Go to car


Latest Comments
Car: 87847   By: DiRF   Comment: "My brain is currently ping-ponging between two son..."
Car: 87847   By: Low-Tech Redneck   Comment: "Er, round I mean, ROUND...."
Car: 87847   By: Low-Tech Redneck   Comment: "Is the steering wheel square? If yes - Japanese if..."
Car: 87847   By: Obsidian   Comment: "Considering how Datsun made it - it looks more lik..."
Car: 48539   By: wannabemustangjockey   Comment: "That moment when you go into the drive thru the wr..."
See last 25 comments
 Go to

Next picture
Ricecop Home
Linkage
Plates
Bling Bling
Photo
Free Post

 Top 10

Top 10 Ricers
Top 10 Non-Ricers
Top 10 Other Good
Top 10 Other Bad

 New & Retired

Newest Images
Retired Images

 Other

Submit a picture
Profile Lookup
FAQ
Site Log
Leader Board
Site Stats

 Online Now

0 Ricecops
1 Guests

Detailed List

 Login

Username:

Password:


Remember Login?

Sign up!
Why sign up?
Forgot my password


View this image at full size
Click here to let us know if the image above is broken.


Go back and vote on this image.

Picture Information
URL: http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=37693
Submitted by: DiRF
Comments: 31  (Read/Post)     Favorites: 0  (View)
Submitted on: 01-04-2005
View Stats Category: Car
Description:
2006 Dodge Charger


   Comments

Showing page: 1 of 2
[
1 2 ]

#1
1-04-2005 @ 11:23:49 PM
Posted By : DiRF  Reply | Edit | Del
http://www.autoweek.com/files/speci...s/D2006_005.jpg

I freaking love it. ...but, of course, there will people in this thread STILL bitching about them putting the name "Charger" on it... gee, I guess the legend of that '80s Omni-based fastback really is a lot to live up to :P

...and looking at the rear-side-door-windows, and the C-pillar, I definitely see a heavy influence from the '66-'67 Charger.

[Edited by DiRF on 1-04-2005 @ 11:26:19 PM]


#2
1-04-2005 @ 11:30:36 PM
Posted By : solid_snake Reply | Edit | Del
I like the c-pillar and rear fender but I don't like the grille

#3
1-05-2005 @ 12:00:45 AM
Posted By : 427 Vette Reply | Edit | Del
eh.......

#4
1-05-2005 @ 12:23:58 AM
Posted By : blackcat77 Reply | Edit | Del
Whatever it is, it AIN'T a Charger. I'd give it a 4 if it had another name, but it getsan 8 for profaning the name of a car that used to be great.

#5
1-05-2005 @ 12:59:54 AM
Posted By : Tastycakemix Reply | Edit | Del
#4, Yea! just to keep the tradition of the mighty omni charger, charger should be an option to the Neon!
This is evil!


#6
1-05-2005 @ 01:00:23 AM
Posted By : MxCx Reply | Edit | Del
Oh they screwed the Charger in the ass when it went front wheel drive. This is at least a step in the right direction (rwd v8). Needs two fewer doors and a completely reworked face and itd be perfect.

#7
1-05-2005 @ 01:02:58 AM
Posted By : Tastycakemix Reply | Edit | Del
#6, They couldn't put charger on anything else at that time. They couldn't predict RWD was going to make a comeback.

Actually, I don't see the point to this. This will just ruin the magnum sales. They should have release the charger as 2 door. If people wanted 4 door, they would get a 300.

[Edited by Tastycakemix on 1-05-2005 @ 01:03:21 AM]


#8
1-05-2005 @ 01:04:16 AM
Posted By : Tastycakemix Reply | Edit | Del
Check out the side view. Boring as hell!
http://www.autoweek.com/files/speci...s/D2006_004.jpg


#9
1-05-2005 @ 01:07:06 AM
Posted By : MxCx Reply | Edit | Del
Check out the edit button. Useful!

:P


#10
1-05-2005 @ 01:07:58 AM
Posted By : Tastycakemix Reply | Edit | Del
#9, on what? #8?

#11
1-05-2005 @ 01:12:20 AM
Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck Reply | Edit | Del
It's leaps and bounds above the crap concept they rolled out 2-3 years ago....

#12
1-05-2005 @ 02:12:51 AM
Posted By : Altima35se2003 Reply | Edit | Del
it is a forward step. 2-3 years ago all was fwd v-6! and i ain't harping on my v-6 fwds'! it goes back to the old school which is where we all need to be. the average fuck tard should not be given the opiton between rwd/fwd and/or 6 cylinder or 8.

#13
1-05-2005 @ 07:55:06 AM
Posted By : kstagger Reply | Edit | Del
I dunno... this car kinda leaves me cold... the front doesn't seem to blend well with the rest of the body - the hood almost looks too short. and the rear looks like a Stratus.

[Edited by kstagger on 1-05-2005 @ 07:56:26 AM]


#14
1-05-2005 @ 08:05:02 AM
Posted By : somekid Reply | Edit | Del
question? why are they bothering with bringing back these old great muscle cars and just throwing there name on what ever there minds come up with?

#15
1-05-2005 @ 08:08:56 AM
Posted By : kstagger Reply | Edit | Del
#14, marketing for aging yuppies who used to own (or want to own) those cars in the 60s/70s?

basically using their past history to market the stuff for today


#16
1-05-2005 @ 08:09:33 AM
Posted By : DiRF  Reply | Edit | Del
#7, Better? http://photo.ricecop.com/pics/quicherbichin.jpg

WHOOPS...not meant to be a reply to #7.

[Edited by DiRF on 1-05-2005 @ 08:10:12 AM]


#17
1-05-2005 @ 08:11:32 AM
Posted By : Edaw 0 Reply | Edit | Del
#13, It's like a thought cut short made into metal, seems unfinished.

#18
1-05-2005 @ 08:13:51 AM
Posted By : Edaw 0 Reply | Edit | Del
#16, Nice, but there's still something about the front end. Maybe because I think 'truck' when I see the grille.

#19
1-05-2005 @ 09:55:33 AM
Posted By : PA28Aviator Reply | Edit | Del
#8, from that view, when i look at the front end, i see the new mustang for some reason

#20
1-05-2005 @ 12:36:44 PM
Posted By : Skid Reply | Edit | Del
Enough about the Omni-based Charger already. Just because the name was bastardized once is no excuse to do it again. They should just sell this thing as the Coronet.

BTW, Car and Driver noted that after revealing the first photos of this car, they got more feedback than they'd gotten on a new car in a very long time....and it was 30 to 1 against it. If Chrysler goes through with this, I have a feeling they will really regret it.

[Edited by Skid on 1-05-2005 @ 12:38:03 PM]


Showing page: 1 of 2
[
1 2 ]


Login to leave a comment

Classifieds 
Click here to post your own classified ad






Want to send some feedback? Click here.

Server time: Monday, December 18, 2017 09:55:43 AM

All pictures on this site are property of their respective owners.
Copyright 2000 - 2017 Ricecop. All rights reserved.