Pontiac Solstice Forum banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Mod Emeritus
Joined
·
7,468 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So will they have a commemorative "Richard Petty Blue" car on the track at next years Daytona 500? I am not a huge Nascar fan, but it is still exciting to see them resurrecting the Charger name and moving it into Nascar, even if its on a 4 door sedan. It certainly lends itself more to racing than the Intrepid it is replacing, or the Ford Taurus racer. Or even the Monte Carlo, seeing as its based on a front drive car itself.

article:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2004-07-19-dodge-charger-nascar_x.htm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
FightingChance said:
I'm not a fan of the Magnum's styling. Here's to hoping it somewhat resembles the beautiful 1999 concept that bears it's name.
I know the concept is what i wanted to see built. This new one won't be anywhere near as fluid as that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
aawil said:
I know the concept is what i wanted to see built. This new one won't be anywhere near as fluid as that.
It will more than likley be the Magnum with the back notched into a sedan. I still can't buy the 4 door Charger concept. Reminds me of when the Thunderbird went 4 door. Totaly lame. I guess I'm old fashion, but 4 door is not sporty or performance to me. I love 2 door coupes, but I guess they don't sell too well these days. What's next? 4 door Cameros? How about a Corvette SUV? I know, a 5 door hatchback Mustang would be just the ticket.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,844 Posts
Although I personally like the look of the Magnum, I suspect it's aerodynamics (or lack of) wouldn't work for NASCAR. Blunt nose and square back. Not much better than a Xion Xb. Now there's an image! :jester
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
AeroDave said:
It will more than likley be the Magnum with the back notched into a sedan. I still can't buy the 4 door Charger concept. Reminds me of when the Thunderbird went 4 door. Totaly lame. I guess I'm old fashion, but 4 door is not sporty or performance to me. I love 2 door coupes, but I guess they don't sell too well these days. What's next? 4 door Cameros? How about a Corvette SUV? I know, a 5 door hatchback Mustang would be just the ticket.
I know what you mean about the 4 door charger concept. But at least on the concept it was well integrated. As long as ferrari doesn't sell out and build a SUV I'll be happy.
 

·
Mod Emeritus
Joined
·
7,468 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I would almost bet that it will have a different nose/front end than the Magnum sedan, mainly because it really needs to have some kind of resemblamce to past Chargers. Look at all the heat Pontiac has taken on the GTO. Can Dodge afford to put out a car with the name of a classic musclecar and not give it some kind of visual resemblance? I do not like the 4 door bodystyle either, but if they do the styling right it may not be so bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
Looks light there might be a coupe version of the charger after all. Here's a sneak preview article from C&D.

Chrysler 300 convertible and coupe
Already a solid success, Chrysler's 300 promises to become a series with the addition of coupe and convertible editions. The good-looking convertible draws heavily on the 300 Hemi C show car from the 2000 Detroit show. The coupe uses a sweeping C-pillar line to soften the 300's brick-like profile. DaimlerChrysler is also planning to offer coupe and sedan versions of the Dodge Magnum, as well as a revival of the old Charger nameplate. Look for the Dodge offerings as '05 models. The 300 coupe and convertible aren't expected until 2006.
 

·
Mod Emeritus
Joined
·
7,468 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
aawil said:
Looks light there might be a coupe version of the charger after all. Here's a sneak preview article from C&D.

Chrysler 300 convertible and coupe
Already a solid success, Chrysler's 300 promises to become a series with the addition of coupe and convertible editions. The good-looking convertible draws heavily on the 300 Hemi C show car from the 2000 Detroit show. The coupe uses a sweeping C-pillar line to soften the 300's brick-like profile. DaimlerChrysler is also planning to offer coupe and sedan versions of the Dodge Magnum, as well as a revival of the old Charger nameplate. Look for the Dodge offerings as '05 models. The 300 coupe and convertible aren't expected until 2006.
Nice catch! I have not seen any mention of a coupe version in Motortrend or some other sources, but C&D seems to have more info on DCX's future plans as long as its mostly correct info. Maybe they have a man on the inside! I hope they do bring out a coupe version. 4 doors on a Charger just isn't right!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
Fformula88 said:
I would almost bet that it will have a different nose/front end than the Magnum sedan, mainly because it really needs to have some kind of resemblamce to past Chargers. Look at all the heat Pontiac has taken on the GTO. Can Dodge afford to put out a car with the name of a classic musclecar and not give it some kind of visual resemblance? I do not like the 4 door bodystyle either, but if they do the styling right it may not be so bad.
The answer is... yes they can put out a car with absolutly no resemblence to the classic charger. They already have. In 1984 I bought a brand new two door hatchback called a Charger. It was FWD, had a 2.2 transverse four and a 5 speed. It also had nothing in common with the classic charger. It didn't look like it or drive like it. It actually was a great car for me. It was really good value and served me well. It even came in a pick up configuration and had a Shelby version. It shared it's platform with the Omni. So yeah, they can and probably will do it again, considering the 4 door configuration.

They can get away with the lack of heritage or lineage from the old Charger as long as they don't try to make the comparison and make a big deal out of the charger name and then try to charge alot of money for a modern collectable. It's only a name. The GTO gets bashed only because it's looks don't inspire anyone and don't match expectations for a car at that price point that is supposed to be a revival of the classic GTO. If Dodge discounts the car, and gets it in every rental fleet, like they did with the 300, then it won't matter that it doesn't look like the General Lee, or Richard Petty's car.
 

·
Mod Emeritus
Joined
·
7,468 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
AeroDave said:
They can get away with the lack of heritage or lineage from the old Charger as long as they don't try to make the comparison and make a big deal out of the charger name and then try to charge alot of money for a modern collectable. It's only a name. The GTO gets bashed only because it's looks don't inspire anyone and don't match expectations for a car at that price point that is supposed to be a revival of the classic GTO. If Dodge discounts the car, and gets it in every rental fleet, like they did with the 300, then it won't matter that it doesn't look like the General Lee, or Richard Petty's car.
LOL, funny you should bring this up! My grandfather just picked up a brochure for the new Magnum, and the car on the cover is parked in a lot with classic Dodge Chargers (not the 80's version either) surrounding it! Now that is more than just a suttle marketing hint there! That with their announcement of its return to nascar, and I am sure they will really play up the names lineage to those 60's/70's musclecars. Like the 300, the Charger with the hemi will be priced in the 30's, same ballpark as the GTO. If styling is completely different, I am sure there are going to be people who criticize it.

PS, was the 80's Charger widely criticized? My neighbor back then bought one new and I certainly remember the car, but I do not remember much about it (probably because I was at most 10 years old at the time).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
Fformula88 said:
PS, was the 80's Charger widely criticized? My neighbor back then bought one new and I certainly remember the car, but I do not remember much about it (probably because I was at most 10 years old at the time).
At the time I bought mine in '84 it was considered out of date old technology and Dodge did almost no advertising or promotion for it. At the time it was on the lot with the then brand new Dodge Daytona, so they were pushing that. The net result was that the Charger was a great value, lots cheaper than the Daytona. Consumer Reports at the time gave the Charger average to less than average marks and most car magazines wouldn't even talk about it much. My experience with it was very positive and it turned out to be much better than what the magazines for told. It was a heck of a deal.
 

·
Mod Emeritus
Joined
·
7,468 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
They had forsaken the Charger in favor of the Daytona. Maybe my memory is getting fuzzy, but was there many major differences between the two? From what I remember, they looked very similar, enough so to make me believe they were essentially the same car. What was the difference between them that caused people to ignore the Charger and focus on the Daytona?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
Fformula88 said:
They had forsaken the Charger in favor of the Daytona. Maybe my memory is getting fuzzy, but was there many major differences between the two? From what I remember, they looked very similar, enough so to make me believe they were essentially the same car. What was the difference between them that caused people to ignore the Charger and focus on the Daytona?
They were deffinately not the same car. Two tottaly seperate chassis and platforms. The Charger shared it's platform with the Omni economy car and the Daytona had it's own. They were similar in size and configuration but the Daytona costs thousands more. Dodge (and Plymouth) were trying to squeek out a little more profit from the Charger since the Omni replacement wasn't due any time soon, and they shared so many components they must have figured what the hell?

The Daytona was new and the Charger was old. If you were willing to buy a car that the automotive press called out dated and past it's prime, you could save lots of money and get a great value. I opted for that. Like I've said here before, I can't resist a great value. The reason people spent thousands more for the Daytona was it looked newer inside and out and the magazines said it was better. My Charger was great and was just as fast and functional as a Daytona. I think my Charger was $8300 out the door and the Daytona started at just under 10k.
 

·
Mod Emeritus
Joined
·
7,468 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
AeroDave said:
They were deffinately not the same car. Two tottaly seperate chassis and platforms. The Charger shared it's platform with the Omni economy car and the Daytona had it's own. They were similar in size and configuration but the Daytona costs thousands more. Dodge (and Plymouth) were trying to squeek out a little more profit from the Charger since the Omni replacement wasn't due any time soon, and they shared so many components they must have figured what the hell?

The Daytona was new and the Charger was old. If you were willing to buy a car that the automotive press called out dated and past it's prime, you could save lots of money and get a great value. I opted for that. Like I've said here before, I can't resist a great value. The reason people spent thousands more for the Daytona was it looked newer inside and out and the magazines said it was better. My Charger was great and was just as fast and functional as a Daytona. I think my Charger was $8300 out the door and the Daytona started at just under 10k.
Thanks for clarifying the difference! I had always assumed the Daytonas were built off the same platform, and didn't know that they carried such a large price premium!

I certainly don't blame you for going the value route on that one. $2000 savings today may not sound like all that much, but back in the 80's when it was 20% of the purchase price it sure would have been a big deal! I likely would have made the same choice!
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top