how big is the new challenger?

[Mike]

are we weighing the camaro with or without al hanging from its balls?

[WildBillyT]

Originally Posted by NJSPEEDER

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

I always thought the Charger was the model put on par with the Chevelle and GTO.

[Tru2Chevy]

Originally Posted by WildBillyT

I always thought the Charger was the model put on par with the Chevelle and GTO.

As was mentioned a few posts back, Challenger fought Camaro / Mustang, and Charger fought GTO / Chevelle.

- Justin

[SteveR]

Those B-Body Mopars were enormous. I'd put them in the class of the mid '60's Impalas. The GTO was so much smaller. The E-Bodies were competition with the Camaro and Mustang in 1970. Thats it. The E-Body Challenger/Cuda was debuted in 1970, and the hemi was discontinued a year later, so all this competition talk is mainly only in hind sight. They competed in Trans Am racing head to head for one year, and the '68 - '69 Camaro was the only successful Trans Am Camaro anyway, and Mustang won the championship in '70, so both GM and Mopar failed, and Mopar pulled out in '71, and AMC won the last two years of the series, so Camaro and Mopar for the full fail.

[SteveR]

Another thing to note, with all this talk of competition between the Challenger and the Camaro in 1970, it wasnt 427 COPO Camaro against a 426 hemi Challenger, like a lot of people try and speculate which would win. Those cars were extremely rare and you didnt really ever see one on the street, so it wasnt stop light to stop light of ultra-rare muscle cars, it was most likely a 318 Challenger borrowed from dad against a 307 Camaro borrowed from uncle bob, and thats if they were both V8s. I'm sure a lot of it was moms strait 6 '67 Mustang against older brothers strait 6 '68 Firebird.

[NJSPEEDER]

Al, once again you manage to completely miss the point and fail to understand any aspect of marketing. Both cars will sell well, just to different groups of people.

Maybe this is too complicated a concept for you, but auto manufacturers, just like every other industry, do not aim for the exact same slice of every market segment. Comparing the realities of the Camaro and Challenger would be just one more example if you would open up your eyes and look around long enough to see beyond whatever GM is doing.

[12secondv6]

Challenger is uber sexy!

[Untamed]

Originally Posted by 12secondv6

Challenger is uber sexy!

I still think the Challenger is slab sided and not as attractive as it should be. And as far as the Challenger's "boring" or "conservative" interior, I much prefer it to the Camaro's interior.

[ShadowHawk]

Originally Posted by SteveR

Its no bigger than the new Camaro.


/thread

+1, and I agree with NJSPEEDER too, they look similar. They did back then, they do NOW. Same body lines with different protrusions here and there. The challenger's a little boxier, but the overall style's the same, especially the B-pillar and trunk area. If we took a shaded side profile of both, with ZERO color and just the overall shape, you'd see it more. Identical, no, but similar.

The 1st gens were pretty big cars...so here's a nice comparison(albiet the concept but "same thing"...so says Al anyway).



The public, according to some people, seem to be nutting themselves over the car, why is anyone's guess. Maybe the F-bodies died out because the 4th gen's weren't bland enough for the general public. It scared all the little girls into buying Mustangs, and sales dropped. Looks like it's PROBLEM SOLVED!! Thanks GM!!!

[ShadowHawk]

Originally Posted by cbrrmike

are we weighing the camaro with or without al hanging from its balls?

[BigAls87Z28]

Originally Posted by NJSPEEDER

Al, once again you manage to completely miss the point and fail to understand any aspect of marketing. Both cars will sell well, just to different groups of people.

Maybe this is too complicated a concept for you, but auto manufacturers, just like every other industry, do not aim for the exact same slice of every market segment. Comparing the realities of the Camaro and Challenger would be just one more example if you would open up your eyes and look around long enough to see beyond whatever GM is doing.

Auto makers stick to the same general segment size, shape, and weight.

Sub compact, compact, midsized, full size, full size trucks, not to mention the 3 major classes of luxury car found in the US, they stick to the general segment idea.
The segment might grow over time, but the segment grows together.
Challenger is in the segment...just the biggest one in it.
Its in the same class...I never said it wasnt. It seems to be the people that are trying to defend the Challenger's downfalls are putting it into another segment

Pricing, powertrain, and options mimic the same set up as the Mustang and upcoming Camaro.

Camaro will be king of the class, Mustang will be the sales queen, and the Challenger will just be a MOPAR wet dream.

[band77one]

anyway...that car next to the challenger looks like a shark with that thing on the window =D

[BonzoHansen]

Originally Posted by SteveR

... it was most likely a 318 Challenger borrowed from dad against a 307 Camaro borrowed from uncle bob, and thats if they were both V8s.....

I'll take the 307 in that race!

[BigAls87Z28]

Originally Posted by nighthawk355x

+1, and I agree with NJSPEEDER too, they look similar. They did back then, they do NOW. Same body lines with different protrusions here and there. The challenger's a little boxier, but the overall style's the same, especially the B-pillar and trunk area. If we took a shaded side profile of both, with ZERO color and just the overall shape, you'd see it more. Identical, no, but similar.

The 1st gens were pretty big cars...so here's a nice comparison(albiet the concept but "same thing"...so says Al anyway).



The public, according to some people, seem to be nutting themselves over the car, why is anyone's guess. Maybe the F-bodies died out because the 4th gen's weren't bland enough for the general public. It scared all the little girls into buying Mustangs, and sales dropped. Looks like it's PROBLEM SOLVED!! Thanks GM!!!

If first gens were "pretty big cars" then you drive a really big car.
People are attracted to style, not 2 door Concordes.
4th gens died out for many reasons, but the big one will always remain sales. While Mustang had no problem selling 120k units a year, Camaro went from 150-250k in the mid 80's, to under 90k units COMBINED Fbody sales...thats Camaro AND Firebird, by 2002.

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by qwikz28

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

I agree.

Steve, I'm still not sure on your "the new Mustang handles better than a 4thgen" comment. I don't know, I liked the handling of my Z better than the new GT's...in fact I really don't like how they ride or handle.

[NJ Torque]

they suck.

[SteveR]

Originally Posted by Frosty

I agree.

Steve, I'm still not sure on your "the new Mustang handles better than a 4thgen" comment. I don't know, I liked the handling of my Z better than the new GT's...in fact I really don't like how they ride or handle.

I think they're more predictable than anything else. You can turn the traction control off on a new Mustang and go whipping around turns, foot to the floor, and know that theres a better chance of you not ending up backwards than I felt in my 4th gen.