how big is the new challenger?

[qwikz28]

this big:


cue bigal, go!

[SamhainZ28]

lol thats pretty funny

[maroman88]

LOL yea it is pretty big

[WildBillyT]

WOW

[BigAls87Z28]

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?

[bad64chevelle]

Originally Posted by BigAls87Z28

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?

STFU al! You have yet to put up my little offer on friendly race too!

[SamhainZ28]

Originally Posted by BigAls87Z28

ITS BIGGER THEN YOUR BIG ASS 4TH GENS!

really? i don't consider my car big, but w/e

[jts98z28]

Originally Posted by SamhainRS27

really? i don't consider my car big, but w/e

x2
4th gens FTW!

[SteveR]

Its no bigger than the new Camaro.


/thread

[Tsar]

Originally Posted by SteveR

Its no bigger than the new Camaro.


/thread

[BigAls87Z28]

Originally Posted by SteveR

Its no bigger than the new Camaro.


/thread

Originally Posted by Tsar

Challenger is 198 inches long
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

to you both.


CAMARO ROXORS YOUR CHALLENGARS!!

[SteveR]

eight inches. wow. Only four more than a 4th gen. same thing, and they weigh the same.

[transmaro93]

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...

[NJSPEEDER]

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.

[BigAls87Z28]

Originally Posted by NJSPEEDER

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.

From the lame, sluggish and overpriced Challenger to the Aweosme, hot, and perfect Camaro, that whole spectrum?

[SteveR]

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.

[NJSPEEDER]

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.

[SteveR]

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.

[NJSPEEDER]

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.

[SteveR]

Originally Posted by NJSPEEDER

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.

True. It's not a great handling car, but it's a lot better than up until this point, has been a lot better than anything else in it's price range, as far as muscle cars go. I got to beat on a a lot of them, and I was most impressed with the Roush and Saleens where when you turn off the traction control and floor it, as long as you point it in the general direction of where you want to go, it'll go there. Not so much with 4th gens. You floor it and you could end up sideways, backwards, etc. The Mustang, at least the aftermarket ones, are at least predictable, and instill a sense of confidence when driving it. I'm sure with a few more years under it's belt, the Camaro and Challenger will do better, but they are throwing an extra 500 pounds into each turn. That's a lot more added force on those shocks and springs.

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.

[SteveR]

So my brother bought a GT last December, and we did a bunch of stuff to it. Heres what we started with;



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.

[r0nin89]

Originally Posted by SteveR

So my brother bought a GT last December, and we did a bunch of stuff to it. Heres what we started with;



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.

New spoiler ftw.

[GP99GT]

Originally Posted by BigAls87Z28

From the lame, sluggish and overpriced Challenger to the Aweosme, hot, and perfect Camaro, that whole spectrum?

perfect...

LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLlllllllllllllllllllllllll ll

[BigAls87Z28]

Originally Posted by NJSPEEDER

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

1970 Challenger
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.

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.

Good...it drives like a luxury car. Im glad.
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.

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.

Agreed, but the Mustang can work up. New platform will be here by 2012, as will new power plants. Its cheap flimsy platform should do for now, hopefully what Ford has learned about the GT500's handling, or lack there of, they can try to make the upcoming "5.0" Mustang do better then the current one. Plus it gets a refresh for this year (that was moved up because Ford is scared of the Camaro and Challenger's success) so that it can look on par with the new new commers.

[qwikz28]

Originally Posted by NJSPEEDER

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.

couldn't agree more. both cars are great, but the camaro is more sports oriented while the challenger is more luxury coupe oriented. i will admit that both are heavy BUT THAT IS A SIGN OF THE TIMES. WITH THE NEW SAFETY REQUIREMENTS AND LUXURY DEMANDS, THIS IS HOW HEAVY CARS WILL BE FROM NOW ON. IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND? ok i'm done with that rant.

Originally Posted by SteveR

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.

the mustang served its purpose and served it well. it was never meant to excel, it was meant to be an above average car that looked great, and was cheap. in that respect, i don't see how ford failed in teh slightest.

Mustang- muscle car for the masses
Camaro- muscle car king of the ring
Challenger- the big luxurious sexy throwback muscular coupe.

pick your poison.