MT: Challenger and Camaro face a case of bad timing

[Scotsman]

Chrysler's just-launched Dodge Challenger and General Motors' upcoming 2010 Chevrolet Camaro are the two most high-profile new models at this, and virtually every other automotive Web site. Yet with gasoline at $4 per gallon -- and that's for regular -- the two muscle cars could quickly fade into obscurity. As one industry insider told me this week, "things will be very different in 2010."


2008 Dodge Challenger SRT8

That's calendar year, not model year. In model year 2011 -- in other words, late calendar '10 -- automakers must start complying with those new Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards. The V-6 versions of the Challenger and Camaro will become more important. In a normal market, the high-zoot V-8 models would sell well in the first year, and lower-priced V-6s, with their better fuel mileage, would become dominant in subsequent years, anyway. Just like the Ford Mustang.

With that new CAFE standard looming, and $4 gas for now, two new musclecars will have their own set of challenges for a standard five-year product cycle. Since their concept car introductions, I've predicted the Challenger and Camaro will probably last for no more than one product cycle, like the original Challenger, which was replaced for 1975 with a badge-engineered Mitsubishi. Even with fairly efficient V-6 engines and maybe hybrid powerplants in the future, these two big, hefty coupes won't send the right signal to consumers simply because they don't look like efficient cars. Call it the reverse-Prius effect. What's more, while maybe half of the readers here want either a Challenger or Camaro, and maybe 10 percent of that half will actually buy one of them, by the end of their first model years, everyone who wants one will have bought one.

The Camaro is a much bigger car now than it was in 1967-1970 because the new one is just about the same size. Yet everything else on the road has shrunk considerably since then. A full-size car is about 195 inches long, not 220 inches long, as in the original Camaro's time. The Challenger, because it's on the full-size Chrysler LX platform, is even a bit bigger than its early-'70s counterpart. I've suggested in the past that the Camaro, at least, could switch to the coming Alpha small rear-drive platform after the new one's product cycle runs out about 2015 or '16. But that platform, being developed to give Cadillac a BMW 3 Series-fighter, is probably too costly for a Chevrolet.

Ironically, the proposed new CAFE standards don't necessarily encourage such downsizing, anyway. The standard classifies car sizes by "footprint," or the space between tire patches. In other words, wheelbase and front/rear track. Replace the Camaro with a car on a smaller platform and CAFE would require a higher mpg standard, anyway.

In the end, it could come down to fuel prices. And if history is any guide, the Oil Producing and Exporting Countries (OPEC) will eventually raise production and lower prices (it doesn't matter how much oil we import and from where -- the amount OPEC supplies affects the world's value of crude oil). This time, things will be different. OPEC countries are beginning to demand euros instead of trading in dollars. Iran already does so. And if OPEC wants 65 euros per barrel and sticks to that price for a long time, it still means price increases for us so long as the value of the dollar keeps going down. In the end, the lesson seems to be that there isn't much room in today's global economy for all-American cars like the Challenger and Camaro.

http://blogs.motortrend.com/6245950/...ing/index.html

[Mr. Wyndham]

I really don't know how many more of these articles I can read before burning the magzine rack at the supermarket!

[MerF]

I'm with Dragon.

[Muscle Master]

fools

[Rock36]

The other thing that these people are missing is that we are really only talking about three muscle/pony cars in this day and age. Camaro, Mustang, Challenger. Back in the 60s and early 70s there were tons.

You had Torinos, GTXs, Roadrunners, Novas, Chevelles, Chargers, Darts, Barrcudas/'Cuda, Impalas, Malibus, Skylarks, GTOs, Fairlanes, Camaros, TAs, Mustangs and the the list goes on.

Sure we have Chargers, Impalas, and Malibus today, but they don't quite live up to the muscle car heritage of their 60s and 70s counterparts.

Either way there isn't as big of proliferation of muscle cars these days, and I don't think they will get so destroyed by rising gas prices.

[GTAHVIT]

Dorks.

[stovt001]

There will always be drivers willing to sacrifice mileage for performance, even when gas gets expensive. Some people just like exciting, fun to drive, fast cars and are willing to pay for it. Not all of us want to drive a Pious.

[Scotsman]

Originally Posted by stovt001

There will always be drivers willing to sacrifice mileage for performance, even when gas gets expensive. Some people just like exciting, fun to drive, fast cars and are willing to pay for it. Not all of us want to drive a Pious.

[Muscle Master]

I sick of people bashing the challenger, cant wait to get one

[Scotsman]

Originally Posted by Muscle Master

I sick of people bashing the challenger, cant wait to get one

Cool, we get some members from the competition!

[MAC]

Originally Posted by Muscle Master

I sick of people bashing the challenger, cant wait to get one

I still haven't seen one on the street yet :(
I'd really like to tho seeing as how it has many similarities to the camaro.

[1bad67camaro]

the person that wrote this drives a donkey to work

[TheMadHatter99]

It's only one man's opinion, but it is a pretty informed one. It's hard to argue with a lot of his points and frankly I'm not sure I disagree with him. I've had a feeling for a while now that we'll see the Camaro for a couple years and then sales will dwindle and GM will cut it yet again.

[Camaro_Corvette]

BAH!!!