Why American car companies suck - Page 16

Wagner · #**151** 03-25-2009, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lo_jack

Charger was a sound business decision. It's on the 300 chasis, they sold a lot of them and the economics of building them were better than if it had been the Challenger, which is why they did that second, IMO. I am a fan of 68-71 Chargers though, and of course I would have liked to have seen it come out as a 2 door. But the market was not so good for a two door legacy car, (not that now is much better, but I hear the Challenger is doing ok) so they found a market they wanted and put a name on it.

Challenger is true to it's roots. It is fat, like most mopars then and now.

But the v6 car is comparable to the other two. However, and this also applies across most of the modern history of all three of these cars, mustang always prices in lower entry and markets to a different audience than the other two. That's why Fbody died. They were aimed at a higher target and mustang just outsold them in volume on lower end units. And let's be honest, someone buying a v6 version of any of these is not the reason these are being built. It helps on the CAFE standards though.

Sponsored Links

E61Silver · #**152** 03-25-2009, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lo_jack

Charger was a sound business decision. It's on the 300 chasis, they sold a lot of them and the economics of building them were better than if it had been the Challenger, which is why they did that second, IMO. I am a fan of 68-71 Chargers though, and of course I would have liked to have seen it come out as a 2 door. But the market was not so good for a two door legacy car, (not that now is much better, but I hear the Challenger is doing ok) so they found a market they wanted and put a name on it.

Challenger is true to it's roots. It is fat, like most mopars then and now.

But the v6 car is comparable to the other two. However, and this also applies across most of the modern history of all three of these cars, mustang always prices in lower entry and markets to a different audience than the other two. That's why Fbody died. They were aimed at a higher target and mustang just outsold them in volume on lower end units. And let's be honest, someone buying a v6 version of any of these is not the reason these are being built. It helps on the CAFE standards though.

The dash on related interior on most Mopars are hard plastic, the 300 was the last nice car that they made. All of the smaller cars are least in class.

FSETH · #**153** 03-25-2009, 07:17 PM

I would personally only consider driving a Mustang in this particular group of cars, but only in V8 form. I was just comparing apples to apples for jewelthief, who brought up MPG.

E61Silver · #**154** 03-25-2009, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FSETH

I would personally only consider driving a Mustang in this particular group of cars, but only in V8 form. I was just comparing apples to apples for jewelthief, who brought up MPG.

The Mustang is nice car, Ford has done a lot with it. A Corvette is also nice. Both Ford & GM have come a long way.

Wagner · #**155** 03-25-2009, 08:40 PM

BTW: Look at the 2010 Taurus SHO...

3.5 Ecoboost V6 motor, 365hp/350tq....twin-turbo....6-spd auto, AWD, 25+ mpg..under $39K......kinda makes 3.0 with 300/300 look like kids stuff

FSETH · #**156** 03-25-2009, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by x54.4blue

The Mustang is nice car, Ford has done a lot with it. A Corvette is also nice. Both Ford & GM have come a long way.

I agree and Chrysler/Dodge is left in the dust.

FSETH · #**157** 03-25-2009, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wagner

BTW: Look at the 2010 Taurus SHO...

3.5 Ecoboost V6 motor, 365hp/350tq....twin-turbo....6-spd auto, AWD, 25+ mpg..under $39K......kinda makes 3.0 with 300/300 look like kids stuff

That's what I was saying earlier. I saw one at the car show and I was impressed. I thought it looked really nice and apparently it is very safe as well. I give it

jewelthief · #**158** 03-26-2009, 08:23 AM

taurus 2010 not bad under the hood but otherwise just looks like another infiniti....challenger does a great job of being true to it's roots like previously said.. just a great motoring experience....

Jay Leno's Garage

FSETH · #**159** 03-26-2009, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jewelthief

taurus 2010 not bad under the hood but otherwise just looks like another infiniti....challenger does a great job of being true to it's roots like previously said.. just a great motoring experience....

Jay Leno's Garage

Have you seen one in person? It has pretty nice lines, a strong looking stance and is more European looking than Japanese, IMO.

The thing about the Taurus SHO is that it makes pretty much any sedan from GM (except the CTS) and Dodge look old. Especially anything in the Dodge camp. The interior of the Taurus is far better than anything Chevy or Dodge currently offers as well.

E61Silver · #**160** 03-26-2009, 08:50 AM

Dodge interior is always tons of black plastic.

Sponsored Links