Spotted New Challenger Today

[cletus8269]

i got a ricer buddy who has a car i actually respect, he had a 4 banger with 11.0:1 and 380 dyno'd power. of course he came around and realized there is no replacement for displacement and got himself an 01 ZO6 now thats been stroked. i like the sti's too dont get me wrong, but that fart in a coffee can sound just doesnt do to me what a v8 such as what is in this all business challenger is surely going to sound like. turn the key and its instant turn your head and look.

Edited July 12, 2007 by cletus8269

[Sixty8panther]

So I guess the Camaro is gonna be lame too when it has a B pillar...

I do NOT think Chevy will cheap/pu$$y out like

Mopar did, but if they do then YES the 5th gen.

production Camaro will be very LAME compared

to the super cool concept!

[big blue]

Just noticed this thread right now. Damn it that challenger is going to be cool. However Bumble Bee burns all who try to keep up

[Delta Force79]

I do NOT think Chevy will cheap/pu$$y out like

Mopar did, but if they do then YES the 5th gen.

production Camaro will be very LAME compared

to the super cool concept!

Well then prepare yourself, cause I wouldn't get my hopes up for a hardtop. Yeah the concept is cool, but you can't buy it.

[rueben44]

Boy that car looks good even under camo.

[Robert Hall]

The PT has aged well? Hmmmm?

I give the Challanger 5 years before the neat factor wears out. Then where do they go?

5 years would be fine. The original only lasted 5 years..

[Robert Hall]

Well, some people like myself would just rather have a Subaru.

Subies are neat, a buddy has a WRX Sti..it's fast, handles well, but is so painfully ugly inside and out...

[toesuf94]

By the way, the silver paint and chrome wheels really make the Camo look nice!

Whether you think it is a Xerox of the 72 Challenger or not or hate the b-pillar or not - it is still a sexy assed car - just like the Camaro will be.

Cannot wait to see one in person...Sassy Grass or Plum crazy will look really nice on this car!

[Robert Hall]

The B-pillar is a non-issue for me.. with A/C, I rarely drive w/ the windows down anyway. And it would have been heavier if they had built it as a hardtop...

[georgejetson]

Around here Subarus are what the soccer moms make their whipped loser husbands buy to park next to the minivan. So "practical", and good in snow too!

[schuby87]

I gotta step in here as a newbie and a Magnum SRT-8 owner and say I or anyone I know with SRT-8s rarely get whipped by anything. We run a tick over 13 seconds in the 1/4 with a 2500 ft D/A... right off the showroom floor. The only problem I have with the LXs is their limited tuning abilities. Even so, I rarely lose a race.

I wipe my @$$ with SRT's all the time.

[bobf]

I wipe my @$$ with SRT's all the time.

Congratulations. I'll assume if that's your Trans-Am, it's pretty well modded. If not, I'd have to take issue with your statement.

I do the same with lots of other cars. As for oyur initial post - Not too many cars from the factory can do what ours do at this price point, heavy or not.

P.S., it's also nice to load up the family or 3 friends for a comfy road trip.

[Cory Wolfe]

Congratulations. I'll assume if that's your Trans-Am, it's pretty well modded. If not, I'd have to take issue with your statement.

I do the same with lots of other cars. As for oyur initial post - Not too many cars from the factory can do what ours do at this price point, heavy or not.

I'd have to take issue with your statement.

Trans Am WS6, Stock: 0-60: 4.9 secs, 1/4 mile: 13.4 secs

Charger SRT8, Stock: 0-60: 5.0 secs, 1/4 mile: 13.5 secs

Magnum SRT8, Stock: 0-60: 5.1 secs, 1/4 miles: 13.6 secs

Not a big difference, but a difference, none the less.

Edited July 13, 2007 by blackviper8891

[Robert Hall]

I'd have to take issue with your statement.

Trans Am WS6, Stock: 0-60: 4.9 secs, 1/4 mile: 13.4 secs

Charger SRT8, Stock: 0-60: 5.0 secs, 1/4 mile: 13.5 secs

Magnum SRT8, Stock: 0-60: 5.1 secs, 1/4 miles: 13.6 secs

Not a big difference, but a difference, none the less.

Kind of an apples and oranges thing since the Charger and Magnum are currently available, while the TA has been out of production for 4 years...

[CaddyXLR-V]

Well I know my GTO could beat an SRT8. I've seen a few, but it was during the middle of the day with too much traffic so I couldn't put them in their place.

[Camino LS6]

I'm so bloody tired of sedans, it's great to see a new RWD coupe with nice lines.

I wouldn't be caught dead in a Subaru and have always thought that the Charger was very,very, ugly.

Interesting to note that a WS6 ( not the highest performance variant of the T/A BTW) still has an edge on the SRT8 five model years after production ended.

GTO vs. SRT8?

No contest: GTO hands down!

[hyperv6]

I'm so bloody tired of sedans, it's great to see a new RWD coupe with nice lines.

I wouldn't be caught dead in a Subaru and have always thought that the Charger was very,very, ugly.

Interesting to note that a WS6 ( not the highest performance variant of the T/A BTW) still has an edge on the SRT8 five model years after production ended.

GTO vs. SRT8?

No contest: GTO hands down!

Not to stick up for the Charger but only to be fair. The SRT is a large heavy sedan and the GTO is a smaller Coupe.

Now I will be interested to see the G8 GXP once it arrives as it will be lighter a little smaller and just more a sports sedan than the Charger. I expect it will out run and gun the new Y car Chrysler has coming. The new Y car had better go on a diet or shrink in size a little.

Also with the HSV part mixed in the G8 it should have the look with out the cheap stickers and JC Whitney wing.

As for the Challanger. It was one of Chyslers best looking car in the 60's and 70's. Why does everyone want one now and when back then they sold so few? It was never a big seller and neither were the later Cudas. I don't have the numbers handy but they were well under the Camaro and Mustang. And it was not just the gas crunch. That is why they are so expensive today as demand has far out reached demand with so few built and so many rusted away.

[Camino LS6]

Not to stick up for the Charger but only to be fair. The SRT is a large heavy sedan and the GTO is a smaller Coupe.

Of course. That's why I said "hands down". Also, the GTO is a much more refined car.

Now I will be interested to see the G8 GXP once it arrives as it will be lighter a little smaller and just more a sports sedan than the Charger. I expect it will out run and gun the new Y car Chrysler has coming. The new Y car had better go on a diet or shrink in size a little.

Also with the HSV part mixed in the G8 it should have the look with out the cheap stickers and JC Whitney wing.

I fully expect the G8 to trounce the Charger in all categories. (Stupid name notwithstanding)

As for the Challanger. It was one of Chyslers best looking car in the 60's and 70's. Why does everyone want one now and when back then they sold so few? It was never a big seller and neither were the later Cudas. I don't have the numbers handy but they were well under the Camaro and Mustang. And it was not just the gas crunch. That is why they are so expensive today as demand has far out reached demand with so few built and so many rusted away.

Chrysler always took a back seat to Ford and GM as far as sales went, even back then. Everyone wants the new Challenger because it is a beautiful design on a powerful car. The pent-up demand for a real performance (RWD) coupe from Chrysler has been pent-up much longer than that same demand from GM and Ford. Chrysler has been sooo long without a car like this that any name or bodystyle they could have picked from that era would get a similar reaction. I'm glad that they picked their best bodystyle ever (IMO) to re-do. Too bad it can't be a 'Cuda.

[bobf]

I'd have to take issue with your statement.

Trans Am WS6, Stock: 0-60: 4.9 secs, 1/4 mile: 13.4 secs

Charger SRT8, Stock: 0-60: 5.0 secs, 1/4 mile: 13.5 secs

Magnum SRT8, Stock: 0-60: 5.1 secs, 1/4 miles: 13.6 secs

Not a big difference, but a difference, none the less.

I guess my issue was more with the "ass wiping" comment as it was so gracefully put. I have no doubt the WS6 is in the same realm as the SRT-8s. I do have an issue with a stock one putting a beating on an SRT-8. I have been to the track many times with Mustangs, GTOs and F-Bodies (of which I am a previous owner BTW), and every time, the SRTs are edging out the others stock-for-stock. Of course, nothing I say here will change anyone's opinion - and heck, I'll probably buy the next CTS-V. But until someone shows me different, I can only believe what I've seen.

[CMG]

It's a pretty easy game to play, so I'll play it. The Neon SRT4's times are all over the place with nearly a second difference between the fastest and slowest times for the same year. Doesn't put out very reliable times, now does it? As well, it's still just a POS Neon that even I feel cramped in. You get what you pay for, as they say. I like playing this game.

Because you have some kind of "chip on your shoulder", your opinion must trump all others..?

My buddy has a Chrysler 300 SRT8, dead stock on stock tires he has run 12.93 @ 107.75 mph at Mission Raceways. I've seen many SRT8 cars very close to 13.00, some under.

An SRT4 WILL beat a Subaru for less money, we have a stock SRT4 running very consistent 13.8/13.9 times at our track, and most Subies run mid 14s.

Besides, even YOU can't say the SOUND of the horizontal four doesn't make you..... WINCE?

[CMG]

I wipe my @$$ with SRT's all the time.

I guess that means you got a hella fat ass then?

:AH-HA_wink:

[CMG]

I'm so bloody tired of sedans, it's great to see a new RWD coupe with nice lines.

I wouldn't be caught dead in a Subaru and have always thought that the Charger was very,very, ugly.

Interesting to note that a WS6 ( not the highest performance variant of the T/A BTW) still has an edge on the SRT8 five model years after production ended.

GTO vs. SRT8?

No contest: GTO hands down!

I think you better read the comparison yourself, it's already been done, but the results weren't quite what you claimed....?

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedan/...pecs_price.html

Take a look at ALL the tests, acceleration, braking, slalom, you name it.

[Cory Wolfe]

Because you have some kind of "chip on your shoulder", your opinion must trump all others..?

My buddy has a Chrysler 300 SRT8, dead stock on stock tires he has run 12.93 @ 107.75 mph at Mission Raceways. I've seen many SRT8 cars very close to 13.00, some under.

An SRT4 WILL beat a Subaru for less money, we have a stock SRT4 running very consistent 13.8/13.9 times at our track, and most Subies run mid 14s.

Haha... A chip on my shoulder? I do? What... because I think the Neon is crap, which in this place I like to call "reality", it is?

As for the times, I'm just quoting times from credible sources. Stating times from tracks isn't exactly a reliable means of doing so. You have to figure in altitude adjustments, driver skill, and most of all, credibility. I'd rather trust the times posted by professionals.

One last tidbit, I didn't state an SRT4 wouldn't beat a Legacy for less money. It will. I'd rather have the better car, not the one that happens to be a POS, but slightly faster. As I said, you get what you pay for. Besides, if the Legacy's performance isn't good enough for you and the cost is pushing it, there's always the somewhat cheaper WRX STi. It may be ugly, but at a few grand less than the Legacy, you get performance of 0-60 coming in 4.6 seconds and the 1/4 mile in 13.2 seconds. Certainly rivals the SRT8s (according to the aforementioned times).

[Ravenfreak13]

WHO CARES WHAT BEATS WHAT! No one races their cars anyway so get over it! OOOO! I need to pay for .8 second diffence in 0-60 or what ever. No one cares...no one should care.

As long as it's fast, reliable, stylish and soulful, its a great product.

[Camino LS6]

I think you better read the comparison yourself, it's already been done, but the results weren't quite what you claimed....?

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedan/...pecs_price.html

Take a look at ALL the tests, acceleration, braking, slalom, you name it.

I made no specific claims, just a statement of what I would choose. At a 10k discount, you can have the much more refined GTO with nearly identical performance numbers. And, as I said before, I'm sick of sedans.

I noticed that only the SRT8 was an automatic in that test, I wonder how an automatic GTO would have differed. Doesn't really matter to me, the SRT8's auto-only status eliminates it from consideration for me.

[CMG]

Haha... A chip on my shoulder? I do? What... because I think the Neon is crap, which in this place I like to call "reality", it is?

As for the times, I'm just quoting times from credible sources. Stating times from tracks isn't exactly a reliable means of doing so. You have to figure in altitude adjustments, driver skill, and most of all, credibility. I'd rather trust the times posted by professionals.

One last tidbit, I didn't state an SRT4 wouldn't beat a Legacy for less money. It will. I'd rather have the better car, not the one that happens to be a POS, but slightly faster. As I said, you get what you pay for. Besides, if the Legacy's performance isn't good enough for you and the cost is pushing it, there's always the somewhat cheaper WRX STi. It may be ugly, but at a few grand less than the Legacy, you get performance of 0-60 coming in 4.6 seconds and the 1/4 mile in 13.2 seconds. Certainly rivals the SRT8s (according to the aforementioned times).

Any car built as an "entry level" car can be considered "crap" can it not?

Is your Millenia something truly outstanding?

LOL

It's cheap "bang for the buck" performance. It doesn't PRETEND to be a luxury car. Simple as that.

I would say "credibility" is MY EYES WATCHING AT THE TRACK alot more than what YOU read in a magazine. I've seen many high 13/low 14 second SRT4s at the track. I suggest you go to the track and watch yourself. It's worth it if only it opens your eyes up A LITTLE. Can't hurt anything...?

Comparing a COMPACT that runs close to the times of an SRT8 is great. Unless you have 4 passengers and luggage of course. LOL!!!!! It's an "apples and oranges" scenario you point to.

I don't mind Subies, I H-A-T-E the sound of the horizontal engine, it's disgusting to me, but the cars aren't bad for what they are. They aren't street car "world beaters", they aren't "luxury cars", they are more a wanna be rallye car than anything else IMO.

Some look ugly, some look bland, some not so bad.

It's OPINION, and every car manufacturer has it's detractors and it's backers.

What do you think of Ford's Mustang?

Great styling (I know, lemme gues.... "plagarism" ) and awesome bang for the buck in my eyes.

Let's have YOUR clinical dissection of a Mustang.

LOL

[CMG]

I made no specific claims, just a statement of what I would choose. At a 10k discount, you can have the much more refined GTO with nearly identical performance numbers. And, as I said before, I'm sick of sedans.

I noticed that only the SRT8 was an automatic in that test, I wonder how an automatic GTO would have differed. Doesn't really matter to me, the SRT8's auto-only status eliminates it from consideration for me.

Let me ask you something, straight up-

Do those numbers surprise you?

I'll tell you what, they sure surprised ME! I couldn't believe it, not just acceleration, but handling, slalom, braking, you name it. Once again- apples and oranges, but the comparison is a two seat "sports car" (muscle car? sports touring?) against a large 4 door sedan. I find the comparison outstanding myself, I was shocked.

I've since driven a good friend's Chrysler 300 SRT8 and it set me on my ear. Lots of power, good handling, great braking, it's not what I was expecting. AT ALL.

The GTO would have still been alive today if it were a true reincarnation of the original- STYLE, and image, that's what was missing IMO. Great car, but the Holden it was derived from was a better package IMO as far as styling and image goes.

The "new" GTO was hard to beat as far as "bang for the buck", I know many people who bought them for a song- brand new, but a year old....

[Cory Wolfe]

Any car built as an "entry level" car can be considered "crap" can it not?

Compared to non entry level cars, certainly. In the Neon's case, it's compared to its own competitors of the time. Everything but J-bodies and Hyundais were better vehicles.

Is your Millenia something truly outstanding?

LOL

It's a 12 year old luxury sedan with 175k miles... Should I expect it to be?

It's cheap "bang for the buck" performance. It doesn't PRETEND to be a luxury car. Simple as that.

I would say "credibility" is MY EYES WATCHING AT THE TRACK alot more than what YOU read in a magazine. I've seen many high 13/low 14 second SRT4s at the track. I suggest you go to the track and watch yourself. It's worth it if only it opens your eyes up A LITTLE. Can't hurt anything...?

Unless the times were clocked by the same driver with identical track conditions... and without proof, I might add... It's worthless quoting times that aren't professionally recorded.

Comparing a COMPACT that runs close to the times of an SRT8 is great. Unless you have 4 passengers and luggage of course. LOL!!!!! It's an "apples and oranges" scenario you point to.

How else did the SRT4 comparison come into this conversation? I don't see you taking issue with that.

It's OPINION, and every car manufacturer has it's detractors and it's backers.

Pointing out the obvious, aren't you? It was a harmless conversation between a few guys who enjoyed going back and forth about it. It's not exactly life and death, so why you barge in and start making an issue out of everything is quite a mystery. You're new here, so perhaps you haven't had a chance to understand these things. As I said in my other response to you, respect and sarcasm, inform yourself.

[CaddyXLR-V]

What you see on the track means nothing. Even tire pressure could mean win or lose on the track. Did you test the tire pressure of each GTO and SRT8 you saw at the track?

And while we are talking about personal stories, I raced a 95+ Viper. It was the previous gen, but had the exhaust out the back so it wasn't one of the early ones. My nose was at his door up until about 90mph when we slowed down, so I was less than a car length behind a 450hp ~3300lb car. Oh yeah, and that was only about 2 weeks after I bought my GTO, and it is my first manual trans car.

[Northstar]

The GTO owns the SRT8's dollar-for-dollar. They are very similar stock-for-stock but the GTO costs $10k less. With that, you can throw on twin turbos, Pedders suspension, Brembos, and some better tires and be at 600RWHP (SRT8 is under 400RWHP) if you're interested in building the faster car.

Stock GTO's are terribly out of tune from the factory, as well. The RWHP on GTOs is considerably less than that on C6s. With a tune, GTOs gain ~20RWHP on average.

FWIW, the fastest totally stock LS2 GTO ran 12.88 @ 108.9MPH, and the fastest totally stock LS1 GTO ran 13.09 @ 105.0 MPH.

My GTO is cammed and interestingly enough the slowest cam-only LS1 is 12.75 @ 108 MPH (this surprised me that it's faster than the fastest stock LS2). I've never ran mine on the track, though I'd like to someday. Today an M3 wanted to run, but I was busy talking on the phone (figures). Just based on what he sounded like he was giving it, I think I would have murdered it. I was giving it maybe 60% throttle and he sounded like he was at WOT. Sure, he put 10 lengths on me or so, but I wasn't racin'.

[NOS2006]

:pokeowned:

Not owned at all. The SRT8 isn't really that quick for a car of its price and HP. Both C&D and MT tested the Mustang GT and SRT8. The SRT-8 is a little quicker 0-60 but that's about it. And the Mustang GT isn't all that quick.

[CMG]

What you see on the track means nothing. Even tire pressure could mean win or lose on the track. Did you test the tire pressure of each GTO and SRT8 you saw at the track?

Huh?

That's a MAGAZINE test. Nothing I saw at the track...?????

[CMG]

The GTO owns the SRT8's dollar-for-dollar. They are very similar stock-for-stock but the GTO costs $10k less.

Won't deny the GTO is great bang for the buck, it is.

The GTO isn't a family sedan though, I have no idea why they tested it against the SRT8 and the Cadillac.

Stock GTO's are terribly out of tune from the factory, as well. The RWHP on GTOs is considerably less than that on C6s. With a tune, GTOs gain ~20RWHP on average.

Same scenario for the Chrysler/Dodge LX cars. DiabloSport has a tuner coming out, 20hp right across the rpm range, according to their dyno tests...

FWIW, the fastest totally stock LS2 GTO ran 12.88 @ 108.9MPH, and the fastest totally stock LS1 GTO ran 13.09 @ 105.0 MPH.

There is a guy who I believe ALSO owned a GTO, maybe I'm wrong... on the LS1.com forums. His stock Chrysler 300 SRT8 went 12.56, or so he claimed.

Does anybody here post on the LS1.com forums?

[CMG]

As I said in my other response to you

Weird, what I heard was

[Northstar]

Won't deny the GTO is great bang for the buck, it is.

The GTO isn't a family sedan though, I have no idea why they tested it against the SRT8 and the Cadillac.

I'm not sure why they tested the GTO either. They should have thrown in the Mustang for something to compare the GTO to.

Same scenario for the Chrysler/Dodge LX cars. DiabloSport has a tuner coming out, 20hp right across the rpm range, according to their dyno tests...

According to their dyno tests... K&N claims an 18RWHP gain on the GTO with only their CAI... yeah right. The tuner will certainly add HP, but what I'm talking about is that many GTOs are simply way out of tune... many run extremely rich and simply need to be tuned to how they're supposed to run. The Diablosport changes the PCM and gives you new shift points, fuel cut-off, etc. The GTO has that too, but again that's not what I meant.

There is a guy who I believe ALSO owned a GTO, maybe I'm wrong... on the LS1.com forums. His stock Chrysler 300 SRT8 went 12.56, or so he claimed.

Does anybody here post on the LS1.com forums?

It's quite possible his stock 300 SRT8 went 12.56. However, what does stock mean? Is a tune still "stock"? What about DR's? etc. etc. There are tons of little things you can do to a car that really isn't changing anything and is still considered "stock" by most. However, if the SRT8 was tuned and got the extra 20HP over "stock" from that, that will cut down some time, and if it had DR's that cut 60ft times down .5s, well that's a huge difference, but they didn't actually do anything to modify their engine... no aftermarket parts other than tires.

It's hard to say what car is faster. Certainly a "fast" (perfectly tuned) SRT8 would a "slow" (out of tune) GTO and vice versa. It's hard to say which is faster unless you have two very similarly tuned vehicles on the same track with the same tires and drivers that are totally equal in skill.

One thing I will say is that I rode in a Magnum SRT8 at the auto show on the test track, and I didn't think it felt all that fast, so I asked the test driver if he floored it or not. He claimed he did, and I thought it was a bit weird that it didn't feel as fast as my '04 GTO. I guess considering the slowest cam-only LS1 GTO recorded is 12.75 may have something to do with that, however.

[CMG]

I'm not sure why they tested the GTO either. They should have thrown in the Mustang for something to compare the GTO to.

Yup, Mustang vs GTO would have been a way better test IMO. I honestly didn't know how good the sedans were until I read that comparo, never really heard of the Caddy/SRT8 much until that test came out and internet links started popping up...

I still think the LACK of image was the only thing the GTO had against it.

According to their dyno tests... K&N claims an 18RWHP gain on the GTO with only their CAI... yeah right. The tuner will certainly add HP, but what I'm talking about is that many GTOs are simply way out of tune... many run extremely rich and simply need to be tuned to how they're supposed to run. The Diablosport changes the PCM and gives you new shift points, fuel cut-off, etc. The GTO has that too, but again that's not what I meant.

Well I know the LX guys tested all the various CAIs they could get their hands on, and I think the AirHammer was the only TRUE power maker. The K&N listed their CAI as "21.09 horsepower" and I think the increase wasn't much at all, if any. Tuners are a different story altogether..

It's quite possible his stock 300 SRT8 went 12.56. However, what does stock mean? Is a tune still "stock"? What about DR's? etc. etc. There are tons of little things you can do to a car that really isn't changing anything and is still considered "stock" by most. However, if the SRT8 was tuned and got the extra 20HP over "stock" from that, that will cut down some time, and if it had DR's that cut 60ft times down .5s, well that's a huge difference, but they didn't actually do anything to modify their engine... no aftermarket parts other than tires.

Couldn't agree more, which is why I said "claimed".

My buddy's 300 was stock, no tuner (not available even!) and he had stock tires and rims, he went 12.93 @ 107.75mph. A 12.56- while not "impossible", is considerably quicker, and hard to explain IMO.

It's hard to say what car is faster. Certainly a "fast" (perfectly tuned) SRT8 would a "slow" (out of tune) GTO and vice versa. It's hard to say which is faster unless you have two very similarly tuned vehicles on the same track with the same tires and drivers that are totally equal in skill.

Times as close as 13.2 vs 13.3 would be a toss up IMO as far as the cars go. Either car could win or lose for a variety of factors like you say.

One thing I will say is that I rode in a Magnum SRT8 at the auto show on the test track, and I didn't think it felt all that fast, so I asked the test driver if he floored it or not. He claimed he did, and I thought it was a bit weird that it didn't feel as fast as my '04 GTO. I guess considering the slowest cam-only LS1 GTO recorded is 12.75 may have something to do with that, however.

I drove my buddy's 300 SRT8 and it felt very quick for a new car, let alone a 4 door sedan. I've yet to ride in a NEW style GTO, rode and driven in lots of the originals, from 1964 to early 70's. I think the new version has the PERFORMANCE covered, it can probably do better in almost every area performance-wise than the original, if only they had a better marketing in the US, who knows..?

The new GTO could have easily been competitive with the Mustang if done right marketing-wise, but now we'll never know..?

[cletus8269]

actually... car and driver or import trend (cant remember which) did a comparison against 04 stang and an 04 goat... the goat barely bested the mustang but they still gave the overall win to ford because of the price issue. by the way... what does the past 3 pages have to do with the challenger spy shots? i feel like i am at freakin streetfire reading comments after a video.