I have always been a Ford guy and still am but I got rid of my 2012 Mustang GT after getting my 2009 Challenger SRT8 because the SRT8 was a much better car to drive. More comfortable all around and more room. My wife liked it so much I got her a 2012 Charger RT Max and we both love to drive that car.
Input on 2014 Dodge Challenger
- Thread starter harbor
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: SLCraig
I agree on the Charger instead..
Better MPG, 8 speed auto, and more room.
If I were to own a Challenger, it would no doubt be a Hemi with a 6MT trans. But thats just me. The Charger is fine in V6 trim with auto trans, as it's more of a family hauler than the Challenger.
A V6 Challenger is a crime against nature, much like a Miata with a slushbox.
I agree on the Charger instead..
Better MPG, 8 speed auto, and more room.
If I were to own a Challenger, it would no doubt be a Hemi with a 6MT trans. But thats just me. The Charger is fine in V6 trim with auto trans, as it's more of a family hauler than the Challenger.
A V6 Challenger is a crime against nature, much like a Miata with a slushbox.
The current chargers drive very well. I rent them fairly frequently and it is the first mainstream American sedan that I have been impressed with in a while. I had considered getting one to replace the my wife's car as it gets closer to 100k, but my wife doesn't like them. She has made the financial case that her BMW could require some serious repairs and still make more sense to drive than buying a new car. So - no charger. She would however take a new BMW - fiscal case notwithstanding. Go figure.
Originally Posted By: MCompact
Originally Posted By: SLCraig
I agree on the Charger instead..
Better MPG, 8 speed auto, and more room.
If I were to own a Challenger, it would no doubt be a Hemi with a 6MT trans. But thats just me. The Charger is fine in V6 trim with auto trans, as it's more of a family hauler than the Challenger.
A V6 Challenger is a crime against nature, much like a Miata with a slushbox.
I kind of disagree. It's hard to find a basic RWD American coupe anymore. IMO, the base Challenger is much more toned down in appearance inside and out than a Mustang or Camaro. It's a nice full size cruiser. A small V8 option would be cool for the novelty, but that's probably not going to happen.
I mostly like the interior of the current models. Fit and finish is really good for the price, and it looks like a normal car interior should. No faux retro or crazy shapes. Though they obviously jumped on the retro bandwagon with the exterior, I think the execution is pretty good. It's a nicer looking car than a current Mustang or Camaro to me.
I know most people will buy the V6 because they want a "cool muscle car." To me though, the V6 Challenger is as close as you can get to say a 1980s GM G-body coupe or a Fox body Thunderbird/Cougar, but with better fit and finish. That's why I like it. I'm glad there is at least one RWD, kind of big, American "personal coupe" out there.
Originally Posted By: SLCraig
I agree on the Charger instead..
Better MPG, 8 speed auto, and more room.
If I were to own a Challenger, it would no doubt be a Hemi with a 6MT trans. But thats just me. The Charger is fine in V6 trim with auto trans, as it's more of a family hauler than the Challenger.
A V6 Challenger is a crime against nature, much like a Miata with a slushbox.
I kind of disagree. It's hard to find a basic RWD American coupe anymore. IMO, the base Challenger is much more toned down in appearance inside and out than a Mustang or Camaro. It's a nice full size cruiser. A small V8 option would be cool for the novelty, but that's probably not going to happen.
I mostly like the interior of the current models. Fit and finish is really good for the price, and it looks like a normal car interior should. No faux retro or crazy shapes. Though they obviously jumped on the retro bandwagon with the exterior, I think the execution is pretty good. It's a nicer looking car than a current Mustang or Camaro to me.
I know most people will buy the V6 because they want a "cool muscle car." To me though, the V6 Challenger is as close as you can get to say a 1980s GM G-body coupe or a Fox body Thunderbird/Cougar, but with better fit and finish. That's why I like it. I'm glad there is at least one RWD, kind of big, American "personal coupe" out there.
Originally Posted By: MCompact
A V6 Challenger is a crime against nature, much like a Miata with a slushbox.
Actually, the modern V6 offers up more horsepower than most of the original Challenger's V8 options (save for the 400cu.inch+ options). I have no problem with modern V6s that produce 300bhp+... unlike some old (but fairly recent) V8s that barely eeked out 200 to 260bhp.
All slushboxes are crimes against nature IMO, some are just worst than others.
A V6 Challenger is a crime against nature, much like a Miata with a slushbox.
Actually, the modern V6 offers up more horsepower than most of the original Challenger's V8 options (save for the 400cu.inch+ options). I have no problem with modern V6s that produce 300bhp+... unlike some old (but fairly recent) V8s that barely eeked out 200 to 260bhp.
All slushboxes are crimes against nature IMO, some are just worst than others.
The 8 speed slushbox used by Chrysler in BOTH LC and LX platforms is the ubiquitous ZF 8 speed. Currently used by BMW, Bentley, Audi, Jaguar, Land Rover, maserati, Rolls Royce, etc.
Nice gearbox and proving to be durable in service.
Nice gearbox and proving to be durable in service.
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: dareo
This suggestion is kind of out there, but if large is the goal, what of a Ram 1500 quad cab V6 8 speed? 25 highway and you could haul stuff if needed.
The 25 MPG highway in the Ram 1500 is only for RCSB 2WD's. It goes down from there in Quad Cabs and if 4WD is added.
True, but how many mpgs does a 4x4 challenger get? A Ram would be more useful and resell higher than a coupe.
Originally Posted By: dareo
This suggestion is kind of out there, but if large is the goal, what of a Ram 1500 quad cab V6 8 speed? 25 highway and you could haul stuff if needed.
The 25 MPG highway in the Ram 1500 is only for RCSB 2WD's. It goes down from there in Quad Cabs and if 4WD is added.
True, but how many mpgs does a 4x4 challenger get? A Ram would be more useful and resell higher than a coupe.
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Originally Posted By: MCompact
A V6 Challenger is a crime against nature, much like a Miata with a slushbox.
Actually, the modern V6 offers up more horsepower than most of the original Challenger's V8 options (save for the 400cu.inch+ options). I have no problem with modern V6s that produce 300bhp+... unlike some old (but fairly recent) V8s that barely eeked out 200 to 260bhp.
All slushboxes are crimes against nature IMO, some are just worst than others.
Yes, but the SAD problem is that these new, high output, refined (and yes GREAT) V-6es must move MUCH MORE MASS than those older, low specific output, V-8s did.
The sad part is that even the V-8 versions of these cars are not as quick as they should/could be because of the excessive heft they are required to push (which also puts added strain on ALL of the rest of the drivetrain as well).
Originally Posted By: MCompact
A V6 Challenger is a crime against nature, much like a Miata with a slushbox.
Actually, the modern V6 offers up more horsepower than most of the original Challenger's V8 options (save for the 400cu.inch+ options). I have no problem with modern V6s that produce 300bhp+... unlike some old (but fairly recent) V8s that barely eeked out 200 to 260bhp.
All slushboxes are crimes against nature IMO, some are just worst than others.
Yes, but the SAD problem is that these new, high output, refined (and yes GREAT) V-6es must move MUCH MORE MASS than those older, low specific output, V-8s did.
The sad part is that even the V-8 versions of these cars are not as quick as they should/could be because of the excessive heft they are required to push (which also puts added strain on ALL of the rest of the drivetrain as well).
Buy the hemi. I get better mileage with mds then the sixxer does,with way more punch when the loud pedal drops.
As far as I'm concerned oem's should ditch their sixxers and make everything an mds V8.
As much as I hate to say it I think I'm stuck now with dodge for my fun toys,new ones anyways. I cannot say enough about a hemi with mds.
As far as I'm concerned oem's should ditch their sixxers and make everything an mds V8.
As much as I hate to say it I think I'm stuck now with dodge for my fun toys,new ones anyways. I cannot say enough about a hemi with mds.
Originally Posted By: dareo
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: dareo
This suggestion is kind of out there, but if large is the goal, what of a Ram 1500 quad cab V6 8 speed? 25 highway and you could haul stuff if needed.
The 25 MPG highway in the Ram 1500 is only for RCSB 2WD's. It goes down from there in Quad Cabs and if 4WD is added.
True, but how many mpgs does a 4x4 challenger get? A Ram would be more useful and resell higher than a coupe.
My dad in his 2014 hemi quad cab 4x4 with the full load gets 27mpg on the highway not towing and when just driving around the city I've never seen the mileage indicator under 18.
Chrysler has to be under rating their expected mileage because unless I drive my dads truck painfully hard I can barely get to their projections. I'm higher in his truck and in my charger however lately the charger has taken a fuel economy hit.
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: dareo
This suggestion is kind of out there, but if large is the goal, what of a Ram 1500 quad cab V6 8 speed? 25 highway and you could haul stuff if needed.
The 25 MPG highway in the Ram 1500 is only for RCSB 2WD's. It goes down from there in Quad Cabs and if 4WD is added.
True, but how many mpgs does a 4x4 challenger get? A Ram would be more useful and resell higher than a coupe.
My dad in his 2014 hemi quad cab 4x4 with the full load gets 27mpg on the highway not towing and when just driving around the city I've never seen the mileage indicator under 18.
Chrysler has to be under rating their expected mileage because unless I drive my dads truck painfully hard I can barely get to their projections. I'm higher in his truck and in my charger however lately the charger has taken a fuel economy hit.
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Originally Posted By: MCompact
A V6 Challenger is a crime against nature, much like a Miata with a slushbox.
Actually, the modern V6 offers up more horsepower than most of the original Challenger's V8 options (save for the 400cu.inch+ options). I have no problem with modern V6s that produce 300bhp+... unlike some old (but fairly recent) V8s that barely eeked out 200 to 260bhp.
All slushboxes are crimes against nature IMO, some are just worst than others.
Yes, but the SAD problem is that these new, high output, refined (and yes GREAT) V-6es must move MUCH MORE MASS than those older, low specific output, V-8s did.
The sad part is that even the V-8 versions of these cars are not as quick as they should/could be because of the excessive heft they are required to push (which also puts added strain on ALL of the rest of the drivetrain as well).
Old but fairly recent? WTH does that mean?
But seriously, all that weight exacts a penalty on every single mile. Tires, brakes, suspension parts, EVERYTHING takes a bigger beating in a heavier vehicle. then there's physics, which is pretty hard to deny as well.
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
Originally Posted By: MCompact
A V6 Challenger is a crime against nature, much like a Miata with a slushbox.
Actually, the modern V6 offers up more horsepower than most of the original Challenger's V8 options (save for the 400cu.inch+ options). I have no problem with modern V6s that produce 300bhp+... unlike some old (but fairly recent) V8s that barely eeked out 200 to 260bhp.
All slushboxes are crimes against nature IMO, some are just worst than others.
Yes, but the SAD problem is that these new, high output, refined (and yes GREAT) V-6es must move MUCH MORE MASS than those older, low specific output, V-8s did.
The sad part is that even the V-8 versions of these cars are not as quick as they should/could be because of the excessive heft they are required to push (which also puts added strain on ALL of the rest of the drivetrain as well).
Old but fairly recent? WTH does that mean?
But seriously, all that weight exacts a penalty on every single mile. Tires, brakes, suspension parts, EVERYTHING takes a bigger beating in a heavier vehicle. then there's physics, which is pretty hard to deny as well.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Buy the hemi. I get better mileage with mds then the sixxer does,with way more punch when the loud pedal drops.
As far as I'm concerned oem's should ditch their sixxers and make everything an mds V8.
As much as I hate to say it I think I'm stuck now with dodge for my fun toys,new ones anyways. I cannot say enough about a hemi with mds.
Another won over to the new gen Hemi. Nice to hear of a convert...
Buy the hemi. I get better mileage with mds then the sixxer does,with way more punch when the loud pedal drops.
As far as I'm concerned oem's should ditch their sixxers and make everything an mds V8.
As much as I hate to say it I think I'm stuck now with dodge for my fun toys,new ones anyways. I cannot say enough about a hemi with mds.
Another won over to the new gen Hemi. Nice to hear of a convert...
Originally Posted By: dishdude
When you buy a Dodge, you have to get a Hemi. Everytime someone sees it, the first question they ask is "Does it have a Hemi?".
"Yes, of course it does!"
or
"No, i uh like 26 mpg fuel economy instead"
I see those cars as an all or nothing, Hemi V8, enjoy the power and style. Otherwise there are so many nice cars that destroy a 26 mpg rating handily.
When you buy a Dodge, you have to get a Hemi. Everytime someone sees it, the first question they ask is "Does it have a Hemi?".
"Yes, of course it does!"
or
"No, i uh like 26 mpg fuel economy instead"
I see those cars as an all or nothing, Hemi V8, enjoy the power and style. Otherwise there are so many nice cars that destroy a 26 mpg rating handily.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: kam327
I'd get the Charger with the 8 speed instead. Great mpg, probably handles similarly in everyday conditions. My folks, lifelong GM owners, rented one to drive 8 hours and really liked it.
Pssst, they're all the same basic platform! Charger, Magnum, and 300 are LX, Challenger is LC. Nearly identical, same powertrains, just minor differences in equipment.
And these days you get TWO V8's with MDS. Both the 6.4 and the %.7 now have vvt and mds (unless a six speed stick Challenger, then they disable it. But the hardware remains in place).
Fine choice that makes a lot of folks happy.
Thanks for stating the obvious (to me anyway). You missed my point. You can't get the 8 speed in the challenger ( at least not yet). So get the Charger. More practical too.
Originally Posted By: kam327
I'd get the Charger with the 8 speed instead. Great mpg, probably handles similarly in everyday conditions. My folks, lifelong GM owners, rented one to drive 8 hours and really liked it.
Pssst, they're all the same basic platform! Charger, Magnum, and 300 are LX, Challenger is LC. Nearly identical, same powertrains, just minor differences in equipment.
And these days you get TWO V8's with MDS. Both the 6.4 and the %.7 now have vvt and mds (unless a six speed stick Challenger, then they disable it. But the hardware remains in place).
Fine choice that makes a lot of folks happy.
Thanks for stating the obvious (to me anyway). You missed my point. You can't get the 8 speed in the challenger ( at least not yet). So get the Charger. More practical too.
Originally Posted By: FutureDoc
The Challenger is the only real muscle car left. Both the 'Stang and the Camaro are trying to toe the line as a GT/Sportier Coupe. For that alone, out of the three, the Challenger is my favorite but I would never own any of the three unless it was an early vintage.
I think the sleeper in the Chrysler ranks is the Dart. Mostly a re-badged Alfa to a lesser extent but with a "softer" American-oriented suspension and a few other bits. (Kinda stinks as a true Alfa trim would be great). Despite the "Americanization" it is a fun car and it is economical. The manual is available across the range if you care about that but finding one might be a bit tougher due to dealers shying away. Might be a bit harder if you want a confortable cruiser but it might be the best Chrysler in a while.
Problem is they can't get the power / economy balance right. First it was underpowered with average mileage, now they're expanding the bigger 2.4L across the lineup but economy falls well below average. When they finally get that 9 speed in it, then it may finally be competitive. Until then get the excellent Focus, Mazda3 or Jetta 1.8L.
The Challenger is the only real muscle car left. Both the 'Stang and the Camaro are trying to toe the line as a GT/Sportier Coupe. For that alone, out of the three, the Challenger is my favorite but I would never own any of the three unless it was an early vintage.
I think the sleeper in the Chrysler ranks is the Dart. Mostly a re-badged Alfa to a lesser extent but with a "softer" American-oriented suspension and a few other bits. (Kinda stinks as a true Alfa trim would be great). Despite the "Americanization" it is a fun car and it is economical. The manual is available across the range if you care about that but finding one might be a bit tougher due to dealers shying away. Might be a bit harder if you want a confortable cruiser but it might be the best Chrysler in a while.
Problem is they can't get the power / economy balance right. First it was underpowered with average mileage, now they're expanding the bigger 2.4L across the lineup but economy falls well below average. When they finally get that 9 speed in it, then it may finally be competitive. Until then get the excellent Focus, Mazda3 or Jetta 1.8L.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Old but fairly recent? WTH does that mean?
But seriously, all that weight exacts a penalty on every single mile. Tires, brakes, suspension parts, EVERYTHING takes a bigger beating in a heavier vehicle. then there's physics, which is pretty hard to deny as well.
"Old but fairly recent" Prime example would be Ford's 4.6L of shame producing 260bhp.
Weight is a terrible thing... that is why I have a MR2
Old but fairly recent? WTH does that mean?
But seriously, all that weight exacts a penalty on every single mile. Tires, brakes, suspension parts, EVERYTHING takes a bigger beating in a heavier vehicle. then there's physics, which is pretty hard to deny as well.
"Old but fairly recent" Prime example would be Ford's 4.6L of shame producing 260bhp.
Weight is a terrible thing... that is why I have a MR2
Originally Posted By: kam327
Problem is they can't get the power / economy balance right. First it was underpowered with average mileage, now they're expanding the bigger 2.4L across the lineup but economy falls well below average. When they finally get that 9 speed in it, then it may finally be competitive. Until then get the excellent Focus, Mazda3 or Jetta 1.8L.
Not a fan of the Focus and I would not consider a Jetta after an '09 broke down on a test-drive while shopping for the Mrs' car. (I do think the Jetta cheaped out a bit in the redesign). I like the Dart more the Focus/Jetta but the Mazda3 is my favorite of out that bunch. I am also partial to the Impreza.
Yes, the 1.4T is a bit laggy/weak (not really that bad IMO) but you have to drive it like an Italian... thrash it. The Rev-limit is just a suggestion and keep on it till the valves dance on the hood. Sure, it kills the average fuel economy but a 3200lbs "economy car" does that too.
The How in the heck is a 9-speed manual going to work?
Problem is they can't get the power / economy balance right. First it was underpowered with average mileage, now they're expanding the bigger 2.4L across the lineup but economy falls well below average. When they finally get that 9 speed in it, then it may finally be competitive. Until then get the excellent Focus, Mazda3 or Jetta 1.8L.
Not a fan of the Focus and I would not consider a Jetta after an '09 broke down on a test-drive while shopping for the Mrs' car. (I do think the Jetta cheaped out a bit in the redesign). I like the Dart more the Focus/Jetta but the Mazda3 is my favorite of out that bunch. I am also partial to the Impreza.
Yes, the 1.4T is a bit laggy/weak (not really that bad IMO) but you have to drive it like an Italian... thrash it. The Rev-limit is just a suggestion and keep on it till the valves dance on the hood. Sure, it kills the average fuel economy but a 3200lbs "economy car" does that too.
The How in the heck is a 9-speed manual going to work?
Originally Posted By: kam327
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: kam327
I'd get the Charger with the 8 speed instead. Great mpg, probably handles similarly in everyday conditions. My folks, lifelong GM owners, rented one to drive 8 hours and really liked it.
Pssst, they're all the same basic platform! Charger, Magnum, and 300 are LX, Challenger is LC. Nearly identical, same powertrains, just minor differences in equipment.
And these days you get TWO V8's with MDS. Both the 6.4 and the %.7 now have vvt and mds (unless a six speed stick Challenger, then they disable it. But the hardware remains in place).
Fine choice that makes a lot of folks happy.
Thanks for stating the obvious (to me anyway). You missed my point. You can't get the 8 speed in the challenger ( at least not yet). So get the Charger. More practical too.
ZF box is scheduled for all of them asap, so expect it soon. Nothing at all wrong with the NAG1 5 speed, they are nearly bulletproof even up to 500 rwhp.
And btw, the different platforms do not handle very similarly IMO. I have track time in every one in SRT8 guise, and the differences are very noticeable to me. Challenger actually had the most movement, and dove a lot under braking.
Charger has the highest spring rates of the bunch, but the real track folks at Skip Barber prefer the 300 for its happy tail with ESP disabled.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: kam327
I'd get the Charger with the 8 speed instead. Great mpg, probably handles similarly in everyday conditions. My folks, lifelong GM owners, rented one to drive 8 hours and really liked it.
Pssst, they're all the same basic platform! Charger, Magnum, and 300 are LX, Challenger is LC. Nearly identical, same powertrains, just minor differences in equipment.
And these days you get TWO V8's with MDS. Both the 6.4 and the %.7 now have vvt and mds (unless a six speed stick Challenger, then they disable it. But the hardware remains in place).
Fine choice that makes a lot of folks happy.
Thanks for stating the obvious (to me anyway). You missed my point. You can't get the 8 speed in the challenger ( at least not yet). So get the Charger. More practical too.
ZF box is scheduled for all of them asap, so expect it soon. Nothing at all wrong with the NAG1 5 speed, they are nearly bulletproof even up to 500 rwhp.
And btw, the different platforms do not handle very similarly IMO. I have track time in every one in SRT8 guise, and the differences are very noticeable to me. Challenger actually had the most movement, and dove a lot under braking.
Charger has the highest spring rates of the bunch, but the real track folks at Skip Barber prefer the 300 for its happy tail with ESP disabled.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
ZF box is scheduled for all of them asap, so expect it soon. Nothing at all wrong with the NAG1 5 speed, they are nearly bulletproof even up to 500 rwhp.
I know, that's why I said "at least not yet." If the OP is shopping around now, he/she ain't gonna get the ZF in the Challenger.
I have the Nag1 in my '13 Durango and it's just fine for our family hauler. But I sure wouldn't mind the extra 1-2 mpg from the 8-speed. Just didn't want to pay several thousand more for it (higher MSRP, lower discounts right now).
But if the OP is looking to spend roughly the same on a Challenger w/ 5-speed or Charger w/ 8-speed, I'm recommending going for the 8-speed.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
And btw, the different platforms do not handle very similarly IMO. I have track time in every one in SRT8 guise, and the differences are very noticeable to me. Challenger actually had the most movement, and dove a lot under braking.
Charger has the highest spring rates of the bunch, but the real track folks at Skip Barber prefer the 300 for its happy tail with ESP disabled.
With all due respect to your knowledge and experience, who cares about this stuff? Certainly not the OP who clearly stated this was for their DD and they don't need a Hemi, SRT8, etc.
ZF box is scheduled for all of them asap, so expect it soon. Nothing at all wrong with the NAG1 5 speed, they are nearly bulletproof even up to 500 rwhp.
I know, that's why I said "at least not yet." If the OP is shopping around now, he/she ain't gonna get the ZF in the Challenger.
I have the Nag1 in my '13 Durango and it's just fine for our family hauler. But I sure wouldn't mind the extra 1-2 mpg from the 8-speed. Just didn't want to pay several thousand more for it (higher MSRP, lower discounts right now).
But if the OP is looking to spend roughly the same on a Challenger w/ 5-speed or Charger w/ 8-speed, I'm recommending going for the 8-speed.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
And btw, the different platforms do not handle very similarly IMO. I have track time in every one in SRT8 guise, and the differences are very noticeable to me. Challenger actually had the most movement, and dove a lot under braking.
Charger has the highest spring rates of the bunch, but the real track folks at Skip Barber prefer the 300 for its happy tail with ESP disabled.
With all due respect to your knowledge and experience, who cares about this stuff? Certainly not the OP who clearly stated this was for their DD and they don't need a Hemi, SRT8, etc.
- Status
