Yes and no, twin turbo V6 available in some models? Hell yes! Replace the Hemi with it? NO! Dropping the Hemi altogether is Chrysler shooting themselves in the foot, keep it available as an option, I don't see a TT V6 being sought after much in the Rams anyways, cars yes and Dakota possibly (I'd love to have one).

the ttv6 would be great on a sport car platform not a 300c luxury style car platform. even the charger is better with the 5.7 hemi v8, the charger,challeneger and even the magnum are all v8 style muslce car ( thats the look of them). a ttv6 is more of a tuner car motor. thats just my opinion.
dodge never really had a tuner car platform other than the srt-4. put the ttv6 in that and it would be sweet.

also look at tuner cars that come with twin turbo setups example supra, most people convert to a bigger single turbo setup and get more out of the motor anyways. why not throw one big turbo on there that can throw 10-20 psi of boost and have the internals built to hold it. You never see that from factory.

Yes, it does!

Yep, I agree completely. Still need the V8. I mean, really, a V6 Challenger simply wouldnt be(and isnt) the same, even if it had twins. Thats the kind of car you almost HAVE to have a V8 in.

And a V6 Ram wouldnt cut it either. Unless, of course, it was diesel...

something to keep in mind...fords ecoboost "theory" is to make V8 power with a smaller v6...theyve been working on one for the F150, and i wouldnt be surprised to see something like that eventually get into a mustang.

GM did well with their SC V6s, but with VVT and direct injection, turbocharging setups have really come around, and we are to the point where turbocharging is a legitimate way to make a car more efficient with less of the "lag" that many people complain about. in speaking with the ford reps at the f150 media event, their biggest concern was that if they put a TTV6 in an f150, "truck guys" all say 'turbo cars lag', so that was one of their key concerns, and i was told that their setup has "almost completely eliminated lag"...

Yeah, the new turbo Cobalts are very impressive, and sound quite nice as well. The SC'd GM cars have been very mod friendly, and still get good gas mileage.

I'm more interested in performance then I am the motor under the hood

I agree with Altair, its a good idea, but not a replacement. Its a good idea for efficiency and power all in one :D I wouldnt mind a car with a TTV6, the sounds of a turbo and bov on a car always gives me chills and an adrenaline high when driving :D:D

All true, I've been saying for a long time that the big 3 need to look at what the rest of the world is doing. Porsche has always made world class performance vehicles with 6 cylinder engines, Skylines have done a great job making gobs of power with 6 cylinders, etc.

Sound isn't even a factor, because that can be fixed within the exhaust. I once drove a 3.1 cavalier that I had to get out and look under the hood because the rumble made me think it had an engine swap lol. It ofcourse was still the stock v6, but it had a good exhaust on it, I can't remember if it was magnaflow or borla. It sounded like a v8 though.

BUICK
Lucerne A-4 3.8/6 16/25

CADILLAC
DTS A-4 4.6/8 15/22

CHEVROLET
Impala A-4 3.5/6 18/29

CHRYSLER
300/SRT-8 A-4 2.7/6 18/26
A-4 3.5/6 17/24
A-5 3.5/6 17/24
A-5 5.7/8 15/23

I copied and pasted these directly from the EPA website. A-4 = Automatic 4 speed.
3.5/6 = 3.5L V6 etc. Although this looks complicated, it is simple. Chrysler is not lagging to the GM products. If you compare horsepower to MPG, Chrysler is far ahead. I put GM's best 2 Full size V6 MPG up for comparison. Also, I put the highest performance Chrysler cars to the middle of the road GM cars. If you were to put the Lucerne 3.8L supercharged, Chryslers 5.7L SRT8, beats it in fuel economy. There is NO BENEFIT in supercharged or twin turbo V6's compared to Chryslers V8's. Don't believe me? Look for yourself. Chrysler leads the pack of American cars:http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/FEG2008.pdf