Are we EVER going to see the 2010 Charger a 2 door like the new Challenger???

[TheGhost]

Personally, I think post-1970 Chargers look like shoe horns. I've never liked them and even protested their inclusion (en masse) in the magazine.

Seriously?

How open minded of you.

[Rustymuscle]

Seriously? How open minded of you.

That's my point, Ghost. While I personally don't care for one particular generation of Charger, it didn't stop others from liking it. Despite my personal gripes, all generations of Chargers were featured in the magazine, and more often than not, I was the one writing up the article.

My point is that there's a lot of hand wringing and teeth gnashing going on, and frankly, my understanding is that people bemoaning this proposed or the 2005-today Chargers are drumming up equally moot views as saying, "the only true Chargers were build during 1968-through-1970." Sounds pretty ludicrous doesn't it?

Frankly, I'd like to see anyone's 1973 318 Charger go up against a "miserable four-door" 2008 R/T.

[hotrod98]

I'll bet that insuring a 69 Charger with an 07 body would be a nightmare. Imagine the look on the adjustor's face when he has to do a damage  appraisal on that car for the first time.

[Ghoste]

Frankly, I'd like to see anyone's 1973 318 Charger go up against a "miserable four-door" 2008 R/T.

Or even a classic Hemi Charger.  But then I don't think most of us are bemoaning the performance of the new car, only it's appearance.  Let's face it if we were only seeking performance then there are a lot of cars much better suited to the role than our classic Chargers and almost as good looking.  Hell, a 69 Super Bee Six Pack is 1/4 mile performer that will not be denied.  Same with most 340 A-bodies.  So why do we like the Charger so much?  Simple, it's image.  The Charger was the styling flagship for Dodge and the advertising of the day clearly shows the image they were trying to sell.  Conciously or not most of us have bought 100% into the image and when Trevor Crud came along and told us that anybody who wasn't willing to drink the Kool-Ade simply had no idea what a Charger really was, then my answer is that I have a HELL of a lot better idea of what a "real" Charger is than old Trevor does. 
Taking an unattractive (in my own biased styling opinion) family car and making it go fast, turn hard and stop instantly at an affordable price is a fantastic idea.  But when you come to me and pitch the idea you need to bring a different image for it.  They chose the name "Charger" because they hoped the established image of that would do all the work for them.  When it didn't, they lashed out and said that WE, the consumers, were the ones who didn't know what "Charger" meant.
I glumly accepted the disco Charger and the Omni Charger because they existed in bizarre periods of auto history.  I can also tolerate them based on the image part because as far as what Chrysler offered they were styled about as well as they could be at that time.  This time they ignored that to go with the corporate mandated "brand" grille.  The side profile still leaves me cold.  It looks like a fat Sebring or Avenger or whatever.  It's a very Japanese way of making cars and I just want more I guess.  It's too bad because I really want to like the car but at the end of the day, I'll take the 318 powered 73 Charger if the decision is based on style and image.

[Brock Samson]

 a '73 318 against a new R/T Hemi is a totally unfair comparo. to streach things back the other - way a modern SXT against a Rally would be a much better match up. We can't deny 30 plus years of automotive progress,..
compare a '73 charger against an early 40s dodge coupe... 

[Ghoste]

Not unfair based on styling.    (and the 73 wins hands down)

[mjwebb]

talk about needing to duck for cover....but man the new Camaro is AWESOME!

[Ghoste]

I think all three of the new pony cars are awesome.  No small coincidence probably that they stayed true to their image.

[bull]

My point is that there's a lot of hand wringing and teeth gnashing going on, and frankly, my understanding is that people bemoaning this proposed or the 2005-today Chargers are drumming up equally moot views as saying, "the only true Chargers were build during 1968-through-1970." Sounds pretty ludicrous doesn't it?

The only sub-stellar comments about the new "Charger" are offered when the subject comes up, and the subject is usually brought up by someone who's asking for opinions. So if you ask a bunch of classic two-door muscle car fans their opinion about the modern version, and that version looks like a Chevy Silverado sedan, you're bound to get some dissent. This is not a difficult concept to comprehend.

[66chargerkid]

I have seen a place that makes 2 door conversions and CONVERTIBLE 2 door conversions and they really dont look half bad.
In a couple years find a wrecked challenger and *CHARGERFY* it. That would be cool

[Magnumcharger]

 

[chargerman67]

This is what the 2011 charger is really going to look like 

[Khyron]

Frankly, I'd like to see anyone's 1973 318 Charger go up against a "miserable four-door" 2008 R/T.

carfull, I know a 318 motor that will hand has handed a SRT-8 it's ass. and no, it's NOT stroked.

[Khyron]

I have seen a place that makes 2 door conversions and CONVERTIBLE 2 door conversions and they really dont look half bad.
In a couple years find a wrecked challenger and *CHARGERFY* it. That would be cool

naaa, I'll buy a mustang convertable and save the money

[Ghoste]

And Chargerfy it??   

[Landonsrt]

Here's a few more pics of the 2 door gen Lee charger knock off that west coast customs did. Go to the showroom first page and see a highly modded 68 with new charger dash... Looks pretty good. Too overly ghetto for my taste though.

http://www.westcoastcustoms.com/showroom/index.html