Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The idea is nothing more than the 60's muscle cars, the new "ricers" or Import performance began as more of a way of competing with the muscle cars, I mean its always more fun to take a smaller displacement engine and open a can of whoop azz on a big block right? so take a 4cyl and turn 12's is pretty impressive, so much so that the manufacturers started making factory versions, IE: Evo, Wrx sti, srt4, focus svt, etc... or high tech versions like the skyline. Its nothing that hasnt been around since the beginning of automobiles, we always want it to be faster. As far as the colors, boldness etc... well each his own, I still choose a 60's muscle car, or a newer forced fed mustang, challenger etc..
That's not ricing. That's tuning. Two very different attitudes about vehicle modification.
Its no worse then your question of how many Honda's can lay a 100 ft strip of rubber. They are two different kinds of cars, built for two different times.
If your Chargers were so great, why did they go away? Why did dodge and all other manufactures stop building them? If they were as great as you say they are, why couldn't Ford/Dodge/Chevy find ways to make that kinda power even with the new emission and safety laws?
Its no worse then your question of how many Honda's can lay a 100 ft strip of rubber. They are two different kinds of cars, built for two different times.
If your Chargers were so great, why did they go away? Why did dodge and all other manufactures stop building them? If they were as great as you say they are, why couldn't Ford/Dodge/Chevy find ways to make that kinda power even with the new emission and safety laws?
Gas prices shot up, supply went down, few people were willing to pay to keep driving musclecars. Manufacturers did find a way to put power back in. It just took a while to break the stranglehold that emissions controls put on engines.
Its no worse then your question of how many Honda's can lay a 100 ft strip of rubber. They are two different kinds of cars, built for two different times.
If your Chargers were so great, why did they go away? Why did dodge and all other manufactures stop building them? If they were as great as you say they are, why couldn't Ford/Dodge/Chevy find ways to make that kinda power even with the new emission and safety laws?
Dude, back in the 1980s, Dodge did make a FWD turbo 4 Charger. Pontiac/Buick also had a turbo 4 car that was pretty quick. The problem wasn't a lack of power, it was poor overall build quality. In 1987, Pontiac Sunbird and Buick Skyhawk had a 2 liter turbo with about 0-60 in around 6 seconds. Mr. Shelby worked with Chrysler in the 80s to develop the FWD cars with the 2.2L turbo on the Dodge Omni and Dodge Charger. It was also used in the Dodge Shadow ES. They were pretty quick.
The idea is nothing more than the 60's muscle cars, the new "ricers" or Import performance began as more of a way of competing with the muscle cars, I mean its always more fun to take a smaller displacement engine and open a can of whoop azz on a big block right? so take a 4cyl and turn 12's is pretty impressive, so much so that the manufacturers started making factory versions, IE: Evo, Wrx sti, srt4, focus svt, etc... or high tech versions like the skyline. Its nothing that hasnt been around since the beginning of automobiles, we always want it to be faster. As far as the colors, boldness etc... well each his own, I still choose a 60's muscle car, or a newer forced fed mustang, challenger etc..
Those cars have nothing to do with muscle cars.
Evo and wrx are rally cars. They were purpose built to haul ass through ever changing terrain.
Muscle cars are made and built for drag racing. Two totally different things.
The srt4 is just a bastard car they made to try and capture some of the tuning crowd. They missed the mark.
They have potential, but they made a few mistakes.
Skylines started out as ugly boxy crap cars and evolved in to track cars. Never trying to compete with muscle cars.
Dude, back in the 1980s, Dodge did make a FWD turbo 4 Charger. Pontiac/Buick also had a turbo 4 car that was pretty quick. The problem wasn't a lack of power, it was poor overall build quality. In 1987, Pontiac Sunbird and Buick Skyhawk had a 2 liter turbo with about 0-60 in around 6 seconds. Mr. Shelby worked with Chrysler in the 80s to develop the FWD cars with the 2.2L turbo on the Dodge Omni and Dodge Charger. It was also used in the Dodge Shadow ES. They were pretty quick.
Those aren't "muscle cars" though and I am sure FLEET would put those cars in the same category as the Honda's. The point I am trying to make is, times change, cars change. What was fast 40 years ago is going to be different then what is fast 10 years ago or even now.
Last edited by Me007gold; 09-07-2013 at 08:09 AM..
In it's day the NSX was a decent contender in the lower rungs of upper end performance.
If interior counts for anything the cabin of the NSX looks like an early nineties Civic which is to say the interior appears like any Japanese econo box of it's era.
The Japanese didn't get performance car interior design down until arguably the current Nissan GT-R came about.
I am a big fan of the current GT-R.
It and the Lexus LFA are the only two Japanese production vehicles that can currently compete with the world concerning super car performance.
Those cars have nothing to do with muscle cars.
Evo and wrx are rally cars. They were purpose built to haul ass through ever changing terrain.
Muscle cars are made and built for drag racing. Two totally different things.
The srt4 is just a bastard car they made to try and capture some of the tuning crowd. They missed the mark.
They have potential, but they made a few mistakes.
Skylines started out as ugly boxy crap cars and evolved in to track cars. Never trying to compete with muscle cars.
Dodge may have missed the mark sales wise with srt4, but as for the car, it was quite impressive. And I'm not even remotely close to a dodge fan.
And about 90% of the time, most of those people do just ordinary driving. It's a myth that muscle cars could "only does one thing well."
You wouldn't know that for sure unless both cars were on a road course. But most muscle car owners are not interested in autocross racing. Back in the '60s some street racers would actually remove the anti-sway bar to reduce vehicle weight.
No it isn't a myth. Unless someone dumped money into a muscle car to make it a purpose built track car, they only did one thing well. Not that there is anything wrong with that. That's what they were built for.
Its no worse then your question of how many Honda's can lay a 100 ft strip of rubber. They are two different kinds of cars, built for two different times.
If your Chargers were so great, why did they go away? Why did dodge and all other manufactures stop building them? If they were as great as you say they are, why couldn't Ford/Dodge/Chevy find ways to make that kinda power even with the new emission and safety laws?
They came back, but for me to see a 4 door charger makes me ill.
I don't know if they are trying to have dads plaster their children into the back seat with G forces, or have dads scare the bajesus out of their kids, or both.
300 horses. 2013 Dodge Charger | 370-HP 5.7 HEMI V8 Engine with AWD | Dodge
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
