Quote:
ORIGINAL: THE STUD
yeah I'm not sure why Dodge is so heavy these days, is it qualit? is it all the new ride stuff these days? yeah there's more plastic inside, but there's more "stuff" everywhere it seems. the old days there was a metal dash, that had like nothing on it, maybe a radio, maybe AC, and heat.
Now we got all these navigation systems, and sound systems and I relaly don't know why dodge is so heavy. IT's a good thing when it comes to crash safety. I think the Dodge trucks might be heavier as well than the other trucks. I would call that better quality, hoping the lighter stuff just means more plastic, but I can't say for sure.
I do with they could slim the challenger to around 3500, but can't see that happening. Still, the numbers on the internet say it's 0-60 is around 4.5 the shelby gt500 is 4.5, so if those numbers can be turned into fact instead of projected, I won't care what the car weighs, if it can top a 500hp lighter smaller mustang, even though I love stangs and camaros too. I love the muscle wars comin back. I just hope people won't fous on gas when they see these cars. Yeah their not 35mpg but their still a lot better than the original muscle cars, A LOT BETTER.
Well yeah I got time off also intrepid, 4 weeks off, starting this friday after finals, yuck
My bowl game is Fiesta Bowl, my college is BSU, how sweet is it that my college and home town is goin to play Oklahoma? Anybody for the Broncos? GO BRONCOS
|
I believe its the platform they are using. That LX (LY for the Challenger) is built to be a tank. The problem the manufactures are having is that people want both safety, price, fuel economy, and performance. Unfortuneatly, it is impossible to give them all at the same time. I think that DCX wants to make sure the Challenger is safe since they know people are going to drive it fast. With the way people are these days, if a vehicle has any small safety issue, they raise the underworld about it.
I'm not referring to something like the Crown Vic problem, more of if it doesn't get 5 stars in every category and get a perfect rating in the off set tests, they call it unsafe. Making the vehicle safe makes it weigh more. The platform they are basing the Challenger off of was in its original form intended to be used for a Mercedes whos top priorities are safety, structure, and comfort. The Challenger is about performance and style. In my opinion, they never should have used the Mercedes E-class platform in the first place. The platfom is the reason why the Challenger is going to cost considerably more than the Mustang.
They also shouldn't have used the Mercedes designed W5A580 transmission in the LX cars either. If they would have worked on the ratios a little, the 545RFE should have been the one they used. From the '99 concept the Charger was going to use the LH platform (Intrepid, 300M, LHS, Concorde, Vision, Prowler, etc.). As much as I like the looks of the current Charger, I prefer the looks of '99 concept better. The LH platform would have been better suited for the Charger. It would have been lighter, more aerodynamic, it was RWD capable (and most likely AWD capable), and considerably less expensive.
I can understand the 300C having the LX platform since it is a Chrysler and Chrysler is supposed to be about luxury (though you wouldn't know it since they added the Plymouth marketing and products to Chrysler's line). The Magnum also makes sense to use the LX.
The Challenger more than anyother one should have the LH instead of the LY platform. This would both solve the weight and price issue. It wouldn't be nuclear proof, but that isn't why a person buys a muscle car anyways.
I believe the Challenger can match the GT500 because the 6.1L is underrated. In a test that either MT or C&D did testing the Magnum SRT-8 was found to actually produce 467hp. I don't know about the actually output of the GT500, but I know it is in fact defeated by the 2000 Cobra R which didn't have a supercharger.
I've seen the Charger and 300C SRT-8s range from 4.7-4.9 secs in the 0-60 and that is with the automatic. I believe the manual will make the difference, plus if you look at the picture of the engine compartment from the concept Challenger and compare it to the SRT-8s, you'll notice they have a K&N intake on the Challenger that isn't on the other SRT-8s. Whether they include it or not in the rating, it will be more powerful than the others and maybe just enough to make the difference.
About fuel economy, I'm afraid if prices continue they way they are going that might become an issue for some. GM will be offering close to 30mpg with their Camaro with the LS2 from what I have read since it will have Displacement-On-Demand. The only problem is it seems like that DOD isn't very efficient despite what the EPA claims. I have read many cases in the magazineswhere the 5.7L-powered LX cars in real life get way better mileage than the DOD models despite the 3 mpg difference, in fact I've even seen cases where the 6.1L gets better mileage than the LS4 (5.3L in Impala/Monte Carlo SS & GP GXP) and the 6.1L doesn't even have MDS. I'd like it if they would offer the Bluetech diesel as an option on the Challenger. Selling a model that will accelerate to 60 in the mid to upper 6 sec range and can get up to 37 mpg sounds pretty good to me.
I was finished with my finals yesterday at 3:00p.m. Thank goodness that is over. My university is going to be playing in the Division 2 championship. We're NWMSU. Good luck on your finals and your team. GO BEARCATS!