PDA

View Full Version : I feel for you Mopar guys



Matt
01-04-2005, 01:37 PM
The Chevy side has the new z06, and the hopefully forthcoming 2007 camaro. The Ford guys get the return of the GT(40), and the slick new Mustang.

...you poor folks are stuck with this, the new charger.

my condolences


https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

colt zantop
01-04-2005, 02:12 PM
oh wow.....thats the first shot Ive seen of that. that looks terrible!!!!! LOL

YUCK!

redsand
01-04-2005, 02:16 PM
It looks like a durango that got smooshed by an elephant. When I saw the rust colored concept car a couple years back, I was impressed. This is bad.....

Piet
01-04-2005, 02:22 PM
A 4 door Charger?... that's just wrong.
Put a station wagon back on it.... and you have the magnum.
I thinks someone is cutting corners.....

harshman
01-04-2005, 02:25 PM
I suppose the catch phrase question would be "does it have a hemi?” To my reply - "does it matter?" I do believe that is the ugliest thing out there. And speaking of ugly - an opportune time to use a smiley- :kiss:

Bill Howell
01-04-2005, 02:48 PM
Is this a front or rear wheel drive?
Gotta love the R/T emblem. At least there is no chessy R/T stripe down the side(yet).

Matt
01-04-2005, 02:50 PM
The motor looks longitudinal, and the magnum/300 is rwd. So I'd assume rwd. So they got one thing right, let's work on the other 285 things.

socalfandabodys
01-04-2005, 03:17 PM
Why doesnt detroit build good looking cars. Seriously I have seen awesome looking concepts and drawings. Does anyone know why they wont build a car like Kris Horton drew. That car looks like it was designed by a three year old and then beaten with an ugly stick

Ralph LoGrasso
01-04-2005, 04:32 PM
I thought it was getting a 6.1L hemi or something similar?

trapin
01-04-2005, 04:52 PM
Why doesnt detroit build good looking cars. Seriously I have seen awesome looking concepts and drawings. Does anyone know why they wont build a car like Kris Horton drew
Because Kris Horton's drawings are just that.....concepts. You can't just draw a picture of a car and then say, "OK...go build it". There are about 3,756,989 different criteria that have to be met that includes occupant packaging, safety requirements, tooling...stuff we like to call 'buildability'. Believe me, where I work (GM Design) I have seen some renderings of vehicles that'll do things to you the boys at Viagra and Cialas could only dream of. We're talking jaw layin on the floor, tongue hanging out, hair standing straight up BEAUTIFUL!!!!

Unfortunately....we couldn't build them to look like that because of all the criteria requirements that go into manufacturing automobiles. You should have seen the concept drawings of the Pontiac Aztek. You wouldn't have believed they were the same vehicle.

Look at the Japanese. Sure they build a dependable vehicle...but they're about as vanilla as it gets. At least we put some creativity into our vehicles. We'll figure the dependability thing out before long. Bear with us. :usa:

Just curious....if the car up above was a 2-door with bigger wheels, would you all feel the same way about it?

socalfandabodys
01-04-2005, 06:11 PM
now that I look at it your way. If they helped out the fron of the car and lowered the stance and made it a two door it would look half decent. For some reason though that front end reminds me of those cheesy golf carts from the 80's with a rolls royce front clip on them

Nine Ball
01-04-2005, 06:48 PM
Looks kinda like a pig hunched down. Those lines on the rear quarters would be the top of its legs, and that snout is unmistakable.

UGLY. I like the Chrylser 300 better.

shmoov69
01-04-2005, 07:17 PM
:jawdrop: WOW!! That is one ass ugly car!! Lets take a Durango, 300, and an Intrepid and morphidite them together and throw on some Magnum wheels and viola!! :pat:
Tony's right, but man, it is STILL ugly! Can't they even start from the concept? The PT cruiser, Viper and Prowler all look similar to the original (released) concept. I hate to critize someone's hard work, but........ :slap:

derekf
01-04-2005, 07:45 PM
That's ugly.

At least the Dodge folks have the Magnum - that's probably the best looking wagon I've seen in a long time... and I'm almost contemplating trying to get one.

MrQuick
01-04-2005, 08:57 PM
yeah I do have to say it is on the normal side, they tried to catch the Stratus style and use the LX platform...doesn't work. But I do suppose it will grow on you after awhile. I do wish they had used the Magnum facsia
The Chrysler 300 SRT 8 will get you guys back up, a nicer air ducted facsia, 1 inch lower stance, 20" rims standard, improved suspension and the wicked 6.1L Hemi (which hauls it) should be the car to be looking out for.Go out for a test drive in one,very nice power.

Piet
01-05-2005, 08:59 AM
If they called it a "New Yorker" it would believe it... But a Charger?

As a car... it's fine. But when you resurrect a classic name, I think that you should stay true to the past styling. Like a 2 door muscle car... not a 4 door family sedan.

It looks like a 300 with different wheels and a Magnum Grill.
They brought nothing new to the table for me.... IMHO.


Chrysler 300c
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2005/01/chrysler300cside640-1.jpg

Chrysler Magnum
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

Steve1968LS2
01-05-2005, 09:06 AM
Don't feel too bad for the Mopar guys. They have the 300, Viper and the SRT-4. Who do you think has more 13 second factory cars, GM or Dodge?

However that Charger is ugly. :(

socalfandabodys
01-05-2005, 10:32 AM
Gm has the
vette
cts-v
gto

Matt
01-05-2005, 12:58 PM
Good points, the 300c is remarkable, the viper is pretty slick, and I've had a chance to play with a 500+hp srt-4.

It wouldn't have been as muscle, but I really wanted to see the razor go in to production. A rwd turbo 4-banger that weighed next to nothing would have been a blast for lots of people.

The thing with the charger is it just deviates so far from how all of us saw the original. The rear quarter lines are good, where it looks like the rear quarters on the pig someone mentioned. However between the front, 2 too many doors, and a far too docile stance I just don't see it being a charger.

trapin
01-05-2005, 02:35 PM
4-doors are cheaper to insure.

Steve Chryssos
01-05-2005, 04:43 PM
I wuz really hoping that the side glass would be pillar-less. Like this. (Oh, and I lowered it, too)
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

Piet
01-05-2005, 05:18 PM
Also a 2 door with a longer hood

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

touring67
01-05-2005, 06:27 PM
I like the 2 door with the longer hood, that looks much better. Sorta reminds me of the Viper from the back. The 4 door can remain as the modified one, but if both models were available (2 door modded, and 4 door modded) I would choose the 2 door myself. However, that is only if the Charger was the only car I was able to buy.

Nine Ball
01-05-2005, 07:53 PM
Now, THIS is more like it!!!

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif

Derek69SS
01-27-2005, 08:11 PM
Nothing wrong with a 4-door (94-96 Impala SS for example), but that is one ugly car.