CarSpyShots
Quick Member Login:
Forgot password?
Forum Statistics:
Forum Members:
Total Threads:
Total Posts:


There are users
currently browsing forums.
  FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 10-08-2010, 05:58 AM
Caarnut Caarnut is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 150
Default

Looks much better-except for the front end. However,I wonder if this will drive any better to match its sporty appearance. I have been driving the current version for the past 3 days( for the first time).Its anemic and handles worse than a camry. Far from sporty muscle car it pretends to be. Isnt this based on the W210 like 300c? I expected better.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-08-2010, 01:34 PM
DoMiNo's Avatar
DoMiNo DoMiNo is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Five-Oh-Five.
Posts: 11,509
Default

Something tells me you're not driving an R/T; probably a rental with the atrocious 2.7L V6 or, at best, the coarse 3.5L V6. So it's no wonder you feel that way. But considering the fact that volume models will now be getting the new Pentastar V6 standard, even lower-end Chargers will have some more grunt (290hp/260 lb-ft, to be exact). Not sure if there will be a low-displacement fleet model. The 5.7L and 6.1L models have certainly never been "anemic" by any means, but they're getting more power as well (and the latter a significant bump in displacement). Not sure about what dynamic improvements Chrysler has made to this platform, but I think it's safe to assume that they've done some work to address handling. Although I was never aware that was a weak point; the suspension architecture may be ooold but I always thought it was capable.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-08-2010, 05:55 PM
IS300M IS300M is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Boston, USA
Posts: 289
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoMiNo View Post
Something tells me you're not driving an R/T; probably a rental with the atrocious 2.7L V6 or, at best, the coarse 3.5L V6. So it's no wonder you feel that way.
The 2.7L was never really intended to power such a portly car. It has never been known for its reliability (sludging up if you didn't use Synthetic oil). How ever in lighter cars it was a very efficient V6. A friend of mine followed me to PA in a 2.7L powered Intrepid and was able to average 31 MPG, while my 3.5L 300M was only averaging 26 MPG. Honestly the "Coarse 3.5L V6" you speak of has an adequate amount of horsepower (250-255 depending on the year)for my everyday needs, the killer is that the 3.5L was mated to the massaged and slightly updated K-car 4-speed transmission.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-08-2010, 06:33 PM
63Bonneville 63Bonneville is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Northvale, NJ
Posts: 4,986
Send a message via AIM to 63Bonneville
Default

I'm impressed with the new Charger and appreciate the proportions and sculpting even greater than the predecessor. I'm looking for ward to seeing it in person, as well as the Durango, Challenger facelift, and the next-generation Chrysler 300. Other things to look forward to are seeing the official specs of all, and when the reported 8-speed tranny will be offered to these vehicles. It's even going to be far more respectable in it's base guise with the new 3.6L Pentastar V6.
__________________
Pontiac Lives through BMW and Lincoln - via their split grills and attitude!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-08-2010, 07:01 PM
Supremus Supremus is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 340
Default

Eh, still the same Angry Toaster (tm) from before, only with more finesse. The retro tail lights are cool, but don't mesh with the rest of the car at all.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-09-2010, 01:17 AM
Caarnut Caarnut is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 150
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoMiNo View Post
Something tells me you're not driving an R/T; probably a rental with the atrocious 2.7L V6 or, at best, the coarse 3.5L V6. So it's no wonder you feel that way. But considering the fact that volume models will now be getting the new Pentastar V6 standard, even lower-end Chargers will have some more grunt (290hp/260 lb-ft, to be exact). Not sure if there will be a low-displacement fleet model. The 5.7L and 6.1L models have certainly never been "anemic" by any means, but they're getting more power as well (and the latter a significant bump in displacement). Not sure about what dynamic improvements Chrysler has made to this platform, but I think it's safe to assume that they've done some work to address handling. Although I was never aware that was a weak point; the suspension architecture may be ooold but I always thought it was capable.
Its a fleet car- 3.5L v6 with under 10K miles on it.It doesnt feel like 250hp even and the 4 speed probably is not helping. It handles OK for a $25K car I guess but its just that I expected better from the RWD platform. Hopefully there will be some improvement on car that now LOOKS like its worthy of its name.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-09-2010, 01:51 AM
SV's Avatar
SV SV is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,098
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supremus View Post
Eh, still the same Angry Toaster (tm) from before
I always figured THIS was an angry toaster:



The reference will be lost on most people I imagine....
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-09-2010, 05:29 AM
IS300M IS300M is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Boston, USA
Posts: 289
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Caarnut View Post
Its a fleet car- 3.5L v6 with under 10K miles on it.It doesnt feel like 250hp even and the 4 speed probably is not helping. It handles OK for a $25K car I guess but its just that I expected better from the RWD platform. Hopefully there will be some improvement on car that now LOOKS like its worthy of its name.
its definitely the 4-speed, cause for a limited time they were available with the 5 speed and the 3.5L and those cars dyno higher wheel horsepower then ones with the 4-speed.

A 300M with the 3.5 and 4-speed dyno numbers range from 175-190 HP at the wheels depending on the year, and package
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-09-2010, 05:46 AM
IS300M IS300M is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Boston, USA
Posts: 289
Default

Interior Teaser shot from Dodge's Site



http://www.dodge.com/en/2011/charger/
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-09-2010, 01:29 PM
swizzle's Avatar
swizzle swizzle is offline
Raconteur
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bakersfield
Posts: 25,351
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supremus View Post
Eh, still the same Angry Toaster (tm) from before, only with more finesse. The retro tail lights are cool, but don't mesh with the rest of the car at all.
The tail is growing on me, but the rest of the car needs a lot more retro for this to be a successful design.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:29 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Black Falcon Media Group Oy