And dealers are getting $15,000 over sticker and more on them.

I know of 2 that are already signed for with deposits at this price.

 

I'm honestly not surprised at all.

This is why I questioned all that said they'd take it over a new Mustang.

The new Mustang GT may be crude, but it is a fairly solid performance value for the money.

I'd still like a Challenger, but more as a cruiser than anything else.

 

Chrysler is aware of the weight problem. Unfortunately, they only addressed it in the drag version of the car (which is 800 pounds lighter.)

The performance figures will be helped with a new set of gears (3.08's in a performance car?,) but the weight is almost inexcusable.

The Mustang just got a new lease on life.

 

Wow that makes two Dodges I was actually excited about that they proceeded to ruin. (Challenger and Demon)

 

Is anyone at all surprised? You only have to look as far as every other SRT model to see the pork trend. Minus the SRT4, maybe.

 

The 1970 challenger weighs 3200lbs with a big 'ol cast iron 426 engine.

:what:

 

And doesn't have airbags, ABS, huge disk brakes, 92" rims, etc.

 

I just noticed that the press release mentions reinforced safety beams in the front and rear doors. :lol:

 

Wow, surprise surprise. Yet another American car manufacturer just can't seem to get it right. This is seriouly pissing me off. It's a great looking car, but if I wanted something that weighs 4,100 pounds, I'd buy a damn SUV. What a pathetic attempt at reviving a car.

 

Probably needed that to pass crash standards.

 

92" rims

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Crash standards aside, 4,100 pounds in an American Muscle car? You can't possibly tell me that the reason they had all that weight in there is so that they could pass crash standards. A MINI is one of the safest cars on the road, and it's light and nimble. There's no reason that the Challenger, or even the Mustang for that matter, should weigh anywhere near what they do. You can design a car to handle a crash properly without adding a ton of weight to it.

 

ooh, i can't wait for the first one to show up at the local strip and get embarassed repeatedly

Mike

 

Well, keep in mind that they had to design the car so that it could fit ample cupholders and have enough lighted vanity mirrors for everyone

Seriously, people are shocked that a revived American muscle car is heavily bloated? The trend with cars nowadays is to make them weigh more than enthusiasts want them to (think of the MKV GTi). Honestly though given the $40K+ price tag of these, how many of them do you really think are going to be taken to the track and treated like a muscle car of yester-year? These will mostly be bought up by middle-aged men that'll oogle over them in their garages and take them to car shows, just like the vast majority of Corvettes I see. Sure it's sad to say, but hey, I sure as hell can't afford the cost of a car like this, the gas it'll consume, and the bloated insurance prices I'm sure it'll come with, so it's the middle-aged men that can mostly afford to buy these anyway :dunno:

-Brian

 

Crash standards aside, 4,100 pounds in an American Muscle car? You can't possibly tell me that the reason they had all that weight in there is so that they could pass crash standards. A MINI is one of the safest cars on the road, and it's light and nimble. There's no reason that the Challenger, or even the Mustang for that matter, should weigh anywhere near what they do. You can design a car to handle a crash properly without adding a ton of weight to it.

Of course the reinforced doors don't add all that much, but more than the original Challenger, which was my point.

And actually, the MINI is heavy considering its size. My loaded MCS weighs as much as my Focus did and it is MUCH smaller.

 

Im suprised that it is slower than the Mustang. That definitely sounds like a tuning/gearing issue.

 

Where are you finding your BMW 335's for under $38k. Last time I priced a bare bones 335i it rang up to $38,900 with zero options. The 335ci that i would love to wrap my hands around is about $50k. Apples and oranges here. And lets not kid ourselves about some magical 3200 lb 1970 Challenger. Most vintage muscle cars were piles of crap when it comes to NVH, HP, mileage, and pretty much everything else that today's cars excel at. I would gladly take a slightly more portly but well equipped 2008 Challenger over a death trap 1970 Challenger any day of the week. Nate

 

Well, keep in mind that they had to design the car so that it could fit ample cupholders and have enough lighted vanity mirrors for everyone

Seriously, people are shocked that a revived American muscle car is heavily bloated? The trend with cars nowadays is to make them weigh more than enthusiasts want them to (think of the MKV GTi). Honestly though given the $40K+ price tag of these, how many of them do you really think are going to be taken to the track and treated like a muscle car of yester-year? These will mostly be bought up by middle-aged men that'll oogle over them in their garages and take them to car shows, just like the vast majority of Corvettes I see. Sure it's sad to say, but hey, I sure as hell can't afford the cost of a car like this, the gas it'll consume, and the bloated insurance prices I'm sure it'll come with, so it's the middle-aged men that can mostly afford to buy these anyway :dunno:

-Brian

x'2 thats why the majority of owners will be 50 plus and know nothing about their own car. Most vette owners buy them because they know the name and it's the fastest thing in the world. Thats why the guy in his late 80's vette with his wife in the car during the all vette show in carlisle tryed to run me. I wont say where that ended being street racing isn't good to talk about here but it didn't favor the vette much.

People buy cars to make a statement now and the people that have the money to buy them will do just that, with looks.

 

Where are you finding your BMW 335's for under $38k. Last time I priced a bare bones 335i it rang up to $38,900 with zero options. The 335ci that i would love to wrap my hands around is about $50k. Apples and oranges here. And lets not kid ourselves about some magical 3200 lb 1970 Challenger. Most vintage muscle cars were piles of crap when it comes to NVH, HP, mileage, and pretty much everything else that today's cars excel at. I would gladly take a slightly more portly but well equipped 2008 Challenger over a death trap 1970 Challenger any day of the week. Nate

Ummm...those 1970 piles of crap do excel in 1 thing....resale.:hump:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1970-Trip-Black-Hemi-Challenger-Convertible_W0QQitemZ200196762327QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item200196762327

 

Most vintage muscle cars were piles of crap when it comes to NVH, HP, mileage, and pretty much everything else that today's cars excel at. I would gladly take a slightly more portly but well equipped 2008 Challenger over a death trap 1970 Challenger any day of the week. Nate

I own a 69 mustang and would like to take that on. The car still has the drums in the rear and came factory with an option of front discs. There are no power brakes, there is no power steering and it's a B&M slapshift 3 speed auto. It does drive like a real car and it stops just fine too as long as your not an idiot driving it. The car is slighltly modified with some headwork, a nice cam and a holley 4 barrel. I have over 10k under the hood of my focus and it makes my focus look like it's sitting still. Gas mileage, eh I get around 15 if i'm easy on it (thats not highway driving).

So basically it doesn't take corners like a new car does and doesn't get the same gas mileage because it goes faster.

 

Ummm...those 1970 piles of crap do excel in 1 thing....resale.:hump:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1970-Trip-Black-Hemi-Challenger-Convertible_W0QQitemZ200196762327QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item200196762327

yea that too, I cant wait to watch mine start going up a little more. It's only assessed at 12k right now. Apparently somebody has never driven a pile of crap like that. I love the looks and thumbs up, I dont get that in the focus, maybe laughed at.

 

Probably needed that to pass crash standards.

na, cars are rated in weight classes

 

Im suprised that it is slower than the Mustang. That definitely sounds like a tuning/gearing issue.

Most Mustangs are about 400lbs lighter and 3:55 gears with a tremac standard never mind 10,000 less bucks

 

Well the design didnt give me that warm and fuzzy feeling. Oh well.

 

Those 1970 cars still had the power. The gas crunch and suffering HP numbers didn't hit hard until '72.