Spy Photos 2008 Dodge Challenger

[Oracle of Delphi]

For your viewing pleasure!

http://jalopnik.com/cars/challenger-is-go-...nger-273280.php

[NOS2006]

Or displeasure. I'm only seeing one picture..

[Bimmer325]

How exciting.

[BrewSwillis]

Cool! I don't know what the deal is with them saying that the R/T's are already sold out at $50K a pop?? That doesn't make sense on a few levels.

First, how can they sell a car that isn't even finalized, and aren't taking orders for?

Second, I don't really see how it could go for $50k, even if the R/T is the 6.1L HEMI with 425 HP.......unless the R/T will have the new SRT motor that is supposed to put out over 500 HP!?.....but then will there be an SRT model that goes for more than $50K?? I doubt it.

[BrewSwillis]

How exciting.

Yeah, because RWD American muscle cars with 500 HP aren't exciting.........

[Northstar]

Who would ever pay $50k for this? A Corvette with a few options can be had for less than that.

[Delta Force79]

I'd buy one in a heartbeat...but not for 50K..not for a Dodge

[AxelTheRed]

Everyone is so down on this being a $50,000 Dodge. 50K is too much for ANY muscle car, regardless how how well-equipped it is. Doing that is to miss one of the fundamental draws to muscle cars...to be affordable to most people.

Even the starting price is too much...a starting price of $31,000 is ridiculous.

Edited June 29, 2007 by AxelTheRed

[Paolino]

I still hear "Dodge" and I still think of Al Bundy... :AH-HA_wink:

[Bimmer325]

Yeah, because RWD American muscle cars with 500 HP aren't exciting.........

When a car does nothing in terms of progressing design, I (and countless others) consider it boring.

The Challenger is the least exciting model to debut in years. We've literally seen it all before.

How unoriginal can DCX get?

[FAPTurbo]

The old guys in my family happen to love this car... mostly because it hearkens back to the good ol' days, when vehicles had some essence of soul.

My Dad likes the new Camaro... but at the Auto Show, I literally had to pull him away from the Challanger. It may not 'progress' design, but it certainly is making a statement that vehicles today are f*ckin' boring to look at.

[NOS2006]

When a car does nothing in terms of progressing design, I (and countless others) consider it boring.

The Challenger is the least exciting model to debut in years. We've literally seen it all before.

How unoriginal can DCX get?

I agree 110%

The old guys in my family happen to love this car... mostly because it hearkens back to the good ol' days, when vehicles had some essence of soul.

My Dad likes the new Camaro... but at the Auto Show, I literally had to pull him away from the Challanger. It may not 'progress' design, but it certainly is making a statement that vehicles today are f*ckin' boring to look at.

If Dodge is copying the "soul" they had from 35 years ago, what is that saying about their designers now? That they can't design for $h!. Time for a new panel of creative thinkers, eh?

I don't see why people think this car is amazing. I think of Dodge and I can't get past the plastic interior and crap engineering that my parents faced with their last three Dodge vehicles. I mean, all vehicles differ and we'll have to see this Challenger on a lot to actually check it out, but I'm jumping the ball and saying it's going to lack refinement and have terrible gas mileage. Now, I know it's got 425+ HP and all that hooplah, but if it can't get 25 MPG highway, what's that saying? And I just can't get past the point that it looks 35 years old and it hasn't even hit showrooms yet.

[/rant]

[Satty]

I actually like the Challenger, maybe more than the Camaro (which I really only like in vert form) but 0 n0zerz I spi teh b-pill@rz through teh windeez oh teh suxxorzz!!!!!11111oneoneoneeleventy

[Sixty8panther]

DOdgefan and I were just discussing the possibility of the B-pillars on

the "production ready" chassis being just another way to get press &

generate excitement over this car... now with the disguised C/B pillar

area I think that might be a possibility.

If this car, same as the Camaro, are not hardtops I just might stick to

my "nothing newer than 1979" rule for many years to come.

[Sixty8panther]

When a car does nothing in terms of progressing design, I (and countless others) consider it boring.

The Challenger is the least exciting model to debut in years. We've literally seen it all before.

How unoriginal can DCX get?

I know, RIGHT?

I see about two dozen of them on my way to work every day.

Most of them 1970/1971s. God damn Mopar for going retro, I

would much rather see ANOTHER Camry Solara LE than some

RWD, Mustang-stomping, asphalt ripping musclke car. :AH-HA_wink:

[Delta Force79]

I actually prefer the looks of this to the Camaro....and I'd get this over a Camaro.

[toesuf94]

I am on both sides of the fence here. On one hand we have the new thinkers who brought us the Calliber...and then we have the retro studio who brought us a Xerox of a 1970's Challeger with computer tweaking for the 21st century. When I look at the new stuff, I cringe. When I look at the Challenger, I smile. It is cool, Retromodern. It captures what Dodge was. But I will not buy it. Not at those prices. ( MAYBE in Plum Crazy or Sublime Green if I was a multi-millionaire...)

When I look at the Camaro, I instantly see Camaro, not a '69, not an '86, and not an '02 - but a Camaro. Sure the lines resemble a '69, but if you park them side by side, you will be able to see the huge difference between the cars. Plus, the promise of the LS3 and other hot engines that provide power and economy ( something the Hemi or the Ford has NOT been able to do ), The Camaro is the no brainer choice. I am already in line for one.

[6t5frlane]

I too like this better the the Camaro. The new camaro in convertible form is nice but the car wants to be a 69 and a 07 and missus both. The Dodge delivers there (more 70-07 ). That said I think it is exciting that all the US companies will be back in the game...Mustang/ Camaro/ Challenger.

[Intrepidation]

When a car does nothing in terms of progressing design, I (and countless others) consider it boring.

The Challenger is the least exciting model to debut in years. We've literally seen it all before.

How unoriginal can DCX get?

Pretty original to me.

I agree 110%

If Dodge is copying the "soul" they had from 35 years ago, what is that saying about their designers now? That they can't design for $h!. Time for a new panel of creative thinkers, eh?

I don't see why people think this car is amazing. I think of Dodge and I can't get past the plastic interior and crap engineering that my parents faced with their last three Dodge vehicles. I mean, all vehicles differ and we'll have to see this Challenger on a lot to actually check it out, but I'm jumping the ball and saying it's going to lack refinement and have terrible gas mileage. Now, I know it's got 425+ HP and all that hooplah, but if it can't get 25 MPG highway, what's that saying? And I just can't get past the point that it looks 35 years old and it hasn't even hit showrooms yet.

[/rant]

We go over this time and time again, and I suppose we need to go over it once more. The Challenger was designed the way it was because of the Charger. When the Charger debuted there was bitching and moaning that it wasn't retro, wasn't a coupe, and didn't "look like a Charger" (although this is the best looking Charger IMO).

To appease these people, who want a retro, 2-door muscle car that "looks like it should" they created this. It's everything the Charger isn't in terms of design, and what people wanted. In addition,

I (and countless others)

(including people on this very thread)

consider it to be excellent looking, carrying the spirit of the Challenger, with odern proportions. It isn't a carbon copy of the original. It's very retro to be sure, but the proportions are very modern, as is the [concept's] interior.

So, for those who want a modern, practical muscle car, we have the Charger, and for those who want a retro, 2-door muscle car, we have teh Charger.

I for one love both the Camaro and Challenger designs, for different reasons. I love Chevrolet's modern take on the car, but I love Dodge's retro take on the Challenger. They took different takes on their icons, and neither one is bad.

Edited June 29, 2007 by Dodgefan

[Bimmer325]

Pretty original to me.

Appealing product like the Charger is a thing of the past. DCX's more recent models would make a Chinese automaker blush.

[BrewSwillis]

Don't get too hung up on the reported pricing. I'm sure it is wrong. Why would it's pricing not fall in line with other LX's (or LY's)? This needs to compete with the Mustang and Camaro, and will be priced accordingly. Even the limited production Prowler was not really that expensive when it came out.....and that was hand built. I will say that the Challenger can be purchased for just under $30K with a V8. They will probably sell a 5.7L HEMI version for $29,999.00

[BrewSwillis]

Appealing product like the Charger is a thing of the past. DCX's more recent models would make a Chinese automaker blush.

Nice method of trying to find the worst picture possible. It's too soon to tell if most of the pictured cars will not sell due to looks.....but I know the Caliber is a smashing success. I have a feeling the Compass will surprise everyone, and the Avenger will do really well, with the Sebring just doing O.K..

[Intrepidation]

I love the Avenger...and yeah using the base models is a great way to make a car look bad...but yeah the Avenger is 78% fleet...

[Chazman]

Here's more and on another Challenger caught on public roads. http://www.automochatter.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1603

Edited June 29, 2007 by Chazman

[Cory Wolfe]

When a car does nothing in terms of progressing design, I (and countless others) consider it boring.

The Challenger is the least exciting model to debut in years. We've literally seen it all before.

How unoriginal can DCX get?

Agreed.

Consider it to be excellent looking, carrying the spirit of the Challenger, with modern proportions. It isn't a carbon copy of the original. It's very retro to be sure, but the proportions are very modern, as is the [concept's] interior.

So, for those who want a modern, practical muscle car, we have the Charger, and for those who want a retro, 2-door muscle car, we have teh Charger.

I for one love both the Camaro and Challenger designs, for different reasons. I love Chevrolet's modern take on the car, but I love Dodge's retro take on the Challenger. They took different takes on their icons, and neither one is bad.

Modern proportions? Other than it not being low like the original, it's nearly identical. Modern, my ass.

Appealing product like the Charger is a thing of the past. DCX's more recent models would make a Chinese automaker blush.

Nice method of trying to find the worst picture possible. It's too soon to tell if most of the pictured cars will not sell due to looks.....but I know the Caliber is a smashing success. I have a feeling the Compass will surprise everyone, and the Avenger will do really well, with the Sebring just doing O.K..

They look like crap regardless.

As far as how well they're doing...

Dodge Avenger - 79% fleet

Dodge Caliber - 45% fleet

Chrysler Sebring - 63% fleet

Jeep Compass - 14% fleet

And for fun

Chrysler PT Cruiser - 62% fleet

Chrysler 300 - 44% fleet

Dodge Charger - 56% fleet

Dodge Magnum - 61% fleet

I'll concede that the Compass is doing far better than I thought it would, but otherwise... Pretty pathetic.

[Intrepidation]

Modern proportions? Other than it not being low like the original, it's nearly identical. Modern, my ass.

Higher beltline, shorter glass, wheels pushed out to corners, wheels coming out to the edge of wheel well s as opposed to being tucked inside.

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

True, the Caliber, Avenger, Sebring, Compass, etc. are all piles of crap, but I've always had hope for Chrysler Group Vehicles. The Challenger looks better than the concept-hopefully its a foot or half a foot shorter too-the concept Challenger was way bigger than the real 1970-74 models. And $31,000 is too high too start-what does it think it is, a 300 Limited or C?

[AxelTheRed]

Higher beltline, shorter glass, wheels pushed out to corners, wheels coming out to the edge of wheel well s as opposed to being tucked inside.

Come on man, you know that everything Chrysler does is bad, remember? Some folks on this forum are more down on Chrysler than they are on Toyota.

[Cory Wolfe]

Come on man, you know that everything Chrysler does is bad, remember? Some folks on this forum are more down on Chrysler than they are on Toyota.

No. I give Chrysler credit where I think they deserve it, but I call it as I see it. It's my opinion, everyone has one, don't belittle it. Edited June 29, 2007 by blackviper8891

[AxelTheRed]

No. I give Chrysler credit where I think they deserve it, but I call it as I see it. It's my opinion, everyone has one, don't belittle it.

I was only making a point man, no need to get on the defensive.

[Bimmer325]

Nice method of trying to find the worst picture possible. It's too soon to tell if most of the pictured cars will not sell due to looks.....but I know the Caliber is a smashing success. I have a feeling the Compass will surprise everyone, and the Avenger will do really well, with the Sebring just doing O.K..

No. I chose real-world images on Google, many of which were among the first results to appear. You found images photoshopped beyond recognition by Chrysler. Which is a better representation of how these cars actually look?

[Intrepidation]

No. I chose real-world images on Google, many of which were among the first results to appear. You found images photoshopped beyond recognition by Chrysler. Which is a better representation of how these cars actually look?

The blue AVenger is an illustratio, the Compass is bad photoshop, the rest are straight photos It's all about the camera angles. The wrong angle can make any car look like crap...just ask GM photography

Also, most of these look better in the real world (except the Compass)...plus you used the base Avenger and Sebring.

Edited June 29, 2007 by Dodgefan

[Flybrian]

The Avenger is doing wonderfully. I here you can get them for like $130 a week.

Oh, you can buy them, too?

[Bimmer325]

[Cory Wolfe]

The blue Avenger is an illustration.

Yes, it actually looks semi decent in that picture... But in person, I think it looks worse than it does in pictures.

[Intrepidation]

Yes, it actually looks semi decent in that picture... But in person, I think it looks worse than it does in pictures.

I've been up close and personal with a back R/T...I think it looks very sharp in person, but that's me

They do look crappy in base form though...at least the bumpers are painted!

[balthazar]

By most academic design standards, BMW has 1 truely classic design, the 507 (and even that falters in the details IMO). Everything from the late '60s thru the pre-Bangles has been unendless mild reshuffles of the exact same design elements. It's tremendously boring to 'countless' of us. The new uber concept sedan in the rags this month is the first car to legitimately have a chance to be on the same level as the 507... if it even gets built.

At least the Challenger is modeled after a car long gone from the roads, an iconic car from their heritage, a car so collectible and sought after that examples have sold for over $3,000,000 and as stated, a car that compliments the Charger perfectly.

What?- you mean there was another Dodge about 40 years ago that bears a strong resemblence to this? Why am I supposed to care again?"

The Challenger looks very close to fantastic- everything else about the past doesn't matter in the least or change anything in 2008.

[Intrepidation]

At least the Challenger is modeled after a car long gone from the roads, an iconic car from their heritage, a car so collectible and sought after that examples have sold for over $3,000,000 and as stated, a car that compliments the Charger perfectly.

What?- you mean there was another Dodge about 40 years ago that bears a strong resemblence to this? Why am I supposed to care again?"

The Challenger looks very close to fantastic- everything else about the past doesn't matter in the least or change anything in 2008.

For the Win!

[FAPTurbo]

By most academic design standards, BMW has 1 truely classic design, the 507 (and even that falters in the details IMO). Everything from the late '60s thru the pre-Bangles has been unendless mild reshuffles of the exact same design elements. It's tremendously boring to 'countless' of us. The new uber concept sedan in the rags this month is the first car to legitimately have a chance to be on the same level as the 507... if it even gets built.

At least the Challenger is modeled after a car long gone from the roads, an iconic car from their heritage, a car so collectible and sought after that examples have sold for over $3,000,000 and as stated, a car that compliments the Charger perfectly.

What?- you mean there was another Dodge about 40 years ago that bears a strong resemblence to this? Why am I supposed to care again?"

The Challenger looks very close to fantastic- everything else about the past doesn't matter in the least or change anything in 2008.

+1

[Cory Wolfe]

From a design standpoint, it's a almost a near copy. It's completely unoriginal. Say what you want about BMW, but their designs have evolved over the years. None of them are direct copies nearly to the degree that the Challenger is. I don't care if it's a great design, it is, but it's a copy, it's plagiarism. If a Foreign manufacturer came out with a great design, but was a direct copy of something else, would you guys remark on how it's a great design? No, you would berate the fact that it's a copy. Why is this any different? Oh, because it's... Retro? American? Iconic? Either way, it's a double standard.

[Intrepidation]

From a design standpoint, it's a almost a near copy. It's completely unoriginal. Say what you want about BMW, but their designs have evolved over the years. None of them are direct copies nearly to the degree that the Challenger is. I don't care if it's a great design, it is, but it's a copy, it's plagiarism. If a Foreign manufacturer came out with a great design, but was a direct copy of something else, would you guys remark on how it's a great design? No, you would berate the fact that it's a copy. Why is this any different? Oh, because it's... Retro? American? Iconic? Either way, it's a double standard.

It's not plagiarism if it's their own model they are using. If any other manufacture did something like this, and teh end result was good, I'd like it regardless.

Of course if it's like what Porsche does with their SUV...trying to their truck is in it's 2nd generation, when all they did was redo the front fascia...then yeah I'll berate that.

[Cory Wolfe]

It's not plagiarism if it's their own model they are using. If any other manufacture did something like this, and teh end result was good, I'd like it regardless.

Regardless, it still is. One designer penned the original one, and another copied his design. Plagiarism.

[Intrepidation]

Regardless, it still is. One designer penned the original one, and another copied his design. Plagiarism.

Well if we wanna get technical about it, plagiarism is an exact copy of something without giving the original material credit.

It's similar to be sure, but it's not an exact copy, and I'm reasonably sure credit was given to the original

[FAPTurbo]

So what if a car company wants to replicate one of their previous vehicles...

Like this one... The Ultimate retro.

http://www.gizmohighway.com/autos/ford_model_t_100.htm

[AxelTheRed]

Funny how folks didn't piss and moan like this when the New Beetle came out...or better yet: the Ford GT looking pretty much the f@#king exact same as it did in 1967. Nah, this is a Dodge, God knows that whatever they do isn't worth a damn

Edited July 1, 2007 by AxelTheRed

[Cory Wolfe]

Well if we wanna get technical about it, plagiarism is an exact copy of something without giving the original material credit.

It's similar to be sure, but it's not an exact copy, and I'm reasonably sure credit was given to the original

There is only one car that is more of an exact copy, and that is the Ford GT, Axel mentioned. It's pretty damn close. And it's unoriginal, which was the main point.

Funny how folks didn't piss and moan like this when the New Beetle came out...or better yet: the Ford GT looking pretty much the f@#king exact same as it did in 1967. Nah, this is a Dodge, God knows that whatever they do isn't worth a damn

Or you're delusional. *nods*

[Flybrian]

In sheer terms of intrigue, this is the least intriguing of all the muscle car revivals simply because we know what its going to look like. If that's what everyone else is saying, I must agree 100%.

[FAPTurbo]

There is only one car that is more of an exact copy, and that is the Ford GT, Axel mentioned. It's pretty damn close. And it's unoriginal, which was the main point.

Yeah, that too was a copy... but it was still nice car. Same deal with the Challanger... who cares if it is a copy, it still looks great.

Besides, with their recent track record of design, do you WANT Chrysler to design new vehicles?

[Cory Wolfe]

Yeah, that too was a copy... but it was still nice car. Same deal with the Challanger... who cares if it is a copy, it still looks great.

Besides, with their recent track record of design, do you WANT Chrysler to design new vehicles?

On that note, I'll have to agree.

[§carlet §wordfish]

The intent with the '08 was to complete the original idea of the Challenger; that if it had stayed in production beyon 1974, this is what it would look like. It's no more a plagarism of the older car than the Porsche 997 is of any other 911. It's the same car, just updated with modern technology.

I personally think the older models looks better proportioned, but the '08 is much cleaner and more refined.