I guess we should put our money where our mouth is...

Ian F wrote: Yes, the new car is substantially heavier, but given the requirements of a modern car that's not unexpected. But the 6" difference in length and height is not unreasonable. At least the writer in the OP article commented about how big the car feels inside. How many "big" cars have we been inside that seem cramped?

Agreed, a lot of new cars are practically cavernous inside. I personally don't like that feeling, but I get how the majority of people would feel safer/more comfortable in newer, admittedly MUCH safer cars.

Knurled wrote:

Vigo wrote: And it has the same problem as the Challenger: Too tall. They both look like they're wearing an extra 6" of height at the bottom of the body.

Get used to it. Beltlines are going up and up and up. Thank pedestrian crash standards for that.

Why do we have to protect pedestrians? It is much harder to get points then.

PHeller wrote: Approved:

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGG!!!

Also, I just looked up the curb weight on the CTS-V. berkeley.

93EXCivic wrote:

Knurled wrote:

Vigo wrote: And it has the same problem as the Challenger: Too tall. They both look like they're wearing an extra 6" of height at the bottom of the body.

Get used to it. Beltlines are going up and up and up. Thank pedestrian crash standards for that.

Why do we have to protect pedestrians? It is much harder to get points then.

At what point does it start being the pedestrians fault for getting hit? I mean, if I'm on the sidewalk first, and they run out in front of my car.....

I am not worried about the belt line.. but the challenger overall is too tall. There are a few of them at work and they appear not much shorter than the smallest SUVs and much taller than most cars

unevolved wrote: Here's a picture of one next to an NSX for perspective. It's not a small car:

Point well made. Everything modern is huge by the standards of just 810 years ago.

I remember parking my 2005 S2000 next to my friend's 94 FD RX-7. The S2000 was longer, taller and wider. And it was one of the smallest cars you could buy at the time.

810 years, you have some memory going on there

mad_machine wrote: I am not worried about the belt line.. but the challenger overall is too tall. There are a few of them at work and they appear not much shorter than the smallest SUVs and much taller than most cars

The high beltline means the overall car has to be taller. That chassis already has a severe case of tank-slit-ism.

It may be 6 inches higher than the E-body Challenger but I wouldn't doubt if the beltline was 8-10 inches higher.

They actually made the Challenger longer than the 4-door cars in order to get the proportions right.

The core has been out for a bit now, they seem to fall between the r/t and srt8 price wise. It struck me more as a way to get the engine in a more affordable package as opposed to significant weight savings.

I remember looking when they came out as the srt8 heatedsteering wheel is lust worthy, but not available in the core.

These make seriously great luxo/style cruisers with bite to back their bark. The 6.4 just makes it better.

Get used to it. Beltlines are going up and up and up. Thank pedestrian crash standards for that.

I don't consider it to be a universal problem. The Challenger has a very specific problem, which is that the entire design was visually dictated by the height of the front core support which is the same as a Magnum or 300 or Charger which were actually styled with the mechanical constraints in mind in the first place. It's not like Mopar had a raft of RWD platforms to choose from, so the fact that dodge had to use that platform and work with the geometry of the existing LX for $$/crash-testing purposes is what made the Challenger so dang tall.

I got a laugh reading Ian F's post that the new Challenger is, indeed, 6" taller than the original.

Agreed, I DD an econoline, not too many cars get that big. OTOH it also seats 7 and can hold 12' boards.

One of my main arguments against the Challenger is that it is all the size and weight of a Magnum with a fraction of the utility. The Challenger's proportionally-challenged looks are not worth all that much to me.. I would still rather have a Magnum. Too bad they didnt keep the magnum long enough to get the 300hp v6, the 8 spd auto,the 6 spd manual, the 6.4L Hemi, or some of the other cool stuff from the newer cars.

SilverFleet wrote: The new Challenger (and Charger for that matter) are up there on the lustworthy list for me. They are big, roomy, and comfortable cars that look awesome and manly, and would make a great highway bomber. As an all-out performance vehicle, there are better choices though. They are heavy and huge! And I second that they should have done this with the base R/T. Also, the new Camaro completely misses the mark. I don't fit in them, which is inexcusable. My head hits the roof unless I employ the "gangsta-lean" seating position. That is stupid, especially since they are so damn big.

Manly is subjective; I drive a Miata and a Spitfire and I feel it makes me more manly and more secure in my manhood. I'm not saying I'm better, but that whole "manly Harley, big truck, muscle car" only goes as far as like-minded individuals. I get why some people think they're cool though, as they can have an awesome presence.

-Hamid

AverageH wrote: I'm not saying I'm better, but that whole "manly Harley, big truck, muscle car" only goes as far as like-minded individuals.

I dunno, when I see "built truck" I think "My wife won't let me get a fun car so I have to modify this."

This was the actual rationale behind one of the more pain the ass builds I was involved with, a 410 Mopar into a panel van. His wife didn't want him to get a fun car so he modded the hell out of his work truck. A big-inch Magnum does silly things to the drivabilty of a van. The barrel intake manifold limits power to about 300hp but it makes it just about everywhere. Was accidentally spinning the tires at 50mph while breaking in the engine. It was giggle-fest silly, but when you want a modified beast within limitations, you work with what you can, you know?

PS - Headers meant for a pickup do NOT work in a van without heavily modifying the floor and doghouse.

Can they charge an extra $5000 and remove half a ton?

They DID sell a severely lightened challenger for drag racing called the Track Pak. 3200 lbs.

Weighing over 1,000 pounds less than the stock Challenger means that mirrors, an HVAC system, windshield wiper assembly, airbags, rear seats, power steering system, exhaust system, cross-car and side impact beams, rear bumper beam and rear deck lid spoiler are not going to be found anywhere on or in the car.

My interest wanes with anything over $4,000

Knurled wrote:

AverageH wrote: I'm not saying I'm better, but that whole "manly Harley, big truck, muscle car" only goes as far as like-minded individuals.

I dunno, when I see "built truck" I think "My wife won't let me get a fun car so I have to modify this." This was the actual rationale behind one of the more pain the ass builds I was involved with, a 410 Mopar into a panel van. His wife didn't want him to get a fun car so he modded the hell out of his work truck. A big-inch Magnum does silly things to the drivabilty of a van. The barrel intake manifold limits power to about 300hp but it makes it just about everywhere. Was accidentally spinning the tires at 50mph while breaking in the engine. It was giggle-fest silly, but when you want a modified beast within limitations, you work with what you can, you know? PS - Headers meant for a pickup do NOT work in a van without heavily modifying the floor and doghouse.

Interesting! Funny too... poor guy. That sounds like a fun beast no matter what, and a sleeper too. I'm lucky that my wife is cool with me having two "impractical" roadsters while we still have two kids under the age of 5. I'm hoping I'll be known as the cool dad when I pick up my kids from school in them. I wasn't so lucky; my dad picked me up in an '84 VW Vanagon... dang I was always so embarrassed. Although I think they're awesome now.

My comment wasn't meant to sound harsh, I was only pointing out that people tend to buy items that they feel represent their self-perceived persona (not always obviously, as some cars are only beige appliances to some). A Harley enthusiast, for example, may often feel that the bike represents their manly ruggedness, costume and all. While men and women within that group may identify with this thought process, others like myself see it as the direct opposite; manly= less than so.

Just being conversational.

-Hamid

Vigo wrote: They DID sell a severely lightened challenger for drag racing called the Track Pak. 3200 lbs.

Weighing over 1,000 pounds less than the stock Challenger means that mirrors, an HVAC system, windshield wiper assembly, airbags, rear seats, power steering system, exhaust system, cross-car and side impact beams, rear bumper beam and rear deck lid spoiler are not going to be found anywhere on or in the car.

Now that's what I would call a good starting point.