Challenger Unmasked

[Delta Force79]

AM I the only one that noticed in the pic of the two outside the Roush building, the grey one is missing it's fuel filler. The red one clearly shows it being on the driver's side, as well as the other photos of the production Challenger. They are both facing the same way so the image isnt flopped....hmm quite strange

[K.C.]

I really do like this car. I think the different grille looks fantastic and the taillamps are better than the concept. It's great to see this car in something other than Hemi Orange. I love the pewter gray colored one in front of the Roush factory. That is gorgeous!

[Sixty8panther]

Only thing lamer than a $30,000 Camaro with B-pillars is a $38,000 Dodge Challenger with B-pillars!

Look at that fat plastic covered pillar.

This is the kind of car where if you're buying an automatic it better be because you have a prosthetic

left leg or your right arm is not usable due to some tragic injury.

[6t5frlane]

Wow, I like I like....Camaro's not even in the same ballpark. I'll take mine in Black.

[SuperSport623]

sixty8, im totally with you there...

hell even if i had no left leg i ghetto rig something hand operated.... i neeed a stick!

[04monteintimidator]

Umm, are you crazy? I know you weren't raised during the '80s, so those cars couldn't have rubbed off on you too much...

Im not sitting here saying i dont like horsepower or torque or whatever... in fact its just the opposite... im a huge fan

what i was saying... is regardless of what you want... you never really need more than 250hp and to be honest you could probably do just fine with less than that... and either way... the point i was trying to make is that just because a car has a lot of horsepower... doesnt mean its worth as much as they want to charge for it... a 425 hp V8 challenger sounds great to me... but when you tell me that its gunna run me 38k before the dealers do what they do, i wont be able to get a manual for a while AND while i dont hate the styling, its definitely not the most stunning thing i've ever seen... all of a sudden... a 263 hp V6 and absolutely beautiful Cadillac for less money sounds pretty damn good

[NOS2006]

I agree, but if they only offered 263 HP Cadillacs, everybody would have the same one. That's what's great about the Mustang line. I can't stand that there are so many models, but they've got HP from the 200 range up through 500, and even higher in the Super Snake or whatever it's called. You can't just offer one. Just because you and I can't afford it doesn't mean someone else can't.

And I don't know about you, but I'm holding out until I can buy the top-of-the-line Camaro. Until then, I'm driving the Cobalt.

[04monteintimidator]

well of course... ill be waiting for a Camaro as well

i just felt like it brought the price into better perspective when you realized its more expensive than a Cadillac

not to mention... i was pretty much stating my personal opinion... i never once said "ew noone will buy this" i simply said that i wouldnt

Edited January 17, 2008 by 04monteintimidator

[NOS2006]

I know what you meant. I'm just the type of person who will buy a car, love it, mod it, love it more, and mod it again. Then I'll be sick of it and sell it haha.

[ZL-1]

My opinion is the Camaro is better in taking retro cues and wrapping them in a modern-day package.

Edited January 17, 2008 by ZL-1

[NOS2006]

My opinion is the Camaro is better in taking retro cues and wrapping them in a modern-day package.

Agreed 100%

[Intrepidation]

My opinion is the Camaro is better in taking retro cues and wrapping them in a modern-day package.

It's not better at all. The two cars were designed with a different philosophy. The Camaro was designed with the goal of creating modern car with retro elements. The Challenger was designed to make a retro car with modern elements. No doubt it was designed that way to please muscle car fans who disliked the Charger's 4 doors and non retro styling. To say one is better than the other from an objective design standpoint is unfair because they where designed with different philosophies. Of course you just happen to like one's styling over the other that's fair.

[enzl]

It's not better at all. The two cars were designed with a different philosophy. The Camaro was designed with the goal of creating modern car with retro elements. The Challenger was designed to make a retro car with modern elements. No doubt it was designed that way to please muscle car fans who disliked the Charger's 4 doors and non retro styling. To say one is better than the other from an objective design standpoint is unfair because they where designed with different philosophies. Of course you just happen to like one's styling over the other that's fair.

Forget about it...you'll never win...there are people around here who don't believe that the HHR is a PT ripoff....just take a deep breath and let it go...Styling is subjective. So are the opinions of posters.

The Challenger is here. The Camaro isn't. Enjoy the brief respite before the breathless bleatings of the horde proclaim the new Camaro a reincarnation of Jesus himself in vehicular form.

[NOS2006]

It's not better at all. The two cars were designed with a different philosophy. The Camaro was designed with the goal of creating modern car with retro elements. The Challenger was designed to make a retro car with modern elements. No doubt it was designed that way to please muscle car fans who disliked the Charger's 4 doors and non retro styling. To say one is better than the other from an objective design standpoint is unfair because they where designed with different philosophies. Of course you just happen to like one's styling over the other that's fair.

I think you just misread; you basically summed up what he said: "The Camaro is better at taking retro cues and wrapping them in a modern day package."

[CMG]

And I don't know about you, but I'm holding out until I can buy the top-of-the-line Camaro. Until then, I'm driving the Cobalt.

If you think a fully optioned top of the line performance-wise Camaro is gonna sell for $30,000 or even close to that ....

<insert "sell bridge" comments here>

:AH-HA_wink:

[CMG]

I think you just misread; you basically summed up what he said: "The Camaro is better at taking retro cues and wrapping them in a modern day package."

Take a look at the interior of the Challenger and the interior of the Camaro concept.

Sorry, but once you see pictures posted of each interior I'll agree with an above poster- there is NO comparing the two cars. The interior of the Camaro concept is horrible IMO.

I'm still willing to bet neither the Camaro or the Challenger base models will sell for a price as low as a base model Mustang.

[NOS2006]

I wouldn't opt for fully-optioned, but I will probably have at least one or two options. I want the top powertrain, suspension, and stereo. And it'll probably reach into the $40,000s, and I'm okay with that.

I honestly could afford an '06 GTO last year when I was out to buy a new car, but I opted for the Cobalt just to save that little bit of extra money. I'll be able to afford the Camaro once I graduate and work full time without a problem.

[NOS2006]

Take a look at the interior of the Challenger and the interior of the Camaro concept.

Sorry, but once you see pictures posted of each interior I'll agree with an above poster- there is NO comparing the two cars. The interior of the Camaro concept is horrible IMO.

I'm still willing to bet neither the Camaro or the Challenger base models will sell for a price as low as a base model Mustang.

Well, opinions vary. I like both interiors, but I feel the Challengers is too plain. I'd honestly take the Mustang's design over the Challenger's interior-wise. I like the Camaro's too.

And I agree that the Mustang will probably be the cheapest because it uses the least technology and will most likely have the least standard equipment, until maybe the '09 refresh, then we'll see.

[Intrepidation]

Take a look at the interior of the Challenger and the interior of the Camaro concept.

Sorry, but once you see pictures posted of each interior I'll agree with an above poster- there is NO comparing the two cars. The interior of the Camaro concept is horrible IMO.

I'm still willing to bet neither the Camaro or the Challenger base models will sell for a price as low as a base model Mustang.

Have you seen the production Challenger interior?

[CMG]

Have you seen the production Challenger interior?

Bits and pieces posted on MoPar forums, I've read posts with guys who have actually sat in the production cars, not prototypes.

Have YOU seen the interior on the Camaro concept?

I would have to say it might scare people away from the car when it is produced, it's THAT bad IMO.

[CMG]

I wouldn't opt for fully-optioned, but I will probably have at least one or two options. I want the top powertrain, suspension, and stereo. And it'll probably reach into the $40,000s, and I'm okay with that.

I honestly could afford an '06 GTO last year when I was out to buy a new car, but I opted for the Cobalt just to save that little bit of extra money. I'll be able to afford the Camaro once I graduate and work full time without a problem.

ALL the 2008 Challengers are SRT8 top of the line performance models, and they are under $40,000.

It's funny how nobody flinches at over $40,000 for a projected pricetag for a top of the line performance Camaro...??

The new GTOs were being GIVEN away, I know people who have bought them at insanely low prices. The LS1 forum has a few unbelievable deal stories...

[CMG]

Try this link and tell me what you all think.

HONESTLY!

http://www.carbodydesign.com/archive/2006/...rior%202-lg.jpg

Better yet- here's a pic!

Edited January 17, 2008 by CMG

[NOS2006]

ALL the 2008 Challengers are SRT8 top of the line performance models, and they are under $40,000.

It's funny how nobody flinches at over $40,000 for a projected pricetag for a top of the line performance Camaro...??

The new GTOs were being GIVEN away, I know people who have bought them at insanely low prices. The LS1 forum has a few unbelievable deal stories...

I know the GTOs were being given away cheap, but I'm saying if it were at MSRP with a couple options, I could've afforded it straight up. I was 18 at the time, and I only work 6 months a year. Point is, I will be able to afford the Camaro I want no problem when I'm 21 or 22 working full time.

And, yes, I honestly do like the Camaro's interior. I really like it even in the spy pics of it:

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog...t.pw.kgp.ed.jpg

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog....dcu.kgp.ed.jpg

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog...door.kgp.ed.jpg

I am unsure of the center stack though, but that won't really be shown until the production car is shown.

[Intrepidation]

I know the GTOs were being given away cheap, but I'm saying if it were at MSRP with a couple options, I could've afforded it straight up. I was 18 at the time, and I only work 6 months a year. Point is, I will be able to afford the Camaro I want no problem when I'm 21 or 22 working full time.

And, yes, I honestly do like the Camaro's interior. I really like it even in the spy pics of it:

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog...t.pw.kgp.ed.jpg

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog....dcu.kgp.ed.jpg

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog...door.kgp.ed.jpg

I am unsure of the center stack though, but that won't really be shown until the production car is shown.

With the exception of the shifter I really like the production Camaro's interior...I like how the center stack appears to use fully integrated controls. Hurray for no more black ties!

[BrewSwillis]

Another pic from Dodge's Canadian website:

[Camino LS6]

Nice pic

[Cory Wolfe]

In that picture... I feel like its smiling at me with the lower grill and the headlights. Sort of like something from "Cars". But maybe I'm just delusional.

[NOS2006]

That looks chopped to me.

[CMG]

I know the GTOs were being given away cheap

They were given away soooo cheap they were a "bang for the buck" deal I don't think will be seen for a looong time again.

I hope a few of you are joking about the Camaro concept interior. It must be the worst part of any concept Chevy I have seen for over a decade.

[Robert Hall]

In that picture... I feel like its smiling at me with the lower grill and the headlights. Sort of like something from "Cars". But maybe I'm just delusional.

Yes, reminds me of a Simpsons fish... but with a license plate, it won't be as smiley looking.

[Robert Hall]

It's not better at all. The two cars were designed with a different philosophy. The Camaro was designed with the goal of creating modern car with retro elements. The Challenger was designed to make a retro car with modern elements. No doubt it was designed that way to please muscle car fans who disliked the Charger's 4 doors and non retro styling. To say one is better than the other from an objective design standpoint is unfair because they where designed with different philosophies. Of course you just happen to like one's styling over the other that's fair.

I think the Camaro will do better with the under 35 crowd and the Challenger better with the over 45 Baby Boomers. Being between those two ranges, I find both appealing, along the Mustang.

[Cory Wolfe]

I hope a few of you are joking about the Camaro concept interior. It must be the worst part of any concept Chevy I have seen for over a decade.

It wasn't completely horrible in the concept... But I see it going downhill by quite a bit for production. That's even if I ignore the cobbled together spy shots.

[Robert Hall]

It wasn't completely horrible in the concept... But I see it going downhill by quite a bit for production. That's even if I ignore the cobbled together spy shots.

The pics I've seen of the concept and production prototypes certainly look better than the 4th gen interior...remember, this is a cheap Chevy..I wouldn't expect Cadillac quality interiors...

[Guest YellowJacket894]

That looks chopped to me.

It is. The production Challengers don't have the cross-hair grille of the concept car.

[NOS2006]

The pics I've seen of the concept and production prototypes certainly look better than the 4th gen interior...remember, this is a cheap Chevy..I wouldn't expect Cadillac quality interiors...

Then again, the Malibu is cheaper than the Camaro, and that's a damn nice interior...

[ZL-1]

It's not better at all. The two cars were designed with a different philosophy. The Camaro was designed with the goal of creating modern car with retro elements. The Challenger was designed to make a retro car with modern elements. No doubt it was designed that way to please muscle car fans who disliked the Charger's 4 doors and non retro styling. To say one is better than the other from an objective design standpoint is unfair because they where designed with different philosophies. Of course you just happen to like one's styling over the other that's fair.

I should have used the expression subjective opinion on my post :AH-HA_wink:

[SuperSport623]

we've discussed the problem with retro before... all three pony cars have to either evolve or die stylistically, and since the Mustang and even more so the Challenger are more or less carbon copies of original designs, redesigning them poses a challenge.... i think since the Camaro is more of a modern package, it has the best chance of being redesigned without alientating its new fan base.

[ponchoman49]

Uhm... A base-price $38,000 specialty performance car debuting in 2008 with a 4-speed automatic...

Quote:Shortly after that initial production run, Dodge will be offering three versions of the Challenger as 2009 models. The base model will be powered by a 3.5L V6 and will be mated to a four-speed automatic transmission. The 3.5L will be replaced by Chrysler's upcoming 4.0L Phoenix V6, but probably not until the 2011 model year

Actually it looks like only the base much cheaper priced V6 model will have a 4 speed automatic. The V8's all come with a 5 speed auto.

[ponchoman49]

one fast car of the 80's

sorry your post made me think of the abismal automotive times that the 80's must have been.. i want alive... lol

I grew up during the 70's and 80's and had to live with a 85 HP Fairmont (my first car) a 110 HP 231 gutless Cutlass, a 140 HP 301 2BBL Lemans, 140 HP 307 Cutlasses etc. They were all dogs but at the time they seemed ok as everything else was slow. 1983 saw the 190 HP HO 305 F-bodies which seemed like race cars along with the 175 HP 5.0 Mustangs. 1984 saw the birth of the fuel injected Buick turbo 3.8 in the T-Types and Grand Nationals but it wasn't until 1986 that saw the return of a true powerhouse in the form of the intercooled turbo 3.8 GN's and the fortified TPI 350 Vettes. Who could forget the 1989 Trans Am pace car with a Buick intercooled turbo and 250 underrated HP. Yes cars were pretty slow during the 80's but there were some pretty quick ones too. And lets not forget that cars back then didn't have 100 airbags, ABS, AWD, 18" tires, 200 lbs of insulation and side guard door beems to make them so heavy like todays cars. A full sized car like a Olds 98 or Buick Electra from 85-90 only weighted 3200-3300 lbs. Vettes were little more than 3000 lbs. Mid sizers like the Celebrities weighted 2700 lbs and Cavaliers were in the 2500 lb ballpark.

Edited January 18, 2008 by ponchoman49

[Camino LS6]

I grew up during the 70's and 80's and had to live with a 85 HP Fairmont (my first car) a 110 HP 231 gutless Cutlass, a 140 HP 301 2BBL Lemans, 140 HP 307 Cutlasses etc. They were all dogs but at the time they seemed ok as everything else was slow. 1983 saw the 190 HP HO 305 F-bodies which seemed like race cars along with the 175 HP 5.0 Mustangs. 1984 saw the birth of the fuel injected Buick turbo 3.8 in the T-Types and Grand Nationals but it wasn't until 1986 that saw the return of a true powerhouse in the form of the intercooled turbo 3.8 GN's and the fortified TPI 350 Vettes. Who could forget the 1989 Trans Am pace car with a Buick intercooled turbo and 250 underrated HP. Yes cars were pretty slow during the 80's but there were some pretty quick ones too. And lets not forget that cars back then didn't have 100 airbags, ABS, AWD, 18" tires, 200 lbs of insulation and side guard door beems to make them so heavy like todays cars. A full sized car like a Olds 98 or Buick Electra from 85-90 only weighted 3200-3300 lbs. Vettes were little more than 3000 lbs. Mid sizers like the Celebrities weighted 2700 lbs and Cavaliers were in the 2500 lb ballpark.

Sums it up nicely.

It always makes me wonder what could have been if the regulations hadn't castrated these cars.

[Robert Hall]

we've discussed the problem with retro before... all three pony cars have to either evolve or die stylistically, and since the Mustang and even more so the Challenger are more or less carbon copies of original designs, redesigning them poses a challenge.... i think since the Camaro is more of a modern package, it has the best chance of being redesigned without alientating its new fan base.

Yes, for the Challenger, that redesign is 5 years down the road.... If it lasts 5 years, like the original, that will be great. They don't need to continue it beyond 5 years....

[A Horse With No Name]

It's easier on my eyes than the Mustang, but the Camaro pwns both.

Actually I like the new Mustang (go figure) but yeah the new Camaro is the "A" ticket.

But then that should come as no suprise. The camaro owned the Mustang and the Challenger in 1971, it might as well own both in 2008.

Now if it were a 70 Mach 1 or a 70 Boss 302 it might be a different story...

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Sums it up nicely.

It always makes me wonder what could have been if the regulations hadn't castrated these cars.

Although regulations have given us modern engene management systems that have given us cars like the C-6 Z06.

We live in an era when we have the best of both worlds, might as well enjoy it for as long as we can.

Sadly, in 15 years CAFE will have killed even 4 cyl. performance cars like the Sky, Solstice, Miata, Civic SI, GTI etc. The Muscle car era cars will all be in museums, and no onw will remember other cool cars like the faux wood paneled station wagons of the 60's-70's.

Or the two toned and thee toned chromed wonders of the fifties.

Makes me sad...

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Forget about it...you'll never win...there are people around here who don't believe that the HHR is a PT ripoff....just take a deep breath and let it go...Styling is subjective. So are the opinions of posters.

The Challenger is here. The Camaro isn't. Enjoy the brief respite before the breathless bleatings of the horde proclaim the new Camaro a reincarnation of Jesus himself in vehicular form.

Well, it did rise from the dead...and preach the gospel of speed to millions of converts world wide...

Chris

[Camino LS6]

Although regulations have given us modern engene management systems that have given us cars like the C-6 Z06.

We live in an era when we have the best of both worlds, might as well enjoy it for as long as we can.

Sadly, in 15 years CAFE will have killed even 4 cyl. performance cars like the Sky, Solstice, Miata, Civic SI, GTI etc. The Muscle car era cars will all be in museums, and no onw will remember other cool cars like the faux wood paneled station wagons of the 60's-70's.

Or the two toned and thee toned chromed wonders of the fifties.

Makes me sad...

Chris

Rest assured, people will remember.

And if we get our act together and get off of oil, we may yet get these cars back.

[Intrepidation]

we've discussed the problem with retro before... all three pony cars have to either evolve or die stylistically, and since the Mustang and even more so the Challenger are more or less carbon copies of original designs, redesigning them poses a challenge.... i think since the Camaro is more of a modern package, it has the best chance of being redesigned without alientating its new fan base.

I dunno, if the Challenger makes it to a next generation they have more freedom with the car's design. This generation was retro, but the next could evolve it into something modern but unmistakably the Challenger like what the new Camaro is.

[cletus8269]

i dont think the styling is too bad retro, more progressive i guess considering this thing was one of the last "challengers" we saw

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1982-dodge-...tem270203464126

[Camino LS6]

Camaro has the advantage of other generations to pull cues from.

[Robert Hall]

I dunno, if the Challenger makes it to a next generation they have more freedom with the car's design. This generation was retro, but the next could evolve it into something modern but unmistakably the Challenger like what the new Camaro is.

That's a big if....who knows what form Chrysler will exist in in five years or so..

[NOS2006]

Camaro has the advantage of other generations to pull cues from.

Challenger has the advantage of a 30 year gap.