Filed under: Concept Cars, Detroit Auto Show, Spy Photos, Coupes, Sports/GTs
Spy Photos: Dodge Challenger!
It's confirmed: the North American International Auto Show in Detroit will play host to the Challenger, Dodge's
2-door venture into modern muscle. Based on the 1970s model of the original Challenger, this new vehicle is built on a
short Chrysler 300/Dodge Magnum platform and offers up a fitting 6.1 liter Hemi mated to a 6-speed manual
transmission.
Chrysler released a few derivations of the
sketch we've all seen, of course, but AutoWeek has some bona fide
spy shots worth taking a look at.
So here's the question — will the Challenger be the PT Me Too to the Mustang? The Mustang has been an extraordinary
star in the Ford lineup, exceeding all sales expectations — and it's even a coupe. Has the Mustang captured all of the
sales to be had for retro muscle? Or will we reserve that designation for the Chevy Camaro should it ever make its way
to the streets of Detroit?
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
spencer 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
AWESOME!!! I'm glad the Charger isn't a two door. I would much rather have this.
Reply
Tutor 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
That's an awesome car. I'll take mine in Statutory Grape, please.
Reply
Steve S 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
I had really hoped it was going to look better.
A tad too retro for my tase.
Reply
Doogs 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
Oh, it would sell alright, but I doubt it would reach the volume that the new Mustang is enjoying.
The Mustang strikes me as unique in that it has serious appeal across gender lines. My wife, not a car enthusiast by any stretch, has always been taken with Mustangs, and when the new ones came out, she jumped at the chance to get one.
The Challenger, however, strikes me as wholly and unabashedly masculine. Which isn't a bad thing - I just don't see a lot of women lining up for one.
Reply
Inthebiz 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
That's just a little too retro. I am sure it will be nice, but it doesn't take much imagination or engineering knowledge to copy 1970 Challenger. My first car was a '69 1/2 SuperBee. Loved it. But I wouldn't jump thru hoops to buy one if they just flat out manufactured it's twin. No, it would not be the same. I think that todays engineers should try and put their own signature design to these retro-mobiles.
Reply
k0an 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
It's a shame it's just a mildly (4") shortened version of the Charger platform. Currently the Charger is 700 lbs. heavier than the Mustang GT. Granted, the Challenger will smoke a stock Mustang with the 120 HP advantage of the 6.1 L but it would be nice if they could get that weight down a little.
Reply
Steve 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
Um, shouldn't Dodge/Chrylser attempt to push their momentum built already in muscle cars into different markets? How many people out there need their ahem gear ahem enlarged? While not the -exact- same niche as its two future siblings, it does seem like the same general market.
Reply
Tim UF 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
the only thing that i dont like about this car is the uber high doorsill. being a person of below average height, i lose a lot of visibility (though i imagine a lot of people lose visibility because of the sills regardless of height). that problem is shared across the 300/charger platform, as well as in the new 'stang. drop the door sills an inch or two, itd make the car look lighter, as well as actually make it lighter, id imagine.
Reply
Rocket Punch 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
Well thats one way to cut your annual design budget by 80%. Why design a new car when you can just copy one from the pass?
The bad part is, it looks much worst that the "original". This proves that the finest moment of American design is always in the past.
Reply
V?or Rubiera 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
I insist this car should be the Dodge Charger because the Dodge Charger was the muscle car in the then Chrysler Corporation.
Reply
naggs 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
build it
Reply
avixe 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
6-speed manual for the SRT Hemi? Wow, they've finally gotten there!
Reply
triplight 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
Incredible! A fantasy come true - a classic musclecar re-engineered with modern technology while keeping essentially the same design of the original. Check the rear view mirrors on stalks and the door glass going all the way down into corner of the A-pillar, instead of the usual cheap-looking, black plastic triangle. A brushed-metal door handle and matching trim around the windshield and rear glass, and it would be perfect.
For those who think it's too retro, keep in mind that modernization of otherwise perfect designs usually results in generic-looking, egg-shaped transports. Porsche realized the 911 was drifting toward this when they dialed back the front end with round headlights, and Ford knew this when creating the GT. Unfortunately, Pontiac put the GTO badge on one of these eggs, and is trying to bring it back to form by adding hood scoops and whatnot. If you're going to re-create a classic, don't lose sight of what made it a classic in the first place.
Reply
Jay 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
It has an appealing silhouette, but the front end and rear end details just look way too retro. It looks like a new car that has old parts on the ends, and not like a cohesive design where everything flows together.
Hopefully they'll clean some things up before the production model hits...they're close to a real winner!
Reply
Corey W. 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
Agreed, GM dropped the ball with the GTO. On the new Challenger, I like the rear but doesn't that front look a little weird...
Reply
Tony C 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
I wonder why the testing team needed to bring a Toyota Sienna along for the ride? =D
Reply
Jeremy's Right 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
For those of you commenting that it's "too retro", have no fear; it won't resemble this at all.
Remember the Charger show car? It was gorgeous and reflected much of the styling of the second gen (67-68) while incorporating 4-doors. Remember when the production Charger arrived and we all went "WHAT THE F--- is THAT!?!" because it looks ABSOLUTELY NOTHING like the show car?
So sleep easy, fans. The production Challenger will look more like a Grenada than it will look like this show car...
Reply
WillDaThrill 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
The companies need to stop pulling the plug on their famous muscle cars. You know we have to have em. I think thats why Mustangs are having sucess with theirs. They didn't have just one body style to retroize, they've had fourty plus years of body styles to incorporate into this vehicle. Now everyone wants to go retro muscle and trip over what body style they want to use. Stop pulling your cars because of gas and insurance natzi's. If Ford can tough it out, you can too. We can't afford SUV's either, so what's the use in pulling our beloved muscle cars?
Reply
jake 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
I like it's head light, mind blowing.
Reply
jwhite 10:37PM (12/18/2005)
Yep. They just need a stronger, more bold looking front end to keep with the current Dodge theme. I'm not saying the whole front needs to change. not at all but it looks a little weak in todays market. Just make the headlights and grill bigger overall and give it a real front bumper. (Not all of those cars will get out of my way fast enough so I need a little protection :) ). The rear is almost spot on but they could incorporate a bit more of the taillamp treatment from the '99 Charger concept. The character line could be less exaggerated just a bit. some slight wheel flares might also work better. Overall nicely done and a great looking concept with definite production potential. As for the weight, in production form this thing will probably be built on the next generation 300/Charger platform (LY platform code) due in 2009 or so and I think they were aiming to lighten the platform up some as part of that redesign. A Challenger around 3500-3700 lbs wouldn't be bad at all. Engines would likely be a new 4.0 V6, 5.7 HEMI, and 6.1 HEMI (or the 392 HEMI if they productionize it) mated to a 6 speed. mmmm. A couple minor tweaks and the right pricing (which should be good since it's already on a profitable platform) this baby will be a hit. Now lets see it in black
Reply