The thing is a boat...fuel economy should be measured in nautical miles and the speedo should read knots.

 

The interwebz say the new Vipers are starting at ~85k. I guess that one must be either optioned out or that dealer has a habit of tacking on several thousands of dollars to the MSRP.

 

this viper had a 10k markup.

102k is directly off the sticker on the pictured viper.

 

for almost 30k dealer markup (profit) they BETTER have distanation charges included.

30k dealer markup... I can't even believe it... and it sucks that someone out there will pay it to be the one the the 1st to own it. *rolleyes*

 

Well then a 4th gen Camaro (and by association, the 3rd gen) is also a boat.

Challenger is just 1" wider and 4" linger.

That's the width of your thumb for the width and the width of your 4 fingers together on length respectively.

The mammoth size is an optical illusion due to the wheelbase and height.

 

So I'm not the only one on this board that follows that concept, eh? Thanks for saying what I already planned to type

We have an orange one in stock...we're auctioning it off. Starting bid is $500 under MSRP, and starts Friday night. We'll see where it ends up. A guy from Jersey calls every day, offering me $49k to avoid the auction. We're getting so much hoopla over it (its advertised on the radio and in our newspaper ads), even if we don't sell it for even that much, the interest its generating is great for us.

At the auctions, they're already dropping some...3 weeks ago, one did $55k, two weeks ago 1 did $49k, and last week 3 did mid 40s. We'll see what happens on a retail level...

 

Not exactly; size would include height as a measurement. The "visual" and actual mass of the Challenger FAR exceed that of the 4th gen.

4th gens were not small cars, but they sure as hell are not as large as the Challenger.

Save for the fuel tank, much of the mass on a 4th gen is centralized within that much smaller, compact car-sized wheelbase. The front and rear overhangs are long on an F-car, and much of the front overhang is styling related. If they had more blunt noses instead of pointed beaks, the overall length would be reduced by another few inches. If you view a 4th gen from a direct side profile angle, the front overhang looks monstrous, because you are seeing all the way to the tip of the "beak." But if you look at one from a slightly rearward position, the front overhang looks MUCH shorter. You could argue that the largish length of the F-cars is partially an illusion.

But even using the dimensions as they are, the Challenger something like 6" taller (IIRC) than the F-car measuring high point to high point.

 

While the 4th gen was nearly as long, it was much shorter, and if you compare the volume of the two vehicles the charger is an absolute behemoth in comparison. Also the 4th gen has a pointy front clip, the charger is totally flat.

I agree the 4th gen was long (too long in my opinion), but I don't agree that the 4th gen was large.

 

+ 1. My parents have a 2007 and a 2008 Honda Accord and my 4th gens are pretty small in comparison. Not so much to the 2007, but the 2008 is a big, bulky looking car with a snub-nose and a big, droopy ***.

 

Plus the weight difference is only 3450 to 4150. Clearly optical only!

 

Though, to be fair, there were certainly some F-cars that were over 3500. But not 4100+...

 

 

On paper is one thing....but when seeing the car in real life the thing is friggin huge. I don't know how many times I have to say it before it sinks in. The Challenger is a behemoth. Keep repeating this sentence to yourself. The Challenger is very, very, very big.

 

oink oink. that car is a pig.

 

Length and width are the only factors that go into weight? Wow, I never knew.