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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-06-2015, 06:38 AM
 
Location: NWA/SWMO
3,106 posts, read 3,989,345 times
Reputation: 3279

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Cravings View Post
SRT8 or bust. Let me preface this with: I don't consider my car "fast". I can walk Challenger and Charger R/T's in my lightly modded 4banger. Their powerful motors are undercut by their ridiculous weight. But if you have passengers to carry they're a good blend of quickness and comfort. Plus, without a doubt, RWD>FWD.
I considered the SRT8 Jeep, but practicality wise, you will miss the 5mpg across the board you give up to the 6.1 or in later models, 6.4L.

I know, I know, "if you can afford", but it begins to drag on you, it really does. Yes, I've had truly fast cars, sure, and it was super fun, etc. but at the end of the day, there is only so much you can have on the street that you will use. Anything over that, and you're paying for something you aren't getting, or flirting with jail time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-06-2015, 06:44 AM
 
Location: Flawduh
17,155 posts, read 15,373,458 times
Reputation: 23738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merc63 View Post
Because in this age of safety nannies and anti-car regulations, it's nice, as a car guy, to see a manufacturer actually produce and sell something so over the top and fun. Manufacturers don't have to make fun cars. They could make a bunch of boring, vanilla sedans for the average non-enthusiast to crawl to work in. So it's refreshing when they occasioanlly stick a big middle finger in the air to the people that want to deny us fun.

Yeah, it's overkill. That's the freaking point!
Okay... What are you going to do with a Hellcat that you can't do with an SRT-8?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2015, 06:46 AM
 
Location: NWA/SWMO
3,106 posts, read 3,989,345 times
Reputation: 3279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcenal352 View Post
Okay... What are you going to do with a Hellcat that you can't do with an SRT-8?
Brag about it on the internet. Pull someone from an 80mph punch on the freeway who bought the SRT8 instead. Make more smoke and wreck it faster.


Just my .02
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2015, 06:57 AM
 
10,926 posts, read 21,992,098 times
Reputation: 10569
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWG223 View Post
They brought them back a few years ago.
9 years ago to be exact, 2006.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JWG223 View Post
The Charger is actually the lowest performing of the "Pony Car" trio (Camaro/Mustang) until you spring for the SRT or Hellcat models.

You're a tad confused, the Charger is not in the same class as the Mustang and Camaro, Chryslers retro vehicle is the Challenger.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2015, 07:03 AM
 
Location: Flawduh
17,155 posts, read 15,373,458 times
Reputation: 23738
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHDave View Post
9 years ago to be exact, 2006.





You're a tad confused, the Charger is not in the same class as the Mustang and Camaro, Chryslers retro vehicle is the Challenger.

Essentially the same car, no?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2015, 07:11 AM
 
Location: NWA/SWMO
3,106 posts, read 3,989,345 times
Reputation: 3279
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHDave View Post
9 years ago to be exact, 2006.





You're a tad confused, the Charger is not in the same class as the Mustang and Camaro, Chryslers retro vehicle is the Challenger.


I think you're right. I simply lumped it in because it resurrected the namesake, and was obviously a modern muscle car. Chrysler said as much. Technically though, the Camaro and Mustang (although some argue over the Yenko) was not a muscle car, but a pony car, and the Charger was more a muscle car.

I suppose one could argue that the Charger brought the Muscle car concept back. To me, THAT IS RETRO, but I get what you're saying about the styling, for sure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcenal352 View Post
Essentially the same car, no?

Yes and no. Same driveline and chassis. But then again the Cadillac ATS and Camaro are rumored to share the same Chassis once the Camaro is revamped, I believe, and I wouldn't call them the same car.

Nor would I have called the Cadillac XLR-V a Corvette...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2015, 07:12 AM
 
Location: NY
9,131 posts, read 20,006,903 times
Reputation: 11707
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcenal352 View Post
Essentially the same car, no?
Basically yes. I would say the Challenger is more "retro" however and aimed more at the pony car buyers, where the Charger is more modern with a couple retro styling touches. (But we are into shades of grey here). Really they are both probably too big to be true pony cars IMO, but the Camaro and Mustang seem to keep growing too...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2015, 07:12 AM
 
10,926 posts, read 21,992,098 times
Reputation: 10569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcenal352 View Post
Essentially the same car, no?
Depends on how you define "same". They share a base platform and drivetrain, but one is a sedan and one is a 2 door, 2 different vehicle classes. The Challenger is also a bit lighter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2015, 07:14 AM
 
Location: NWA/SWMO
3,106 posts, read 3,989,345 times
Reputation: 3279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checkered24 View Post
Basically yes. I would say the Challenger is more "retro" however and aimed more at the pony car buyers, where the Charger is more modern with a couple retro styling touches. (But we are into shades of grey here). Really they are both probably too big to be true muscle cars IMO, but the Camaro and Mustang seem to keep growing too...
Muscle cars WERE big!

The Camaro and Mustang were not muscle cars. They were pony cars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2015, 07:17 AM
 
Location: NY
9,131 posts, read 20,006,903 times
Reputation: 11707
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWG223 View Post
Muscle cars WERE big!

The Camaro and Mustang were not muscle cars. They were pony cars.
Sorry a typo, meant "Pony"
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.

Ā© 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