Cory Wolfe

It competes with that class moreso than the Passat does. 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.

Sunroofs are great, let me tell you. I've used it for that purpose more than a few times.

I think you may have a bigger problem, then.

What he said. Maybe me, too.

But... but... Girls just want to have fun... Right?

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.

Guys, name some songs I should download.

Just had to ruin our fun, didn't you? The 'Speed6 ranks up there with the Legacy.

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!"

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

Test times don't vary by a second. They vary by 2 or 3 tenths of a second, at most. So not only will you put out unreliable times, you'll do it in a cramped POS Neon even with the Stage III kit. Being FWD, that kit will be essentially useless since you won't be able to get any of the added power down to the ground, making that used car a necessity. Go ahead, get the SRT4. Me, I'll take the Legacy GT Spec.B (not Type-R) and save myself all the needless hassle while having a stylish, roomy, high quality sedan with a wonderful 50/50 biased AWD system.

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

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

It's a pretty easy game to play, so I'll play it. The Neon SRT4's times are all over the place with nearly a second difference between the fastest and slowest times for the same year. Doesn't put out very reliable times, now does it? As well, it's still just a POS Neon that even I feel cramped in. You get what you pay for, as they say. I like playing this game.

Atleast I use smilies when I joke.

The hood is aluminum. Aluminum melts.

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.

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.

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!

If it's stock, you can be sure it won't go below 13 seconds. But you're right, very few cars have been able to in stock form outside of exotic brands. The Challenger won't one of them. You're not calling me a ricer are you? That's an insult. A V8 is dandy and all... Though, they're also a dime a dozen. I have much more respect for engines that you don't see in everything from a family toting Impala to an exotic Ferrari. The boxer engines, rotary engines, W/staggered bank configuration engines, and even the Miller cycle. Hey... When a Mustang tries to race you thinking it's just another boring sedan, and you whoop his ass, suddenly it seems a little more special.

Hey... Another Muse fan...

True and fair enough. I, as you may know, am a small guy and don't see the point in owning a huge car. Not to mention I would get nearly the same performance with better handling and gas mileage wrapped in a contemporary package with a much higher quality interior. I dig it.

Well, some people like myself would just rather have a Subaru.

Nothing wrong with a Subaru, unless its a pre-facelifted Tribeca or the new Impreza.

Random fact: A Subaru Legacy GT Spec.B lags only .3 seconds to 60 mph (5.3 versus 5.0) and only .5 seconds to 1/4 mile (14.0 versus 13.5) behind a Dodge Charger SRT8 while getting better fuel economy (19/25 versus 14/20), handling better (66.5 mph through slalom versus 65.2 mph), and costing $4000 less before options ($34,620 MSRP versus $38,095, which can easily shoot up to $44k).