The '99 concept was better than what is slated for production, but it had it's problems also. What I would like to see and would consider buying is not even on the horizon, so I'm gonna shut up for now on the subject entirely. It isn't worth getting myself worked up over it anymore.[:@]

 

I say let your opinion rip! That's what these forums are about. I love see and hearing what people think should be produced, how else will anything ever come about

 

As you can see from my avatar, I have definite bias issues when it comes to the name 'Charger'. It's extremely frustrating to me that DCX can be so arrogant to try tell us that we don't want 2 doors, that they can hang whatever name from the past they feel like on a car that doesn't measure up to that name, that I don't want a manual tranny..... you get the idea. If you're going to use a retro name on a new car, better make sure the car measures up to the name. Two points in contrast: GTO.... Pontiac..... failure! Mustang.... Ford..... success! There's a reason for each result.... the cars they were put on! Quite frankly, I think DCX had their minds made up before they even started with their planning on this car. They obviously didn't check with the Mopar enthusiasts of old, who would likely be the first customers of a revived Charger, what they thought or would like to see. I don't think they did much in the way of market research at all. If 2-door cars are so passe, how does one explain the new Mustang? Is DCX just pretending it doesn't exist, or that it's success is a fluke? Or should I just attribute this to the arrogant M-B mindset now controlling the company that once was Chrysler?

 

That was awesome, I like the Avatar, by the way.
I agree on the GTO, they justify it by saying it is supposed to hold over Pontiac enthusiast until the new 2007 or whatever GTO hits. Ummm there's a poor strategy if I ever heard one, "we'll sell you this rebadged 8 year old platform, HSV Mondeo, from Australia, that has less power than the Mondeo, and we'll sell it for oooooohhhh $36,000." Less the inevitable GM REBATES
I agree the Mustang is a success, but not the savior Ford thought it would be. They will probably sell more though, I agree with you there. As for the manual tranny on the Charger that hasn't been totaly denied, YET, again I agree with you it probably will. I also agree with you on checking with enthusiast, it would have been a nice reminder of where all of the HEMI craze came from. I know the Charger wasn't the first, but it made a name for it none the less. Maybe they'll ofer a coupe version of the Charger, who knows? Ford has a Falcon in Ausi, that looks somewhat similar to the new Stang. OK maybe not that close but close.
I respect your opinion and appreciate your honesty to stay true to the original Charger idea...could we do it with a different name, now that we've alienated the Charger name?

 

Hmm.. dcxrje, would you happen to work at DCTC? That seems to be an awful lot of dcx products in you sig! Personally I think the main problem is this, when you think of a charger what do you think of? V8, rear drive, two door period. Yeah they had the k-car crap of the 80's(Shelby's excluded), but for the most part thats what most people think of. Also it seems that dcx design studios has gone off the deep end lately.
Durango, fugly. Dakota, fugly. Charger, fugly. See where I'm going here? Now I do work for dcx, and its dis hearting to see the design process going south![:@] I've seen photos for the 06 ram front end, fugly. Also if we wanted a four door performance sedan, we would have already bought a 300.

So here it is dcx we want a TWO door,rear drive, V8, another pet peeve, the engine choices should have been 4.7, and 5.7. NO V6![:'(]
And last pet peeve to me, we bring back the classic American sedan and possible coupe, built in Canada, with a hemi, built in Mexico![:'(]

Just my two cents, as a concerned emp.

Joe

 

I'll concede that this car should not be called a Charger, but back in '68, the mustang outsold the Charger. Even if Dodge made a pony car today, the relative size disparity between Ford and Dodge, along with other market conditions, would place 3 mustangs on the road for each Dodge pony car. Dodge should not be surprised by hate mail about this, but I'd hope you agree that Dodge needs a four-door sedan more than a 2-door coupe.

 

Haha, yes a multi-billion dollar company didn't do much in the way of market research because they didn't ask you and a minority of consumers about your desire for a two-door, mid-size, rwd, Dodge-badged performance car. But you know why they didn't have to ask you?...because they know you exist and they also know that there aren't enough people that would buy a dodge rwd performance coupe as there are that would buy a sedan/performance sedan. After many quarters of posting losses, Chrysler group is now posting earnings and before they cater to those who want a two-door, mid-size performance coupe (which should be forthcoming in the next couple of years), that's what they have to do! Again, it shouldn't have been called a Charger and you're entitled to your opinion, but you're not going to change that now.

In addition, the mustang isn't going to be a success because of its styling--it's going to be a success because it always has been! It eliminated the Camaro and the Challenger and the 'Cuda and the reason for this has never been purely based on any of the vehicles' performance or looks, but rather that Ford can put more V6 pony cars on the road than its competitors. In reality, that is where most of the Mustang sales come from.

"I don't think they did much in the way of market research at all" --You must be a business major, right?

 

I'm fairly certain you could get a slant-six in the original Charger, so why no V6 for this one?

 

Nice try, but ...NO! B.S. Mech. Engr., working as a QA Engineering supervisor for a defense contractor. I have to disagree with a lot of your logic also. Do you really believe the Mustang succeeds just because Ford can build them in high volume? You don't need a business degree to know that someone still needs to BUY them!!! The Mustang has also ALWAYS outsold the Charger.... along with most everything else produced as it's competition. So What?
You also don't think styling helps sell cars? Explain the current GTO debacle to me then.
Why is it that you think there is some perceived need for ANOTHER performance sedan from DCX. The 300C doesn't already fulfill that? Do you think that people will buy a Dodge version of that just because it's a Dodge, as opposed to a competitor's sedan? My belief is that the target audience for this new Charger is the same audience that is already getting into 300Cs or Magnums.... there isn't going to be any overall sales increase for DCX, just a redistribution of sales volumes across the product model lines. They will only be competing among themselves... and that's what has already led to the demise of Plymouth and Oldsmobile.

At least we do agree on one point- it shouldn't have been called Charger.

 

You guys need to get over the 60's/ Its the year 2004, SURPRISE!!!!!!!!! Then new Charger looks awsome. Todays cars are about efficiency in performance AND design. The old Charger was awsome! I love it, its my fav. But it was designed for the 60's. Today a car of that size is better off as a sedan. Now we all know that DC is workin on a coupe 300, so automatically you must know they are working on a coupe Charger(especially after the response from in here ). Even if they are not there will def be a Challanger(tee hee hee) to the Mustang. The only reason the Mustang stayed around is becuase as a car it was designed w/ the genral public in mind!!! Thats why the camaro and firebird got axed. They had boring styling(4th Gen) for muscle cars and your *** draged on the floor. I mean the GTO is a perfect example of a car that has the biggest ***** of them all, but looks like a nissan!!!!. Anyway the new Charger will be badass. A big chiseled american monster, THAT IS PRACTICAL & EFFICIENT!!!!!