The NYT On The Charger Name Controversy!
Thread Starter
|
Banned
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,879
Likes: 0
From: Metro Detroit
The NYT On The Charger Name Controversy!
December 27, 2004
AUTOS ON MONDAY | COLLECTING
Dodge Charger, a Name of Many Shapes
By JERRY GARRETT
ANGRY letters have been deluging DaimlerChrysler headquarters in Michigan ever since the company announced in October that it would bring back the Charger nameplate for a 2006 Dodge.
The reason for the outcry is that the revered model name will be affixed to four- door sedans, an affront to purists who say it should be reserved for two-door coupes, where it was first used four decades ago. The revived Charger will make its debut next month at the Detroit auto show.
Trevor Creed, senior vice president for design at Chrysler, said that public response to the name's new use has been "almost unanimously negative." At Car and Driver magazine, where letters to the editor on such controversies usually trickle in, the flow has become "a torrent, running 30-to-1 against" Dodge's decision, said Steve Spence, the managing editor.
Oddly, Mr. Creed points out, many of those complaining ask why Dodge did not put its well-regarded Charger design study of 1999 into production - a car that was, in fact, a four-door.
But what defines the true Charger? Must it be a Hemi-powered, four-on-the-floor brute like the memorable models of 1960's?
Dodge produced Chargers, always in coupe form, from 1966-78 and again from 1982-87. During those model runs, the designers proved there is more than one way to skin a coupe. The Charger's body took the form of a fastback, a notchback, a hatchback and a Chrysler Cordoba knockoff.
It was a rear-wheel-drive car and a front-driver, a full-size car and a compact econobox. It was powered by behemoth V-8's and timid 4-cylinders and even the almost-indestructible Slant 6. The car also had a brief run as a turbocharged pocket rocket.
Perhaps no other model in automotive history, except for the Ford Thunderbird, has endured such an identity crisis.
Dodge used the Charger name on two design studies in the 1960's. The Charger II of 1965, a large coupe with an extended fastback roofline, was well-received on the auto-show circuit. With few changes, the shape was rushed into production as a 1966 model to compete with the wildly popular Ford Mustang. A variation of the comparatively dowdy Coronet, it had hidden headlights, four bucket seats and was available with the 426-cubic-inch Hemi engine.
Despite a late introduction, more than 37,000 of the '66 models were sold. Sales collapsed in '67 - to fewer than half as many - but fortunately a handsome redesign was already in the works.
The second-generation Charger, introduced for 1968, is the one most prized by collectors. The car's distinctive Coke-bottle contours were drawn while Bill Brownlie was in charge of the Dodge studio, but Richard Sias, a former General Motors stylist, is generally credited as the actual designer. Mr. Sias's design, done during lunch breaks and after-hours apart from his regular assignments on the Dart, almost didn't see the light of day; only a timely intervention by Elwood Engle, Chrysler's vice president for styling, saved it.
The Charger underwent few changes through the 1968-70 model years. During that era it gained a reputation as one of the most virile of all muscle cars, but in fact most Chargers were powered by small V-8's. Hemi engines, advertised as producing 425 horsepower and 490 pounds-feet of torque, never sold in large numbers, for reasons that included bare-bones warranty coverage and rapidly escalating insurance costs for performance models. And the Hemi sometimes had a fussy temperament.
The Hemi engine was an expensive option, too, adding nearly a third to the car's cost. The rarity of factory-built Hemi Chargers - which has sent values over six figures for some examples - has resulted in the assembly of many "clones" by fitting base models with replacement engines.
Charger sales took off in 1968, to 74,886. The 1969 models were only slightly changed, but Dodge added two aerodynamically enhanced versions for Nascar racing: the Charger 500, with a smoother installation of the grille and rear window, and the Charger Daytona, one of the most outlandish models of the muscle car era, with its 18-inch extended nose up front and a sky-high wing at the rear. The Daytonas were so impractical and hard to sell that many ended up being converted back to "normal" Chargers.
The third-generation Charger arrived in 1971 as a somewhat bloated coupe with a more conservative roofline - but they sold well. Production of the 426 Hemi ceased after that year, in anticipation of impending fuel regulations. Tightening exhaust emissions standards also began to put a chokehold on the 440 Magnum engine, which was gradually detuned from 375 horsepower down to 275 by 1974.
When the Charger was redesigned in 1975 as Dodge's version of the Chrysler Cordoba, the 440 was discontinued. Sales slid steadily until 1978 when the model was discontinued.
In 1982, Dodge tried to recapture the Charger magic by sticking the name on the Omni 024 hatchback, a tepid front-drive economy car. In base trim, that Charger was propelled by a weak 2.2-liter four-cylinder. Dodge later commissioned Carroll Shelby, a racecar driver and small-scale manufacturer, to build a run of Shelby Chargers, and those garishly striped versions enjoyed a cult following. The last-generation models continued until 1987.
Through the Internet, fans of the econo-Chargers have found each other and engage in a lively market for vehicles and parts. Prices are still low - running, unrestored versions can be found for less than $1,000. The cars recently earned some respect when the Charger Registry, an owners' association, added the 1982-87 models to its listings.
At this time, though, the registry does include the 2006 Charger among its listings.
redriderbob
AUTOS ON MONDAY | COLLECTING
Dodge Charger, a Name of Many Shapes
By JERRY GARRETT
ANGRY letters have been deluging DaimlerChrysler headquarters in Michigan ever since the company announced in October that it would bring back the Charger nameplate for a 2006 Dodge.
The reason for the outcry is that the revered model name will be affixed to four- door sedans, an affront to purists who say it should be reserved for two-door coupes, where it was first used four decades ago. The revived Charger will make its debut next month at the Detroit auto show.
Trevor Creed, senior vice president for design at Chrysler, said that public response to the name's new use has been "almost unanimously negative." At Car and Driver magazine, where letters to the editor on such controversies usually trickle in, the flow has become "a torrent, running 30-to-1 against" Dodge's decision, said Steve Spence, the managing editor.
Oddly, Mr. Creed points out, many of those complaining ask why Dodge did not put its well-regarded Charger design study of 1999 into production - a car that was, in fact, a four-door.
But what defines the true Charger? Must it be a Hemi-powered, four-on-the-floor brute like the memorable models of 1960's?
Dodge produced Chargers, always in coupe form, from 1966-78 and again from 1982-87. During those model runs, the designers proved there is more than one way to skin a coupe. The Charger's body took the form of a fastback, a notchback, a hatchback and a Chrysler Cordoba knockoff.
It was a rear-wheel-drive car and a front-driver, a full-size car and a compact econobox. It was powered by behemoth V-8's and timid 4-cylinders and even the almost-indestructible Slant 6. The car also had a brief run as a turbocharged pocket rocket.
Perhaps no other model in automotive history, except for the Ford Thunderbird, has endured such an identity crisis.
Dodge used the Charger name on two design studies in the 1960's. The Charger II of 1965, a large coupe with an extended fastback roofline, was well-received on the auto-show circuit. With few changes, the shape was rushed into production as a 1966 model to compete with the wildly popular Ford Mustang. A variation of the comparatively dowdy Coronet, it had hidden headlights, four bucket seats and was available with the 426-cubic-inch Hemi engine.
Despite a late introduction, more than 37,000 of the '66 models were sold. Sales collapsed in '67 - to fewer than half as many - but fortunately a handsome redesign was already in the works.
The second-generation Charger, introduced for 1968, is the one most prized by collectors. The car's distinctive Coke-bottle contours were drawn while Bill Brownlie was in charge of the Dodge studio, but Richard Sias, a former General Motors stylist, is generally credited as the actual designer. Mr. Sias's design, done during lunch breaks and after-hours apart from his regular assignments on the Dart, almost didn't see the light of day; only a timely intervention by Elwood Engle, Chrysler's vice president for styling, saved it.
The Charger underwent few changes through the 1968-70 model years. During that era it gained a reputation as one of the most virile of all muscle cars, but in fact most Chargers were powered by small V-8's. Hemi engines, advertised as producing 425 horsepower and 490 pounds-feet of torque, never sold in large numbers, for reasons that included bare-bones warranty coverage and rapidly escalating insurance costs for performance models. And the Hemi sometimes had a fussy temperament.
The Hemi engine was an expensive option, too, adding nearly a third to the car's cost. The rarity of factory-built Hemi Chargers - which has sent values over six figures for some examples - has resulted in the assembly of many "clones" by fitting base models with replacement engines.
Charger sales took off in 1968, to 74,886. The 1969 models were only slightly changed, but Dodge added two aerodynamically enhanced versions for Nascar racing: the Charger 500, with a smoother installation of the grille and rear window, and the Charger Daytona, one of the most outlandish models of the muscle car era, with its 18-inch extended nose up front and a sky-high wing at the rear. The Daytonas were so impractical and hard to sell that many ended up being converted back to "normal" Chargers.
The third-generation Charger arrived in 1971 as a somewhat bloated coupe with a more conservative roofline - but they sold well. Production of the 426 Hemi ceased after that year, in anticipation of impending fuel regulations. Tightening exhaust emissions standards also began to put a chokehold on the 440 Magnum engine, which was gradually detuned from 375 horsepower down to 275 by 1974.
When the Charger was redesigned in 1975 as Dodge's version of the Chrysler Cordoba, the 440 was discontinued. Sales slid steadily until 1978 when the model was discontinued.
In 1982, Dodge tried to recapture the Charger magic by sticking the name on the Omni 024 hatchback, a tepid front-drive economy car. In base trim, that Charger was propelled by a weak 2.2-liter four-cylinder. Dodge later commissioned Carroll Shelby, a racecar driver and small-scale manufacturer, to build a run of Shelby Chargers, and those garishly striped versions enjoyed a cult following. The last-generation models continued until 1987.
Through the Internet, fans of the econo-Chargers have found each other and engage in a lively market for vehicles and parts. Prices are still low - running, unrestored versions can be found for less than $1,000. The cars recently earned some respect when the Charger Registry, an owners' association, added the 1982-87 models to its listings.
At this time, though, the registry does include the 2006 Charger among its listings.
redriderbob
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From:
RE: The NYT On The Charger Name Controversy!
I don't mind the 4-Door version as much as everyone else does, but I do think they should offer a 2-Door Coupe version of the car......they probably wouldn't have half the people mad at them they do now......the Charger has always been a 2-Door car.......if they are going to use that name on it then they should at least have a Coupe Version of the car......that way if your looking for a Coupe buy the 2-Door Charger.....if your in the market for a Sedan then buy the 4-Door.......this way there would be a market for everyone.
RE: The NYT On The Charger Name Controversy!
Who wants a 2-door legend to come back as a 4-door with only the nameplate to remember it by Dodge Charger= 2-door sports car Not 4-door junk wagon
Record Breaker
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,513
Likes: 0
From: Warren MI. Home to Rams and Dakotas
Trending Topics
Record Breaker
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
From: southern NH
RE: The NYT On The Charger Name Controversy!
Nice to see it's finally been made public and that Creed has even admitted it. The bigger question is, will he get his head out of his a$$ and correct this huge mistake, or keep repeating his mantra "The world doesn't want 2-doors. 2-doors don't sell. There is no market. The new Charger is wonderful." Wake up, Trevor! Listen and learn, and fix it!!!!![:@][:'(]
Professional
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
From:
RE: The NYT On The Charger Name Controversy!
I have no problem what so ever about a four door Charger. My problem is the fact that it is just a Mitsubishi Galant hand-me-down with a Magnum front end. Don’t get me wrong, the car itself is pretty sweet, only if it were a Stratus or Intrepid. So far that design does not deserve the name Charger. But you know, I was reading my Motor Trend today (February 2005) and I noticed that the car actually didn’t have Charger written on it at all. They never showed the rear end either and from what it looked like on the blurred spy pic, it seemed the name was on it. Allpar.com stated that the Galant was going to replace the Stratus in 2006 and this car looks like a Galant. In fact if you guys have the Motor Trend “Power Issue†you can compare the “Charger†with the Galant by looking at the Galant on page 133. Now there is also a side bar on page 48 called “Couped Up†in which is says…
“Meanwhile, in the studio next door, a separate team was attempting to adapt the highly acclaimed 1999 Charger concept to fit the LX architecture. That low and wide concept didn’t translate well to the big shouldered architecture, and, in any case, its look was too retro.â€
Now they said it didn’t translate well, but only because its look was “too retroâ€. Now isn’t Retro what we want here? I know that’s what I want. Chrysler has dominated the Retro car theme with Prowler, PT Cruiser, and 300, and now this Charger is “Too Retroâ€? I don’t think so. I believe they are all trying to throw us off so we will get all upset and then be Very surprised when we get to see it for real. Besides, on the Dodge website there is a link that has a pic of it and it does look like the 99’ Concept rear.
“Meanwhile, in the studio next door, a separate team was attempting to adapt the highly acclaimed 1999 Charger concept to fit the LX architecture. That low and wide concept didn’t translate well to the big shouldered architecture, and, in any case, its look was too retro.â€
Now they said it didn’t translate well, but only because its look was “too retroâ€. Now isn’t Retro what we want here? I know that’s what I want. Chrysler has dominated the Retro car theme with Prowler, PT Cruiser, and 300, and now this Charger is “Too Retroâ€? I don’t think so. I believe they are all trying to throw us off so we will get all upset and then be Very surprised when we get to see it for real. Besides, on the Dodge website there is a link that has a pic of it and it does look like the 99’ Concept rear.
Rookie
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
From:
RE: The NYT On The Charger Name Controversy!
ChargerSRT8 I hope you're last post is true. I hope chrysler is just covering this car up. They have alot of people pissed off right now, its going to be a huge surprise and welcome if they do have a different charger in the works.