Dodge Challenger Forum banner

21 - 38 of 38 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,707 Posts
I think that Chevy hit a home run with the new mid-engine Vette. I heard that they perform as good as they look.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,017 Posts
I know we already hashed it all out on the Corvette. I still don't get why GM said they reached the "limit" with front engine-rear drive configuration. True, maybe. But that's not the mission of the Corvette.

Honestly, will anyone from young and old choose this Corvette over a Lamborghini Aventador? Forget the numbers, which car will sell more posters? If Corvette was 0.05634 seconds faster, which car will kids dream of? Yes, one day GM will pour all the SUV $$$ to make Corvette the best and the fastest. So what? It's 0.098723 faster than a 911.

As for the front engine layout, Ferrari has not given up. Neither has Benz. At the end of the day, it's about selling cars, And these front engine - rear drive cars are sexy AF. So was the Corvette.
Ferrari is a pure sports car "boutique" car maker. They can afford to make the decision to build many different styles and themes concerning the basic idea of the "ultimate sports car"

Chevrolet and GM in general isn't Ferrari. It's a mass market car company.

It's Corvette is not a Brand in the way Ferrari is.

At the end of the day Corvette is a Chevrolet. Chevy is the brand and Corvette is your ultimate Chevy sports car and the Halo vehicle of the Brand.

There have been years where GM actually lost money on each Corvette sold. More than once the Car was considered for getting the "axe".......yet GM soldiered on because the car has always served a mission as a halo car that brings excitement to any dealer show room with it inside or out on the lot.

The car has a long history of potentially going "mid engine" Zora Duntov himself advocated for the change as early as the in the 1960s. It never got serious consideration until now and if I had to guess why now is different I'd say it's because if the Corvette can't maintain it's place as within reach of the true Super Exotics at an "every man's" price tag it will loose the excitement it's supposed to generate for the bread and butter car and truck dealer that is Chevrolet.

Bottom line:

It was time to make the switch. The execution of the change is spot on too.

Virtually the same entry level price tag as the last years front engine C7. As for performance advantage.......what more do you need to see?

This first version, available with "only" 495 HP can do a 0-60 within a 1/10th or so of last year's 750HP super charged engine car.

It was time, change is inevitable and I do believe this way the correct move for Corvette. The "reachable" price tag is only AMAZING if the car is within the performance and expectation of the sky high priced exotics. Fall too far behind and it's no longer the "super car" for the ordinary man. That's my opinion on it and I'd bet anything it's a large part of why Chevrolet finally made the decision to do it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,017 Posts
I don't disagree with what you said, but I do see the body lines of the 1st gen Camaro in the current car (for the past two gens). I think GM failed to hit the home run with the execution of front and rear lights. The face and the rear end. There's opportunity to link that heritage, and GM didn't do that.

Take the tail lights. That's unexecptable, like they ran out of time. Couldn't someone just work on the weekends to finish the design?

I'm here cause I like the Challenger. I like the Mustang. I really want to like the Camaro too..
Yup.....gotta agree. I look at the current generation of the Camaro and i can still see the inspiration of that '69 it's supposed to be a Retro take on but the "modern" changes.........just horrible and it's almost like some said from the start, "Let's see if we can take one of the most popular and a best looking cars we ever designed and make it over to one of the worst"

If so you gotta say, "Bravo!"

Chopping the roof line makes it tank like when looking out from inside. Stretching and pulling at the original simple lines gives it a cartoon like appearance.

Should have and could have been every bit as good as the Challenger or 2005-14 Mustang..........but instead they designers leaned too far out over their skis and killed it.

I have no doubt that unless something miraculous happens to sales over the next year or two.......the nameplate will be mothballed again as it was on poor sales figures back in 2002.

I don't care if you are "mopar or no car"......... nobody should be cheering the end of a Competitor that helps to force their favorite brand to raise the bar each year rather than become content in their success.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,017 Posts
Meh..... If it had a Hellephant maybe, but it would still be ugly.
Are we looking at the same car? I kinda doubt it. Still, styling is subjective so I'll accept that you think it's ugly. I'll just say that while back of the car leaves a lot to be desired......the front and side views are GREAT, imo. Overall a pretty good looking car.

Then there is the whole GM vs Chrysler engineering in that "hellephant" comment.

I love the look of both my Dodge Challenger and my Ram Truck far better than anything comparable from Chevrolet but that's where it all ends as favorable Comparison.

I only dare too dream of Dodge giving us the engineering Chevy puts into their Camaro and Corvette.
 

·
Registered
2017 Challenger Scat Pack Shaker
Joined
·
162 Posts
For some reason that front end view of the C8 reminds me of the original Acura NSX. Cool that you can buy a mid-engined sports car for around $60K but it doesn't scream Corvette to me as a former C5 vette owner. I really liked the C7 especially the blue and white Grand Sports.

O.J. I'm with you on the Camaro. I had a 2010 SS - at the time I thought it was the coolest looking car out there. Its design just doesn't seem to age as well as the Challenger's. The follow up versions just can't get the front/rear fascias right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
684 Posts
Bottom line:

It was time to make the switch. The execution of the change is spot on too.

Virtually the same entry level price tag as the last years front engine C7. As for performance advantage.......what more do you need to see?
Well said (i'm just quoting this part to save space.)

I'll herd myself into a group. I would NOT call it anti-C8. C8 is every way a better car, spot on, great performance. When you compare to the the Lambo, it's no doubt a better value, even after we load the C8 up to $100K+.

I would call my group, "Nothing wrong with a front engine rear drive Corvette And wish GM kept it that way." Funny thing, I was looking at a Ferrari California a few days ago. That car is beautiful. I see C7 Corvette all over the California's design. Ferrari copied it, exactly, no doubt. And the Ferrari California convertible, sexy AF.

Back to business of selling metal and plastic. Would GM loose any customers by continuing the front engine rear drive design? Will Corvette fans leave the family because it's not 0.04539 seconds faster, or corner 0.0023G better?

Would all the money spent to develop the C8 from the ground up be better spent to make the Cruze and Malibu better? Without looking, the two combine = 500,000 units a year. It keeps families with names like Johnson, Smith, and Richards working. Yes, GM is riding the truck and SUV boom, isn't The (SUV) boom + 500,000 units even better?

If GM can build a better Corvette, and without question C8 is, they can build a better (the best) mid-size sedan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
684 Posts
O.J. I'm with you on the Camaro. I had a 2010 SS - at the time I thought it was the coolest looking car out there. Its design just doesn't seem to age as well as the Challenger's. The follow up versions just can't get the front/rear fascias right.
I do believe (current) Camaro, as we know it, is done (again). There is no Cadillac ATS to share platform, cost, and etc. That's too bad, because the ATS was a great car too.

If the Challenger goes out looking exactly like the current car, it will cement itself in history. If the Mustang goes out exactly as is, awesome. Camaro can not go out looking like an ugly duckling. That's not right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,017 Posts
Not gonna happen for me either.
The cars styling is growing on me, but I am not head over heels in love with it.

I don't like the gauge layout. Call me old fashion, but I still prefer round gauges that have needles that move.

As far as "Retro" not the game for the Vette... your right, its not.
BUT, it very well could have been.

Chevrolet could have done a hard core, true to form, retro 1964 Grand Sport.
It would have had to been done with the same commitment that Ford had, when it brought out the 2005 Ford GT (The modern GT40)

A modern '64 Grand Sport Corvette would have been a huge hit, but it would have had to been in production by 2006/2007, when the "Retro theme" was still fresh and growing in popularity.

IMHO, Chevrolet also dropped the ball with the Camaro, by not following the Ford Mustang and Dodge Challengers more authentic styling Q's.
The 2010 Camaro's styling should have been MUCH closer to the '69 model that inspired it.
Not some quasi-cartoon, futuristic version.
Would still be too small and uncomfortable.
There is that.

The true.....real deal full sized Muscle Car........Dodge is without, too much debate, the only company offering the car.

Many Luxury Models out there today muddy the water a bit though. 500HP and more is becoming pretty common in in full sized import cars but they won't come with the paint and appearance packages that any German styling guy might well be taken out back and face a firing squad for even suggesting. Don't get me started on those price tags attached.

What Dodge has done is give us the purest appearance and at a good price point if a full sized coupe is what a buyer wants. This forum pretty much proves there are a least a few of us left out there willing to buy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,017 Posts
I do believe (current) Camaro, as we know it, is done (again). There is no Cadillac ATS to share platform, cost, and etc. That's too bad, because the ATS was a great car too.

If the Challenger goes out looking exactly like the current car, it will cement itself in history. If the Mustang goes out exactly as is, awesome. Camaro can not go out looking like an ugly duckling. That's not right.
I'd have agreed with you had you suggested that the '14 Mustang was the last Mustang........you lose me though when you suggest the Fusion on Steroids is a good representation of what a Mustang should look like.

Dodge makes what can easily be argued to be the inferior performer among the 3 cars. It even takes a ton of extra horsepower to get the car into the same range out on the drag strip where this car s supposed to excel.

As for Camaro going out as "the ugly duckling"........ 2002 ........that was pretty damned ugly car too.

Sad to say but Camaro has been here before.

We're a long way now from those great looking designs of the first through third generations of the car.
 

·
Super Moderator
2016 SXT Plus Blacktop
Joined
·
15,716 Posts
Other than Farrah on a chilly (every) day, the Mustang II only good thing is the steering being used on so many hot rods :)

A Guy
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
15,087 Posts
I'd have agreed with you had you suggested that the '14 Mustang was the last Mustang........you lose me though when you suggest the Fusion on Steroids is a good representation of what a Mustang should look like.

Dodge makes what can easily be argued to be the inferior performer among the 3 cars. It even takes a ton of extra horsepower to get the car into the same range out on the drag strip where this car s supposed to excel.

As for Camaro going out as "the ugly duckling"........ 2002 ........that was pretty damned ugly car too.

Sad to say but Camaro has been here before.

We're a long way now from those great looking designs of the first through third generations of the car.
the problem with the 4th Gen F-body was by '00, it was looking very dated.

It was a large 193.5" x 74.1" x 51.2" vehicle [Challenger: 197.9" x 75.7" x 57.5" for comparison]
but offered rather poor space / utility for the size it was - even with having a rear hatch with an irregular floor and the well at the back end for cargo / luggage. And not back back seat space with the 2 seats provided.

With all the comments about Challengers being big - the 4th Gen F-body was pretty close in dimensions, save for having a lower roofline. But the utility for the F-body really put it at a disadvantage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
684 Posts
Other than Farrah on a chilly (every) day, the Mustang II only good thing is the steering being used on so many hot rods :)
Ford hit a home run with Charlie's Angles sponsorship. Mustang quickly became a girl's car. It was what secretaries and mistresses drove in the late 70s. Until they wanted Benz SL in the 80s. Price went up during the Regan era.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
187 Posts
No doubt the 2020 Corvette is an amazing car - and certainly the even higher performance specs that will follow on in the next few years will be even more amazing. My hope is that every Z06 owner dumps their car onto the used market so they can buy a new one - thus driving down the Z06 used prices. Then maybe I’ll pick one up (Z06) because that’s the one I really like.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
684 Posts
No doubt the 2020 Corvette is an amazing car - and certainly the even higher performance specs that will follow on in the next few years will be even more amazing. My hope is that every Z06 owner dumps their car onto the used market so they can buy a new one - thus driving down the Z06 used prices. Then maybe I’ll pick one up (Z06) because that’s the one I really like.
That's my plan too. I've been wanting a Corvette since 1978.

Things are funny sometimes. Every goes crazy for the G3 Acura Integra. People steal them like crazy. Now, the Acura Integra (Type R) is starting to ask for premium $$. One used 97 was sold at Barrett Jackson in Vegas for $64K.

No one want the G4 Acura Integra, when it's clearly a better car, with more power, better handling, better chassis.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
739 Posts
That's my plan too. I've been wanting a Corvette since 1978.

Things are funny sometimes. Every goes crazy for the G3 Acura Integra. People steal them like crazy. Now, the Acura Integra (Type R) is starting to ask for premium $$. One used 97 was sold at Barrett Jackson in Vegas for $64K.

No one want the G4 Acura Integra, when it's clearly a better car, with more power, better handling, better chassis.
Funny things do happen in the car world.

A funny thing is happening in the Mustang world, right now.
Quite often a 2013-2014 GT will bring equal or more money than a 2015-2016 GT. I have even seen low mileage 2011-2012 GT's, sell for more as well.
The 2015+ (S550) is far more luxurious, rides better and has a modern interior/exterior design.
It is also heavier.
Its claim of "better performance" over the lighter 2011-2014 (S197) has always been suspect/debated from the start.
A Coyote equipped S197 GT (optioned w/ the Brembo package and 3:73 gears) gives up nothing to the 205-2016 GT cars. The 2013-2014 track pak GTs are faster and the 2012-2013 BOSS's are faster still.
IMHO, the S197 Mustangs have the best styling since the 1964-1970 models.

Sometimes the latest designs lose their appeal rather quickly.
 
21 - 38 of 38 Posts
Top