At Long Last, Official Photos of the Dodge Challenger

[Intrepidation]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=124662#2

Hope that interior is available in other colors though, bleh.

Edited February 6, 2008 by Dodgefan

[CMG]

Hope that interior is available in other colors though, bleh.

I hope somebody loses the steering wheel parts bin!

[Robert Hall]

Hope that interior is available in other colors though, bleh.

Yeah....I HATE HATE HATE solid gray interiors... I'd love to see a black and red 2-tone interior w/ a gray exterior...my favorite Mustang GT color scheme. The original Challenger had some neat interior color choices--blue, green, black and white 2-tone, etc...I know 1970 color schemes probably won't fly today, but it needs more than infinite depression gray...

Edited February 6, 2008 by moltar

[Intrepidation]

I hope somebody loses the steering wheel parts bin!

Yeah!

[Croc]

I took one look at that interior and then had to think what car I was looking at. No joke...I momentarily forgot.

[avant1963]

Boy, you don't realize how bloated, bulky and ugly this thing is until they line it up with the original. I know I'm one of the very few that is not impressed by a car designed by what seems a Hot Wheels designer. Oh, well.

[hyperv6]

I knew how bloated and big this car was and expected it would not look good beside a original car.

They should hide that picture as it will not do it any good to compare.

I just read in the latest Hot Rod they said expected final weight to be just over 4100 pounds. They also said the car was only a few inches shorter than the Charger.

Many who have not seen this car in person will be suprised at the size.

[Z-06]

I knew how bloated and big this car was and expected it would not look good beside a original car.

They should hide that picture as it will not do it any good to compare.

I just read in the latest Hot Rod they said expected final weight to be just over 4100 pounds. They also said the car was only a few inches shorter than the Charger.

Many who have not seen this car in person will be suprised at the size.

What can you expect hyper, they LX platform is heavy to begin with and this car does not do any justice to weight saving. The car may be shorter, but I think it is wider than the Charger.

[bowtie_dude]

The rear is my favorite part. Actually, scratch that, its the only part I actually like.

[ToniCipriani]

For some strange reason, this picture reminded me of Mitsubishi...

[big blue]

As much as I love the engine note from the new Challenger, I'd take the Camaro or Mustang over it just because I feel this style won't age well. Granted, I do think its retro done right but...something about it just doesn't make it a slam dunk for me.

[Intrepidation]

The leather stitching on the armrests is a nice touch, I just wish Chrysler would get a clue and stop showing off their interiors in gray.

[BrewSwillis]

Enough orange already!!

[BrewSwillis]

Boy, you don't realize how bloated, bulky and ugly this thing is until they line it up with the original. I know I'm one of the very few that is not impressed by a car designed by what seems a Hot Wheels designer. Oh, well.

I knew how bloated and big this car was and expected it would not look good beside a original car.

They should hide that picture as it will not do it any good to compare.

So which is people?? Does the car look too much like the 1970 is does it not look enough like it??

All I heard before is that it looked too much like the 1970.....but now all of a sudden, it doesn't look enough like the 1970??

Let me guess.....you're looking for any excuse not to like it....cause your only GM fans??

I hate to break it to ya folks....but the Camaro is exactly the same way. Granted this is the concept Camaro, but as we've seen, the production is pretty close. All cars are "bloated" compared to cars of the past. You can thank the government and safety regs. for that:

[Northstar]

So which is people?? Does the car look too much like the 1970 is does it not look enough like it??

All I heard before is that it looked too much like the 1970.....but now all of a sudden, it doesn't look enough like the 1970??

Let me guess.....you're looking for any excuse not to like it....cause your only GM fans??

I hate to break it to ya folks....but the Camaro is exactly the same way. Granted this is the concept Camaro, but as we've seen, the production is pretty close. All cars are "bloated" compared to cars of the past. You can thank the government and safety regs. for that:

They Camaro does not look nearly as much like the old Camaro as the Challenger looks like the old Challenger. Yes, there are similarities, but it's not a blatant modern interpretation of it. The Camaro looks sleeker, lower, more modern, than the old Camaro. The Challenger looks higher up, puffier, and just plain big.

You're trying to say that an automaker can't make a new car look exactly the same as an old one because of government safety regulations? Please. You could take the old Challenger's sheet metal and make it meet all of the regulations... they're all under the skin anyways.

In short, here is a good summary of the designs:

Camaro: Has retro cues, but it's a modern package. It looks like a modern car in the way a Corvette does.

Challenger: Is a retro package that tries to add on modern cues. It doesn't look much like a modern car aside from the wheels, headlights, and other details (exhaust for example).

There's nothing wrong with the way either car is designed, it's just that different people have different opinions about how they were designed. The Challenger looks much more like an old car that has been customized, and the Camaro looks like a modern car, IMO.

The Challenger looks pretty badass in some shots, especially in black, but that isn't going to stop people from not liking the over bloated feeling they get when they look at it.

When we see a Challenger and a Camaro sitting next to each other, I predict the differences I have pointed out will be very apparent.

Finally, they never said it didn't look enough like the '70. When you see them seperately, perhaps the average person wouldn't notice a whole lot of difference, but when you put them together, you see how massive the new one actually is (the old one wasn't exactly small, either), that is what they are complaining about.

[Cory Wolfe]

So which is people?? Does the car look too much like the 1970 is does it not look enough like it??

All I heard before is that it looked too much like the 1970.....but now all of a sudden, it doesn't look enough like the 1970??

Let me guess.....you're looking for any excuse not to like it....cause your only GM fans??

Stop generalizing you obnoxious fool. You think that because one person says one thing, then someone else says another, they all share the same view. Give it up already and realize there's more out there than Chrysler fans. Not everyone is going to like everything you like. You can't say one thing about Chrysler without gushing, not that I've seen from your posts, anyways. You may be too busy just being snide on these forums. Regardless, a good amount of people here can atleast take off their blinders every once in a while... however rare that sometimes is.

While I still think it's too much of a copy of the original (sure, it's fatter, but that's not a design element), I never said it was a bad design. Copy or not, an attractive design is an attractive design. I wish the slope of the rear windshield was ever so slightly more fastback like, though. I'd say the taillights are my favorite part. Full width lights need to make a comeback.

[BrewSwillis]

Stop generalizing you obnoxious fool. You think that because one person says one thing, then someone else says another, they all share the same view. Give it up already and realize there's more out there than Chrysler fans. Not everyone is going to like everything you like. You can't say one thing about Chrysler without gushing, not that I've seen from your posts, anyways. You may be too busy just being snide on these forums. Regardless, a good amount of people here can atleast take off their blinders every once in a while... however rare that sometimes is.

While I still think it's too much of a copy of the original (sure, it's fatter, but that's not a design element), I never said it was a bad design. Copy or not, an attractive design is an attractive design. I wish the slope of the rear windshield was ever so slightly more fastback like, though. I'd say the taillights are my favorite part. Full width lights need to make a comeback.

The thing is, I like all different makes of domestic cars. I even like the Camaro as much as I like the Challenger. I'm just not blind to all of the things that the GM fans don't see....and I don't go around mindlessly bashing everything that's not a Chrysler. I do, however, mostly stick up for Chrysler when it is mindlessly bashed. The Camaro looks like a bloated Hotwheels version of the 68', just like the Challenger looks like a bloated Hotwheels version of the 70'. Maybe the Camaro is more modern or futuristic looking due to the sharp creases, but it's still almost as bloated.......and guess what, I don't find anything wrong with that! All people do on here is bash, and I call those people out on their mindless, or unfounded complaints.

[Robert Hall]

Looks good in black.

[avant1963]

Let's see... I was considering a Magnum or Charger SRT or a Mustang for my next car, and just because I think the Challenger looks bloated and heavy, I hate all domestics except for GM. Whatever. Next...

[gm4life]

It is sharp.

[Robert Hall]

Interesting...I just noticed that the inner headlights have the turn signals/parking lights in them... and they put driving lights in the fascia where the turn signals were on the '70.

[CMG]

So which is people?? Does the car look too much like the 1970 is does it not look enough like it??

All I heard before is that it looked too much like the 1970.....but now all of a sudden, it doesn't look enough like the 1970??

Let me guess.....you're looking for any excuse not to like it....cause your only GM fans??

I hate to break it to ya folks....but the Camaro is exactly the same way. Granted this is the concept Camaro, but as we've seen, the production is pretty close. All cars are "bloated" compared to cars of the past. You can thank the government and safety regs. for that:

I hate to point out the obvious, but TWO THINGS stand out with those pictures like a sore thumb-

Camaros-

Those are pictures of a 1969 Camaro beside the Camaro CONCEPT. The roof being raised, bigger mirrors, higher suspension height and B pillars would change that comparison picture.

The Camaro WILL be a bigger car than the 1969 Camaro, and heavier too.

Challengers-

Who the heck is the Chrysler ad agency checker? That Challenger that is labelled as a "1970 Challenger" is CLEARLY NOT a 1970 Challenger. It's a 1972 to 1974 in all their ads, with 1970 written all over them.

I wish they knew the "heritage" they are trying to emulate!