Dodge Challenger Forum banner

1 - 20 of 148 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
955 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
No, I'm not talking about sales numbers. I'm not talking about looks either, I'd hate for the Challenger to get the Camaro treatment (I seem to be one of the only people who likes the 2015+ Mustangs?), even though I would like to see a very slightly downsized and significantly lightened version on the new Alfa platform while keeping its traditional lines and looks, something between the sizes of the original E-body and the current Mercedes-based platform.

No, what I'm talking about is engineering and technology. FCA is getting killed by Ford and Chevy in that department (except for the UConnect system).

Read all about the technology and extra performance features that comes in the GT350 for less than a Hellcat (unless you get the R version) and close to the same price as an SRT392:

https://www.caranddriver.com/review...and-transmission-review-car-and-driver-page-2

And as much as I like the simplicity and heritage of a pushrod, single cam Hemi V8, it seems like it's becoming outdated and outperformed by DOHC 32 valve V8's like the Ford Coyote and Voodoo engines (is there any reason those engine designs can't be modified and upsized to 392 or 426 cubes?). Sure we have the Hellcat and Demon engines, but those freaking Coyotes respond REALLY well to mods, especially FI.

GM's Alpha platform (especially with the 1LE package) is one of the best in the world, arguably the best among American manufacturers, so far as handling goes without getting into supercar or Corvette/Viper territory.

Both manufacturers offer MagnaRide shock setups, which is, as far as I know, superior to the magnetic suspension setup in the SRTs.

I love that the Challenger is the last of the true muscle cars. I know that it handles surprisingly well for being such an aged platform, and for its size and weight, and can be made to handle extremely well within certain limits. I love that it's a lot more comfortable and usable than the Mustang and Camaro, which are just two seat sports cars for all intents and purposes. It has the best looking interior on my opinion. It has a great manual transmission and an extremely good automatic, I think the ZF 8 speed is superior to the Chevy 8 speed and the Chevy/Ford developed 10 speed.

But, I would REALLY like to see some advancements in the performance department for the Challenger in its next generation, without sacrificing what makes it so loved in its current incarnation. And if they have to be special options in the upper echelon of the lineup to keep costs down in the more common models, so be it.

What do you all think?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
955 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
I should add, I also like the Challenger because while you can see fairly well out of the Mustang, it feels just a little too cramped for me, and the Camaro is just too small on the inside altogether. Can't see for crap out of the back window and the windshield and side window heights make it like driving in a tank.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,330 Posts
Be careful what you wish for. Sometimes new tech is not all it's cracked up to be. Comparing my last Chevy (which is still in production today) to the FCA product I replaced it with, the build quality and parts quality are night and day in FCA's favor. Chevy may have some newer designed engines but some of the rest of the vehicle is ancient tech. Plus I'd rather have a reliable older design then to have to change my mailing address to the Chevy service department since I was living there between defects and countless recalls. Also, their "new" engines may be direct injection but the carbon build up on the valves is fast and severe. Same with Ford's engines except for the 3.5 and new 5.0 which I believe they did the right thing and put an injector in the old port location to wash off the valves like Toyota figured out a while back with their D.I. engines. With Ford's other D.I. turbo engines, Ford themselves said no cleaner could be used or the turbos will be destroyed so when the carbon builds up you have to replace the heads. FCA may have waited on tech to save money but in the long run they'll end up with a better mouse trap. In the mean time my Dodge and Ram have been the most trouble free of any vehicles I've owned and that's a value to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
955 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Be careful what you wish for. Sometimes new tech is not all it's cracked up to be. Comparing my last Chevy (which is still in production today) to the FCA product I replaced it with, the build quality and parts quality are night and day in FCA's favor. Chevy may have some newer designed engines but some of the rest of the vehicle is ancient tech. Plus I'd rather have a reliable older design then to have to change my mailing address to the Chevy service department since I was living there between defects and countless recalls. Also, their "new" engines may be direct injection but the carbon build up on the valves is fast and severe. Same with Ford's engines except for the 3.5 and new 5.0 which I believe they did the right thing and put an injector in the old port location to wash off the valves like Toyota figured out a while back. With Ford's other D.I. turbo engines, Ford themselves said no cleaner could be used or the turbos will be destroyed so when the carbon builds up you have to replace the heads. FCA may have waited on tech to save money but in the long run they'll end up with a better mouse trap. In the mean time my Dodge and Ram have been the most trouble free of any vehicles I've owned and that's a value to me.
You bring up some good points. I've never been a huge fan of direct injection (I don't know how it's any real improvement over using fuel rails and sequential multi-port?), but my admiration is really for the mechanical design of Ford's motors and how they're able to squeeze so much power out of such small displacement and lightweight V8's. And from what I've heard, their naturally aspirated V8's are extremely reliable.

I've also heard horror stories about Chevy build quality, which is another reason why I'd never buy a Camaro, but the design of their Alpha platform is fairly advanced and pretty sound.

I've also heard that Ford puts most of its effort into its engines and transmissions without concerning themselves too much about the rest of the build quality, to keep costs down (since the Mustang is still the everyman's-sports/muscle car).

I think it would be great if Chrysler could adapt some of their design ideas and include the necessary fixes and improvements while also providing higher build quality.
 

·
Registered
2015 SRT 392
Joined
·
3,140 Posts
No, I'm not talking about sales numbers. I'm not talking about looks either, I'd hate for the Challenger to get the Camaro treatment (I seem to be one of the only people who likes the 2015+ Mustangs?), even though I would like to see a very slightly downsized and significantly lightened version on the new Alfa platform while keeping its traditional lines and looks, something between the sizes of the original E-body and the current Mercedes-based platform.

No, what I'm talking about is engineering and technology. FCA is getting killed by Ford and Chevy in that department (except for the UConnect system).

Read all about the technology and extra performance features that comes in the GT350 for less than a Hellcat (unless you get the R version) and close to the same price as an SRT392:

https://www.caranddriver.com/review...and-transmission-review-car-and-driver-page-2

And as much as I like the simplicity and heritage of a pushrod, single cam Hemi V8, it seems like it's becoming outdated and outperformed by DOHC 32 valve V8's like the Ford Coyote and Voodoo engines (is there any reason those engine designs can't be modified and upsized to 392 or 426 cubes?). Sure we have the Hellcat and Demon engines, but those freaking Coyotes respond REALLY well to mods, especially FI.

GM's Alpha platform (especially with the 1LE package) is one of the best in the world, arguably the best among American manufacturers, so far as handling goes without getting into supercar or Corvette/Viper territory.

Both manufacturers offer MagnaRide shock setups, which is, as far as I know, superior to the magnetic suspension setup in the SRT's.

I love that the Challenger is the last of the true muscle cars. I know that it handles surprisingly well for being such an aged platform, and for its size and weight, and can be made to handle extremely well within certain limits. I love that it's a lot more comfortable and usable than the Mustang and Camaro, which are just two seat sports cars for all intents and purposes. It has the best looking interior on my opinion. It has a great manual transmission and an extremely good automatic, I think the ZF 8 speed is superior to the Chevy 8 speed and the Chevy/Ford developed 10 speed.

But, I would REALLY like to see some advancements in the performance department for the Challenger in its next generation, without sacrificing what makes it so loved in its current incarnation. And if they have to be special options in the upper echelon of the lineup to keep costs down in the more common models, so be it.

What do you all think?
I Respectfully disagree about the engine part. While a Coyote is a Great engine (and loves to be modded and also takes well to said mods), being an DOHC motor, takes quite a bit of the "can be worked on at home" mentality out of it. That;s what I don't like about the Coyote.

The pushrod motors are easy to work on and are time proven. Both the Hemi and the GM LS (and newer LT) motors are just as good and possibly better than the Ford because I feel comfortable working on either one. They both put out just as much (392 Hemi puts out even more than both) and are the antiquated design that you speak of.

By the way, GM's respond to mods as good as or better than the Coyote's do and I'd bet you a dollar that it's easier to change a cam in a Hemi or LS than it is to change a set in a Coyote/Voodoo setup. Please don't get me started on tuning them! :D

The downside to the Hemi is that their engine blocks are stone age compared to the LS or Coyote. The iron blocks have their place for strength, but both Ford and GM have figured out how to get block strength out of aluminum. If Dodge used an alloy block, they could take a couple hundred pounds both off the total weight of the Challenger and also some weight off of the front end. Just a thought.

On to the 10 speed GM/Ford trans.........That transmission makes our feel like an old school slush box (and our HP70 8 speed is a good trans).

We have the 8 speed in Ruby and it's a Great transmission, but the adaptive piece of the puzzle basically stinks! It gets used to how I drive (which changes quite often) and tells the trans that is how it should shift. I don't mind resetting the adaptives with a fuse pull, but don't want to do that every time that I drive. After having driven my friends 2017 ZL1 with the 10 speed in it, I have to say that the GM/Ford collaboration works. That trans shifts as quickly as any transmission that I've ever driven and the shift points are on the money.

I don't want to come across as a Dodge hater because I Absolutely Love our SRT 392, but is she perfect....No, but no car is and her flaws are pretty easily forgotten once I start her up and start rolling down the road!

Now, if Dodge would put a switch to turn off the MDS mode, then the other issues wouldn't matter to me as much, but that a whole different thread! :D

I do agree with you on the Magnetic ride though. It's a Nice setup and would be welcomed on our cars!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
955 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
No, I'm not talking about sales numbers. I'm not talking about looks either, I'd hate for the Challenger to get the Camaro treatment (I seem to be one of the only people who likes the 2015+ Mustangs?), even though I would like to see a very slightly downsized and significantly lightened version on the new Alfa platform while keeping its traditional lines and looks, something between the sizes of the original E-body and the current Mercedes-based platform.

No, what I'm talking about is engineering and technology. FCA is getting killed by Ford and Chevy in that department (except for the UConnect system).

Read all about the technology and extra performance features that comes in the GT350 for less than a Hellcat (unless you get the R version) and close to the same price as an SRT392:

https://www.caranddriver.com/review...and-transmission-review-car-and-driver-page-2

And as much as I like the simplicity and heritage of a pushrod, single cam Hemi V8, it seems like it's becoming outdated and outperformed by DOHC 32 valve V8's like the Ford Coyote and Voodoo engines (is there any reason those engine designs can't be modified and upsized to 392 or 426 cubes?). Sure we have the Hellcat and Demon engines, but those freaking Coyotes respond REALLY well to mods, especially FI.

GM's Alpha platform (especially with the 1LE package) is one of the best in the world, arguably the best among American manufacturers, so far as handling goes without getting into supercar or Corvette/Viper territory.

Both manufacturers offer MagnaRide shock setups, which is, as far as I know, superior to the magnetic suspension setup in the SRT's.

I love that the Challenger is the last of the true muscle cars. I know that it handles surprisingly well for being such an aged platform, and for its size and weight, and can be made to handle extremely well within certain limits. I love that it's a lot more comfortable and usable than the Mustang and Camaro, which are just two seat sports cars for all intents and purposes. It has the best looking interior on my opinion. It has a great manual transmission and an extremely good automatic, I think the ZF 8 speed is superior to the Chevy 8 speed and the Chevy/Ford developed 10 speed.

But, I would REALLY like to see some advancements in the performance department for the Challenger in its next generation, without sacrificing what makes it so loved in its current incarnation. And if they have to be special options in the upper echelon of the lineup to keep costs down in the more common models, so be it.

What do you all think?
I Respectfully disagree about the engine part. While a Coyote is a Great engine (and loves to be modded and also takes well to said mods), being an DOHC motor, takes quite a bit of the "can be worked on at home" mentality out of it. That;s what I don't like about the Coyote.

The pushrod motors are easy to work on and are time proven. Both the Hemi and the GM LS (and newer LT) motors are just as good and possibly better than the Ford because I feel comfortable working on either one. They both put out just as much (392 Hemi puts out even more than both) and are the antiquated design that you speak of.

By the way, GM's respond to mods as good as or better than the Coyote's do and I'd bet you a dollar that it's easier to change a cam in a Hemi or LS than it is to change a set in a Coyote/Voodoo setup. Please don't get me started on tuning them! <img src="http://www.challengertalk.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Big Grin" class="inlineimg" />

The downside to the Hemi is that their engine blocks are stone age compared to the LS or Coyote. The iron blocks have their place for strength, but both Ford and GM have figured out how to get block strength out of aluminum. If Dodge used an alloy block, they could take a couple hundred pounds both off the total weight of the Challenger and also some weight off of the front end. Just a thought.

On to the 10 speed GM/Ford trans.........That transmission makes our feel like an old school slush box (and our HP70 8 speed is a good trans).

We have the 8 speed in Ruby and it's a Great transmission, but the adaptive piece of the puzzle basically stinks! It gets used to how I drive (which changes quite often) and tells the trans that is how it should shift. I don't mind resetting the adaptives with a fuse pull, but don't want to do that every time that I drive. After having driven my friends 2017 ZL1 with the 10 speed in it, I have to say that the GM/Ford collaboration works. That trans shifts as quickly as any transmission that I've ever driven and the shift points are on the money.

I don't want to come across as a Dodge hater because I Absolutely Love our SRT 392, but is she perfect....No, but no car is and her flaws are pretty easily forgotten once I start her up and start rolling down the road!

Now, if Dodge would put a switch to turn off the MDS mode, then the other issues wouldn't matter to me as much, but that a whole different thread! <img src="http://www.challengertalk.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Big Grin" class="inlineimg" />

I do agree with you on the Magnetic ride though. It's a Nice setup and would be welcomed on our cars!
Good points about tuning and ease of working on the engine. I too would also really like to see an alloy block, would really help in weight savings along with the lighter/slightly smaller platform.

Damn, really? I drove a Scat Pack with the 8 speed and didn't think it was possible for an auto to get any better without some dual clutch design...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
955 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Also, can Dodge PLEASE give us a PCM that's unlocked and tunable from the factory?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,732 Posts
I do agree with you on the Magnetic ride though. It's a Nice setup and would be welcomed on our cars!
Dodge already offers an adaptive suspension on SRTs. Although it isn’t as high-tech as GM’s, it’s a great suspension.

I owned two SRT 392s before my current Scat Pack and that’s the one thing I miss. I wish FCA made it available on non-SRTs.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,330 Posts
You bring up some good points. I've never been a huge fan of direct injection (I don't know how it's any real improvement over using fuel rails and sequential multi-port?),
The Chevy I had with DI was their 5.3 with a six speed. The six speed was not bad. Hunted around for a gear less then other more obnoxious trans I've had. But our 8 speed is far, far better. The 5.3, 355 hp I actually liked better than the 5.7's I've had. The power was more evenly applied for smoother acceleration and it got 2-3 more mpg then the 5.7. So DI is an improvement in drive ability but without fixing the carbon build up problem I'll never buy another DI engine unless it's been updated with that auxiliary port injector. I was on a GM forum back then and one guy pulled the intake manifold off his 5.3 with only 30,000 miles on it. There was so much carbon built up, I don't know how any air was getting by. He had pictures online. Now those are engines you REALLY need a catch can on. Elite even made a dual can setup for them since their intake has two lines. I think it's BMW and Volvo have valve cleaning as a 30k service item. They have to remove the intake manifold and blast the carbon off with crushed walnut shells. DI was rushed into the market before they thought it through enough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,177 Posts
I keep hearing about how the DOHC V8s are so much more technologically advanced than pushrods, but I just don't see that much advantage to them. Sure it almost has the power of an engine with 1.4 liters more displacement or whatever, but where is the fuel economy of such a smaller engine? As per fueleconomy.gov, the 2018 Mustang GT 5.0 automatic gets 16 city, 25 highway. Challenger 6.4L automatic gets 15 city, 25 highway. And the Challenger is heavier. Now I know a common argument is that fuel economy doesn't matter in muscle cars, but that would be the one advantage to smaller displacement and it's just not there. Not to the extent you'd expect. The only difference is that your cylinder heads are wider, you have more valvetrain up high, and more timing chains to worry about. It's a matter of opinion I'm sure, but I'll take the Hemi. Our engines are excellent, and so are our transmission choices.

Now I will agree about platform. GM's Alpha body is that good. We have something similar in FCA, the Giorgio platform under the Alfa Giulia. I really hope we see it get put to use in a V8 Mopar. It would be a shame and probably a losing investment otherwise if it stays limited to Alfa Romeo. The Giulia Quadrifoglio did the Nurburgring in 7:32. Imagine how sweet that platform would be with a Hemi under the hood, Mopar bodylines, and dimensions similar to the original Challengers....*wipes drool*
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
955 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I keep hearing about how the DOHC V8s are so much more technologically advanced than pushrods, but I just don't see that much advantage to them. Sure it almost has the power of an engine with 1.4 liters more displacement or whatever, but where is the fuel economy of such a smaller engine? As per fueleconomy.gov, the 2018 Mustang GT 5.0 automatic gets 16 city, 25 highway. Challenger 6.4L automatic gets 15 city, 25 highway. And the Challenger is heavier. Now I know a common argument is that fuel economy doesn't matter in muscle cars, but that would be the one advantage to smaller displacement and it's just not there. Not to the extent you'd expect. The only difference is that your cylinder heads are wider, you have more valvetrain up high, and more timing chains to worry about. It's a matter of opinion I'm sure, but I'll take the Hemi. Are engines are excellent, and so are our transmission choices.

Now I will agree about platform. GM's Alpha body is that good. We have something similar in FCA, the Giorgio platform under the Alfa Giulia. I really hope we see it get put to use in a V8 Mopar. It would be a shame and probably a losing investment otherwise if it stays limited to Alfa Romeo. The Giulia Quadrifoglio did the Nurburgring in 7:32. Imagine how sweet that platform would be with a Hemi under the hood, Mopar bodylines, and dimensions similar to the original Challengers....*wipes drool*
Also good points. And yes, that is *exactly* what I want to see the next incarnation of the Challenger become
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
955 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
You bring up some good points. I've never been a huge fan of direct injection (I don't know how it's any real improvement over using fuel rails and sequential multi-port?),
The Chevy I had with DI was their 5.3 with a six speed. The six speed was not bad. Hunted around for a gear less then other more obnoxious trans I've had. But our 8 speed is far, far better. The 5.3, 355 hp I actually liked better than the 5.7's I've had. The power was more evenly applied for smoother acceleration and it got 2-3 more mpg then the 5.7. So DI is an improvement in drive ability but without fixing the carbon build up problem I'll never buy another DI engine unless it's been updated with that auxiliary port injector. I was on a GM forum back then and one guy pulled the intake manifold off his 5.3 with only 30,000 miles on it. There was so much carbon built up, I don't know how any air was getting by. He had pictures online. Now those are engines you REALLY need a catch can on. Elite even made a dual can setup for them since their intake has two lines. I think it's BMW and Volvo have valve cleaning as a 30k service item. They have to remove the intake manifold and blast the carbon off with crushed walnut shells. DI was rushed into the market before they thought it through enough.
That's insane, you'd think the auxillary port would just become standard practice for DI at this point. Hopefully Chrysler pays attention if they go that route.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,177 Posts
I don't think they have been. The new 2.0L eTorque/Hurricane GME turbo 4 (Found in Jeeps and Alfa Romeos) has direct injection, without the port injection.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
955 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I don't think they have been. The new 2.0L eTorque/Hurricane GME turbo 4 (Found in Jeeps and Alfa Romeos) has direct injection, without the port injection.
Well that's disappointing. Hopefully they stick with SMPI for the Hemis.

I wonder though, if they do learn in time, if we'll see a DI 426 Hemi made of an aluminum block? If the 5.7 or 6.4 has to be sacrificed to make that possible, so be it...the weight savings and better fuel economy simply due to the engine design may help them meet CAFE standards
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,669 Posts
I guess that I may be, and think differently than a lot of other folks.


Since day one of my first Challenger, I knew that there were others out there with higher tech engines, and whatever else. Technology and advancements in them, are a good thing, sometimes.............and sometimes not.


The Challenger has advanced in may ways since its' initial release, though maybe not as "radical" as other makes. That's just fine with me.


Don't get me wrong, I admire good technology, but with the Challenger, I'm perfectly happy with letting others pass it up with technology that is "better".


I like the FCA formula. More CI's, A8's, and if that's not powerful enough, then there's two choices of engines with FI.


With the looks, room, ride, and CI's, I'm totally content with the technology that FCA has in it's present line up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,177 Posts
Certainly can't argue the looks. The Challenger nailed it and has become timeless, despite being true to the '70s. The Camaro and Mustang looks keep getting refreshed and redesigned every 2 or 3 years because they keep failing to get it right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FreddyG

·
Registered
2015 SRT 392
Joined
·
3,140 Posts
Dodge already offers an adaptive suspension on SRTs. Although it isn’t as high-tech as GM’s, it’s a great suspension.

I owned two SRT 392s before my current Scat Pack and that’s the one thing I miss. I wish FCA made it available on non-SRTs.
It's not in the same league as the GM stuff. The GM stuff adapts as you drive, while the Dodge stuff is change the setting and you get what you got. Soft, Medium and Firm for the Dodge and pretty much change as you drive for the GM (always adjusting).

Like I said, not knocking Dodge, just stating facts.

I keep hearing about how the DOHC V8s are so much more technologically advanced than pushrods, but I just don't see that much advantage to them. Sure it almost has the power of an engine with 1.4 liters more displacement or whatever, but where is the fuel economy of such a smaller engine? As per fueleconomy.gov, the 2018 Mustang GT 5.0 automatic gets 16 city, 25 highway. Challenger 6.4L automatic gets 15 city, 25 highway. And the Challenger is heavier. Now I know a common argument is that fuel economy doesn't matter in muscle cars, but that would be the one advantage to smaller displacement and it's just not there. Not to the extent you'd expect. The only difference is that your cylinder heads are wider, you have more valvetrain up high, and more timing chains to worry about. It's a matter of opinion I'm sure, but I'll take the Hemi. Our engines are excellent, and so are our transmission choices.

Now I will agree about platform. GM's Alpha body is that good. We have something similar in FCA, the Giorgio platform under the Alfa Giulia. I really hope we see it get put to use in a V8 Mopar. It would be a shame and probably a losing investment otherwise if it stays limited to Alfa Romeo. The Giulia Quadrifoglio did the Nurburgring in 7:32. Imagine how sweet that platform would be with a Hemi under the hood, Mopar bodylines, and dimensions similar to the original Challengers....*wipes drool*
Well put! :cheers:

That Giulia is a Special car and that Quadrafoglio is out of my price range, but it does pretty much everything well! They are a Wicked sounding engine to at WOT too :).

The Quadrafoglio TT V6 in an SRT wouldn't make me sad! :D

The base Ti Sport is a Really Nice car too though and at a decent price point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
955 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Here's a thought, why not give the new Challenger an option for independent rear suspension along with factory fixes for wheelhop? More power and less weight along with MagnaRide adaptive shocks should more than compensate for the disadvantage that IRS cars have straight off the line.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,130 Posts
As far as tech. Keep it simple as possible. I bought my 12 SRT just because I didn't want those ugly rear sensors on the back..thats how old school I am. I don't even know how some of you guys drive around with the newer radio shack speaker on the front grill that helps you brake. It is almost embarrassing to tell someone you have that in a Sprot - Muscle car with that on.
We almost crashed in my buddies Charger on the highway when the car braked for us. That radio shack speaker has to be Dodges all time worst design features.

I drove the 4 door Porsche sedan last weekend. It would turn the wheel for me,inflate the seats when I leaned forward, braked when I didn't want to, blew cold air in my face because it thought i was hot. This folks are for lawyers and accountants..not for us.
The modern tech stuff is not for me. Give me a hot looking car, a big motor and and a stick and thats all I really need in a muscle car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
955 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
As far as tech. Keep it simple as possible. I bought my 12 SRT just because I didn't want those ugly rear sensors on the back..thats how old school I am. I don't even know how some of you guys drive around with the newer radio shack speaker on the front grill that helps you brake. It is almost embarrassing to tell someone you have that in a Sprot - Muscle car with that on.
We almost crashed in my buddies Charger on the highway when the car braked for us. That radio shack speaker has to be Dodges all time worst design features.

I drove the 4 door Porsche sedan last weekend. It would turn the wheel for me,inflate the seats when I leaned forward, braked when I didn't want to, blew cold air in my face because it thought i was hot. This folks are for lawyers and accountants..not for us.
The modern tech stuff is not for me. Give me a hot looking car, a big motor and and a stick and thats all I really need in a muscle car.
I'm not into any of those unnecessary features, just more stuff to break. I just wanted updated tech so far as performance and handling goes. The Challenger is already more than adequately equipped with gadgets as it sits.
 
1 - 20 of 148 Posts
Top