Disgruntled Bovine posted:

Subaru's full time AWD is notoriously thirsty. The Legacy getting worse mileage than other cars in its class is no surprise. I think that's the reason they're tending towards CVTs lately, to compensate for the AWD drain.

tetrapyloctomy posted:

Not totally happy with the GT86? Toyota has something for you!

quote:

HRM: Will there be a future for the Hellcat? Is it a limited production car?

TK: This one I love, because I’m so pissed about this. Someone wrote an article and said, ‘F Dodge, they built this awesome car but they are only gonna build 1200 of them and I’ll never be able to get one,’ Bullshit. We never said that! I don’t know where the guy got that information. The Hellcat is not limited production. We’ll see what the demand is, but definitely not limited to 1200.

quote:

HRM: Have you ever considered making a two-door Charger or convertible Challenger?

TK: No. The reason why is the Charger is an amazing car for us, we sell 100,000 of those a year, because it doesn’t fit the mold of anything else that is a full-size sedan. Nothing else is like it in its segment. I’m not messing with that. That’s why this is different than a Camaro or a Mustang. I don’t want to compete with Camaro or Mustang. I want people who are looking at midsize cars to go hey, those are cool.

VikingSkull posted:

VikingSkull posted:

This is what I've always said in AI about the Challenger when it gets the Mustang/Camaro comparisons. The Challenger isn't a pony car.

quote:

The Challenger was described in a book about 1960s American cars as Dodge's "answer to the Mustang and Camaro."[5] Introduced in fall 1969 for the 1970 model year,[5] it was one of two Chrysler E-body cars, the other being the slightly smaller Plymouth Barracuda. "Both the Challenger and Barracuda were available in a staggering number of trim and option levels" and were intended "to compete against cars like the Chevrolet Camaro and Ford Mustang, and to do it while offering virtually every engine in Chrysler's inventory."[6] However, the 1970 Challenger was "a rather late response to the ponycar wave the Ford Mustang had started" with its introduction in April 1964.[7] In his book Hemi Muscle Cars,[8] Robert Genat wrote that the Challenger was conceived in the late 1960s as Dodge's equivalent of the Plymouth Barracuda, and that the Barracuda was designed to compete against the Mustang. The 1964 Barracuda was actually the first car in this sporty car segment by a few months, but was quickly overshadowed by the release of the segment defining Mustang (the segment being referred to as "Pony Car"). He added that Chrysler intended the new 1970 Dodge as "the most potent ponycar ever," and positioned it "to compete against the Mercury Cougar and Pontiac Firebird." Genat also noted that the "Barracuda was intended to compete in the marketplace with the Mustang and Camaro/Firebird, while the Dodge was to be positioned against the Cougar" and other more luxury-type musclecars.

Nidhg00670000 posted:

I'm pretty sure that VS is talking about the current Challenger, which seems more of a grand tourer than a pony car.

VikingSkull posted:

Yup exactly. From the time it came back, Chrysler has maintained it wasn't competing with the Mustang and Camaro directly. It has always been a GT style car, made for cruising the highways far more than racing down back roads. Even in that wiki link, it only says that a book puts it as the answer to the Mustang and Camaro, and goes on to say that the 'Cuda was smaller, lighter and more of a heads up comparison to the pony cars, while the Challenger was more aligned with the Firebird and Cougar. Those were upscale pony cars at the time, but more of what we call a grand tourer today.

The modern Challenger is totally a GT car from the word go, they've never planned to have a track day version like the Z/28 or Boss because that's not who the car is targeted at. It has more back seat room and more trunk space than both the Camaro and Mustang IIRC, and is targeted at a slightly older demographic.

People often forget that back in the day Plymouth was the budget group of Chrysler, and Dodge was the performance brand. Much like Pontiac, Dodge cars were a tad upscale without being luxury cars like Chrysler.

Son got a Road Runner, dad got a Coronet, and grandpa had a 300.

Also sorry leica, lol

Cream_Filling posted:

Honeslty the modern Challenger is more like the historical Charger - big two door that's bigger than a pony car but not as fat as a Thunderbird.

HotCanadianChick posted:

This. They should have called the Challenger the Charger, and called the Charger the Imperial or Windsor or something else.

HotCanadianChick posted:

This. They should have called the Challenger the Charger, and called the Charger the Imperial or Windsor or something else.

Phy posted:

The fuzz here drive Chargers when they're not in Vics. Weren't there a lot of police Polaras back in the day? It's sounding better and better.

VikingSkull posted:

was way cooler than the wagon.

Tommychu posted:

Also when someone says "Dodge Magnum" and isn't talking about a wagon, the first thing I think of is the '90s 318/360.

Fucknag posted:

Don't forget the black sheep of the line, the 8.0 V10. The diesel alternative that was less powerful than any diesel and the Hemi line that replaced it, and also worse fuel economy than any of the other options.

Only mark in its favor is that they poured aluminum in the mold and had Lambo put some good heads on it to create the Viper motor.

Coredump posted:

The sister car to that, The Hyundai Elantra, has a touring model that is like that. Ever looked into it?

Augmented Dickey posted:

The Optima is a midsize car; its Hyundai analogue is the Sonata. The Elantra is a compact.

The Elantra GT is actually based on the European i30 (I think?) and is a few inches shorter than the Elantra/Forte sedan and coupe.

Coredump posted:

Well drat I got told. I was pretty surprised when I saw one just recently. I honestly thought it was a Canadian car until I saw the plates on it since I'd never seen one before and station wagons so rare in the US.

PBCrunch posted:

The Tacoma starts $2000 cheaper and has the Toyota repuation.

Q_res posted:

These aren't mid-size family sedans, having a bowtie on the front is an asset and not a disadvantage.

What's going to hurt these is how fast that price rises when you start adding stuff like the V6 or the Z71 package. If I were GM I'd be more worried about the Silverado/Sierra than the Tacoma.

Augmented Dickey posted:

I was expecting both (especially the GMC) to start in the mid-20's; the interiors look miles ahead of anything else in the segment.

fknlo posted:

I don't care if the Canyon comes in at a higher price than a somewhat comparable full size after discounts are taken into account. I don't loving need something as big as a full size truck. I don't want anything that big either. I don't really want a truck, but the Canyon Diesel is going to be the closest thing to what I want/need in a vehicle that you can buy in the US. They're smart with their marketing towards active people with kayaks and bikes and camping shots in the press releases. That's what got me interested.

Why are people paying a premium for a loaded compact like the focus when they could get a fusion for just a couple thousand more? It's the same thing. There is a market for not full size trucks.