JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,584
- 985
- 126
TehMac
Diamond Member
- Aug 18, 2006
- 9,976
- 3
- 71
Yeah, exactly.
The Charger is the same way, I reckon, but for two reasons: It actually is meant to be heavy, and it's a standard automatic torque converter--you're never gonna get much lift off straight away.
Still, if they made at least half of the Challenger out of carbon fibre, it'd be a lot more sporty. But it isn't meant to be sporty anyway, and Chrysler is fucked royally, so I doubt it'll happen.
The weight doesn't bother me at all because it might see the track once or twice in its life. I bought this car for its performance and awesome roominess. I'm 6'6 and i actually had to put the driver's seat up t get everything perfect. Gas mileage is going to blow but whatever.
I only work 3 miles from my apartment anyway
I only work 3 miles from my apartment anyway
zerocool84
Lifer
- Nov 11, 2004
- 36,041
- 472
- 126
Umm hate to break it to you but sales of Challengers compared to Mustangs aren't even close so there is no way you could say that it has beaten the Mustang.
TehMac
Diamond Member
- Aug 18, 2006
- 9,976
- 3
- 71
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/0...ng-last-month-and-ytd/
Is that so?
For this month anyway, but considering the Challenger is a lot more expensive, I reckon around 30k more, it's pretty impressive they've been selling like hot cakes. Probably one of the more impressive lineups Chrysler has right now, unfortunately.
Is that so?
For this month anyway, but considering the Challenger is a lot more expensive, I reckon around 30k more, it's pretty impressive they've been selling like hot cakes. Probably one of the more impressive lineups Chrysler has right now, unfortunately.
zerocool84
Lifer
- Nov 11, 2004
- 36,041
- 472
- 126
Originally posted by: TehMac
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/0...ng-last-month-and-ytd/
Is that so?
For this month anyway, but considering the Challenger is a lot more expensive, I reckon around 30k more, it's pretty impressive they've been selling like hot cakes. Probably one of the more impressive lineups Chrysler has right now, unfortunately.
Oh well I stand corrected for the month.
TehMac
Diamond Member
- Aug 18, 2006
- 9,976
- 3
- 71
Originally posted by: zerocool84
Originally posted by: TehMac
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/0...ng-last-month-and-ytd/
Is that so?
For this month anyway, but considering the Challenger is a lot more expensive, I reckon around 30k more, it's pretty impressive they've been selling like hot cakes. Probably one of the more impressive lineups Chrysler has right now, unfortunately.
Oh well I stand corrected for the month.
lol
zerocool84
Lifer
- Nov 11, 2004
- 36,041
- 472
- 126
Originally posted by: TehMac
Originally posted by: zerocool84
Originally posted by: TehMac
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/0...ng-last-month-and-ytd/
Is that so?
For this month anyway, but considering the Challenger is a lot more expensive, I reckon around 30k more, it's pretty impressive they've been selling like hot cakes. Probably one of the more impressive lineups Chrysler has right now, unfortunately.
Oh well I stand corrected for the month.
lol
That's great though. I want something to outsell the Mustang. I'm sick of it being the only Ponycar we have. Ford has had no competition so they have not had to radically change the Mustang technically.
TehMac
Diamond Member
- Aug 18, 2006
- 9,976
- 3
- 71
Yes I agree. Unfortunately, the pony car is dying off, I think. Maybe not, but it just doesn't have that massive appeal it did in the '60's-80's, I think it's dying off primarily because pony cars are manufactured exclusively by the big three, who until recently used the materials of junkyards (GM did this a lot in the '90's) to try to offset production costs, and even though these are higher quality cars, the quality and talent, or lack thereof, shows. For example, even though pony cars aren't light by nature, they could be lighter if time was spent manufacturing a better crank wheel for starters.
Japanese forges cast beautiful shafts that were balanced out of the oven. In contrast, the GM workers would get the crude shaft newly cast, and bludgeon the thing til it was 'balanced enough.'
The Japanese were able to make lighter cars, in effect not needing such huge engines, and not needing to worry about such huge breaks to stop the damn car. Also, a lighter car, plus a more efficient engine = less gas consumption and in some cases, a smoother engine.
So this applies to cars in general, but I find the Pony Cars in the same boat, because really what it boils down to is great styling + fast engine, and that's it. No lasting a long time, no real sportiness you'll find in similar priced cars.
In the case of the SRT8 Challenger, you're paying for a big car, HUGELY charismatic styling, lots of power that the car needs...and that's it.
Now, I love pony cars, I love sports cars, and I understand that people who like one or the other, might not need both, but in the case of HIGHER level cars, such as the GT500, IRS for one might not be a bad start.
The SRT8 Challenger has IRS, if I recall.
TehMac
Diamond Member
- Aug 18, 2006
- 9,976
- 3
- 71
Let me guess: president of GM?
There was a study done back in the '80's that pointed out the Japanese labor costs were half that of GM's. GM's response? Ban the study's formulator from GM's property.
How is denying a definite problem going to help a company? Especially a company that is leeching off our tax dollars, right as we're sitting here talking about it?
Sticking one's head into the sand only goes so far. But if you have a Keynesian paddy wack administration full of deadbeats, I guess it goes farther than it would seem.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter