Dodge seeking your input...

[200MPH]

 

[Kowalski Supersoul]

Hello to the Mopar Community abroad.

I wanted to give you all a brief update on our quest for capturing your feedback towards the Dodge brand; specifically Challenger and Charger.

Your responses have been overwhelming, to say the very least.  The passion displayed by forums all across the net is most impressive.

Due to the sheer quantity of responses, it has been nearly impossible to respond to each individual post.  For that reason alone, we let the messages collect in mass and have just finished combing through them.  Not a single word was passed over.  In fact, responses still continue to surface.

The fan base has spoken very clearly as to what they truly desire.  Glaring patterns have been established amongst the hundreds of replies we received.

That said, it is now our job to report your intelligence back to those who asked for it.  All we ask for now is your patience. 

This may be our last update for a little while, but that is not a bad thing.  Organizing this material and presenting it takes careful planning.  We are as eager as you all are to share this invaluable information.

And, by all means, if you have further input, share it!  Email me directly at SRV@EVENTSOLUTIONS.NET.  The offer to speak in person also stands as I will be at Auto Shows in Detroit, Washington D.C., Chicago, and beyond.

Thanks again for all your thoughts, and have a Happy New Year!

Sincerely,
Scott Vandekerckhove
SRV@EVENTSOLUTIONS.NET



SIDE NOTE SPECIFICALLY FOR DODGECHARGER.COM...

I want you all to know that we received the largest amount of feedback from your site.  Hands down, you were the most vocal group about how you felt.

It is no secret that I have taken quite a bit of scrutiny on here, but that's okay.  Your passion for the car you love runs very, very deep which is wildly impressive and admirable.

Please understand that my blanket forum posts were only done out of necessity due to the volume of responses.

If you can have an ounce of faith in this process, then I would be most grateful.  If you cannot, them I am still very grateful.

We push forward with the best of intentions and hopefully we can have an impact soon.

Thanks again to you all here at DODGECHARGER.COM!!!

[resq302]

Scott,

Thank you for the personal note attached to the reply.  It just shows that you are reading these and do care and hopefully can get Fiat or Chrysler or whatever it is called now back in the right direction giving cars back to who should have an input in design and the cars that WE want to buy.

[TK73]

Years too late... If Dodge had put this out I'd be driving it instead of a new Mustang GT (Ford now has my business):

I still have no idea how this beautiful machine morphed into that fugly piece that came off the production line...

[jeryst]

If the Charger looked like one of these, I'd be standing in line.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YcCepsPlk4

[Nacho-RT74]

I want you all to know that we received the largest amount of feedback from your site.  Hands down, you were the most vocal group about how you felt.

Maybe because we were the most cheated/dissapointted crowd with the name of our cars

[alcusswhen]

The Challenger didn't really change during its 5 year run, and it has years to go forward, but the Charger did. The 73,74 Charger can't be topped in looks which means there is no where to go long term with it. Dodge had has a hit with the new luxo sedan and should keep it that way. There is not enough 2 door market anymore to have the Challenger and Charger compete against each other. And for me if my 07 Charger R/T with r&t package didn't have four doors I'd still be driving my Dakota quad cab.

[stripedelete]

The Challenger didn't really change during its 5 year run, and it has years to go forward, but the Charger did. The 73,74 Charger can't be topped in looks which means there is no where to go long term with it. Dodge had has a hit with the new luxo sedan and should keep it that way. There is not enough 2 door market anymore to have the Challenger and Charger compete against each other. And for me if my 07 Charger R/T with r&t package didn't have four doors I'd still be driving my Dakota quad cab.

Mr. Alcusswhen just stated the business case for no retro charger.  Why split your retro market with two entries while doubling your production and marketing costs? Mopar retro customers won't double with two entries. The Charger has already evolved - where are you going to take it?  In addition, why compete in the pony car market with a Charger?

If you walked in to a executive level product planning meeting with a retro Charger plan - your career would end.

At the end of the day, you are broke, really broke, so why not squeeze every dime out of Charger name plate (I do hate to see it)?  Folks, if you think the nameplate is abused right now, wait till some Vietames or Chinese company licenses the Dodge, Chrysler or Plymouth Marquis to come to this country.  Your going to see friggen' gas grills with R/T's on them.....     

Sorry, but I had to throw out a reality check.....

[Nacho-RT74]

One thing is simply and basic... Charger didn't have producction continuity on line progress like Pony cars from GM and Fords did. Then the Chally what is the pony car by Mopar got the line "continuity" getting a retro design due the ausence from the market all this time. Now if will keep the production, can build a new Chally with diff lines and keep the continuity and progress on design, looking forward. Hard to do it, but not impossible.

Now if you think on Charger production, would need to get back to the old lines to keep and built a continuity... that would explain the need for a retro design. Then you will be able to look forward on newer and progressive lines from there, from a new starting line.

Of course we are jumping the bad old days of the Mitsu Chally and Granny Charger ( same as the 80s "nothing impressive" on design Charger ), basically because supposelly the deal is try to float back the good old days.

[bull]

SIDE NOTE SPECIFICALLY FOR DODGECHARGER.COM...

I want you all to know that we received the largest amount of feedback from your site.  Hands down, you were the most vocal group about how you felt.

It is no secret that I have taken quite a bit of scrutiny on here, but that's okay.  Your passion for the car you love runs very, very deep which is wildly impressive and admirable.

Please understand that my blanket forum posts were only done out of necessity due to the volume of responses.

If you can have an ounce of faith in this process, then I would be most grateful.  If you cannot, them I am still very grateful.

We push forward with the best of intentions and hopefully we can have an impact soon.

Thanks again to you all here at DODGECHARGER.COM!!!

I read the above 2-3 times, Scott, and it looks like you wrote some stuff down but didin't actually say anything.

[aussiemuscle]

Sorry, but I had to throw out a reality check.....

One of the best thought out responses i've read in a long time. 

[stripedelete]

Then you will be able to look forward on newer and progressive lines from there, from a new starting line.

Nacho, I'm not sure I'm following you on the sentence above.   Are you saying the Challenger isn't necessarily retro, Chrysler just picked up where they left off?  Where as a Charger entree has to be retro in order to pick up the styling cue's from different generations?   If I am reading it right to that point, I need help with the above sentence.

Great point about the Challenger. I never considered it, but it is a strategic advantage in the "pony" market segment.  It will evolve much easier, and therefore less costly, than it's competition.  I wonder if there were a set of next gen Challenger/Cuda plans in somebody's drawer that were never pulled out as the 70's turned into bankruptcy? 

[TylerCharger69]

well....I'm a late bloomer to this topic, but I'm gonna voice my opinion anyway.....mind you this is just my opinion.  I think the Charger needs to be revamped....It doesn't really look like it should have that name.  I would have gladly accepted  Polara, Monaco, even Dart, or Demon....but not Charger....A Charger should not be a two door  for one thing.  What they did with the Challenger was awesome....I would have expected the Charger to be treated the same way....Kinda give it a 2nd generation modern look to it.......I saw some pictures of some prototypes before they were released  and what I saw was pretty decent.  Not this Chrysler 300 knockoff.....like i said....just my opinion.


But here's a thought!!!!

Everyone here pretty much shares the same opinion about this topic.  That being said...I'd like to propose a solution to the "designing dilemma" for you and your marketing superiors....LET THE MEMBERS OF DODGECHARGER.COM  BE THE DECIDING VOTERS ON THE NEXT CHARGER DESIGN!!!  WE KNOW WHAT IT SHOULD BE!!!!

[Big Lebowski]

  So Scott, I'm thinking that 98% of Charger fans want(ed) a 2 door Charger. What say you?

[66chargerkid]

Everyone here pretty much shares the same opinion about this topic.  That being said...I'd like to propose a solution to the "designing dilemma" for you and your marketing superiors....LET THE MEMBERS OF DODGECHARGER.COM  BE THE DECIDING VOTERS ON THE NEXT CHARGER DESIGN!!!  WE KNOW WHAT IT SHOULD BE!!!!

^What he said.

[Nacho-RT74]

Then you will be able to look forward on newer and progressive lines from there, from a new starting line.

Nacho, I'm not sure I'm following you on the sentence above.   Are you saying the Challenger isn't necessarily retro, Chrysler just picked up where they left off?  Where as a Charger entree has to be retro in order to pick up the styling cue's from different generations?   If I am reading it right to that point, I need help with the above sentence.

Great point about the Challenger. I never considered it, but it is a strategic advantage in the "pony" market segment.  It will evolve much easier, and therefore less costly, than it's competition.   I wonder if there were a set of next gen Challenger/Cuda plans in somebody's drawer that were never pulled out as the 70's turned into bankruptcy?  

I'm telling that the need of the Charger on a retro design like Challenger was made, will allow you to give newer draws from there to get it into a new gen ( if projected ).

being we got a LOOONG years jump without any REAL CHARGER production, you never associate the idea about a Charger is on the market.

On a Mustang and on a Camaro, Corvette ( I think also MonteCarlos never stopped ? dunno ), we saw the evolution. You can like or not, but there is an evolution. Challenger and Charger not, so Challenger was made just right, showing the old lines LEFT and giving the base of a new gen ( if will come ). You can see the CHALLENGER left back on the new Challenger

The Charger was a newer NOTHING RELATED car with the Charger, and used an old name to give us a... "revival" ? can you say is a revival of the Charger ? Do you see a Charger on it ?, naaaah, thats a marketing deal on the name.

The new GTO show us too use the name doesn't mean you got the car, but thats a GM problem, not Mopar.


so whats the deal ? get the lines and ideas left back, and continue from them. That's the deal on the retro idea, to visualize the evolution still right now, even with the big jump without something to show

I hope is more clear now... sorry english is not my mother language and maybe I can get confused on some phrases trying explain something

[stripedelete]

Then you will be able to look forward on newer and progressive lines from there, from a new starting line.

Nacho, I'm not sure I'm following you on the sentence above.   Are you saying the Challenger isn't necessarily retro, Chrysler just picked up where they left off?  Where as a Charger entree has to be retro in order to pick up the styling cue's from different generations?   If I am reading it right to that point, I need help with the above sentence.

Great point about the Challenger. I never considered it, but it is a strategic advantage in the "pony" market segment.  It will evolve much easier, and therefore less costly, than it's competition.   I wonder if there were a set of next gen Challenger/Cuda plans in somebody's drawer that were never pulled out as the 70's turned into bankruptcy?  

I'm telling that the need of the Charger on a retro design like Challenger was made, will allow you to give newer draws from there to get it into a new gen ( if projected ).

being we got a LOOONG years jump without any REAL CHARGER production, you never associate the idea about a Charger is on the market.

On a Mustang and on a Camaro, Corvette ( I think also MonteCarlos never stopped ? dunno ), we saw the evolution. You can like or not, but there is an evolution. Challenger and Charger not, so Challenger was made just right, showing the old lines LEFT and giving the base of a new gen ( if will come ). You can see the CHALLENGER left back on the new Challenger

The Charger was a newer NOTHING RELATED car with the Charger, and used an old name to give us a... "revival" ? can you say is a revival of the Charger ? Do you see a Charger on it ?, naaaah, thats a marketing deal on the name.

The new GTO show us too use the name doesn't mean you got the car, but thats a GM problem, not Mopar.


so whats the deal ? get the lines and ideas left back, and continue from them. That's the deal on the retro idea, to visualize the evolution still right now, even with the big jump without something to show

I hope is more clear now... sorry english is not my mother language and maybe I can get confused on some phrases trying explain something

Got it now.  No worries on the english.  I follow your other posts very easily.  This topic doesn't lend it'self to an easy translation.

[Brock Samson]

Then you will be able to look forward on newer and progressive lines from there, from a new starting line.

Nacho, I'm not sure I'm following you on the sentence above.   Are you saying the Challenger isn't necessarily retro, Chrysler just picked up where they left off?  Where as a Charger entree has to be retro in order to pick up the styling cue's from different generations?   If I am reading it right to that point, I need help with the above sentence.

Great point about the Challenger. I never considered it, but it is a strategic advantage in the "pony" market segment.  It will evolve much easier, and therefore less costly, than it's competition.  I wonder if there were a set of next gen Challenger/Cuda plans in somebody's drawer that were never pulled out as the 70's turned into bankruptcy? 

As a matter of fact there is/was/are...
                            http://automobileart.homestead.com/CarConceptArt4.html



as a side note, due to the commonality of the two door B and E bodies which began with the 1971 models I suspect the Dodge/Plymouth B bodies would somewhat larger versions of these proposals...

[stripedelete]

Then you will be able to look forward on newer and progressive lines from there, from a new starting line.

Nacho, I'm not sure I'm following you on the sentence above.   Are you saying the Challenger isn't necessarily retro, Chrysler just picked up where they left off?  Where as a Charger entree has to be retro in order to pick up the styling cue's from different generations?   If I am reading it right to that point, I need help with the above sentence.

Great point about the Challenger. I never considered it, but it is a strategic advantage in the "pony" market segment.  It will evolve much easier, and therefore less costly, than it's competition.  I wonder if there were a set of next gen Challenger/Cuda plans in somebody's drawer that were never pulled out as the 70's turned into bankruptcy? 

As a matter of fact there is/was/are...
                            http://automobileart.homestead.com/CarConceptArt4.html



as a side note, due to the commonality of the two door B and E bodies which began with the 1971 models I suspect the Dodge/Plymouth B bodies would somewhat larger versions of these proposals...

Cool.  Thanks for the link.  They may have gone larger.  But don't forget they were always chasing the competition in those days.  That may have moved E-Body smaller yet.

Seems like alot of "Opel" lines in those sketches.

[Nacho-RT74]

short the trunk on this and will get a Jav

[Nacho-RT74]

70 torino reminisence

[Brock Samson]

just for grins here's the felt pen sketch for the '68 Charger, shown to dealers in '67. check out the roof.  
sorry i had to go thru the resize rename repost drill...
  OK: Clearly these Samsen design sketches are wishfull thinking and in many cases misslabled i wont get into details but i think these need to be taken with a grain of salt, the clay mockup was clearly concidered by Mother but none of these show any concideration of the upcomming (at that time) 5 MPH bumper regs.
back on subject & sorry for the sidetrip...

[hemi68charger]

Scott...
Do you see yourself  or Chrysler actively doing another tour similar to the Route 2002/2003 way back when? There hasn't been anything to come through Houston in like forever. Hard to believe being the 4th largest city in the US of A.

Troy
Pres - Houston Mopar Club Connection.........

[stripedelete]

Can't copy page #5 pics, but top left, page 5, looks like a Riviera.  

Bottom left seems to be Speed Racer's "Mach 5"

[skip68]

Hello to the Mopar Community abroad.

SIDE NOTE SPECIFICALLY FOR DODGECHARGER.COM…

I want you all to know that we received the largest amount of feedback from your site.  Hands down, you were the most vocal group about how you felt.Thanks again to you all here at DODGECHARGER.COM!!!

So, out of all the hype and all the talk and all the years of designing the new Charger making the attempt to cling to a legend this is what You "Dodge" did.. You made just a car and nothing more.  Because that's how most all of the new owners look at it is it's "just a car"        We are the most vocal because to us it is more than just a car.   It comes from a time when Chrysler was bold and made history.   I hate to bring this back but, I just saw a picture of the 2011 Charger.  It has a more sleek look but that's about it.   Why are the designers wasting time and money with these stupid baby steps ?   If YOU "Dodge" want to build a Charger, cling to it's past, cling to it's name and keep trying to throw in little touches of the old car then why don't you just build it like you did the Challenger and be done ? ? ?    :slap:    I am sorry if I seem a bit brass, but what the hell is going on in this company ? ? ?   It is ran worse then a Burger King..    If Burger King got rid of the Wopper and then brought it back, you can bet your ass it would be a Whopper and not a fish sandwich.