Author Topic: Challenger Rebirth? (Automotive) (Read 1087 times)

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #15 on:** November 22, 2005, 05:38:05 PM »

Well ****....

Stupid collectors.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #16 on:** November 22, 2005, 05:39:59 PM »

Exactly.

RTSigma · « **Reply #17 on:** November 22, 2005, 05:41:38 PM »

Finally, something that looks badass.

Sandman · « **Reply #18 on:** November 22, 2005, 05:46:37 PM »

Hell... some people use the word "classic" when describing the 1978 AMC Pacer.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #19 on:** November 22, 2005, 05:56:03 PM »

Classic muscle cars we're speaking here boys. Nothing more, nothing rice.

superpug1 · « **Reply #20 on:** November 22, 2005, 06:50:55 PM »

OMG there r so many cars that need to come back! top of the list: Camero, and Trans Am! Then Chevelle (haha, could u imagine a chevelle with a LS7?! OMG 505 hp). And for the love of god, a mustang mach1 done right. the challenger would be cool to.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #21 on:** November 22, 2005, 07:05:08 PM »

Couple more pics....

Then...

Now...(possibly..)

NUKE · « **Reply #22 on:** November 22, 2005, 07:16:45 PM »

cool looking car, but to me it looks more like a 68/69 camaro than any charger that ever existed.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #23 on:** November 22, 2005, 07:23:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
cool looking car, but to me it looks more like a 68/69 camaro than any charger that ever existed.

Its a Challenger, not a Charger. And if memory serves me right, I think the Challenger was the answer to the Camaro, thus the simularity...

Edit:
Found this:
HISTORY
To compete in the Ponycar and muscle car market, Chrysler designed the Dodge Challenger. It was designed to compete against the Mustangs, GTOs and the Camaros but other manufacturers had a three-year head start. To make things worse, by the time the Dodge Challenger program was approved, the Ponycar was into it’s second generation.

The Dodge Challenger was not an original design from scratch, Chrysler management would not allow the new development costs. The first step for PERFORMANCE reasons was to allow all of the Chrysler engines to be put in the Challenger. In order to accomplish this, Chrysler borrowed the K member support from the “B” body Charger and put it in the Challenger. With this support, they could now put the big block 440 and the 426 HEMI in the Challenger. The intent was to use the “A” body Barracuda frame but it wouldn’t allow the K member to fit, so some redesigning was done that widened the frame. Along with this came the idea to redesign the outer body for a sleek long look to complement the widened stance. Its stance was 5 inches wider than the Ford Mustang. The final wheelbase was 110” on the Challenger, and 191 inches in length, 2 inches longer than any other Ponycar. It was in production for only 4 years, 1970 – 1974.

So in a way, 'Charger' was kinda correct!

NUKE · « **Reply #24 on:** November 22, 2005, 07:26:41 PM »

I was refering to the Charger pic.

kevykev56 · « **Reply #25 on:** November 22, 2005, 07:45:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by United
Not so bad. Its better than their pathetic attempt at the Charger.

Not quite....The original Concept Charger was awesome. Somewhere in production they made the critical error of creating an ugly car...Here is the original Charger concept.

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #26 on:** November 22, 2005, 07:53:29 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
Hell... some people use the word "classic" when describing the 1978 AMC Pacer.

As in classic POS.

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #27 on:** November 22, 2005, 07:55:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
Couple more pics....

Then...

Now...(possibly..)

That second pic looks more like a cuda then a challenger.

If they do this close (very close) to the concept it will sell like hotcakes. That is one badass looking car.

The charger concept was fuglier then the production car. Charger and 4 doors should not go together.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #28 on:** November 22, 2005, 08:15:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GtoRA2
That second pic looks more like a cuda then a challenger.

Agreed.

Quote

Originally posted by GtoRA2
The charger concept was fuglier then the production car. Charger and 4 doors should not go together.

Any sports car and 4 doors do not go together, IMO. Buying a 4 door sports car means your wife helped you pick it out.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #29 on:** November 22, 2005, 08:24:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by kevykev56
Not quite....The original Concept Charger was awesome. Somewhere in production they made the critical error of creating an ugly car...Here is the original Charger concept.

Bean counters made the final call by using the Chrysler 300 tooling...Corporate buffoons get hard ons over cost savings when you don't have to re-tool.