THe reason why most people dislike the new Challenger

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by TAG UR IT

Ok guys...that's enough.

Don't make me start deleting posts.

Thanks!



Kevin, if tail lights are the only things holding you back from purchasing a car, change them....aftermarket. Don't miss out on the comeback of the Camaro just because of one thing. That would not be right.

Now, again....no more back and forth.

i agree
by the way go ahead and delete anything you want , it don't matter to me

[dayvedayve]

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

Excuse me but I was not online to respond to you statement, someone had already posted about the 69 camaro tail lights, and I had posted 5 pages ago (post number 11) about the round tail lights on the 70-73 Camaros ( to be accurate 70 1/2 to 73)

here is a 71 camaro with CORVETTE Style Tail lights..

Not trying to steal ya thunder man. Just sometimes when you get many pages down on a thread some important info is overlooked and needs to be restated. I give you your creds.

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by dayvedayve

Not trying to steal ya thunder man. Just sometimes when you get many pages down on a thread some important info is overlooked and needs to be restated. I give you your creds.

I understand.. no prob.

[Angrybird 12]

I think this thread has "Jumped the Shark"

[kevin2323]

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

I think this thread has "Jumped the Shark"

chomp chomp chomp lol

[Congoman775]

DONT DO IN FONZ!!

[Hyperknight]

...so I says "Answer that and stay fashionable!"

[Congoman775]

Originally Posted by kevin2323

A. It does go fast, if you think 4.8 0-60 isn't fast then I dont know.

B. The styling is amazing and far superior to the camaro IMO.

C. It is fat and unfortunately for you camaro hopefuls the camaro is pretty much almost as fat at 3914 a 224 lb difference.

D. It is overpriced and interior is bland, seats are great and gauges work perfectly( what you said sounded a bit fanboyish )


The only thing didge messed up on was the transmission If they would have put a 6 speed auto with performance gearing(which they did with the manual) this car would be must faster than it is. Although it is already fast. Oh and it needed to lose some pounds off of the charger. But some light 18s and some other stuff should take car of that inconvenience.

i encourage you to go look up the Car reviews where they tested the cars 0-60 gauges, G Force meter, and cruise control.

the only thing i can remember is they thought it was funny how consistantly wrong all of these gauges were... and the cruise control wont keep a speed. it will dip and the engine has to re-excellerate t0 retrive its speed.

[kevin2323]

Originally Posted by Congoman775

i encourage you to go look up the Car reviews where they tested the cars 0-60 gauges, G Force meter, and cruise control.

the only thing i can remember is they thought it was funny how consistantly wrong all of these gauges were... and the cruise control wont keep a speed. it will dip and the engine has to re-excellerate t0 retrive its speed.

Oh are you talking about the digital 0-60 timer?

dont know about cruise control thought , the cruise control on my 05 ram runs consistently no problems yet.

[Congoman775]

Originally Posted by kevin2323

Oh are you talking about the digital 0-60 timer?

dont know about cruise control thought , the cruise control on my 05 ram runs consistently no problems yet.

im talking about the special pack of gauges that the SRT comes with optionally... idk if the R/T has the option or not...

its like the G-force, 0-60, and drag time racer, ect.

All the reviews on them were consistantly horrible...

the g-force meter was my favorite part about the whole car too. i was very dissapointed when i heard that it was sloppy.

But ive personally been in a Charger that couldnt hold cruise control for its life. it would drop 5 mph and then accelerate (burning gas...) back to where it should have been.

[carsismeZ06]

Originally Posted by kevin2323

you're missing the point. That is all.

You try to argue the whole 300-400 lb argument then when I prove you wrong you move down to the v6 weight lol.

w.e facts are:

both cars were built on existing platforms(lx and zeta to save money)
both have IRS
both used existing engines from existing models.
price of camaro is unknown and might end up being close to the challenger price but it Will be cheaper. But by how much?

the big difference imo is:
the interior of the camaro looks like a ricer with all that plastic imo.
the car is tiny IMO it looks like a saturn sky. rear is too small and so is the front. I am so glad dodge went with the lx because it looks like a true muscle car.
the rear of the camaro looks like a fugly vette, shouldve stuck with the long likes of the old camaro imo.






BTW do some research the challenger starts at 3720 curb weight.

you are still cool though lol.

I will have to disagree with you, the Corvette is anything but 'fugly'

[kevin2323]

Originally Posted by carsismeZ06

I will have to disagree with you, the Corvette is anything but 'fugly'

no you got me all wrong I love the vette look. I said that the camaro rear end looks like a vette rear gone bad...hence why I said "like a fugly vette"

the rear of the vette is one of my favorite looks.

[kevin2323]

Originally Posted by Congoman775

im talking about the special pack of gauges that the SRT comes with optionally... idk if the R/T has the option or not...

its like the G-force, 0-60, and drag time racer, ect.

All the reviews on them were consistantly horrible...

the g-force meter was my favorite part about the whole car too. i was very dissapointed when i heard that it was sloppy.

But ive personally been in a Charger that couldnt hold cruise control for its life. it would drop 5 mph and then accelerate (burning gas...) back to where it should have been.

the 0-60 timer had complaints due to it counting tire spin on ur 0-60 but as long as u don't spin ur tires it is accurate.

[Congoman775]

i still think reason the chally is going bye bye first is because its on the wrong platform. and eventually it will catch up with it.


i am really not biased towards the chally out of blindness... i at one time really liked the thought of the car. even went out and test drove an SRT.


I was... well, very dissapointed. i knew from the time i saw it that it just stood out. and because it stood out for the wrong reasons, i immediately didnt like it.


its way to bulky, sits way to high off the ground, and is way to plain on the inside. its got a good engine, but it NEEDS that engine to move.

I think the Chally designers did a good job, but their engineers sent the car to hell in a handbasket.

The Mustang and Camaro will have a leg up on the Chally for a few reasons.

A. Weight. more for the mustang than the Camaro. But weight effects everything, gas, performance, handling, everything.

B. price. nothing has been said for the Camaro officially, but even if GM MATCHES Dodge, the chally will be at a dissadvantage. The mustang seems like it will come in under the bar.

C. it is bland. you may not think so... but how about someone who has never been in a dodge before? do you think they would feel the challenger vibe comming from that interior it shares with so many other cars? As... well... different as the Mustang's interior is, it looks nothing like anything else Ford does. And Obviously GM spent alot of time and effort on the Camaro interior.

D. The Mustang is small. the Camaro is smaller. (but wider ) The Chally is not big enough where it wont repel hardcore mopar guys, but it wont do itself any favors with the general public either...