To take it a step further, D-C should discontinue the bespoke V10 for the Viper. Here's an engineering abomination. First, the cylinder bank angle is wrong - it should have been 72 degrees, not 90. Moreover, the alloy V10, designed back in the days when Chrysler owned Lamborghini, is a unique low production engine. Replacing it with the new HEMI V8 would do wonders for production efficiency.

I suspect that even the cast-iron blocked HEMI would be a lighter engine than the alloy V10, and it certainly would be more compact. I'd also say that a tuned, or even supercharged, HEMI V8 would make for a better and cheaper Viper.

Overall, the Viper has always been a joke in my book. It was crude and awkward at inception, and struck me as an alternative to building a "Cobra-replica" kit car. Judging by the scope of assembly operations, it wasn't much more than a factory-built kit car. As much as anything else, the combination of the V10 and the side-pipes created an exhaust note that was horrible. I remember when Car and Driver said the exhaust sounded like a UPS truck.

Slap a real deal V8 in the Viper, and my laughter will subside. It would be nice to see a car that's as brutal and involving as a big-block 1960s Corvette. Perhaps its time for Daimler-Chrysler to end its quest for the perfect "back-yard special."

 

a joke at 500+ cubes...
a gimmick with the hemi...

I still like my no nonsense V8. Snakes I fear not..

 

You've heard that they will be making the Charger or Challenger for sure??

 

Viper and V10 go together like Corvette and V8. Production efficiency??? You've got to be joking. I think you are forgetting the point of Viper all along. This is not some easily attainable, efficient, mass-produced sports car. This is Chrysler's halo car. It is not meant to be subtle, refined and efficient, it's supposed to be rude, crude and quite obnoxious. Do you think DCX cares two cents that they're losing money on this car?

 

If anything, the Viper represents a conceptual throwback to the grim Iaccoca era. Chrysler was the "comeback kid" of the domestic automotive industry, but had throw away all of its heritage for quick K-car profitability. Even the V10 came about simply because they'd also thrown away the big-block V8 tooling -426 HEMI included.

It's funny that it took German management to bring back mainstream RWD products. With brilliant new products in the pipeline, including a V8-powered Charger in 2005, the Viper looks crude and silly. As it is, the Viper is less of a "halo car" than a five o'clock shadow. The new HEMI might not be a true hemispheric combustion chamber engine, but at least its an attempt to reconnect with heritage that made MOPAR products great. It's time they made the Viper a great MOPAR product, not just the crudest low production sports car.

 

This will be the only Hemi going into a Viper

http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/news/qcsrt10.html

 

What isn't "MOPAR" about a MOPAR V10 engine, which eventually will feature (semi-) hemi combustion chambers? I'm not exactly sure that I understand your point. The crude yet monsterous V10 is one of Viper's biggest calling cards which differentiates it from most other players. This is what Viper owners come to expect. I would wager that most of today's Viper sales are repeat buyers. They know what the car is and isn't and they love it that way. DCX can afford to keep it that way because of its low-volume niche status.

Did you ever consider that some sports car buyers would rather not be like every other Joe on the block? Especially when you can spend the kind of jack necessary to buy an 80 thousand dollar car. Everyone has a C5 these days. We're all Vette fans here, but the C5's "prissy" or snooty aura about it is enough to turn some off. This line of thinking is, quite honestly, just one of the reasons why I've always been a Camaro guy. I ENJOY not seeing my car at every stop light and parked in every 3rd or 4th driveway down the residential streets of Middle America. In that respect there are a lot of parallels one can draw between Camaro-Mustang and Vette-Viper. The only difference is Viper was always meant to be a low production vehicle.

Whew. Bringing this all back to the beginning, why change Viper into something that no one is asking for anyway? Keep the crude V10, uncomfortable interior, and keep the stigma of having the baddest of the bad. It's all Viper owners could care about.

 

Maybe this will be a V8 (semi) HEMI with 2 more cylinders?Sweet!

Whats the angle for that engine?(New hemi?)

 

The Crossfire is no slug!!

Challenger, no. But the Charger name will be back.

There will also be an LX coupe sooner or later. Related? Perhaps.

I'm not flaming you on this (we certainly disagree enough), but I'm incredulous to hear you wisfully mention Chrysler's big block V8 dating back to noone knows when, yet brush off the Viper engine, which though shares many 360 components, is a new and powerful alumunum engine, when compared.

Again, not flaming you, but where in the world do you get these views? The German management nearly destroyed Chrysler, simply to get Jeep.

They came right out & said it, for crissake!

Benz bought Chrysler while it was highly profitable, killed off new product money, and used Chrysler's profits to balence out Mercedes Benz's losses! That RWD car you credit Damiler's German bosses for bring out, was actually in Chrysler's product plans BEFORE they were bought out. That project was essentially killed by German management because it clashed with the lower priced Mercedes that were in the pipeline. That Charger concept of 1999 was a look at what the next Dodge LX (initially set for 2003 as a 2004 model) was going to look like, just as Chrysler's concepts before that.

To praise what Chrysler's parent company has done to Chrysler is extremely bizzare, under the curcumstances. It took a massive change of direction, and essentially no choice whatsoever to get these guys to reverse themselves and finally put together a Chrysler business plan, which they finally did just over a year ago.

The Viper isn't for everyone, and like anything that comes from Australia, you are automatically biased against it without having all the facts straight. As an opinion of simply not liking something, I'll respect your view even though I disagree. But in this instance, you positioned yourself based on facts that were all wrong.

 

No, but a Hemi powered Crossfire would be OH SO COOL!

 

How do you figure the crossfire is no slug? In 1978 it would be a supercar, in 1986 it would be a fast car. in 1992 it would be a quick car, in 1998 it would have been a kinda peppy car. In 2004 its silly slow for a 2 seat sportscar that will cost in the upper 30s. It and the Audi TT ar just silly, all show no go overpriced cars. Mitsu was making a AWD turbo 4cyl at half the price.... Just because some drunken, beer break having, German has to get paid way to much an hour we get good slow 2 seaters.

 

Actually, the "old school" Chrysler management mercilessly milked Jeep, and squandered just about every good idea AMC ever had.

1. The engineering for the Grand Cherokee was largely complete when Chrysler bought AMC in 1987. It was intended as a replacement for the Cherokee, not as an upscale SUV. Chrysler delayed the introduction until 1993, jacked up the price, and kept the poor old Cherokee in production until 2001. Sure it made for huge profits, but the consumer got shafted.

2. Chrysler killed off the full sized Jeeps and SUVS, despite the fact that that market segement was heating up. Sure the old J-series pickups were cramped, ancient and thirsty. Killing them off in 1987 wasn't a bad idea, but not replacing them with a '94 Ram derivative was stupid. Similarly, the Grand Wagoneer was an obscenely profitable vehicle that refused to stop selling untill the plug was pulled in 1991. If Chrysler had simply had the gumption to invest in these products, they would have been rolling in Tahoe/Expedition money long before Ford and Chevrolet caught up. Talk about short sighted.

3. Chrysler also nixed the Eagle wagon, the first "cross-over" vehicle. Sure, it was little more than a '68 Hornet with an advanced 4wd drivetrain, but it had sold without investment for years. The concept was great, but there again, Iacocca was chasing K-car dreams.

I could go on with even more Iacocca/Eaton era stupidity, but I think I've made my point. Chrysler had the deal of the century when they obtained AMC's modern production capacity and Jeep line. They mismanaged and underfunded their new found assets mercilessly, while "Lido" squandered cash on Lamorghini, the p*ss poor Maserati-built TC, and hordes of grotesque K-car derivatives.

I know you want to say the Chrysler turned it all around beginning with the brilliant LH sedans, and the return to RWD was in cards all along. We heard of the RWD hype for decades. The sad fact is that the LH was designed with a longitudinal powertrain because its was based on the Eagle Medalion/Renault 25, and even built in the same facilities. All that mid-90s bunk about a BMW engined V8 RWD flagship was just a pipe dream.

That said, the German management at DC did take advantage of Chrysler's massive cash reserves. Even with that heavy indictment, they have done less to screw up Chrysler's products team than the dynamic Eaton/Lutz duo. It was that management team that designed the JH sedans with a low slung chassis and outstanding suspension - then they ruined it with horribly soft tuning and the world's-cheapest-tires. They also scotched the full-sized Dodge Adventurer SUV. They killed the program because "the SUV thing wouldn't last," and because it would rack up huge CAFE fines. In reality, SUVs still haven't cooled off, and none of the Big Three have ever paid a cent on the deferred CAFE fines, and they probably never will.

Of course, we still have the topic of the Viper. Here's a monster with superb specifications and performance numbers that's still a joke as a car. To me, the Viper isn't a corporate calling card, just an oddity. It reminds me that it takes more than a little bit of cash and big dream to create a real vehicle.

 

It's late, I have a big day tomorrow, and unfortunately, I feel compelled to add some thoughts to your points. So much for going to bed by 11!

1. You are right in the fact AMC had a replacement already done for the Cherokee. However the reason Chrysler kept producing the old one is because people kept buying the old one! Sales didn't drop at all! Chrysler would be the most irresponsible company on the planet if they discontinued it. Looking at the fact both Cherokees sold pretty much at capacity, where's the problem?

2. Chrysler killed off full sized Jeeps for 2 reasons. 1st, the design dated back to the early 60s. Remembering that you just said that Viper was a throwback while critisizing Chrysler for discontinuing a vehicle that was around when President Kennedy was is odd. 2nd, it was incapable of passing new standards without being completely redesigned.

Also, the reason they weren't replaced is because of fuel economy standards. As anyone in SoCal, South Texas, or any of the southwest border states will tell you, Dodge made full size Ram-based RamChargers for the Mexican and central American markets. They weren't sold here, and fuel economy standards were why. This was before the hot selling, "truck" classified PT Cruiser came along, and kicked Dodge Truck's fleet CAFE mileage into the stratosphere.

3. The K-car came out years before Chrysler bought AMC! The K-cars enabled Chrysler to not only get out of bankruptcy (bailed out by the US government, and Chrysler payed them back in less than 1/3 the time of the terms of agreement...thanks to the K-car), but it gave Chrysler enough cash to buy AMC from Renault. BTW, I really don't remember Eagles ever selling all that great.

Chrysler made bank throughout the 1980s. At the turn of the decade, Chrysler & GM were both on the ropes. Chrysler again pulled a miracle and created some very spectacular cars.

For the record, the LH cars were designed with the lengthwise because in it's original inception, the LH cars were to be both FWD AND RWD. Late in the program it was decided to do only FWD, my understanding was because of costs. A mistake kept in mind when the LX cars were initially developed by the "dynamic Eaton/Lutz duo", and promptly killed when Mercedes Benz took over, and proceeded to completely obliterate ALL of Chrysler's entire cash reserves, WITHOUT allocating a single penny towards new products that weren't too far along to be killed or stalled.

As for attacking the Viper as a "joke of a car" and "not a corperate calling card" , it's alot like watching a person attack the Hoover dam with a nail file. Sometimes you just gotta sit back, watch them and wonder.