Lol on the AM radio.

 

AM ALL THE WAY!
anyway, i know its expensive to build a car with a body on frame but i'd sure like to see it again. ...and +1 on the lighter challenger even though its already BA

 

As long as its a manual trans 2-door coupe that offers a clean sporty style and as much performance packed into it as possible for a reasonable price then Id be in. It could be a twin turbo 4cyl or 4.0L v-6 fwd (preferably awd) or a small v-8 rwd either one would be good. I think youre on it with the 'everything you need, nothing you dont' approach that Nissan applied to the XTerra. Electronic gizmos like nav systems, dvd screens, etc can be installed by the aftermarket MUCH cheaper and tailored to the buyers needs. Things like power windows and 57 cupholders are garbage that no REAL driver really wants. Id say that anything that doesnt make a car run faster, handle better, more efficient, more reliable or more stylish is garbage that needs to be sh!tcanned, at least on a stripped down car like this.

I think the 4.7 is a bit inferior though. The Ford 4.6 makes more power and is more efficient, whetehr in the mustang or the F-150. A small v-8 between 4.0 and 5.0 liters, using the Hemi technology and nameplate would be a good place for Chryco to sink a few dollars of that bailout money since thats one way we could have our cake and eat it too. Midsize vehicles like the Dakota, Grand cherokee, Wrangler, the future LX sedans and a sub-Challenger type coupe like mentioned here would really benefit from an engine that delivered mileage in the 24-26 range and offered more than 260 horsepower and real V-8 growl. Its TOTALLY do-able, the only reasons it couldnt happen are stupidity and/or laziness.

 

the mini-hemi is a cool idea. i think it should definitley be a v8 though, they are classic, great running and even better sounding engines! nothing can beat that v8 muscle car sound. i have to agree to disagree on the 4.7 vs 4.6 ford. i hate the 4.6 ford i feel like its a very weak motor with hardly any torque after driving a gt musting with it and a rcsb f-150 that was slower than my old 5.2

 

They used to make slant six Hemis in the "Down Under." (Austrilia for you dumb @$$e$!!)

 

The 2005 4.7l has real V8 growl, believe me. Have you looked at the numbers on the 2008+ 4.7l? It produces more hp and torque than the Ford 4.6 and actually uses a similar head to the Hemi. The 4.7 is a great engine, it just doesn't get enough credit.

 

Much agreed The 4.7 is so underrated its pathetic...

 

I'm keeping my eye on the local junkyards for a wrecked 08 I can nab the 4.7 out of

 

From everything Ive ever read on the 4.7, especially in the Ram, they all say its way underpowered and gets crappy gas mileage. In the grand cherokee, dakota or durango its got plenty of oomph, but the 4.6 in my dad's company F-150 still got mileage up near 23-24. Thats hauling 800 pounds of gear in a supercab 2wd with highway gearing and straight extended freeway driving. I dont care for F-150s but this is real world experience and its fairly impressive. A friend at work had a dakota 4wd extracab and could barely break 18 mpg. Smaller truck but likely different gearing and driving habits along with 4wd but its still not really comparable.

Those high horsepower numbers for the 4.7 are likely for the flex fuel or HO versions and both require premium fuel from what I understand. Could be wrong on that. But the Mustang GT delivers all of its numbers on regular. Thats a LITTLE less of a concern right now, but when regular was over $4/gal its a different story.

The other thing is, theres little to no aftermarket support for the 4.7, and availability of upgrades are a HUGE make or break point for me, personally.

 

The flex-fuel 4.7L can use either E-85 or 87 octane (2009 Dakota owners manual, page 304, 2008 Dakota owners manual page 285)
The 2008+ 4.7L definitly packs a punch. 302HP and 329 lb-ft is a very respectable number. (Dakota) 310/330 in the Ram.

And the 2008+ 4.7L rivals Chevy's 5.3L as well (315 hp/338 lb-ft).
Chevy's 4.8L puts out 295HP/305 lb-ft.

4.7L in a non-obese car would be cool.