New Muscle Car Review...Chock Full Of Chargers

[Chris G.]

Just an FYI that the new Muscle Car Review is loaded with Chargers. Without lighting a fire, they do a test between a new Charger and a '70. I gotta say when they are side by side (especially from the back), I am almost thinking like CBill Lizard and Bull.  

They also have the history from 66-74, a sweet white C500, and a great looking bronze '69 (no article). There's more goodies as well. It's worth finding this mag.

[Shakey]

Thanks for the heads up!

[hemi68charger]

..., a sweet white C500, and a great looking bronze '69 (no article). ..

Gotta love those Bronze cars........ 

Troy

[Just 6T9 CHGR]

cant find it locally here......Ill borrow it from ya

[Chris G.]

Here's a few scans.

[Just 6T9 CHGR]

That 69 is the infamous "XP Hemi Charger"

I have that pic on my registry site as well.......
Thanks for the scans

[FastbackJon]

I'll check it out, thanks for the info.

[Charger_Fan]

I like the shot on the cover.

[70charginglizard]

Here's a few scans.

So Chris,

What does the article say about Old School vs 06? Or should I say what do they state to attempt the brainwashing?

I notice that the 70 is in FRONT of the 06.

No suprise to me.

[69_500]

I'll have to see if I can find a copy of the magazine around here locally. Definatley looks like a magazine I"d like to read.

[Chris G.]

Here's a few scans.

So Chris,

What does the article say about Old School vs 06? Or should I say what do they state to attempt the brainwashing?

Lizard, as always, the registry is always there to help. You can view the entire article over here... http://1970chargerregistry.com/Gallery/albums.php
You'd be surprised at the results. The '70 held it's ground I should say.

ps- I still like the new one. I just don't compare it to the classics.

[Shakey]

That 69 is the infamous "XP Hemi Charger"

I have that pic on my registry site as well.......
Thanks for the scans

With wheel discs and white stripe tires 

[plum500]

Perhaps, as the smiley, this is what the 70 should be holding:

Looks like a pork belly coming up behind that nice 70. 

[Dale The Bold]

I like where the article says "We're not saying the '06 Charger is bad, just different."

The problem is, it's more of an insult to talk about how different it is from the '70 than to say it's "bad."   It is "different," and that's worse than just being just plain old "bad."  If they had made it more similar, but bad, it would be better than it is.

[yellocharge68]

I saw it at the magazine rack, and had to have it.  Looks like the Mopars are really getting some serious press these days....I am so glad I bought mine before the insane prices took the elevator to the roof!!!!  That Plum colo9red 1970 Chartger is a beaut, for sure!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[THE CHARGER PUNK]

in the new hemmings muscle mag they do a big feature about a drk green 69 hemi 550 relli sweet but 7$ for mag and no $$ flowing i could not afford it-MATT

[TheGhost]

If they had made it more similar, but bad, it would be better than it is.

That makes no sense.  So, are you trying to say that you would like it better if it was a really shitty car, IE falls apart at the drop of the hat, and can't get out of it's own way, but looked more like the classic Chargers, you would like it better?  Cause I sure hope that ain't what you are saying.....

[Dale The Bold]

If they had made it more similar, but bad, it would be better than it is.

That makes no sense.   So, are you trying to say that you would like it better if it was a really shitty car, IE falls apart at the drop of the hat, and can't get out of it's own way, but looked more like the classic Chargers, you would like it better?   Cause I sure hope that ain't what you are saying.....

Well, the article said the slalom was more fun in the Charger, but the Magnum Sedan was one second quicker, it showed that the "better" technology of today helped the handling, but subtracted the enjoyment.  Part of the charm of old cars is their simplicity, that they take us back to a time when cars were driven, and kept the drivers attention instead of letting them yak on the cell phone until they taste someone's bumper.  In this age of traction control, ABS brakes (bleh!), and every kind of innovation they can conjure up to lull the driver to sleep, I'd rather take the "bad" car that doesn't try to be a luxury ride.  And lets me leave some rubber on the road if the urge hits me.

[TheGhost]

If they had made it more similar, but bad, it would be better than it is.

That makes no sense.  So, are you trying to say that you would like it better if it was a really shitty car, IE falls apart at the drop of the hat, and can't get out of it's own way, but looked more like the classic Chargers, you would like it better?  Cause I sure hope that ain't what you are saying.....

Well, the article said the slalom was more fun in the Charger, but the Magnum Sedan was one second quicker, it showed that the "better" technology of today helped the handling, but subtracted the enjoyment.  Part of the charm of old cars is their simplicity, that they take us back to a time when cars were driven, and kept the drivers attention instead of letting them yak on the cell phone until they taste someone's bumper.  In this age of traction control, ABS brakes (bleh!), and every kind of innovation they can conjure up to lull the driver to sleep, I'd rather take the "bad" car that doesn't try to be a luxury ride.  And lets me leave some rubber on the road if the urge hits me.

Ah.  Thanks for clearing that up.  Those are actually why I prefer driving an old car around as my daily driver.

[bull]

I was talking to my brother-in-law tonight about the issues we have with new cars. The one theme that stuck out is how all the computerization is taking the control out of the hands of the driver and mechanic. There's no way for a mechanically-minded 'artist' to fiddle with the timing, carb tuning, clutch, etc. to alter the performance of today's cars. And there's few ways a driver can manipulate certain driving habits to explore handling, acceleration and braking. Every year the technology gets more intrusive to the point where we are all at the mercy of our onboard computers as it relates to performance. For example, the newer Mustangs can no longer be power shifted because the computer senses what is going on and derates the engine. And how many times have you gone in with a newer car to have a failed sensor replaced because the cam position cannot be read by the computer, or the oxygen mix, or the throttle position, etc., etc. There may be nothing wrong with the cam, throttle or smog equipment but the computer can't gather the data. I say it's none of the computer's damn business! I'm the human, I'm in control. So it's all about fuel economy and safety? Really? My dad often told me he regularly got upwards of 22 mpg with his '57 Chevy Del Ray back in the early '60s. How many cars today that weigh as much get that good of mileage? And safety? Install a set of shoulder belts in a classic car and it's twice as safe as the plastic crap they make now. Have you ever seen a contest between an older car and a newer one? An old Ford pickup got into a wreck with a newer Jeep Cherokee out in front of our house last summer and my wife said the Jeep got absolutely waylaid but the Ford was hardly scratched. I say keep them mechanical and to hell with computerized cars. The human element is quickly being removed from the automotive equation and everyone is just drawn to it like flies to a bug zapper. Right now I'd rather buy a '66 Mustang than anything new on the market. Every part on those things can be had through and classic car catalogue, no DEQ, you can do all the work yourself and when you sell it it's worth as much or more than you paid.

[Charger_Croatia]

Well said bull   

When my car arrived in container and while unloading, people said to me "....be carefull with this car, if you hit somebody in today's car you can disintegrate it...."   So much about European five stars crush tests

[Ghoste]

Of course, the only problem with all of that Bull (and I agree with you btw) is that probably 97% of todays drivers are morons who need all the help they can get behind the wheel.

[Shakey]

Of course, the only problem with all of that Bull (and I agreee with you btw) is that probably 97% of todays drivers are morons who need all the help they can get behind the wheel.

You hit the nail right on the head there Ghoste!

[bull]

Of course, the only problem with all of that Bull (and I agreee with you btw) is that probably 97% of todays drivers are morons who need all the help they can get behind the wheel.

Good point. Maybe carb tuning and timing adjustments should become part of the state driving tests. If you don't pass they put yoiu on mass transit.

[70charginglizard]

Here's a few scans.

So Chris,

What does the article say about Old School vs 06? Or should I say what do they state to attempt the brainwashing?

Lizard, as always, the registry is always there to help. You can view the entire article over here... http://1970chargerregistry.com/Gallery/albums.php
You'd be surprised at the results. The '70 held it's ground I should say.

ps- I still like the new one. I just don't compare it to the classics.

Sure- Lets put the new 06 HEMI charger up against a 70 440 4 bbl instead of a 70 HEMI charger. That way the new 06 HEMI charger will win (barely) and we can sell more 06 chargers with all the great advertisement.

Sounds like brainwashing to me.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Here's a few scans.

So Chris,

What does the article say about Old School vs 06? Or should I say what do they state to attempt the brainwashing?

Lizard, as always, the registry is always there to help. You can view the entire article over here... http://1970chargerregistry.com/Gallery/albums.php
You'd be surprised at the results. The '70 held it's ground I should say.

ps- I still like the new one. I just don't compare it to the classics.

Sure- Lets put the new 06 HEMI charger up against a 70 440 4 bbl instead of a 70 HEMI charger. That way the new 06 HEMI charger will win (barely) and we can sell more 06 chargers with all the great advertisement.

Sounds like brainwashing to me.

 

Well, if you're gonna use a '70 Hemi Charger then you should use an '06 Charger SRT-8 which is a suitable comparison given the price premiums.  AT that point I'd love to see your response when the SRT-8 Annihilates the '70.

[70charginglizard]

Here's a few scans.

So Chris,

What does the article say about Old School vs 06? Or should I say what do they state to attempt the brainwashing?

Hey I just want to see hemi against hemi. Thats all

Lizard, as always, the registry is always there to help. You can view the entire article over here... http://1970chargerregistry.com/Gallery/albums.php
You'd be surprised at the results. The '70 held it's ground I should say.

ps- I still like the new one. I just don't compare it to the classics.

Sure- Lets put the new 06 HEMI charger up against a 70 440 4 bbl instead of a 70 HEMI charger. That way the new 06 HEMI charger will win (barely) and we can sell more 06 chargers with all the great advertisement.

Sounds like brainwashing to me.

 

Well, if you're gonna use a '70 Hemi Charger then you should use an '06 Charger SRT-8 which is a suitable comparison given the price premiums.   AT that point I'd love to see your response when the SRT-8 Annihilates the '70.

Hey I just want to see hemi against hemi...thats all

[Orange_Crush]

Hey I just want to see hemi against hemi...thats all

Fair enough...I have no beef with that except for one thing.

Chrysler sells the Charger with three different Hemi packages. 

The first is the standard 5.7 Hemi rated at 340 horses which, in '70 Charger parlance would be comparable to the 440 4bbl

The second is the 5.7 Hemi with the road and track package which adds ten horses for 350.  This would compare to the 440 6-pack

The third is the 425 horse 6.1 SRT engine which would compare to the top level 426 Hemi.

So, yeah, while the 5.7 IS called a hemi, it is really just their base Charger v-8 engine.

Personally, I'd like to see a comparison between a 318 '70 Charger and a V-6 '06 Charger.

[bull]

Here's a few scans.

So Chris,

What does the article say about Old School vs 06? Or should I say what do they state to attempt the brainwashing?

Lizard, as always, the registry is always there to help. You can view the entire article over here... http://1970chargerregistry.com/Gallery/albums.php
You'd be surprised at the results. The '70 held it's ground I should say.

ps- I still like the new one. I just don't compare it to the classics.

Sure- Lets put the new 06 HEMI charger up against a 70 440 4 bbl instead of a 70 HEMI charger. That way the new 06 HEMI charger will win (barely) and we can sell more 06 chargers with all the great advertisement.

Sounds like brainwashing to me.

 

Well, if you're gonna use a '70 Hemi Charger then you should use an '06 Charger SRT-8 which is a suitable comparison given the price premiums.   AT that point I'd love to see your response when the SRT-8 Annihilates the '70.

The '06 has already annihilated every previous Charger in the butt-ugly category.

[70charginglizard]

It could be interesting-

70 hemi charger: Horsepower @ r.p.m. .....425 @ 5000, Torque, lb-ft @ r.p.m. ……490 @ 4000

06 6.1 L hemi charger: 425 horsepower, 420 lb-ft of torque

[Old Moparz]

in the new hemmings muscle mag they do a big feature about a drk green 69 hemi 550 relli sweet but 7$ for mag and no $$ flowing i could not afford it-MATT

That magazine is really nice & always has very good photographs. I have a subscription to it & it was pretty cheap, maybe the price of 3 single issues? I didn't realize it was $7 per copy so the subscription is dirt cheap then.

[Orange_Crush]

It could be interesting-

70 hemi charger: Horsepower @ r.p.m. .....425 @ 5000, Torque, lb-ft @ r.p.m. ……490 @ 4000

06 6.1 L hemi charger: 425 horsepower, 420 lb-ft of torque

Keep in mind the "gross vs. net" factor.

The new car has its HP measured at the crank with full air intake system and full stock exhaust as well as all engine-driven accessories in place.   

The old hemi's HP was measured at the crank with open headers, no accessories, and an air horn.

In any case, the old hemi was underrated.   I'd put actual gross HP for the 426 up around 470-480.

[Old Moparz]

Maybe the old cars are more "fun" since you have to be more of a driver behind the wheel, but I have to say that the majority of people buying cars want better. I know I do, & that's why I have newer cars/trucks to take care of daily chores. I like reliability, A/C, good handling, comfort, safety & conveniences. I love the old cars quite a bit, & would seriously say I'd give up a newer car I have over one of my old ones if I had to make that decision. (Hypothetically that is.)

The look, feel, design & the whole package of an old car you grew up around, can't be replaced by a newer one. Sentimental reasons will also add to it, like when I drove 2000 miles in my ragtop with my girlfriend to the '85 Nats & through Canada. (She's now my wife.) I could make that same trip next week in my Dodge Ram or her Mitsubishi Endeavor, & the only thing I'll probably get excited over is knowing I'm on vacation.

I don't think I could get sentimental over any new car these days unless something spectacular happened in one. Maybe something like making that 2000 trip with Angela Jolie in a new Charger? 

[Brock Samson]

Well said bull     

When my car arrived in container and while unloading, people said to me "....be carefull with this car, if you hit somebody in today's car you can disintegrate it...."     So much about European five stars crush tests

I realize that in Croatia your Charger is about twice the size of the average car, but that said,..
  ...the newer cars "Crush Zones" are designed and built to disintegrate so the impact energy is dissapated in the crumple zones of the car and the occupants are spared. The only real advantage to the older iron is in it's mass... and if safety is an issue i would bet the newer car at a hefty 4,200 and with it's side air baggs & anti lock brakes, is far superior, just look at the stopping distances. I've asked before, and I'll ask again...
Who wears their shoulder belts in their classic?..
I don't like the new sedan being called a Charger, and I don't care for it's appearance, and I hate the trucky plastic interior and it's overall lack of sporty, personal, hartop style...


But, you have to admit cars have improved on many fronts... other then styling.
We classic owners are primarily concerned with style and power.

[Shakey]

Well said bull     

When my car arrived in container and while unloading, people said to me "....be carefull with this car, if you hit somebody in today's car you can disintegrate it...."     So much about European five stars crush tests

I realize that in Croatia your Charger is about twice the size of the average car, but that said,..
  ...the newer cars "Crush Zones" are designed and built to disintegrate so the impact energy is dissapated in the crumple zones of the car and the occupants are spared. The only real advantage to the older iron is in it's mass... and if safety is an issue i would bet the newer car at a hefty 4,200 and with it's side air baggs & anti lock brakes, is far superior, just look at the stopping distances. I've asked before, and I'll ask again...
Who wears their shoulder belts in their classic?..
I don't like the new sedan being called a Charger, and I don't care for it's appearance, and I hate the trucky plastic interior and it's overall lack of sporty, personal, hartop style...


But, you have to admit cars have improved on many fronts... other then styling.
We classic owners are primarily concerned with style and power.

Correct!  And it is a good thing that mankind progresses forward rather than backwards!   

[bull]

But, you have to admit cars have improved on many fronts... other then styling.

Then why don't they deal with the styling issues and hit a home run rather than constantly farting around trying to steal third base? They've got all this fancy technology and gadgetry wrapped in crap. I just don't get it.

[Old Moparz]

I've asked before, and I'll ask again...  Who wears their shoulder belts in their classic?..

I never heard you ask that, so I'll answer it now. I do.

I wore it in my friend's Superbird over the summer when I drove it into the guiderail & a Honda, & it kept me in the seat & I didn't get hurt. I wear it in my Scamp, but since the Satellite is a ragtop, all I have is the lap belt.

[Brock Samson]

   Re: Styling,.. one huge difference in the old Vs. new debate is/are the overhangs... Modern style is characterised by short overhangs as opposed to our classics, there are many reasons for this which have to do with compact packaging and centrally located mass, but the German's high end designs began that trend in the '90s with the BMW's in particular and others following suit.
the current front off-side crash tests and upcoming front crash standards in particular the "Pedestrian Impact" standards in the E.U. (European Union) mean blunt noses with several inches of "give space" between the hood and engine are going to result in less sleek form fitting bodywork, and even in airbags located in the front bumpers for the sake of the people and dogs who get run over...  
Ma Mopar's "Cab Forward" also pushed the wheels to the corners in their bread and butter platforms and if you look at the problems with G.M.'s F-bodies (Firebird and Camaro) you'll see alot of wasted space in those designs which are particularly inefficient.
Re: Safety the old shoulder belts are a P.I.T.A. (pain in the ass) as they don't retract, self adjust or lock which means they must be cinched tight to be effective,precluding reaching for anything...  
I must admit I don't use mine...

So,.. anyhow, the new '06 sedan is to the old Charger what the Black Eyed Peas are to the Ohio Players,.. Funk Lite...  

[Orange_Crush]

Black Eyed Peas

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm     Fergie.

Funkalicious...

[Troy]

in the new hemmings muscle mag they do a big feature about a drk green 69 hemi 550 relli sweet but 7$ for mag and no $$ flowing i could not afford it-MATT

That magazine is really nice & always has very good photographs. I have a subscription to it & it was pretty cheap, maybe the price of 3 single issues? I didn't realize it was $7 per copy so the subscription is dirt cheap then.

He's in Canada.

Troy

[Dale The Bold]

Of course, the only problem with all of that Bull (and I agreee with you btw) is that probably 97% of todays drivers are morons who need all the help they can get behind the wheel.

Yeah, but which is the cause and which is the effect?  I think the reason we have so many bad drivers is in part because we made driving so much of a casual experience.  Gone are the days when 65 MPH was scary.  So now people casually drift from lane to lane or merge into traffic like they're on a Sunday drive, because all of the creature comforts and automatic "driving" the car does for them gives them a false sense of security.  It's like the saying, "Make something idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot."  We're breeding an army of super-morons.

And yet, people are more concerned about saving gas on a light weight econo-box than wrapping themselves in steel just in case there's a big crash.  Cars keep getting lighter, faster, and a falser sense of security with time.

[Pistolpete]

WOW !!

thats the colour !! ........... thats the colour I was asking about before...what did you say it was? XP Hemi Orange??

does anyone have any more pics ?

Thats the colour I want to use once I get mine finished!!

AWESOME!! 

[70charginglizard]

Of course, the only problem with all of that Bull (and I agreee with you btw) is that probably 97% of todays drivers are morons who need all the help they can get behind the wheel.

Yeah, but which is the cause and which is the effect?   I think the reason we have so many bad drivers is in part because we made driving so much of a casual experience.   Gone are the days when 65 MPH was scary.   So now people casually drift from lane to lane or merge into traffic like they're on a Sunday drive, because all of the creature comforts and automatic "driving" the car does for them gives them a false sense of security.   It's like the saying, "Make something idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot."   We're breeding an army of super-morons.

And yet, people are more concerned about saving gas on a light weight econo-box than wrapping themselves in steel just in case there's a big crash.   Cars keep getting lighter, faster, and a falser sense of security with time.

"Make something idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot."

..... ...no doubt

[miller]

So in reading the article the new charger was more the upgraded version (r/t with road and track package).  Shouldnt then the charger have been at least upgraded with front disc brakes (it was an option) and a 440 6 pack.  Although i understand those are few and far between, and the owners probably wouldnt let them do that to their cars.  But to me that would be the fairer fight.

[ChargerBill]

Did anyone else find it interesteing that with 35 years of innovation and technological advancement that the new Creeder only managed to MARGINALLY outdo the Classic Charger. I mean, you'd think it could eat the '70 for lunch, and really all it did was barely beat it. It's like a 20 year old man bragging that he can run faster and jump higher than a 55 year old man, and then when it comes down to it the 55 year old is nipping at the 20 year olds heels. Who do you respect when you witness something like that?...the 55 year old!! Case closed....

[SirNik73]

This is what i have to say about newer cars... there is no way to give the car a tune-up!

Here is My Fuel Management System!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[TheGhost]

It could be interesting-

70 hemi charger: Horsepower @ r.p.m. .....425 @ 5000, Torque, lb-ft @ r.p.m. ……490 @ 4000

06 6.1 L hemi charger: 425 horsepower, 420 lb-ft of torque

Someone needs to set this up.

[Silver R/T]

turd vs Charger hmm, Im sure who won

[TheGhost]

turd vs Charger hmm, Im sure who won

It would seem that in every category except looks, the so called "Turd" won.

[70charginglizard]

This is what i have to say about newer cars... there is no way to give the car a tune-up!

Here is My Fuel Management System!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Great point!

[70charginglizard]

Did any of you all happen to notice that a purple charger almost exactly like the one in the magazine is on e-bay right now.



http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Dodge-Charger-RT-1970-PLUM-CRAZY-440-MAGNUM-RT-CHARGER-AC-NO-68-69-HEMI_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ6199QQitemZ4583181049QQrdZ1

Could be that articles twin brother by the looks of it

[Orange_Crush]

Did anyone else find it interesteing that with 35 years of innovation and technological advancement that the new Creeder only managed to MARGINALLY outdo the Classic Charger. I mean, you'd think it could eat the '70 for lunch, and really all it did was barely beat it. It's like a 20 year old man bragging that he can run faster and jump higher than a 55 year old man, and then when it comes down to it the 55 year old is nipping at the 20 year olds heels. Who do you respect when you witness something like that?...the 55 year old!! Case closed....

With 100 fewer cubic inches in an engine that gets 26 MPG on the highway and doesn't have to be tuned up until it hits 100,000 miles.

In any case...2/10 is an asswhuppin' at the dragstrip.   at 100MPH, the old charger lost by 2 car lengths.   Nothing "Marginal" about that.  

[ChargerBill]

OC...35 years of advancement and that's the best they can do? And they still made it look like Fido's digested lunch...what's up with that? A 7 year old with a box of crayons could have designed a better looking car.

Ghost, I wouldn't be bragging too much...you obviously ignored my previous post...

BTW: Anyone else notice that the stripe on the purple Charger looks like it was put on by a 5th grader? C'mon, it's so far off from where it should be that it's pathetic. Why does it angle back so far? The stripe sides should be parrallel with the sidemarker. They even mention that they researched stripe placement...where? Over at the Corvette Forum?...LOL

[bull]

When has performance ever been the crux of the issue with the '06 vs. classic Charger anyway? There's are plenty of cars out there that can outdo a 440 Charger in the 1/4 mile but very few I would consider to be better looking. The main issue has always been one of looks and door count. Only the '06 apologists (like some of the magazine editors and a few people here) continually bring up the performance angle and surprise, surprise, 35 years of technological advances has made for certain improvements. But let's go back 35 years prior to 1966 and compare the 1931 Dodges to the '66 Charger. I'd say by that standard the supposed leaps in technology over the past three and a half decades is pretty paltry.

[BB1]

turd vs Charger hmm, Im sure who won

It would seem that in every category except looks, the so called "Turd" won.

I guess you can say that about your Dolphins too.  

[Plumcrazy]

But let's go back 35 years prior to 1966 and compare the 1931 Dodges to the '66 Charger. I'd say by that standard the supposed leaps in technology over the past three and a half decades is pretty paltry.

Good point.

[FastbackJon]

Getting back to the magazine, I checked it out at Barnes and Nobles on the rack. I might have considered buying it had it not been for the editorial idiots writing the articles. In that magazine I learned that...

1) The R/T was a Dodge performance package that ran from 1966 through 1971...

WRONG. There was no '66 R/T model.

2) The Scat Pack was a 1970 Dodge Club that featured their high performance models, and also a club that you could join.

WRONG. The scat pack was around starting in 1968.

3) One of the design changes from the '66 Charger to the '67, was that in 1967, they moved the front turn indicators out of the grille and into the fender tops.

WRONG. '67 Chargers had both grille and fender top turn indicators.

I can't stand editors that don't know their stuff and just publish garbage with incorrect information. If I can easily spot a few things wrong with just the mopar stuff, then how much other stuff am I reading that is also wrong that I can't spot?

[FastbackJon]

As for comparing a 1970 car versus one from 2006 performance wise, ChargerBill and bull hit it on the head. That's 36 years of technology improvements. If they can't design a better faster car with 36 years of improvements, then something is wrong there.

I'd like to see a more fair performance matchup of a stock 1970 Charger R/T, and then a 2006 5.7 Hemi Charger R/T, but the new car would have to have everything removed that has been invented since 1970. Now that would be a fair matchup. The old car would win easily.

Besides, if you put the same money into each car, you could always make the old car faster easier. That is putting $35,000 into the 2006, versus buying a '70 for say $10,000 and then putting $25,000 worth of improvements into it. The old car wins again.

And concerning styling and timelessness, there's no comparison to the old Chargers. They win hands down.

[Arthu®]

  Half of you guys really have no idea what you are talking about now have you?

Btw liked the article

[bull]

Half of you guys really have no idea what you are talking about now have you?

Btw liked the article

Have you entered our presence in order to set a new standard of wisdom? If so, please impart your vast well of knowledge upon this gathering of feeble minds so it might become as wise as you.

[RT DAVE]

Did you see the part where they said they weren't going to discuss post 1971 chargers because they didn't deserve to be called chargers?   If they do a stock vs. stock comparison between a 70 hemi and a 6.1, the result will be even worse for the "classic" charger.   Not that I care.  I only care about my own car's performance.   

[TheGhost]

I'd like to see a more fair performance matchup of a stock 1970 Charger R/T, and then a 2006 5.7 Hemi Charger R/T, but the new car would have to have everything removed that has been invented since 1970. Now that would be a fair matchup. The old car would win

Of course, because the 06 wouldn't have an engine.  It wouldn't run at all if you did that.

[69_500]

I personally haven't seen the article yet. However I do like the new Chargers. Call me weird but I like that fact that Mopar has several RWD V8 powered cars that one can just walk down to a dealership and purchase. I love some cars being 4 door as well, I don't like the Charger name plate on a 4 door but that isn't the point. The point is 5 years ago we were crying for a single RWD V8 powered car to have. Now we have several and people are still crying. Are you guys never satisfied?

[70charginglizard]

Half of you guys really have no idea what you are talking about now have you?

Btw liked the article

Have you entered our presence in order to set a new standard of wisdom? If so, please impart your vast well of knowledge upon this gathering of feeble minds so it might become as wise as you.

well said Bull
And people wonder why we get so pissy with new "one star" members coming in making statements like this.

[skyhawk61]

     Any word or observations yet on how the '06 is selling nationwide?  I'm out on the street daily--a lot of it Interstate traffic and I've only seen 3 that didn't have dealer plates on them since the cars came out  My sources at the local Mopar dealer here in Western NC say they aren't moving many Chargers, but the Magnums and 300's are selling OK.  Seems the biggest complaint is the price of the Charger---the sales guy said he's lost a lot of sales to the new Mustang for buyers looking for performance vs price.                                       
     Not many Hemi's being sold in any Mopar from his dealership, he tells me.  Could be the  price of gas and the bad economy here in furniture/textile land.

[Arthu®]

Oh well a new one star member? I been around for a long long time. But never mind that. Really is it of any use. Do you really think that you could consider the fact that the new Charger is a better Charger (technically) than the old charger?

Really all this talk about how new cars fold when they are crashed which is soo bad. Really that is biggest load of crap that I have ever heard. They are made to do that and not just so you have to buy a new car every time you crash. No it has all to do with absorbing energy.

Also why the newer cars have developed less in 30 years than the 30 years before that. That is not because we can't invent stuff anymore, it just has all to do with the fact that the car as an invention is just being made into perfection now. Like any invention (look at planes for example) you first have the raw drawings and first prototypes, than there are some simple steps to make it better. But when it becomes more evolved you will have less things to worry about since it is already a good product, so than you go perfectionise it by adding the electronics, stability programs, etc.

And being less in control of the car because of all the features. That is bullshit unless you are one hell of a driver which is only a small percentage of the people out there in cars. Mostlikely not even a whole lot of us here can drive as well as we think. The stability programs, ABS, traction control, launch control do make it a safer car and more driveable car. I had the chance to drive a Audi RS6 without the electronics and with the electronics. I am a pretty seasoned racer, driven allmost all the types of street cars there are. And really a powerfull car like that is no fun if it didn't have the electronics to drive on the streets. Without it your tires would be gone in seconds and you would most likely scare the shit out of people on the street. As you will have problems hooking it to the street every time. It is a very tence ride and really not something you would want to sell for street use.

Maybe if some of you had the chance to drive a true new performance car like a new M6 or something, than maybe you would get a whole new point of view on all the electronic programs. Since I can easily say that almost none of you would drive better without the programs than with the programs. And no that isn't cheating.

Anyways the better/worse discussion on the new Charger vs old Charger really is kind of worthless as it is comparing apples with oranges.

Arthur

[Big Lebowski]

  Dodge used to make changes every year to the Charger. Lets just hope they come to there senses and redesign the ugly 4 door into something worthy of the great (2 door) name Charger.

[ChargerBill]

  Dodge used to make changes every year to the Charger. Lets just hope they come to there senses and redesign the ugly 4 door into something worthy of the great (2 door) name Charger.

Be careful what you wish for. They could come out with an even worse monstrosity...maybe a 2008 VundaCreeder or 2009 Creederschnitzel. Could be pretty scary

[Big Lebowski]

  Creederschnitzel? What's that, sounds like a hot dog. 

[Brock Samson]

 The writing was on the wall with the Super-8 Hemi, I think we all lost our lunch when that hit the fan three years ago...   

http://www.autointell.com/nao_companies/daimlerchrysler/concepts-2001/dodge-super8-hemi/dodge-super8-01.htm


http://www.autoblog.com/entry/7784671712512224/

  I belive the prior design was the '99 Concept Charger

http://www.supercars.net/cars/425.html

which other then the camaro headlites and cross bar grill was really well recived, some folks were distressd by the four doors but that was a pre-merger LH baised design..   (which actualy had a four wheel drive capability) ... but post merger we got the Hemi-8... utilizing the Mercedes componets and stalling the project two years...
In any IMHO case it's an fuginugly Charger and an ok Coronet... I dont think the upcomming Challanger will be a hardtop or have a swoopy shape... and of course you can forget about ever seeing a hidden headlight design again..

[ChargerBill]

You know, I STILL don't think they realize that they would have sold TWICE as many Chargers if they had produced the concept car. Really makes no sense...a million more in R&D to sell twice as many cars. And as far as the 4 doors on the concept is concerned, I didn't hear nearly as many complaints...because the carwas cool and the back doors were well integrated...even somewhat hidden. The 99 concept would have competed directly with the Mustang AND would have appealed to the urban crowd they are targeting right now...a definite win win. The lamos at DCX won't ever get it right, simply don't hope or speculate that they will and you won't be disappointed over and over again.

[Dale The Bold]

Bragging about how well the '06 Charger performs is like talking about how good Janet Reno is in bed.  Heck, I'll even believe when you say that the performance is there, but seriously man...dang.

[TheGhost]

You know, I STILL don't think they realize that they would have sold TWICE as many Chargers if they had produced the concept car.

Are you so sure about that?  Just because YOU like it better does not mean it would have sold much better.  And, when they made it, I'm sure people would STILL be bitching over the 4 doors, and the disgrace to the name, blah blah blah.

Face it, you really didn't like the 99 concept untill you seen the real thing, didn't you?

[Ghoste]

I loved the 99 concept and in fact, wrote several letters to DCX pleading with them to build it.  The four doors were not an issue because the car looked great.  I can recall only a tiny handful of people whining about extra doors and a vast majority saying they should build it.

[472 R/T SE]

Hey arthur .  School still keeping you busy?

It seems when '06 Charger's get discussed, never mind arguing.  Sometimes these guys are like pigs because they waller, and roll in the shit all day long.    And it's like a bad wreck, everyone's gotta stop and gawk,and say something like me.

[Arthu®]

Yeah that and 2 jobs and working out keep me from doing much else. Wish I would be able to visit the 70 registery more often. Still lurking around though. Maybe in a couple of years when I got some money (to actually spend on cars) I will be back with a Charger that time. Til than it is just working jobs and going through school. I saw your plum crazy (That was you right that traded the blue R/T for the plum crazy one), anyways that car is awesome really like that color.

Arthur