|
|
|
|
|
Go back and vote on this image.
|
Picture
Information
|
| URL:
http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=35461 |
|
| Comments: 29 (Read/Post) Favorites: 0 (View) |
Submitted
on: 09-15-2004
|
 View Stats |
Category:
Photoshop/Art |
|
|
Description:
One of Car and Driver's first shots of the 2006 Dodge Charger. If you want to know what the back looks like, imagine a new 300C with a flat black stripe in between the taillights, running the width of the deck lid. |
Showing page: 1 of 2
[ 1 2 ]
 |
| #1 |
9-15-2004 @ 04:30:10 PM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
BTW, it's an official Chrysler rendering of the car, which I accidentally mislabeled as a car. If a mod could change that for me, I'd be grateful.
The lowdown: The Charger name is being revived not as a performance coupe ala GTO, but rather an obnoxious, quasi-tough "sports sedan". It'll be powered either by a 250 horse, 250 ft. lbs. version of the venerable 3.5 V6 or the new Hemi, rated at the normal 340/390. The transmission will be one of those pussified "Autosticks", with no available manual transmission. It'll sell for $26-30k, and performance will be the same as the Dodge Magnum and Chrysler 300C.
What I can't figure out is why Dodge is building (with the Magnum sedan supposedly coming up) two cars on the same platform with the same engines....and bastardizing a classic name, no less.
|
|
| #2 |
9-15-2004 @ 04:47:53 PM |
| Posted By : stang392 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
no shit, just call this the a Magnum as well and be done with it
|
|
| #3 |
9-15-2004 @ 04:53:55 PM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Then revive the Charger as a no BS two door PERFORMANCE car. Not a (and I'm quoting Chrysler here) sports tourer.
|
|
| #4 |
9-15-2004 @ 04:56:46 PM |
| Posted By : solid_snake |
Reply | Edit | Del |
somethings aren't worth getting worked up over, what some company calls their car is one of those things.
[Edited by solid_snake on 9-15-2004 @ 04:59:54 PM]
|
|
| #5 |
9-15-2004 @ 05:00:57 PM |
| Posted By : stang392 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
how come we can come with these no brainer(sp?) ideas, but the CEOs of the big 3 can't
|
|
| #6 |
9-15-2004 @ 05:01:32 PM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Didn't they already slap the Charger name on some K-car derived econothingy anyway? Sort of like how they used the Duster nameplate on a rebadged Dodge Shadow?
|
|
| #9 |
9-15-2004 @ 05:04:09 PM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#4, Sorry, you're talking to car enthusiasts.
|
|
| #10 |
9-15-2004 @ 05:05:41 PM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#7, Yeah, I'd say that would be a sufficient disgrace to the name.
|
|
| #11 |
9-15-2004 @ 05:09:00 PM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Fortunately, though, the FWD Chargers were rare and were released with no fanfare...so nobody remembers them. As soon as this car is released, however, people are going to think of this damn thing every time somebody says "Charger"....thereby lessening the impact of the original car's name.
|
|
| #12 |
9-15-2004 @ 05:10:41 PM |
| Posted By : Lemming |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Rare and released with no fanfare, but I seem to recall having read a few rants about them being among the crappiest cars Mopar ever made.
And yes, I think this reduces the impact of the name; it's just that it seems to be a popular thing to do.
[Edited by Lemming on 9-15-2004 @ 05:11:08 PM]
|
|
| #13 |
9-15-2004 @ 05:10:53 PM |
| Posted By : solid_snake |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#9, I've encountered plenty of enthusiasts who can handle a "name desecration"
|
|
| #16 |
9-15-2004 @ 07:55:17 PM |
| Posted By : ImRaptor |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I can handle it, but it doesn't mean I have to like it.
|
|
| #17 |
9-15-2004 @ 08:15:47 PM |
| Posted By : Maine-iac |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#1, you would think they would use the srt-8 engine, 6.1 hemi, same block as the 5.7 just bored out.
|
Showing page: 1 of 2
[ 1 2 ]
Login to leave a comment
|
|
|
|
|
