept Charger
 

You have no idea how disappointed I was when the new Charger came out. When I heard that they were going to come out with one and saw some of the designs, I was in awe. Telling coworkers and friends and willing to go to a car from a truck. When they showed the production car, I was [sm=jawdrop.gif][sm=wtf.gif].

One of the few reasons why I didn't wait for the Challenger. Other, I have no patience and really wanted a muscle car.

RE: Concept Charger
 

Yes, I do know how disappointed you were. I have been waiting since 1978, if not earlier..

RE: Concept Charger
 

WOW, that is a beauty....... I would take that over the Challenger. Now that is a Charger.

RE: Concept Charger
 

A fine-looking car, all right. But would I take one of those over the Challenger? NEVER. I'm the ultimate loyalist to the Challenger. ;)

RE: Concept Charger
 

Wow that is perfect. I would take that over a challenger. Come on DCX get with it.

RE: Concept Charger
 

I want to know what knucklehead was in charge of over riding that design and going with the bloated fish charger they have now?... sorry i call it the way i see it.

RE: Concept Charger
 

Gotta agree... heck, the original 99 concept car they dragged around to the shows up to 6 months prior to the 'unveiling' of the production design was better than what they actually produced.

RE: Concept Charger
 

very nice, if it the current charger had another name ( i.e. cornet) most people on this site will not dislike the charger.

RE: Concept Charger
 

Agreed. I like the Charger sedan in its own way, but I would prefer it to be called the Coronet and make a Charger like that photo chop that Paladin provided. I would probably choose that over a Challenger as well. The Charger is more an icon in my eyes in Dodge's history, but I still love the Challenger.

RE: Concept Charger
 

Here is a video of the Challenger concept at the Woodward Dream Cruise:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm2Jm7jvthA

RE: Concept Charger
 

Let's not besmirch the name of another legendary Dodge. As I've stated previously, it was a TWO-DOOR '68 Coronet R/T 440 Magnum that helped finance my college education -- not to mention my purchase of my '70 Challenger, come to think of it. To me, naming a four-door car after that iconic hardware would be akin to, well, calling a four-door car a Charger. Oh. Yeah. That's been done already. ;)

Also, I read somewhere recently that the Charger was a two-door version of the Coronet. That statement can be summed up in just two letters: B.S.

For anyone who's interested, here's a link to a nice little history of the '60s version of the Coronet:

http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...istory-2.shtml

RE: Concept Charger
 

You are completely right about the two door '68 cornet. Dodge even talks about how great it is on the legacy section on their website. But that does not change the fact that Coronet did have a sedan version nearly every year it was made besides 1968-69. in the 70's the charger kind of took the performance coupe title, until '75 where the coronet had a two door version once again. Personally ( I admit that my previous statement was a little too general) I think that the new charger sedan would have been a tribute to the cornet sedan. As for the coupe version maybe something like the picture that started this thread (obviously both would have to look more like a coronet but the basic concept is there, rwd, big v8, etc).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Coronet

Also The 99 charger concept that alot of the people liked was a 4 door coupe orginally. Check out the pic and look closely.

[IMG]local://upfiles/374/B645407308164B20933290F18823FFE3.jpg[/IMG]

They even say it on their website:

http://www.dodge.com/dodge_life/past...r&type=textNav

Along with the name, we also brought back the heritage that made Charger R/T a legend. This concept car advances four-door style into an entirely new dimension. True to the original muscle car form, Charger R/T, with its low, thrusting hood, has a powerful V8 matched with a five-speed manual transmission that drives the rear wheels. The front grille and lamps look menacing. The body is taut. The rear deck with spoiler, and the fascia with sly-looking taillamps and twin exhaust outlets, all signify a vigorous departure from the past. In true retro form, 1966 meets the millennium. One look at the radio knobs and three-spoke steering wheel will confirm that. The pistol-grip shift lever adds to the feeling.

Throughout this interior past and future, street and racing are balanced. Exposed metal is emphasized -- but the front and rear bucket seats are made of carbon fiber and have red leather accents. Because the Charger R/T is supercharged, the 4.7-liter SOHC, 16-valve, V8 engine has the kind of ferocity that results in 325 horsepower.

But Charger R/T is environmentally gentle -- its Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fuel produces negligible emissions at the tail pipes.

RE: Concept Charger
 

Actually, Joey, Dodge probably would have been better off to just invent another name for the four-door Charger. Unless it's something like the new Challenger -- which is close to the original version -- recycling nameplates generally does little but sully the reputation of the original car. I've never cared for Chrysler trotting out the 300 name first for a mini-Concorde-looking car and now for what's in effect a car that looks like Germany won the war. They never should have trotted the Challenger name back out for the Mitsubishi cars of '78 to '83 nor should they for the Chargers of '83 to '87.

RE: Concept Charger
 

RoswellGrey, with all due respect are you sure that is such a good idea? Look at the names they are coming up with on their new models. The Dodge Nitro, what the heck does a midsized, box, Jeep Liberty-based SUV have anything to do with that name. If this was a compact car with some serious performance, I could see the angle. Dodge Caliber, what does Caliber have to do with a compact station wagon? The problem is that picking a name for a modern muscle car in either sedan or coupe version is very difficult. We are in an era where high tech sounding names is the norm for newer models and coming up with a new name simply isn't that easy. The purpose of the Charger sedan was to appeal to the muscle car audience which need the car to fulfill the needs of a family. If you come up with a new name, it may not catch the attention of the muscle car audience even if it sounds tough and powerful because they do not recognize it.

There would be absolutely no insult to the name Coronet as it did have a sedan version and the sales were mostly sedan sales. The formula is very similar. It's RWD, the base engine has 6 fire holes and has more than one powerful V8 option, its a larger muscle sedan, etc.

I do not see what necessarily you are complaining about on the 300 name plate use either. The 300M was a very nice car, okay it didn't have a HEMI V8 and the rating was not 300hp; however, given that the 3.5L produced 250-255 NET hp, it might have matched the 300 GROSS hp that the originals had. The 300M was a modern approach to the market segment that existed in the very late 90s to earily 2000s. Also, if you are going to call it after one of the other LH platform names, please call it a rebadged second generation Eagle Vision as that is exactly what it was. Also what is wrong with the 300C? It does look like the original 300C and many people think it is quite the looker. I agree that it should be a little more exclusive (drop the V6 versions and keep it as a full-luxury car), and they should have called it the 300N to keep in alphabetically order.

I agree that they should not call any rebadged Mitsubishi cars a "Challenger" and the Chargers of the 80s were a poor choice for the naming of those cars, but we can't change history. If we could, we would be able to prevent that stupid merger/buyout from ever happening.

RE: Concept Charger
 

I kind of like the car name "Interceptor" because it reminds me of the old fast police cars and guided missiles which are so fast you can't get away from them.

Unfortunately, that is too many letter for a license plate, but here is one shot at it.

NTRSPTR

RE: Concept Charger
 

The problems I can see with that are that Ford uses the Interceptor name for their police package the Crown Victoria Police Interceptor, and people apparantly don't like having their cars being associated with police crusiers for some strange reason. I personally like the idea of making people nervous when they see my car (One time, one of my old classmates thought my Intrepid was the Sheriff's police crusier for some strange reason; nevertheless, the look on his face was priceless when I exited the car). That is what I have been told at least.

RE: Concept Charger
 

In MT, they calimed Mark Fields chose the name over the well known galaxie name. If Dodge had used the Interceptor name instead of the Charger, I think it would have had a nice ring to it. The Interceptor name isn't problem for me either. I wouldnt mind having a car that has a name that sounds like it belongs on a police car or sounds like it should be driven by spys or talented defensive backs :D

RE: Concept Charger
 

I agree, Joey, Interceptor is a cool name. That's why I've liked the name Avenger, although I liked the original models better than the current crop. Again, though, that has a lot to do with my anti-four-door bias.
I guess the point I've really been trying to make is that I think if a car bears the name of an earlier model, it should be actually descended from it -- ie., today's Mustang is directly descended from the 1964 and a half version. (The notable exceptions to this would be the Challenger, since its appearance and performance intent is based on the original 1970 model, and, of all things, the Volkswagen New Beetle, since its appearance is rather loosely based on Adolf's favorite car. Of course, to the best of my knowledge, "Beetle" actually was a nickname for the original design and it really is the name of the the current model. The jury, as far as I'm concerned still is out on the Camaro). The current Charger has nothing to do with the original car, nor does the Impala, Malibu, GTO, Taurus, Buick Roadmaster of the 1990s, Dodge Hornet concept car, AMC Hornet, etc., etc., etc.
I just wish that the auto companies could show enough originality to think up new names for new cars rather than attempting to capitalize on something that the new cars definitely aren't. Who knows -- the new cars just might earn their own place in automotive history.

RE: Concept Charger
 

The current mustang is a "direct descended" of the 64 and 1/2 Mustang yet the new Taurus is not. I don't think you can logically make that claim. The current Mustang is on a completely different platform, using completely different engines, different transmissions, much newer technology, etc. The only thing about the new Mustang that is in anyway similar to the original Mustang's is the nameplate and some of the styling. Honestly, the new Taurus has more in common with the Taurus nameplate than the Mustang has with the original. The current V6 is a decendent of the lame 3.0L Duratech first offered in the 1996 Taurus (the era of the catfish styling).

The New Beetle is a disgrace to the traditional Beetle as it is the opposite that the original Beetle stood for (fuel mileage is pathetic, it is an expensive vehicle for what you are getting, and they are unreliable). I will agree with you as far as the Impala and Malibu are concerned. The Impala is nothing other than a Lumina, just renamed since the Lumina was so dull. The purpose of reusing those names is to try to make dull cars appear interesting. The 04-06 GTO would have been fine if the styling was actually that of a GTO and not that of a warmed over styling traded between numerous styling cues from previous Pontiac models.

In my opinion, the new Camaro is not a Camaro as it does not look like one; however, if they would have someone besides a blind person do the styling, I would change my opinion.

RE: Concept Charger
 

Careful, RLSH700, next you'll be making the same claim about the new potentially $70,000 Challenger. ;)

RE: Concept Charger
 

:):):)

RE: Concept Charger
 

RoswellGrey, there is a difference between a car that has a temporary price increase by a dealership, verse making a car who's entire purpose was to be economical in every way a total waste of money. Just an example, what if ten years from now Chrysler would release a compact car called the Omni that got at best 25mpg, cost $40,000, and had reliability that would make a Yugo proud. Besides, you are once again speculating that the price on one of the premium models could be that high at one or two dealerships in the U.S. There is no logical merit in that remark.

RE: Concept Charger
 

Which is why I added this: ;) to my remark.

RE: Concept Charger
 

Anyhow I wouldn't take the Charger as in the photoshop or the '99 concept (although sharp) over the Challenger.

RE: Concept Charger
 

I'd definitely agree with that. They're both cool but not cool enough.

RE: Concept Charger
 

Not sure if this video of the concet has been posted:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=489_1189533409

RE: Concept Charger
 

That's one of the many derivations of the Charger concept that had me SO excited years ago. I attached a pic of the main Charger concept from back in the day. Needless to say i was VERY disappointed in the production model Charger, which at first made me very apprehensive to be excited about this new Challenger. Of course now the big reveal day is fast approaching in Feb in Chicago, and so far they have given no indication that they are planning on ruining the Challenger like they did to the Charger. Back then, the market couldn't support the Charger in the concept version, but now with the new Mustang selling like Apple stock and the Baby Boomers kids away to college, the time is right. Dodge is about to either become my favorite company or most reviled. I pray for the former option! Sorry for the rant, but the knife wound from the whole Charger ordeal has never quite healed, and probably never will.

[IMG]local://upfiles/776/0A2DF2D95ADF445DB82F2BE88B0C0950.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]local://upfiles/776/2789D97F093F47B5BFCFDADEEF088501.jpg[/IMG]

RE: Concept Charger
 

True, I have to admit, they showed blatant disrespect by putting the hallowed charger badge on a glorofied Toyota Camry. If they had called in ANYTHING but a Charger, I would be less irritated.... Oh, and also if they hadn't completely changed the design of the concept into an entirely different, and entirely inadequate, vehicle

RE: Concept Charger
 

I hate to even think it but, we are not out of the water yet. They still have time to SCREW IT up..

RE: Concept Charger
 

Let's not even think about it... happy thoughts, happy thoughts,
:D Will be just like the concept, happy thoughts... ok, feeling a little better now

RE: Concept Charger
 

they didn't screw it up

RE: Concept Charger
 

The production Challenger looks far better than this Charger concept.

RE: Concept Charger
 

Now that is funny!

RE: Concept Charger
 

I would have found a way to get one of each. ;)

RE: Concept Charger
 

Will you be getting a diecast model? :D

RE: Concept Charger
 

Although this is an old post, it needs responding. Logically, how on earth can you compare a full-sized, RWD/AWD, V8, muscle-styled sedan to a FWD, bland, I4/V6/hybrid powered, unoriginal Camry. They look absolutely nothing alike and are compete opposites. I could see your point if you were referring to the new Sebring in comparing to the Camry but the Charger is nothing alike to the Camry. I will admit I liked the '99 concept much better, but I don't think it is all that terrible.