Seeking WF's opinion on buying a new car

I'm looking at the Dodge Charger.

First, what does everyone think of Dodge vehicles in general?

Second, what does everyone think of the 2008 Dodge Charger specifically?

I'm thinking of getting the Charger SLX, which is the 3.5 liter V6 version.

Does 2.7 vs. 3.5 liter make that much difference? It's not that big a price difference, I'd like as much power as possible without having to spend the money for the HEMI V8 version.

Dodge offers the lifetime powertrain warranty, and the standard 3-year, 36,000 mile factory warranty.


I've also looked at the Ford Mustangs, but I'd really like to have a 4-door car, not just a 2-door vehicle.

Any and all opinions and suggestions will be appreciated and repped.

Don't tell my husband Dodge is making Chargers, again ...

That said, got any pictures?

I mean, I can't make a decision if I can't see it. Is it red? I like red.

I don't know about wordforge's opinion on buying a new car, but I can give what I expect to be wordforge's opinion on forum choice with a resounding WHOOOOSH!!!!!!!!!!!

Buy an '82 Ford Pinto.

Then drive backwards at 30 miles an hour into a concrete wall.






There, that should keep this in the Red Room.

http://www.pontiac.com/g8/

Try that. The base 3.6L V6 is so powerful, it replaces most V8s. That, and the car's absolutely gorgeous. We offer a standard ten year warranty, but I doubt you'll ever have to use it, because both the car and the engine are among our mostly highly rated designs and assembled by our best people.

And if you really want it, there's going to be one in manual, with a Corvette V8.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0804_2008_pontiac_g8_vs_2008_dodge_charger

It beats the Charger, no contest.

My step-son has one. He loves it.

That's one of my wife's main criteria too. Is it red, and is it cute?
Hence the red Mini.

Jesus. Don't get me started on the new Charger. Or on Mopar in general right now.

I hate them so much at the moment that I'm seriously considering buying Japanese next time around.

Suffice it to say, a Dodge Charger has two doors. I don't know what I'd call this monstrosity they are claiming is a Charger.

I would never buy a Chrysler product.

You asked for my opinion, and that's it.

Subtle, Flashlight. Very subtle. You're learning.

Anyway, just googled that car. Wow, that's one ugly bitch. But completely befitting for the thread starter: it has no style, doesn't know what it wants to be and it reeks of aggression without further reason.

Here's what my mother drives every day. We bought it new.

The new Dodge Charger is based (like the Dodge Magnum and the Chrysler 300) on the Mercedes-Benz E-Class platform (the W210, which was used from 1995-2002). I've driven it a while ago and it's a really fine car.

Please elaborate, you opinion is appreciated.

When I think of Dodge's, I think of Al Bundy.

Whoosh.

Chris, that's not the actual car. Just a picture of the exact model. Our car has a custom paint job. A creamy yellow.

The first car I can remember is a early 70's model purple colored Charger my father drove. What really makes it so memorable, aside from the color that screamed "PIMPMOBILE," is the way the engine kept catching fire. Growing up I had no idea my father's car was unrepresentative, so I always kind of assumed the Charger to be a tacky death trap on wheels.

Google chrysler engine problems

Well, I was going to point you to my "My Pet Goat (GTO)" thread in The Workshop, or the "Fox Edition Charger" thread I did over at TK, but all the photos are gone from both threads.

Soo... I like coupes. And not some little sports car. I like a big 2 door, along the lines of the Monte Carlo SS, the old-style T-Bird (1990s), or a mid '90's El Dorado coupe I saw a few months back.

So right off the bat, I resent that it is pretty much impossible to get a car like that from an American manufacturer. And to exacerbate that when they actually DO make a decent 2-door, they still manage to fuck it up by offering without the option of a manual transmission (as they did with the Monte Carlo).

Finally, the only thing that pisses me off more than when a firm stops offering a great, classic model as a 2 door (like GM has done with Caddies or the Grand Prix) is when they botch the reintroduction of a classic (like the Pontiac GTO) or bring back a great, classic American muscle car like the Charger [as a four door].

And the coup de gras (no pun intended) is when you go to Dodge's marketing materials and they call this fucking abortion a "Four Door Coupe". You CAN'T have a "four door coupe". By definition a coupe has two doors. So I'd like to see everyone at Chrysler messily killed with a rusty claw hammer.

Because the Charger could be a decent looking car, if they'd done it as a 2 door like they should've. A 2 door would've allowed for a longer hoodline and a longer trunk. Finally, not having to shoehorn a second set of doors on it would've made for a more elegant roofline, window shape, and generally a sleeker, faster, meaner looking car.

Personally, I'd have gone with a more "classic" Charger grille than the Dodge Ram grille that they seem to be throwing on everything, but the grille/headlight assembly is the least of this...thing's...worries.

Years ago, after a bad experience with a Mercury Lynx (Escort) I vowed to never again buy a Ford product. But Ford seems to be the only American company that has any idea how to design a car. The Mustang, which had a rough relaunch back in the early '90s, just keeps getting better and better. You can get it with a manual transmission, and they didn't decide to try and make it into a fucking four door.

No, by definition a coupe has a hardtop and less than 33 cubic feet of cabin space.

Four door coupes are entirely possible, just as two-door sedans are.

Anyway Fox, shut up. Three of these cars are definitely coming to the States within the year, two are almost a lock.

Chevrolet Camaro


Pontiac Solstice Targa


Holden Coupe 60*


Buick Riviera**


Cadillac CTS (CTC?) Coupe



*This will be the next Pontiac GTO. Bob Lutz loves the Holden design team and has stated numerous times he wants another shot at the GTO.

**This depends on Buick dealerships approving the car, which again, given the reduction of their lineup, is almost entirely a lock.

It looks like the Challenger is actually going to happen too. I haven't driven down to a dealership, seen one with a sticker in the window, and kicked the tires, which is still my criteria for "believe it when I see it", but it looks like they will get it into production.

That said, Mopar has been retarded stupid-heads and made the same mistake Chevy did with the Monte Carlo--the bastard is available as an automatic only.

Which brings up...has Chevy learned from past sins? Or will the Bitchin' Camaro be automatic tranny only?

And why is it that every fucking General Motors website is an annoying bandwidth hog, with loud annoying music? [edit: The Camaro site finally loaded and it does, indeed, appear to be available as a manual tranny. ]

Still, I can't help but notice that, even in the "Upcoming Vehicles" section, the Bitchin' Camaro is only listed as "Concept", while everything else lists a 2009 model year, so again, refer to my "kick the tires" rule on future cars.

Next point: As much as I'd love to see a new Riviera, that thing is just fucking ugly. It is God-awful and screams "LOOK AT ME! I'M A CONCEPT CAR! I'M FUTURISTIC!"

The Caddy irks me because I don't like the fastback/hatchback look. In my book a Caddy should have a pronounced trunk.

As far as the GTO, they really didn't learn from the last fiasco, did they? You can't just take an Australian musclecar, slap an iconic American badge on it, and expect people to buy it. If Pontiac wants to do it right they really need to build something from the frame up, basing it on, say, the classic 1968 "Judge" GTO. Instead they'll try to do this on the cheap again and fuck it up again. At least this Holden isn't as totally uninspiring as the last Holden that they tried to pass off as a GTO.

Oh, and I forgot to mention, it would appear that Chris is technically correct. You can have a 4 door coupe. Of course technically you can marry your first cousin in W. Virginia, but I ain't in favor of that either.

And a completely unrelated bit of trivia I read last night (in an article about the $2,000 Indian car): When you buy a GM car, $1,500 of the sticker price goes solely to pay for GM's pension plan and healthcare. Not for steel or plastic. Not for tires or subassemblies. Not for research or design (which may explain why they don't seem to have the capability to actually design a car). Not even for actual labor costs. A grand and a half of the cost of manufacturing every GM car pays for health insurance and retirement.

Well, no. People aren't willing to pay any more for a car just because GM has particularly high health care and pension costs. Price is determined by supply and demand, not the cost of manufacture to individual manufacturers. That money comes out of GM profits; it's not added to the price of the car. That's why car companies prefer to open new plants in Canada these days: much lower costs for employee and retiree health care.

What? Ten years ago maybe.

They make more than we do because their costs/dollar allowed it when their contracts were negotiated. The CAW is shitting bricks right now.

That's because it is a concept car. You need to learn how these things work.

All cars start out as a concept, some are just artistic masturbation or attempts to try out ideas for other cars, others are attempts at corporations to gauge public interest (that's how the Camaro started). That new Riviera might not look exactly the same way, but there's a damn good chance that they'll get a coupe with similar proportions.

They're going to release the concept for the Invicta (a much better name) next month in Beijing. There's a great chance it'll get the green light; Buick dealers are starved for a sporty coupe and they're desperate to cash in on the interest in Buick again.



As for the Caddy, they have to redesign the trunk for exactly the reason you stated (and Federal safety regulations).

Eh. I understand how concept cars work. It is possible, however, that the American auto industry has to reevaluate how the *ahem* concept works.

It is certainly beyond the level of analysis I can bang out here, while avoiding work, but I would submit that the whole idea was to round up a bunch of the press, treat them to food and drink, and then wow them with all kinds of wild, futuristic designs that were never going to see the light of day--whether they were too "out there" or technically not feasible, or just not cost-effective to build--there was virtually nil chance of a concept car getting built.

Oh, maybe they'd add some minor thing--tailfins, or alloy wheels--but the whole idea was to get the press to write in a vague, big picture way about how modern, sexy, and innovative the Big Three were. Ironically, all the smoke and mirrors ran completely contrary to that. If they spent less time showing they were modern, sexy, and innovative and actually spent those resources being modern, sexy, and innovative, that might actually be a better allocation of resources.

They don't show them just to the press. These designs are always introduced at major auto shows, where the public can go and see new designs.

But to what end? Who cares? Is someone going to run out and buy the car they saw at the show? No. Because they can't. The car won't be available for years and years--if ever. What is the point in generating a desire for something you can't buy? It's retarded.

Better to come up with their direction the way normal industry does. If General Mills wants to know if the public wants Chocolate Lucky Charms, they don't spend millions on the Lucky Charms Concept Cereal--with actual hearts, diamonds, and chunks of moon rock--and unveil it at the 2008 Cereal Show. They put together focus groups and find out what the customer wants--and then make it.

Come back to the Caddy again. Someone spend hundreds and hundreds of man hours, finger-fucking some CGI rendering, when Joe Myself can spend 5 seconds looking at it and go "It doesn't have a trunk. Cadillacs have trunks." I mean, if your getting paid tens of thousands of dollars to design Cadillacs, shouldn't you have at least an inkling of what a Cadillac should look like?

I dunno, maybe that's just me.