Spy Photos 2008 Dodge Challenger

[Sixty8panther]

WRONG. It is NOT an exact copy. Not even close.

Some of your people are blind.

Is it as original as the Camaro concept... no. But it IS not a carbon copy.

[NOS2006]

WRONG. It is NOT an exact copy. Not even close.

Some of your people are blind.

Is it as original as the Camaro concept... no. But it IS not a carbon copy.

Sixty8, let's analyze that comparison:

Front:

The grille on the new Challenger is cheaper looking with the cross hairs, but they're necessary to keep it branded with the current Dodge grille theme. The headlights are similar, just updated to today's standards. Fog light placement is the same. The lower fascia is dropped a bit more than the original, but it looks even lower since there isn't a chrome bar under the grille/headlights. The new Challenger's lower opening is larger too, and lower as mentioned.

Side:

The windows lack the chrome trim of the older Challenger. The body is nearly identical, though I'd say the body on the new one is less muscular. Body line is the same. Contour of the greenhouse and windows are approximately the same. Looks like the same size wheel openings, but bigger wheels (it's 2007).

Even the size and placement of the side reflectors are the same.

Rear:

I'd be willing to say that even the designers on the new Challenger got bored with their design and made a really terrible rear end compared to the original. The original was very muscular and the new one is very plain and easy to Photoshop. The reverse light placement is terrible and the taillight panel is very plain Jane. The rear isn't really a carbon copy at all compared to the front and side, but it definitely lacks the spirit and enthusiasm that a true muscle car demands.

Overall, this thing better be ballsy in power and refinement because its design isn't what I expect out of a new Challenger. What is it challenging? The 1970's design was a hell of a lot better. I'm honestly unsure of why someone would buy one of these over a Mustang GT, GT500, or Camaro unless Dodge really impresses us with something we definitely don't expect. However, being that it's Dodge, a company I've lost nearly all my respect for, I don't see them coming out with anything better for the Challenger than Ford or Chevy has/will with the Mustang and Camaro.

[Robert Hall]

Whatever...I like the new Challenger design, it's a modern yet retro interpretation of my favorite design from my birth year (1970)...like the current Mustang and upcoming Camaro, it's satisfyingly retromodern, IMHO.

[Cory Wolfe]

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.

Uh, no. If the Challenger had stayed in production, it would have followed every Chrysler trend to this date... Oversized, understyled excess in the late 70's; downsized, boxy blandness in the 80's; blobby, modern cheapness in the 90's; and their current identity crisis and total cheapness. It wouldn't look nearly identical to original. Even the Porsche 911 changed more from generation to generation. Along side the Ford GT, it's the most blatant copy of an earlier design... Ever.

WRONG. It is NOT an exact copy. Not even close.

Some of your people are blind.

*ahem* The photos you provided are working against you. The new one lacks chrome, the body has more height, and it has a few modern touches. Oh wow... Big difference. We're blind? I don't think so. As NOS pointed out, even the damn side markers are identical!!!!! Come on, stop fooling yourself. Edited July 8, 2007 by blackviper8891

[ocnblu]

I think it's fabulous that all three major pony cars are going to be back on the market soon. All of them are knockouts, the best of their kind, ever. Here's to the Second Coming!

[mustang84]

Agreed 'blu. I don't understand why some get so worked up of the styling...I'm just happy to see the Pony Car Trio back in business!

[CSpec]

Too bad the Challenger will be extremely heavy and pretty expensive... GTO II?

[LosAngeles]

I think the Camaro and Challenger look too much alike.

[BrewSwillis]

I just see a chopped greenhouse with an extremely raked windshield (that probably won't all make it to production), and a little bit more of a coke-bottle form with a narrower grille. Other than that, not much more "original" than the Challenger concept.....even though both are fricken awesome!

[Delta Force79]

I just see a chopped greenhouse with an extremely raked windshield (that probably won't all make it to production), and a little bit more of a coke-bottle form with a narrower grille. Other than that, not much more "original" than the Challenger concept.....even though both are fricken awesome!

The man has a very good point and the proof is in the pic....Camaro is just as much a copy of a 1969, as the Challenger is a 1970.

Edited July 11, 2007 by Delta Force79

[Delta Force79]

I just see a chopped greenhouse with an extremely raked windshield (that probably won't all make it to production), and a little bit more of a coke-bottle form with a narrower grille. Other than that, not much more "original" than the Challenger concept.....even though both are fricken awesome!

The man has a very good point and the proof is in the picture....Camaro is just as much a copy of a 1969, as the Challenger is a 1970.

[Intrepidation]

I just see a chopped greenhouse with an extremely raked windshield (that probably won't all make it to production), and a little bit more of a coke-bottle form with a narrower grille. Other than that, not much more "original" than the Challenger concept.....even though both are fricken awesome!

The man has a very good point and the proof is in the pic....Camaro is just as much a copy of a 1969, as the Challenger is a 1970.

Yet no one complains about it..if it had a Chrysler badge the bitching would never stop!

The biggest difference between old and new is, as pointed out, the chopped roof, raked windshield, and pushed-to-the=corner wheels and modernized fascia.

Both are awesome, both have their own style, if you don't like them, that's fine...you can enjoy your FWD Camry Solara appliance, hideous Monte Carlo, and Nissan Altima (unless it's on fire, then you won't be enjoying it).

It's so cool that the muscle cars will be duking it out once more!

Edited July 11, 2007 by Dodgefan

[Cory Wolfe]

The man has a very good point and the proof is in the picture....Camaro is just as much a copy of a 1969, as the Challenger is a 1970.

Yet no one complains about it..if it had a Chrysler badge the bitching would never stop!

The biggest difference between old and new is, as pointed out, the chopped roof, raked windshield, and pushed-to-the=corner wheels and modernized fascia.

Both are awesome, both have their own style, if you don't like them, that's fine...you can enjoy your FWD Camry Solara appliance, hideous Monte Carlo, and Nissan Altima (unless it's on fire, then you won't be enjoying it).

You guys must be blind. The Camaro has similar design traits, but are done in a radically different way. It blurs the line between being modern and retro. It has a whole different swagger than the original. The Challenger, on the other hand is nearly identical. The only differences being the slight modernization to fit the LX platform. That's it. If ye can't see it, ye art blind!

[Delta Force79]

You guys must be blind. The Camaro has similar design traits, but are done in a radically different way. It blurs the line between being modern and retro. It has a whole different swagger than the original. The Challenger, on the other hand is nearly identical. The only differences being the slight modernization to fit the LX platform. That's it. If ye can't see it, ye art blind!

Well then you must be blind too, sorry to spoil the fun but if the Camaro isn't a blatant rip off of the '69 I don't what it is. I can tell you one thing's for sure, it sure as hell isn't an evolution of a 4th gen Camaro. The first thought that crossed my mind when I saw the Camaro concept was wow it's a '69 Camaro. They share the same greenhouse although chopped on the concept, they share the same c-pillar, the Camaro has it's side markers lights in nearly the same spot as the '69 Camaro ( a complaint about the Challenger I've read) Hell even the bowtie in the rear is in the same place. The major difference is two tailights vs three. The interior is a retro take on the 69's and the list goes on, the side scoop on the rear quarters behind the doors. So come on man, you can't sit here and lie through your teeth saying Chevy did something original. The only original part of the design is the rear view mirrors and the chopped roof.

Edited July 11, 2007 by Delta Force79

[Cory Wolfe]

Well then you must be blind too, sorry to spoil the fun but if the Camaro isn't a blatant rip off of the '69 I don't what it is. I can tell you one thing's for sure, it sure as hell isn't an evolution of a 4th gen Camaro. The first thought that crossed my mind when I saw the Camaro concept was wow it's a '69 Camaro. They share the same greenhouse although chopped on the concept, they share the same c-pillar, the Camaro has it's side markers lights in nearly the same spot as the '69 Camaro ( a complaint about the Challenger I've read) Hell even the bowtie in the rear is in the same place. The major difference is two tailights vs three. The interior is a retro take on the 69's and the list goes on, the side scoop on the rear quarters behind the doors. So come on man, you can't sit here and lie through your teeth saying Chevy did something original. The only original part of the design is the rear view mirrors and the chopped roof.

This is what I said: "The Camaro has similar design traits, but are done in a radically different way." For those of us who can read and interpret words correctly, that basically coincides with what you what you just said. The design is based on the first generation Camaro. It's obvious. However, what I'm saying is they didn't copy it line for line. It has a whole new persona compared to the original, while also looking like the original. I'm not saying its original as it's still retro. Retro largely = completely unoriginal. I'm saying its more original than the Challenger, which it most certainly is. In NOS's Camaro vs. Mustang vs. Challenger thread, I said "Challenger: 99% unoriginal, Mustang: 80% unoriginal, Camaro: 60% unoriginal." Makes sense now, does it not? You can't honestly say the Camaro is equal to the Challenger in terms of design unless you really are blind. I know what I see and what I see is the same thing you are seeing. Take your blinders off.

[Delta Force79]

This is what I said: "The Camaro has similar design traits, but are done in a radically different way." For those of us who can read and interpret words correctly, that basically coincides with what you what you just said. The design is based on the first generation Camaro. It's obvious. However, what I'm saying is they didn't copy it line for line. It has a whole new persona compared to the original, while also looking like the original. I'm not saying its original as it's still retro. Retro largely = completely unoriginal. I'm saying its more original than the Challenger, which it most certainly is. In NOS's Camaro vs. Mustang vs. Challenger thread, I said "Challenger: 99% unoriginal, Mustang: 80% unoriginal, Camaro: 60% unoriginal." Makes sense now, does it not? You can't honestly say the Camaro is equal to the Challenger in terms of design unless you really are blind. I know what I see and what I see is the same thing you are seeing. Take your blinders off.

And the Challenger has "similar design traits" Different grille, more squared off fascia ( Camaro's is curved and raked back somewhat), nearly identical roofline and greenhouse ( same applies to Camaro), Nearly identical rear ( Camaro's is raised up some and the tailight count which I mentioned is different), We have not seen the production interiors of either car yet, but based on the concepts both make liberall use of the original interior designs traits. Both has side markers in nearly the same spot as on the originals ( as I already stated)...in a profile shot, the Challenger is squared off more than the original, dosen't have nearly the front or rear overhangs, nor does the bottom of the new car rise at the front and rear in any way the closely resembles the original ( the Camaro has less overhang front and rear, and has more scultping along the rocker area) otherwise it is a very similar profile to the '69....so I don't see how I'm wearing blinders....they're both copies of their original counterparts, just different in the sense they were penned by different people, who see retro in their own individual way.

[Cory Wolfe]

And the Challenger has "similar design traits" Different grille, more squared off fascia ( Camaro's is curved and raked back somewhat), nearly identical roofline and greenhouse ( same applies to Camaro), Nearly identical rear ( Camaro's is raised up some and the tailight count which I mentioned is different), We have not seen the production interiors of either car yet, but based on the concepts both make liberall use of the original interior designs traits. Both has side markers in nearly the same spot as on the originals ( as I already stated)...in a profile shot, the Challenger is squared off more than the original, dosen't have nearly the front or rear overhangs, nor does the bottom of the new car rise at the front and rear in any way the closely resembles the original ( the Camaro has less overhang front and rear, and has more scultping along the rocker area) otherwise it is a very similar profile to the '69....so I don't see how I'm wearing blinders....they're both copies of their original counterparts, just different in the sense they were penned by different people, who see retro in their own individual way.

Again, both cars have similar design traits. That's a given. But its obvious that the Challenger isn't done in a different sense than the original. The shapes, lines, details. They're all nearly identical. The only thing to change, as I said, was the how the body fits the platform, which is what you described, yourself. The Camaro, on the other hand, isnt nearly identical. The shapes, lines, details, etc are all done in a unique way compared to the original. The side markers may be in the same place, but they're different, unlike the Challenger's which are identically shaped and placed. Each part of the Camaro's design is more than just a copy. It's a unique spin on the original's design. You simply fail to see it because you don't want to see it. Or you really are blind. Either or. Edited July 11, 2007 by blackviper8891

[Delta Force79]

Ok, if you say so....although I'm getting visual lessons from the same person that think's Subaru's are nice?

[Intrepidation]

Let's go through the list of what separates the Camaro and Challenger concepts from the old ones:

They both:

Made the body thicker and the glass smaller...hence the "chopped" look

Have the wheels pushed out to the corners

Both have modern takes on old designs (like the headlight designs)

Both lack Chrome bumpers

What makes the Camaro seem more "modern" is where the front fascia is a more radical take on the old one.

The Challenger is a modern take, but is more "faithful" to the original, and that's what a lot of people want.

Interestingly, it's the Camaro that goes retro inside while the Challenger goes modern.

[Cory Wolfe]

Ok, if you say so....although I'm getting visual lessons from the same person that think's Subaru's are nice?

Not all of them... Just the current Legacy, pre-facelifted current Imprezas, and the old SVX. *nods*

Let's go through the list of what separates the Camaro and Challenger concepts from the old ones:

They both:

Made the body thicker and the glass smaller...hence the "chopped" look

Have the wheels pushed out to the corners

Both have modern takes on old designs (like the headlight designs)

Both lack Chrome bumpers

What makes the Camaro seem more "modern" is where the front fascia is a more radical take on the old one.

The Challenger is a modern take, but is more "faithful" to the original, and that's what a lot of people want.

Interestingly, it's the Camaro that goes retro inside while the Challenger goes modern.

Sir... The Challenger isn't a modern take on an old design. It's an old designed slightly morphed to fit the LX platform.

I'm a perfectionist who analyzes design for enjoyment and it happens to be my planned career. Not to be naive or anthing, but I'm right, damnit.

Edited July 11, 2007 by blackviper8891

[Intrepidation]

Sir... The Challenger isn't a modern take on an old design. It's an old designed slightly morphed to fit the LX platform.

I'm a perfectionist who analyzes design for enjoyment and is my planned career. Not to be naive or anthing, but I'm right, damnit.

I am too, and I am in in college to get my degree in said career. And, I've worked in the field before. So there

Edited July 11, 2007 by Dodgefan

[Cory Wolfe]

I am too, and I am in in college to get my degree in said career. And, I've worked in the field before. So there

But you're a fan of Chrysler's designs. Any self respecting perfectionist automotive design analyzer wouldn't stoop to that level. Edited July 11, 2007 by blackviper8891

[Delta Force79]

Ah you two kiss and make up...and allow me to say the definative word on this issue...they're both retro, they're both cool, and it's about damn time America corrected over 30 years of mistakes and brought these babies back from the dead

Edited July 11, 2007 by Delta Force79

[Intrepidation]

But you're a fan of Chrysler's designs. Any self respecting perfectionist automotive design analyzer wouldn't stoop to that level.

And your a fan of Subaru's. Try again

Ah you two kiss and make up...and allow me to say the definitive word on this issue...they're both retro, they're both cool, and it's about damn time America corrected over 30 years of mistakes and brought these babies back from the dead

I'll drink to that! *sips cola*

[LosAngeles]

The Camaro look is more 68 than 69 to me.

[Cory Wolfe]

Ah you two kiss and make up...and allow me to say the definative word on this issue...they're both retro, they're both cool, and it's about damn time America corrected over 30 years of mistakes and brought these babies back from the dead

Fair enough.

And your a fan of Subaru's. Try again

And proud. The Legacy is the best looking midsize sedan on the market. So there, biatch!

[Delta Force79]

Fair enough.

And proud. The Legacy is the best looking midsize sedan on the market. So there, biatch!

The Legacy is the best looking midsize sedan? now you've gone too far

[Intrepidation]

Fair enough.

And proud. The Legacy is the best looking midsize sedan on the market. So there, biatch!

That's like saying "this is the best moldy bread because it has the least amount of mold"

[Cory Wolfe]

The Legacy is the best looking midsize sedan? now you've gone too far

Well, is it not?

Camry = Pudgy, Bloated

Accord = Emotionless

Sonata = Korea's Honda

Optima = Korea's Nissan

Galant = Pure oddness and ugliness

Mazda6 = Sleek, stylish, but uninspiring

Avenger = Ugly, ugly, ugly

Sebring = Even more ugly, ugly, ugly

Malibu = Good body, iffy fascias

G6 = Horrible proportions, decent design

Aura = Good fascias, uninteresting body

Jetta = Homely

Altima = Exciting, but exaggerated

Verona = "I love the 90s!"

[Camino LS6]

Ah you two kiss and make up...and allow me to say the definative word on this issue...they're both retro, they're both cool, and it's about damn time America corrected over 30 years of mistakes and brought these babies back from the dead

The rest is just a BS debate over semantics.

[Delta Force79]

Well, is it not?

Camry = Pudgy, Bloated

Accord = Emotionless

Sonata = Korea's Honda

Optima = Korea's Nissan

Galant = Pure oddness and ugliness

Mazda6 = Sleek, stylish, but uninspiring

Avenger = Ugly, ugly, ugly

Sebring = Even more ugly, ugly, ugly

Malibu = Good body, iffy fascias

G6 = Horrible proportions, decent design

Aura = Good fascias, uninteresting body

Jetta = Homely

Altima = Exciting, but exaggerated

Verona = "I love the 90s!"

To be blunt....I hate all of them

To be fair, I'd take the Mazda 6 over any other them.

[Cory Wolfe]

The rest is just a BS debate over semantics.

Just had to ruin our fun, didn't you?

To be fair, I'd take the Mazda 6 over any other them.

The 'Speed6 ranks up there with the Legacy.

[Delta Force79]

Just had to ruin our fun, didn't you?

The 'Speed6 ranks up there with the Legacy.

Not looks wise, it far surpasses it

[Cory Wolfe]

I'm a Mazdaphile, so I can see where you're coming from. For me, the front fascia is just a bit off to be classified as better looking than the Legacy. From there back, they're basically equal. If the 'Speed6's front fascia were toned down a bit, I would have a hard time picking a favorite.

[Delta Force79]

I actually prefer the look of a regular Mazda 6 over the 'speed6

[LosAngeles]

Well, is it not?

Camry = Pudgy, Bloated

Accord = Emotionless

Sonata = Korea's Honda

Optima = Korea's Nissan

Galant = Pure oddness and ugliness

Mazda6 = Sleek, stylish, but uninspiring

Avenger = Ugly, ugly, ugly

Sebring = Even more ugly, ugly, ugly

Malibu = Good body, iffy fascias

G6 = Horrible proportions, decent design

Aura = Good fascias, uninteresting body

Jetta = Homely

Altima = Exciting, but exaggerated

Verona = "I love the 90s!"

Losing credibility fast. The Jetta is NOT an intermediate.

As far as the 6, yeah, the notchback doesn't do it for me, but the fastback is stunning.

[Intrepidation]

I'm a Mazdaphile, so I can see where you're coming from. For me, the front fascia is just a bit off to be classified as better looking than the Legacy. From there back, they're basically equal. If the 'Speed6's front fascia were toned down a bit, I would have a hard time picking a favorite.

Right, so it's OK for you to like Mazda's designs but because I like Chrysler's I'm obviously wrong and have no right to say otherwise.

[Cory Wolfe]

Losing credibility fast. The Jetta is NOT an intermediate.

It competes with that class moreso than the Passat does.

Right, so it's OK for you to like Mazda's designs but because I like Chrysler's I'm obviously wrong and have no right to say otherwise.

Well, for one, there is a glaring difference. Chysler designs, for the most part, are hideous. Mazda designs, on the other hand, are attractive if not conservative at times.

Plus, I'm a Mazdaphile. I'm biased towards Mazda just as you are biased towards Chrysler. I don't expect to change anyone's opinion. I didn't say you couldn't say otherwise, either. I think you're misinterpreting the joking nature of the majority of my posts. I like to playfully "push buttons", so to say. You shouldn't take it so serious. Everyone does it and has it done to themselves. How many Millenia jokes do you think I've experienced? Too many, but it's in good nature and is funny. More often than not, there's usually some truth to them, as well.

[Sixty8panther]

The 1969 Camaro has the "speed lines", (fender creases) that are not

found on the 67-68 or the 5th gen concept, those have round wheel

well openings on their fenders.

Well, is it not?

Camry = Pudgy, Bloated

Accord = Emotionless

Sonata = Korea's Honda

Optima = Korea's Nissan

Galant = Pure oddness and ugliness

Mazda6 = Sleek, stylish, but uninspiring

Avenger = Ugly, ugly, ugly

Sebring = Even more ugly, ugly, ugly

Malibu = Good body, iffy fascias

G6 = Horrible proportions, decent design

Aura = Good fascias, uninteresting body

Jetta = Homely

Altima = Exciting, but exaggerated

Verona = "I love the 90s!"

Agreed, except for the Avenger... the Avenger is alright, not great but okay.

[Robert Hall]

I thought this was a thread about the Challenger..what's with all the FWD sedan BS?

[6t5frlane]

The 1969 Camaro has the "speed lines", (fender creases) that are not

found on the 67-68 or the 5th gen concept, those have round wheel

well openings on their fenders.

Agreed, except for the Avenger... the Avenger is alright, not great but okay.

I agree Dodge fan. I was stuck in traffic on the GS Parkway in NJ. Next to me was a brand new Avenger Black w/chrome wheels. I'm diggin this car. I'll take the R/T please. I like it better then the Charger

[Ravenfreak13]

I wish the avenger had a more substantial grill though. It's too thin like the caliber's grill.

[Intrepidation]

I wish the avenger had a more substantial grill though. It's too thin like the caliber's grill.

I think the grill is perfect...

[LosAngeles]

I was stuck in traffic on the GS Parkway in NJ. Next to me was a brand new Avenger Black w/chrome wheels. I'm diggin this car. I'll take the R/T please. I like it better then the Charger

I was looking at one when I was on the 10 yesterday, that had some wheels with a deeper dish design, and they made the fender flares look rather decent. All it needed was to be lowered, and I might have been one to reconsider my stance on the car overall.

Charger would still get my car buying dollar first if I could afford it.

[CMG]

Fair enough.

And proud. The Legacy is the best looking midsize sedan on the market. So there, biatch!

Do you guys ALL post drunk like this?

(I own/like a xxxxx so it's the best!)

Edited July 17, 2007 by CMG

[CMG]

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

So when the HHR was said BY THE DESIGNER to be along the lines of the old Chevy Suburban- PLAGARISM.

The Ford GT must be on death row...

Taking styling cues from the past has been done by all major car companies. Look at BMW's grilles over the years. To say you wannabe a styling/design guy is odd when I read your posts.

Are you young?

[CMG]

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

Yup, or the ..... MUSTANG???

Usually someone will get a hard on for one company or another because of a reason, and try their best to toss insults, but usually it's for a reason. I have a feeling that's what designboy's problem is..?

If Ford messed with the GT40's styling it woulda been a tragedy IMO. The original was a winner as far as styling goes.

[Sixty8panther]

CMG: BlackViper has an epic Ego...

[CMG]

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?

How many SRT vehicles did you pick?

Lemme see.... NONE.

Wonder why that is?

Is this place a kiddie show? LOL

Take a look at BMW's styling of late, it's terrible at best from some angles. Want me to go find the ugliest pics I can, like YOU did?

[CMG]

CMG: BlackViper has an epic Ego...

I can tell. LOL

I bet he's a youngster too, a "I can't be wrong" kinda guy, who's rarely right!

Hi Sixty8panther!