Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive > Brand-specific forums > Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, and Ram
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: What should the Dodge Sedan be called?
Fury 4 25.00%
Polara 5 31.25%
Coronet 5 31.25%
GTX 2 12.50%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-03-2012, 12:59 PM
 
Location: Pikesville, MD
5,228 posts, read 15,290,693 times
Reputation: 4846

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by PullMyFinger View Post
The best Charger was the one it was intended for, the two door muscle car. This new "Charger" is just another moronic idea that they had.
Only a few versions were "muscle cars." most were weak 318/slant 6 versions. Even the "original" Charger, which sold poorly, and had a 230hp 318 in it's base form.



The follow up ones, in order to sell more, re-introduced the slant 6 as a base engine.





yeah, some "muscle car."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-03-2012, 01:27 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
21,872 posts, read 25,139,139 times
Reputation: 19072
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merc63 View Post
Only a few versions were "muscle cars." most were weak 318/slant 6 versions. Even the "original" Charger, which sold poorly, and had a 230hp 318 in it's base form.
No, no, the best was the 1983 Dodge Charger. It was a real cool car. It even came with a VW 1.6 liter! That's the real problem. The old 1983 was just too cool like a Jetta but cooler, not like this retro-muscle stupid stuff. The real Dodge Charger was so cool it was more cool than the original Jetta. You know how I know this? Because it was so cool it didn't need the bigger, more powerful engine that VW had to use to sell the Jetta. That's cool! It had two doors man, and that's what matters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2012, 05:55 PM
 
Location: H-town, TX.
3,503 posts, read 7,498,923 times
Reputation: 2232
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrapperL View Post
Sorry, I let my finger do the walking and it got off by one key. The 3.6 Pentastar engine is a problem child that is going to cost Dodge and Fiat a lot of coins. They have issues with a tick that turns into a miss on #2 cylinder that eventually requires the head to be replaced. Most of the engines, unbeknownst to the owners, has cylinder wall damage at #2 and Dodge is doing the head replacements only. Oil consumption is going to be an issue. The engine also gets about the same fuel mileage as the Ford EcoBrick in the F150. This will just about set the nail in the Chrysler coffin as replacements engines will be many.

The Chargers are being used a lot down here for police use. They're all using the Hemi and so far they've been happy with them. That will probably change when the police cruiser from GM hits the streets in January. We're also seeing a lot trucks used for patrol service as well. Mostly the F150's. The Border Patrol has quite few with limited version engines....and they are quick!
Well, I hope my friends wife gets all the use of the lead gas pedal foot she can before that happens on her '11 3.6L model...

I think Chrysler will get off on that, though. How long has GM been selling vehicles with the LS1-based engines and their oil consumption issues and calling it "acceptable usage"? Exactly. Chrysler probably took good notes.

possible problems with some 3.6 pentastar engines


"didnt post to cause paranoia jus be aware . he said he has saw 2 complaints of the smoking recently and the customers are told that its ok to drive"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2012, 03:09 PM
 
Location: On the edge of the universe
994 posts, read 1,592,448 times
Reputation: 1446
I say the Dodge Judge!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2012, 04:27 PM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
24,510 posts, read 33,309,299 times
Reputation: 7623
Quote:
Originally Posted by fireandice1000 View Post
I say the Dodge Judge!
Pontiac already used that name... The GTO Judge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2012, 04:33 PM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
24,510 posts, read 33,309,299 times
Reputation: 7623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merc63 View Post
Only a few versions were "muscle cars." most were weak 318/slant 6 versions. Even the "original" Charger, which sold poorly, and had a 230hp 318 in it's base form.

The follow up ones, in order to sell more, re-introduced the slant 6 as a base engine.

yeah, some "muscle car."
That's why the Charger R/T was available. With the standard 440-Magnum engine and the optional 426-Hemi engine, every one built was a muscle car.

And there were far more R/Ts built than the 6-cylinder versions:

1968
Charger, 6-cylinder--------- 906
Charger R/T---------------- 17,665

1969
Charger, 6-cylinder--------- 542
Charger R/T---------------- 19,298

1970
Charger, 6-cylinder--------- 211
Charger R/T---------------- 9,509
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2012, 05:54 AM
 
Location: Pikesville, MD
5,228 posts, read 15,290,693 times
Reputation: 4846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
That's why the Charger R/T was available. With the standard 440-Magnum engine and the optional 426-Hemi engine, every one built was a muscle car.

And there were far more R/Ts built than the 6-cylinder versions:

1968
Charger, 6-cylinder--------- 906
Charger R/T---------------- 17,665

1969
Charger, 6-cylinder--------- 542
Charger R/T---------------- 19,298

1970
Charger, 6-cylinder--------- 211
Charger R/T---------------- 9,509
The point is, the Charger wasnt' just a muscle car, there were 6 cyl and 2bbl 318 versions (I had a 318 Charger) as well, and even the first one was a rather slow mid size car.

The Charger name has been put on slow cars and FWD cars for years, so why ***** that the modern one, which is faster than the old ones, and is at least RWD, is called a Charger just because it has 2 more doors?

BTW, about 40,000 of the '68 Chargers (including some of the R/T models) had 318s in them. Most of the R/Ts were 383 cars that were 2bbl/automatic versions. Very few were 4 bbl cars and only a couple hundred had manuals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2012, 07:54 AM
 
1,742 posts, read 6,139,439 times
Reputation: 737

If you're that concerned about it, spend the money and get a coupe. The new ones are better performers and are probably the best sedan on the market not called a CTS-V.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive > Brand-specific forums > Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, and Ram
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top