![]() |
how big is the new challenger?
|
lol thats pretty funny
|
LOL yea it is pretty big
|
WOW
|
ITS BIGGER THEN YOUR BIG ASS 4TH GENS!
Its a Charger coupe...thats the best way I can explain to thoes who still wack off to it and have never seen it. Its big, its overpriced, and its a Dodge. Need I say more? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
4th gens FTW! |
Its no bigger than the new Camaro.
/thread |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Camaro is 190 4th gen is 194 S197 (current) Mustang 188 inches long 4th gen is big for a car that has zero interior space. BIG AL FTMFW :owned: to you both. CAMARO ROXORS YOUR CHALLENGARS!! |
eight inches. wow. Only four more than a 4th gen. same thing, and they weigh the same.
|
haha this thread is funny... first time i seen one in person on the road tahts the first thing i said " whoaaaa that thing is huge.... " ill have to agree on this one..... 4th gens are pretty big they just are low to the ground... low roof lines and such... makes them seem smaller... that thing is a dodge all the way... bulky and just in the way of the real cars...
|
Camaro and Challenger are aimed at different parts of the same market segment. Camaro is for the sporty muscle car shopper and the Challenger is aimed at the luxury muscle car shopper. Prices, mileage, and insurance are in the same range for the most part.
The Challenger is a beautiful car, as is the new Camaro. Just accept them for what they are, the two extremes of the same spectrum for a single market segment. |
Quote:
|
Sluggish? The Challenger will weigh the same as the Camaro, and have the same power. I'd say the only difference in performance will be the driver.
|
Take off the uber-fanboi hat for a second and look at the car Al. It is just like the original Challenger with one minor difference, the power plant is not the best one on the block anymore.
Look into that vast wealth of automotive history you seem to have committed to memory. Back in the day the Challenger was NOT the direct competitor of the Camaro, just like today. The Camaro was a compact car and the Challenger was a worse handling, better riding, and much more expensive MID SIZE competing with the Chevelle and GTO Seriously man, stop using those rose colored GM glasses whenever someone else builds a car. I have had the pleasure, and I mean pleasure, of riding in a new Challenger and it rides better than any of the other vehicles that have been built on the platform, even the 300M. It also has the best seats of any large car I have ever ridden in. If you want to make direct comparisons to the Camaro, you are way off the mark. Between the two cars the mid-price muscle market is covered. The Mustang is now officially the odd man out with plenty of power, terrible suspension, and the most mediocre ride of any car going. |
I don't think the Mustang is that bad, it sure handles a million times better than my 4th gen ever did. And Ford managed to make it 500 pounds lighter than both the Camaro and Challenger. And $5000 less. And make it appealing to women.
|
I just hate how vague the new generation of the Mustang rides. It handles OK, it rides OK, but there is no driving spirit(for lack of a better term) to the feeling I got while behind the wheel.
The styling is a damn sight better than anything else since the completely non offensive Fox platform years, but I still don't see it as having that reach out and grab ya styling that the new Camaro and Challenger have. |
Quote:
And the basic GTs do look a bit plain, but with just a little work, they stand out, and the Roushs and Saleens look pretty nice. Except I cant stand the huge rims on the Saleens. I'll see if I have a pic of my brothers, it looks pretty nice. |
So my brother bought a GT last December, and we did a bunch of stuff to it. Heres what we started with;
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b1...l/Before-1.jpg And we added a Shelby GT billet grill, hood pins, shorty headers, hood scoop, stripe kit, red side mirrors, Roush window louvers, Shelby GT500 rear spoiler, and a push button ignition system out of a Ford GT. I think it looks a lot better than stock. http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b1...ol/9-11-08.jpg |
Quote:
|
Quote:
LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLlllllllllllllllllllllllll ll |
Quote:
190 inches long 110 inch wheel base 76 inch width 51 inches tall 1970 Camaro 188 inches 108 inch wheelbase 74.4 inch width 50.5 hight 1970 Mustang 187.4 inches long 108 inch wheel base 72 inches wide 71-73 Mustangs were bigger. 190 inches long 109 inch wheel base 75 inches wide So...tell me again what class the Challenger was in? Challenger was and will continue to be the Pony car for Dodge. The Baracuda was Plymouths. The E body faught the Mustang and the Camaro's in Trans Am. Charger was Dodge's muscle car to combat the Chevelles, GTO's, and the rest of teh A body crew. Quote:
Its not. Its a sports car. But it drives like a 2 ton E class. Good for a 300C, not good for a 425hp sports car. Just read the current Camaro's reviews. They are driving a car that is 90-95% production ready, and the reviews are glowing in Camaro's favor. Talk of the Challenger's sloppy handling compared to the amazing grip the Camaro has shown in these tests is similar to the same thing you read when MT put the Charger RT vs the G8 GT. Charger lost in every single catagory, yet power is about the same, weight is about the same, but G8 still easilly outdid the Charger. Expect the SAME result. Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Mustang- muscle car for the masses Camaro- muscle car king of the ring Challenger- the big luxurious sexy throwback muscular coupe. pick your poison. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:22 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.