I think one could answer this by saying "love it or hate it, the Charger stands out in a crowd." On the other hand, the GTO (especially the 04) tends to blend in with everything else.

BTW...I am not trying to say either is good or bad.

 

Good point.

 

i swear, no one has ever been able to answer that question for me, either

 

True, then again the shape isn't all that "unique"....the profile will make it blend in with the 300's already on the road. Dodge wants to further distinguish it by splashing retro paint and graphics on it for the Daytona editions (why? I thought DCX execs said "the car isn't supposed to be retro, it isn't marketed toward the original Charger enthusiasts and the fans of the 60's cars can take a hike.")

 

Playing devils advocate to answer Magnum Force and z28wilson:
1. GTO looks like the Gran Prix and even moreso, Grand Am. When it came out, it was into an existing style.
2. The Charger looks like the Magnum, but the Magnum is still relatively new, and unpopular.

 

What is the heritage of the GTO? It was SUPPOSED to look like every other Pontiac on the road... it not only shared styling with other Pontiacs, it WAS a Tempest/LeMans with a few VERY minor changes to appearance... I've always hated the comment that the GTO isn't being done justice by making it look like everything else and by basing it off of an already existing car... that's what the GTO was... doesn't look like anything special, it was a true sleeper to anyone who didn't know they weren't looking at just another Pontiac.

Ok, ok... I'm done... back to topic.

 

AMEN!!! I'll second that emotion!!

 

The new Charger has 2 too many doors.....

 

I love the classics and even I get them mixed up at times. I know that they've always done the whole look alike thing, but to come out with the GTP in an existing body style? Kinda sucks. I had an ex with a 95 Grand Am that looks a lot like the current body style. I'm not sure what year the GTO came out or the new body style but GM seriously dropped the ball there. A new model of anythign should not look like an existing one, but I guess thats just an opinion. It's a fine car and all that, but most people who buy new models, especially at a big mark up, do so because they look different. Maybe GM isn't in it for the money though.

 

The thing is poorly executed all around... The 2 extra doors are a problem, the front fascia is a problem, the roof line is a problem, the weight is a problem, the interior on it and its stable mates is a problem. The hips that look like an afterthougt, designed to fix the unfixable...

If it were called something else though, fewer people would care. If DCX could decide whether or not they were referencing the old chargers are not that would help.

But DCX seems to have no problem with presenting such a slipshod automobile to the public or no interest in helping it. Oh well.

 

See magnum's post #33.

Poorly executed all around?
Gotta disagree.

2 extra doors?
No one said a peep about the 99 concept. What did that tell Chrysler & other makers?

Front fascia is a problem?
OK, I'll go with that one.

Roofline is a problem?
It's aerodynamic and a semi-fastback. Don't see a problem there.

Weight is a problem?
The BMW 7 series weighs over 4870# at 203" long.
The new Lexus 430 sedan weighs 4000# at just 197" long.
The 2006 Dodge Charger weighs 4100# and is 200" long.
The Charger isn't overweight, it's right where it should be for a 200" long sedan with independent rear suspension and a V8 engine.
The CTSV is is a feather-weight in this crowd at 3850#, but at a mere 191" long is also almost 10" shorter, too.

It's a slipslod automobile?
Slipslod means sloppy, assembled together haphazardly, poor quality, etc...
The Charger is FAR from slipslod. Along with the 300 & Magnum, it's one of the tightest and best assembled cars made in here by a US (kind of) based manufacturer.

The only problem I see with the Charger is that I feel they could have done a better job on the front end. The rest of the car looks decent (for a sedan), has as Car & Driver calls "One mother of an engine", it's driven by the correct wheels, and it's very solidly made.

I can see the issue people may have with the name, being the pedastal 60s muscle cars have, reality based or not.

But the Charger on it's own is a pretty impressive piece for what it is... a high performance car for those of us who want a new high powered Mustang or Camaro but have a family to haul around, have a wife involved in the cash handling, but can afford only one brand new car.

 

In 1999 I was 13.

Semi-fastback doesen't work for me. Much like a semi-hemi.


The SRT 300C proves the suspension and engine on these cars can overcome the weight, so thats a good thing. But even if its on rails it still looks like a brick doing it.

I can't determine what came first, they decided they would revive the Charger and then threw something together to try and fit it, or if they threw something together and slapped charger on it. Either way its defeated by its more attractive stable mates, and its name.

Its been proven a solid car, but I don't know anyone whos gonna buy it over the Magnum or 300C. It doesen't offer anything the other two dont other than the name, and it doesent do that well.

 

Its growing on me. To me, its the sportier of the 3(300C, magnum, charger). It would be nice if it had a true 6spd behind it but it does offer the 5spd Autostick so you can somewhat control your shift points if you want. My biggest concern is the torque management that will probably be put into these cars. Its annoyed quite a few of the Hemi truck owners and we've read about he effects of it on the new Mustangs and C6s.

 

I think most people would like to see a manual in the LX cars. BUT, the Mercedes sourced 5 speed auto is not a typical sloshbox. It's a smart sloshbox. For one the shift points are adaptive. So around town it short shifts just like you'd expect. When in sporting mode it will hold a gear (say when going around a corner), downshift early and keep the engine in the power band when braking and firm up gear changes. The best part about it being adaptive is that the driver doesn't have to do much to tell the transmission what he's doing besides mash the throttle. Well, then there's the "manual" mode too but it's really just there for vanity since the the unit behaves properly in auto mode.

 

The more of it I see, the more I have come to accept it. However, I still think the 4 door is a mistake. People will buy it, but I cannot see the car keeping any kind of memorable touch, like the classic Chargers evoked.

I also really don't see how someone in the market for a brick is going to go for the Charger over the 300C. I just don't really care for it, what can I say? I even warmed up to the 2005 Mustang somewhat recently, and I still can't feel better about this car. I think Dodge (and GM to a similar extent) are both probably alienating a lot of future sport car buyers, like myself at age 21, by putting out these questionable designs for cars and ruining names for themselves.

Thats my opinion of course, so it doesn't mean much. I think car designs on the whole have been getting uglier since about 1970.