User Panel
Posted: 6/17/2011 1:50:37 PM EDT
Dodge really didn't have it together for the last charger. It had nearly as bad of a ride as my 1972 Challenger with polyurethane suspension bushings, and a ton of road noise.
The new one though, rocks. They have actually built a car that is on par with what they are asking for it. Great power, great fit & finish, and an excellent ride. As Top Gear says, some cars have an "X Factor" that makes them great on top of the normal qualifiers, and the new Charger is full of X Factor. If I were looking for a new 4 door car, that would be my front runner. |
|
Any idea what AWD system they use?
Hopefully they're not still using the Mercedes parts like they did in my Chrysler product... |
|
Quoted:
Any idea what AWD system they use? Hopefully they're not still using the Mercedes parts like they did in my Chrysler product... No idea. |
|
From my understanding they did a lot to eliminate cabin noise, how is it compared to the last generation?
I considered the last gen to be pretty loud inside. |
|
if they weren't such heavy pigs i'd like them.
although i do love to pick on the srt8 guys. the look on their face when they get dusted by a little blue 4 door rice burner is teh bestest |
|
Quoted:
From my understanding they did a lot to eliminate cabin noise, how is it compared to the last generation? I considered the last gen to be pretty loud inside. Not as quiet as a lexus, but very close. The last ones were horribly noisy. |
|
Quoted:
Still too heavy with poor handling. and engine made in mexico |
|
If they took the Challenger, shaved off 500-1000 lb, gave it AWD with a modern/better V8 engine, it'd be one heck of a car.
|
|
yea, because F1, nascar, and other top racing classes all think AWD rocks! they all use it...........
Theres a reason AWD is not used by them. (was tested with though) |
|
Quoted:
if they weren't such heavy pigs i'd like them. although i do love to pick on the srt8 guys. the look on their face when they get dusted by a little blue 4 door rice burner is teh bestest Totally. I love eating the GTO / Cobra / SS guys the most, though. "You have twice the number of cylinders, half the number of doors, and your car is designed to be fast when going in a straight line. Why is your car so much slower than mine?" |
|
Quoted: yea, because F1, nascar, and other top racing classes all think AWD rocks! they all use it........... Theres a reason AWD is not used by them. (was tested with though) AWD is so bad that Porsche, Lamborghini, Bugatti, Audi, and Ferrari don't use it. Oh wait, they do have production AWD models. Let's not forget WRC. It's not to say you couldn't rally with RWD or FWD, but AWD has its merits. The new Cadillac CTS-V Coupe is even available with an optional AWD with its 550+ hp V8 engine. NASCAR still uses 4-bbl carburetors, live axle rear end with a Ford 9" unit, and MSD ignition. NASCAR is low-tech for a reason. Formula 1 banned a lot of stuff, I'm pretty sure AWD is one of these items. MotoGP even banned automated manual transmissions, but they're used in many other racing leagues. Just because Formula 1 doesn't have a certain technology doesn't mean it is crap - it just means there is a reason, either regulatory or it isn't needed. Bottom line up front: FWD can only handle so much power before it is uncompetitive in a road course. Many production FWD cars have about 300 hp and change, and that is about all they can handle even with black magic tricks. RWD cars can handle lots more power, but they too become squirrely without insane designs. Formula 1 takes advantage of aerodynamics for downforce, along with engine braking, etc... I'm sure you know that just by letting off the throttle (not downshifting or touching the brakes), the braking g-force is the equivalent to slamming hard on the brakes of a production sports car? Factor in a good AWD system, and you can distribute the power to 4 wheels. This makes a high performance sports car very user friendly, rather than become oversteer-friendly. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
yea, because F1, nascar, and other top racing classes all think AWD rocks! they all use it........... Theres a reason AWD is not used by them. (was tested with though) AWD is so bad that Porsche, Lamborghini, Bugatti, Audi, and Ferrari don't use it. Oh wait, they do have production AWD models. Let's not forget WRC. It's not to say you couldn't rally with RWD or FWD, but AWD has its merits. The new Cadillac CTS-V Coupe is even available with an optional AWD with its 550+ hp V8 engine. NASCAR still uses 4-bbl carburetors, live axle rear end with a Ford 9" unit, and MSD ignition. NASCAR is low-tech for a reason. Formula 1 banned a lot of stuff, I'm pretty sure AWD is one of these items. MotoGP even banned automated manual transmissions, but they're used in many other racing leagues. Just because Formula 1 doesn't have a certain technology doesn't mean it is crap - it just means there is a reason, either regulatory or it isn't needed. Bottom line up front: FWD can only handle so much power before it is uncompetitive in a road course. Many production FWD cars have about 300 hp and change, and that is about all they can handle even with black magic tricks. RWD cars can handle lots more power, but they too become squirrely without insane designs. Formula 1 takes advantage of aerodynamics for downforce, along with engine braking, etc... I'm sure you know that just by letting off the throttle (not downshifting or touching the brakes), the braking g-force is the equivalent to slamming hard on the brakes of a production sports car? Factor in a good AWD system, and you can distribute the power to 4 wheels. This makes a high performance sports car very user friendly, rather than become oversteer-friendly. I'm glad you posted this. I saw his post and was going to type up something similar, but you saved me the trouble. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
yea, because F1, nascar, and other top racing classes all think AWD rocks! they all use it........... Theres a reason AWD is not used by them. (was tested with though) AWD is so bad that Porsche, Lamborghini, Bugatti, Audi, and Ferrari don't use it. Oh wait, they do have production AWD models. Let's not forget WRC. It's not to say you couldn't rally with RWD or FWD, but AWD has its merits. The new Cadillac CTS-V Coupe is even available with an optional AWD with its 550+ hp V8 engine. NASCAR still uses 4-bbl carburetors, live axle rear end with a Ford 9" unit, and MSD ignition. NASCAR is low-tech for a reason. Formula 1 banned a lot of stuff, I'm pretty sure AWD is one of these items. MotoGP even banned automated manual transmissions, but they're used in many other racing leagues. Just because Formula 1 doesn't have a certain technology doesn't mean it is crap - it just means there is a reason, either regulatory or it isn't needed. Bottom line up front: FWD can only handle so much power before it is uncompetitive in a road course. Many production FWD cars have about 300 hp and change, and that is about all they can handle even with black magic tricks. RWD cars can handle lots more power, but they too become squirrely without insane designs. Formula 1 takes advantage of aerodynamics for downforce, along with engine braking, etc... I'm sure you know that just by letting off the throttle (not downshifting or touching the brakes), the braking g-force is the equivalent to slamming hard on the brakes of a production sports car? Factor in a good AWD system, and you can distribute the power to 4 wheels. This makes a high performance sports car very user friendly, rather than become oversteer-friendly. I'm glad you posted this. I saw his post and was going to type up something similar, but you saved me the trouble. I think you guys are missing the point of the car. It isn't a Lambo or a Porsche, its a fun full size four door american car. Its just supposed to be fun, its supposed to do all the things a Malibu or Crown Vic does, only look a little cooler doing it. And the AWD is nice in Colorado. |
|
Quoted:
The new Cadillac CTS-V Coupe is even available with an optional AWD with its 550+ hp V8 engine. I don't think so. I just bought a new one and that was never on any options list I saw. You can get the V6 CTS (non-v) with AWD however. PS: I would have bought it in a hearbeat if it was available. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: yea, because F1, nascar, and other top racing classes all think AWD rocks! they all use it........... Theres a reason AWD is not used by them. (was tested with though) AWD is so bad that Porsche, Lamborghini, Bugatti, Audi, and Ferrari don't use it. Oh wait, they do have production AWD models. Let's not forget WRC. It's not to say you couldn't rally with RWD or FWD, but AWD has its merits. The new Cadillac CTS-V Coupe is even available with an optional AWD with its 550+ hp V8 engine. NASCAR still uses 4-bbl carburetors, live axle rear end with a Ford 9" unit, and MSD ignition. NASCAR is low-tech for a reason. Formula 1 banned a lot of stuff, I'm pretty sure AWD is one of these items. MotoGP even banned automated manual transmissions, but they're used in many other racing leagues. Just because Formula 1 doesn't have a certain technology doesn't mean it is crap - it just means there is a reason, either regulatory or it isn't needed. Bottom line up front: FWD can only handle so much power before it is uncompetitive in a road course. Many production FWD cars have about 300 hp and change, and that is about all they can handle even with black magic tricks. RWD cars can handle lots more power, but they too become squirrely without insane designs. Formula 1 takes advantage of aerodynamics for downforce, along with engine braking, etc... I'm sure you know that just by letting off the throttle (not downshifting or touching the brakes), the braking g-force is the equivalent to slamming hard on the brakes of a production sports car? Factor in a good AWD system, and you can distribute the power to 4 wheels. This makes a high performance sports car very user friendly, rather than become oversteer-friendly. I'm glad you posted this. I saw his post and was going to type up something similar, but you saved me the trouble. Same here. I love to point out that Nascar still uses carbs. The height of technology they say... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
yea, because F1, nascar, and other top racing classes all think AWD rocks! they all use it........... Theres a reason AWD is not used by them. (was tested with though) AWD is so bad that Porsche, Lamborghini, Bugatti, Audi, and Ferrari don't use it. Oh wait, they do have production AWD models. Let's not forget WRC. It's not to say you couldn't rally with RWD or FWD, but AWD has its merits. The new Cadillac CTS-V Coupe is even available with an optional AWD with its 550+ hp V8 engine. NASCAR still uses 4-bbl carburetors, live axle rear end with a Ford 9" unit, and MSD ignition. NASCAR is low-tech for a reason. Formula 1 banned a lot of stuff, I'm pretty sure AWD is one of these items. MotoGP even banned automated manual transmissions, but they're used in many other racing leagues. Just because Formula 1 doesn't have a certain technology doesn't mean it is crap - it just means there is a reason, either regulatory or it isn't needed. Bottom line up front: FWD can only handle so much power before it is uncompetitive in a road course. Many production FWD cars have about 300 hp and change, and that is about all they can handle even with black magic tricks. RWD cars can handle lots more power, but they too become squirrely without insane designs. Formula 1 takes advantage of aerodynamics for downforce, along with engine braking, etc... I'm sure you know that just by letting off the throttle (not downshifting or touching the brakes), the braking g-force is the equivalent to slamming hard on the brakes of a production sports car? Factor in a good AWD system, and you can distribute the power to 4 wheels. This makes a high performance sports car very user friendly, rather than become oversteer-friendly. I'm glad you posted this. I saw his post and was going to type up something similar, but you saved me the trouble. Fastest production car in the world, (bugatti) is an AWD drive system. Its still strongly biased to the rear (70%). if its biased that much to the rear, how much is that 30% really helping vs increasing weight and maintenance. and BLAH BLAH BLAH with your AWD is king current train of thought. we are going to see FWD cars start going away in favor of AWD and even more so RWD. FWD was originally developed to save weight and EPA stuff. also lamborghini does not produce a single interesting sports car and shouldnt be mentioned with Ferrari and bugatti. Porche is also meh, however they do produce some very nice cars. vette ZR1 is RWD and kills most cars 2-3 times more expensive. |
|
Quoted:
yea, because F1, nascar, and other top racing classes all think AWD rocks! they all use it........... Theres a reason AWD is not used by them. (was tested with though) Yes, it's called the rules. And if you want to try and argue, I'd be happy to provide relevant links in the rule books to all of those series where AWD is specifically banned. Fact: When not specifically banned, AWD (outside of severely power-restricted classes) is dominant unless handicapped with other penalties, such as weight. Edit: And FWD haters make me rage. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: yea, because F1, nascar, and other top racing classes all think AWD rocks! they all use it........... Theres a reason AWD is not used by them. (was tested with though) Yes, it's called the rules. And if you want to try and argue, I'd be happy to provide relevant links in the rule books to all of those series where AWD is specifically banned. Fact: When not specifically banned, AWD (outside of severely power-restricted classes) is dominant unless handicapped with other penalties, such as weight. Edit: And FWD haters make me rage. Someone must be the guy to come out of left field. At least it isn't you or I. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: yea, because F1, nascar, and other top racing classes all think AWD rocks! they all use it........... Theres a reason AWD is not used by them. (was tested with though) AWD is so bad that Porsche, Lamborghini, Bugatti, Audi, and Ferrari don't use it. Oh wait, they do have production AWD models. Let's not forget WRC. It's not to say you couldn't rally with RWD or FWD, but AWD has its merits. The new Cadillac CTS-V Coupe is even available with an optional AWD with its 550+ hp V8 engine. NASCAR still uses 4-bbl carburetors, live axle rear end with a Ford 9" unit, and MSD ignition. NASCAR is low-tech for a reason. Formula 1 banned a lot of stuff, I'm pretty sure AWD is one of these items. MotoGP even banned automated manual transmissions, but they're used in many other racing leagues. Just because Formula 1 doesn't have a certain technology doesn't mean it is crap - it just means there is a reason, either regulatory or it isn't needed. Bottom line up front: FWD can only handle so much power before it is uncompetitive in a road course. Many production FWD cars have about 300 hp and change, and that is about all they can handle even with black magic tricks. RWD cars can handle lots more power, but they too become squirrely without insane designs. Formula 1 takes advantage of aerodynamics for downforce, along with engine braking, etc... I'm sure you know that just by letting off the throttle (not downshifting or touching the brakes), the braking g-force is the equivalent to slamming hard on the brakes of a production sports car? Factor in a good AWD system, and you can distribute the power to 4 wheels. This makes a high performance sports car very user friendly, rather than become oversteer-friendly. I'm glad you posted this. I saw his post and was going to type up something similar, but you saved me the trouble. Same here. I love to point out that Nascar still uses carbs. The height of technology they say... Nascar goes fuel injection in 2012. |
|
The Charger was FAIL when it came with 4 fuckin doors.. WTF Dodge!!!
|
|
Quoted:
Fastest production car in the world, (bugatti) is an AWD drive system. Its still strongly biased to the rear (70%). if its biased that much to the rear, how much is that 30% really helping vs increasing weight and maintenance. Obviously it helps enough that they can chose to put it on the no holds bar million dollar hot rod. A platform which was a true no holds barred car. I have driven all drive types and in my opinion AWD is a hands down winner. Especially if any kind of limited traction is a factor which is common at high speed. ************************************** Disclaimer, my opinion is worth what you paid for it |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: yea, because F1, nascar, and other top racing classes all think AWD rocks! they all use it........... Theres a reason AWD is not used by them. (was tested with though) AWD is so bad that Porsche, Lamborghini, Bugatti, Audi, and Ferrari don't use it. Oh wait, they do have production AWD models. Let's not forget WRC. It's not to say you couldn't rally with RWD or FWD, but AWD has its merits. The new Cadillac CTS-V Coupe is even available with an optional AWD with its 550+ hp V8 engine. NASCAR still uses 4-bbl carburetors, live axle rear end with a Ford 9" unit, and MSD ignition. NASCAR is low-tech for a reason. Formula 1 banned a lot of stuff, I'm pretty sure AWD is one of these items. MotoGP even banned automated manual transmissions, but they're used in many other racing leagues. Just because Formula 1 doesn't have a certain technology doesn't mean it is crap - it just means there is a reason, either regulatory or it isn't needed. Bottom line up front: FWD can only handle so much power before it is uncompetitive in a road course. Many production FWD cars have about 300 hp and change, and that is about all they can handle even with black magic tricks. RWD cars can handle lots more power, but they too become squirrely without insane designs. Formula 1 takes advantage of aerodynamics for downforce, along with engine braking, etc... I'm sure you know that just by letting off the throttle (not downshifting or touching the brakes), the braking g-force is the equivalent to slamming hard on the brakes of a production sports car? Factor in a good AWD system, and you can distribute the power to 4 wheels. This makes a high performance sports car very user friendly, rather than become oversteer-friendly. I'm glad you posted this. I saw his post and was going to type up something similar, but you saved me the trouble. Same here. I love to point out that Nascar still uses carbs. The height of technology they say... Nascar goes fuel injection in 2012. On behalf of myself and the citizens of 1985, I welcome them into the world of EFI. In all seriousness, they aren't making them TBI or something idiotic like that are they?
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: yea, because F1, nascar, and other top racing classes all think AWD rocks! they all use it........... Theres a reason AWD is not used by them. (was tested with though) AWD is so bad that Porsche, Lamborghini, Bugatti, Audi, and Ferrari don't use it. Oh wait, they do have production AWD models. Let's not forget WRC. It's not to say you couldn't rally with RWD or FWD, but AWD has its merits. The new Cadillac CTS-V Coupe is even available with an optional AWD with its 550+ hp V8 engine. NASCAR still uses 4-bbl carburetors, live axle rear end with a Ford 9" unit, and MSD ignition. NASCAR is low-tech for a reason. Formula 1 banned a lot of stuff, I'm pretty sure AWD is one of these items. MotoGP even banned automated manual transmissions, but they're used in many other racing leagues. Just because Formula 1 doesn't have a certain technology doesn't mean it is crap - it just means there is a reason, either regulatory or it isn't needed. Bottom line up front: FWD can only handle so much power before it is uncompetitive in a road course. Many production FWD cars have about 300 hp and change, and that is about all they can handle even with black magic tricks. RWD cars can handle lots more power, but they too become squirrely without insane designs. Formula 1 takes advantage of aerodynamics for downforce, along with engine braking, etc... I'm sure you know that just by letting off the throttle (not downshifting or touching the brakes), the braking g-force is the equivalent to slamming hard on the brakes of a production sports car? Factor in a good AWD system, and you can distribute the power to 4 wheels. This makes a high performance sports car very user friendly, rather than become oversteer-friendly. I'm glad you posted this. I saw his post and was going to type up something similar, but you saved me the trouble. Same here. I love to point out that Nascar still uses carbs. The height of technology they say... Nascar goes fuel injection in 2012. On behalf of myself and the citizens of 1985, I welcome them into the world of EFI. In all seriousness, they aren't making them TBI or something idiotic like that are they? |
|
Well, at least there will be 8 injectors. With the push rods and distributor those guys are still making me feel high tech with my 86' Dodge Omni though. More power to them; literally.
|
|
We just purchased a V6. First car I have ever owned. As a long time Dodge owner, I kept my trap shut during the process and let her pick her car. After driving comparable vehicles, I must say this one is the nicest of the bunch. Time will tell how it holds together though.
After driving the hemi and the V6, the hemi would be a trouble maker. The V6 has plenty enough power for us. |
|
My dad just got the awd hemi. He really to enjoy it, and it seems to fit him well. He hated how the old one drove, but is really impressed with this one so far.
|
|
Quoted:
The Charger was FAIL when it came with 4 fuckin doors.. WTF Dodge!!! Yep. What were they thinking? Might as well put a screen door on a submarine for Pete's sake. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Charger was FAIL when it came with 4 fuckin doors.. WTF Dodge!!! Yep. What were they thinking? Might as well put a screen door on a submarine for Pete's sake. True, but the Challenger currently occupies that section of the market for Dodge. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Charger was FAIL when it came with 4 fuckin doors.. WTF Dodge!!! Yep. What were they thinking? Might as well put a screen door on a submarine for Pete's sake. True, but the Challenger currently occupies that section of the market for Dodge. Agreed, but the new Charger preceded the Challenger by a few years, so what gives? |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The Charger was FAIL when it came with 4 fuckin doors.. WTF Dodge!!! Yep. What were they thinking? Might as well put a screen door on a submarine for Pete's sake. True, but the Challenger currently occupies that section of the market for Dodge. Agreed, but the new Charger preceded the Challenger by a few years, so what gives? People gripped about them when they were FWD in the 80's too. I think it's time to let it go... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Charger was FAIL when it came with 4 fuckin doors.. WTF Dodge!!! Yep. What were they thinking? Might as well put a screen door on a submarine for Pete's sake. True, but the Challenger currently occupies that section of the market for Dodge. Agreed, but the new Charger preceded the Challenger by a few years, so what gives? I don't have an answer to that question, but the "re-boot" Charger really looked like a POS up until this year |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Charger was FAIL when it came with 4 fuckin doors.. WTF Dodge!!! Yep. What were they thinking? Might as well put a screen door on a submarine for Pete's sake. True, but the Challenger currently occupies that section of the market for Dodge. Agreed, but the new Charger preceded the Challenger by a few years, so what gives? I don't have an answer to that question, but the "re-boot" Charger really looked like a POS up until this year I own a classic 1968 Charger... So i will never let it go!!! NEVER!!! ARGGGHH!!!!! |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The Charger was FAIL when it came with 4 fuckin doors.. WTF Dodge!!! Yep. What were they thinking? Might as well put a screen door on a submarine for Pete's sake. True, but the Challenger currently occupies that section of the market for Dodge. Agreed, but the new Charger preceded the Challenger by a few years, so what gives? I don't have an answer to that question, but the "re-boot" Charger really looked like a POS up until this year I own a classic 1968 Charger... So i will never let it go!!! NEVER!!! ARGGGHH!!!!! Just be nice to the Turbo Mopar owners. We're people too. |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.