Appleseed wrote: Again, why does it need to be updated?
Because there are a bunch of engineers and designers that want to keep their jobs. Not to mention the journalists that are desperate for something to write about.
Appleseed wrote: Again, why does it need to be updated?
Because there are a bunch of engineers and designers that want to keep their jobs. Not to mention the journalists that are desperate for something to write about.
Toyman01 wrote:Appleseed wrote: Again, why does it need to be updated?Because there are a bunch of engineers and designers that want to keep their jobs. Not to mention the journalists that are desperate for something to write about.
Not to mention the forum guys(and Jeremy Clarkson) around the world that need a new platform to piss on because they have played out the lies about the old one.
I don't remember people bitching that the 94-96 impala ss were on an almost 20 year old chassis, they stumbled over themselves to get a muscly fullsize car in an era when everything else was a 140hp w body
Appleseed wrote: Again, why does it need to be updated?
It seems to still work, but it's falling behind it's competition, and that seems to be affecting sales. In 2016, they sold about 65000 Challengers, about 72000 Camaros, and over 100000 Mustangs. Prices and stats are similar across the board for those three models, and the Challenger has the benefit of looking the business, but it's still lagging in sales.
I understand that FCA seems to be cash strapped, and therefore it makes sense to get as much mileage as possible out of their equipment by dressing up existing components as much as possible. But, there comes a time when a manufacturer has to reinvest in wholly new product in order to keep the revenue stream intact. How would FCA's financials look if they were able to sell 80 or 90 thousand Challengers a year?
patgizz wrote: I don't remember people bitching that the 94-96 impala ss were on an almost 20 year old chassis, they stumbled over themselves to get a muscly fullsize car in an era when everything else was a 140hp w body
This explains the issue perfectly. It's not actually the age of the chassis that matters. It's whether or not it's still good enough to not seem "behind" when compared to other cars with a similar purpose. If it's 20 years old and still measures up, keep using it! If it's 10 years old but everyone else has done much better, time to make some updates!
patgizz wrote: I don't remember people bitching that the 94-96 impala ss were on an almost 20 year old chassis, they stumbled over themselves to get a muscly fullsize car in an era when everything else was a 140hp w body
I don't remember them selling particularly well, either. Enthusiasts may love them, but as we've discussed before, there aren't enough of us. There's SOME reason there was never a 1997 model.
As for the age of the LX platform, 90% of the buyers don't care, or even know. It's essentially the only affordable large RWD "American" sedan on the market at this point, so they kind of own that segment.
The Impala SS was a cop car with leather. The regular Caprice sold millions each year. Chevy had a virtual strangle hold on the police cruiser market. The B-body was killed to make room for the "improved" FWD Impala.
That worked well, right?
Everyone who liked that style of car bought Crown Vics.
The talk about the Challenger and Chargers aging platform (especially from journalists) reminds me of how every mass market car magazine used to poo poo GM's 3800 V6. "It's a hoary old pushrod design" they'd all say.
Yes, it had pushrods....it also produced prodigious torque, got fantastic MPG, and was reliable as an anvil. GM wisely ignored the naysayers, and ran that engine until emissions regulations shut it down. It was actually a perfect engine for a big sedan.
This isn't to say that the Challenger / Charger platform is perfect---- just that the criticisms are similar.
In reply to STM317:
They only made around 83000 challengers to begin with in 16. 65 thousand out of 85 thousand is fairly decent, it's not like these things are sitting on the lot.
Chrysler has very rarely had the production numbers to keep up with Ford and GM on sales.
I don't know how we are talking about a chassis that runs 9s stock and lifts the front wheels stock is "outdated" or "lagging the competition"...
I see the Camaro and Mustang as pony cars and the Challenger as a Muscle Car. I honestly didnt think that FCA built it as a direct competition to those cars. Learn something new everyday. And when has FCA out sell Ford and GM in anything other than minivans?
Anyway, the Demon was designed for a certain purpose and they executed that purpose. Every car ever could've been done better. But, this damn thing has balls and is awesome to me and a lot of other people. Now, back to knocking it with every possible reason we can find.
Does it come in Plum Crazy?
This is actually a serious point. I require ridiculous paint.
Appleseed wrote: The Impala SS was a cop car with leather. The regular Caprice sold millions each year. Chevy had a virtual strangle hold on the police cruiser market. The B-body was killed to make room for the "improved" FWD Impala. That worked well, right?
From GM's standpoint? Yeah, it did. I can't find sales data from the 90s on the internet, but I guaran-damn-tee you that the FWD Impala handily outsold the RWD Caprice it replaced. It was more fuel efficient, had better space utilization, easier to drive and park, and is easier to drive in snow. Again, enthusiasts ALWAYS make this mistake. What we care about is not what the majority of the car-buying market cares about.
As for Crown Vics, if you take out fleet sales, the market numbers on those were pretty small compared to the big hitters like the Accord and Camry, or even the Taurus.
Grizz wrote: Does it come in Plum Crazy? This is actually a serious point. I require ridiculous paint.
This is important.
Why do I feel alone on the hp wars. This stuff is nuts. Most, if not all, buyers can't handle near this hp. A lot of hp in an otherwise incompetent car is pure stupidity. Brakes, then handling then hp.
torque may win races, but no one ever said brakes or handling sells cars.
In reply to Robbie:
Hey Mazda sold a million odd Miata's.
*also Sublime Green is better
The0retical wrote: In reply to Robbie: Hey Mazda sold a million odd Miata's. *also Sublime Green is better
Shots fired!
I'm in with the Plum Crazy camp.
I doubt that the 3300 people that buy these will give half a damn if the chassis could be better refined. One doesn't buy 840 horsepower for refinement. As for the people that outrun their talent and ball them up, I bet a little refinement wouldn't have saved them.
markwemple wrote: Why do I feel alone on the hp wars. This stuff is nuts. Most, if not all, buyers can't handle near this hp. A lot of hp in an otherwise incompetent car is pure stupidity. Brakes, then handling then hp.
You're not alone. I said this when the car was first announced, and was roundly criticized for it. I've mellowed somewhat and can appreciate it for the lunacy that it represents, but it's still not my cup of tea. I'd pick a ZL1 or GT350 every day over the Demon.
STM317 wrote: While this is true, they were pretty much all built as homologation specials so that the manufacturers could actually race them. Although it may be built in the same spirit as those old drag warriors, the Demon isn't a homologation special. It's almost the opposite in fact since Dodge hasn't expressed plans to race it, and the largest sanctioning body for it's intended purpose won't let it run as it's sold.
If you think of it as the roadgoing counterpart to the supercharged Drag Pack cars built for NHRA Super Stock racing, this is more of a case of "The class doesn't require a homologation special, but we're building one anyway." There aren't that many venues these days that actually require homologation specials that I can think of.
The0retical wrote: In reply to Robbie: Hey Mazda sold a million odd Miata's. *also Sublime Green is better
Yeah women loved them! 
MadScientistMatt wrote: -snip- There aren't that many venues these days that actually require homologation specials that I can think of.
Which is a shame for everyone.
mazdeuce wrote:Grizz wrote: Does it come in Plum Crazy? This is actually a serious point. I require ridiculous paint.This is important.
I kinda feel like plum crazy or that ridiculous lime color are the only correct answers here.
In reply to mndsm:
I dunno, 9 seconds and Panther Pink has a certain appeal.
talk about old platforms. How about the CJ's and Wrangler.
Dimensions and a few other changes but still the basic old design. still a CJ weighed about 2400 lbs. How did they get so heavy ?
I'll take my Demon in Molten Orange.
You'll need to log in to post.
