New Charger: Hot or Not?
Hans Bricks has been up in arms over big, gas-guzzling cars recently, and the new Dodge Charger is his latest target.
Not only is Hans pissed that DaimlerChrysler is essentially tossing trunkloads of cash to terror-supporting Middle Eastern autocrats, but his commenters are ragging on the new beast as a betrayal to the original Charger from the '60s, an affordable two-door muscle car which boasted absolute gobs of power to run down little old ladies, after which it would use splinters of their bones to pick their flesh out its teeth.
I beg to differ on both counts.
First, the car itself.
I'm not going to debate the styling because that's something that you either like or you don't. Personally I love it. The grill leans forward, imparting a sense of speed to the car. The headlights are scrunched down in an angry scowl. The rear fenders are flared out like the haunches of a beast. Meanwhile, the window lines are straight and clean. This is one hell of a handsome machine.
The car comes with several engine options, but the one that matters for this discussion is the SRT8 option that squeezes 425 hp from the 6.1 liter Hemi. That's good enough for 0-60 in five seconds flat, putting it close to the Mustang GT and other sports cars. Pretty freaking good for a big four-door sedan.
Ah, that's where the problem lies for Mopar purists. A lot of people can't get over the fact that a Charger has four doors. It doesn't even give me pause. I judge the car on its own merits, not against some 35-year-old ideal. If you're still really disgusted by the doors, look at it this way: Detroit has a storied history of totally deballing some of the hottest cars in its stable. The Nova, the Impala, the Monte Carlo (hey, all Chevys. Hmmm) and even previous iterations of the Charger weren't fit to carry the jockstraps of their predecessors. If cars wore jockstraps, that is. Anyway, given that the heart of the new Charger is a kick-ass block of engine, it seems a bit shortsighted to nitpick over two extra doors.
Now for Hans' gripe, which is that Detroit continues to crank out cars that guzzle gas like Mean Joe Green guzzles Coke. The argument is compelling: these cars increase our demand for oil, we get most of our oil from the Middle East, the Middle East is primary funder and backer of terrorism targeting America, therefore we should switch to alternative fuels to starve these evil-doers of the cash to carry out their nefarious schemes. It's a nice plan, and we may even get there some day. But I don't think terrorism will shrivel up any time soon if GM would just start making dang hybrids.
First, hybrids are a cross-over technology. They are powered by both batteries and a conventional internal-combustion engine. They still need gasoline. And they may not even be the most efficient use of that gasoline. Many drivers of diesel VWs routinely claim better mileage than what you get out of the current generation of hybrids.
But let's set aside hybrids and say the auto makers should dive into fuel cells, which run on hydrogen and thus obviate the need to purchase Middle Eastern oil to power our automotive fleets. Let's also assume that technological difficulties (mainly extracting, transporting and storing hydrogen) prove unexpectedly easy to solve. Detroit is able to ramp up production of these marvels pretty quickly. How long would it be before enough H-powered cars are on U.S. roads to make a dent in our oil imports? I would guess at least 10 years, maybe 20.
That's not even considering the fact that the U.S. is but one slice of the auto market. The biggest one, for sure, but what about Japan, Germany and China? Unless they get on board with this grand hydrogen plan, there are still going to be major amounts of cash flowing to the Middle East.
The U.S. burns about 20 million barrels of oil a day. About 3/4 of that is imported. Our passenger cars account for something like half of total consumption. The other half goes to things like trucking, aviation, shipping and power consumption, things which I think would take a lot longer to switch over to hydrogen, if it was even possible at all. Even if all our passenger cars ran off of imported oil and we were able to convert them all to hydrogen, that would still leave us importing about 5 million barrels a day, a bit under what Japan's imports are today.
It might be more effective to simply diversify our imports. Russia has become a major player, though it sells overwhelmingly to Europe. Interestingly, Canada has been exporting more oil to us, and recent projects to tap their tar sands could be really exciting. Our neighbor to the north (Hi Mayor!) has more than trillion barrels of black gold locked up in these tar sands. A few years ago, when oil was at $10 a barrel, it didn't make sense to tap that stuff. The equation obviously changes when we're looking at $50 a barrel.
Incidentally, part of the problem with alternative energy cars right now is that they are boring as shit. I have absolutely zero interest in driving a Prius. The thing looks like, I don't know, a streamlined Pontiac Aztek. Look at that ass! The wheels are laughably small -- my son's trike has bigger wheels. Yes, I know the thing is packed with cutting-edge technology and it's a real hoot to see the little computer display showing your current mileage and all that. But I crack open a "Car and Driver" here and see that the Prius takes 11.3 seconds to haul its ass to 60 mph. The magazine carries specs for 148 cars. Here is a complete list of all the vehicles that move slower than the Prius:
.
That's right, the Prius is one of the slowest cars on the roads right now. The next slowest is the Suzuki Verona EX at 10.7 seconds, then the Scion xB at 10.6 seconds. Yup, a rolling refrigerator is faster than the Prius. Big chunks of the American driving population are preoccupied with one thing: horsepower. Witness the proliferation of engines packing serious numbers of ponies recently. We are in the middle of a great horsepower war, and it's awesome because there are more cool cars to chosose from than at any point since the late '60s.
One development that will lend legitimacy to alternative fuels is when it is shown that they won't come at the expense of horsepower and fun. Mitsubishi was on the right track when they showed off a hybrid Eclipse concept last year that mated a 270-hp V6 to an electric motor capable of pumping an additional 200 hp to the rear wheels. Unfortunately Mitsubishi is struggling and it doesn't look like the hybrid setup will go into production. But show me a hydrogen-powered Corvette that scoots to 60 mph in four seconds and I will show you an American market ready to buy.
Anyway, I don't have any real ideological bias against alternative fuels. Though I love a big burly V8 engine (even in four-door cars) what I dig most is performance. If I can have a great driving experience in a car running on electricity or hydrogen or the menstrual blood of teenage Peruvian virgins, hey, that's great, count me in.
But until then, does anyone have the name of a good Chrysler dealer?
Not only is Hans pissed that DaimlerChrysler is essentially tossing trunkloads of cash to terror-supporting Middle Eastern autocrats, but his commenters are ragging on the new beast as a betrayal to the original Charger from the '60s, an affordable two-door muscle car which boasted absolute gobs of power to run down little old ladies, after which it would use splinters of their bones to pick their flesh out its teeth.
I beg to differ on both counts.
First, the car itself.
I'm not going to debate the styling because that's something that you either like or you don't. Personally I love it. The grill leans forward, imparting a sense of speed to the car. The headlights are scrunched down in an angry scowl. The rear fenders are flared out like the haunches of a beast. Meanwhile, the window lines are straight and clean. This is one hell of a handsome machine.
The car comes with several engine options, but the one that matters for this discussion is the SRT8 option that squeezes 425 hp from the 6.1 liter Hemi. That's good enough for 0-60 in five seconds flat, putting it close to the Mustang GT and other sports cars. Pretty freaking good for a big four-door sedan.
Ah, that's where the problem lies for Mopar purists. A lot of people can't get over the fact that a Charger has four doors. It doesn't even give me pause. I judge the car on its own merits, not against some 35-year-old ideal. If you're still really disgusted by the doors, look at it this way: Detroit has a storied history of totally deballing some of the hottest cars in its stable. The Nova, the Impala, the Monte Carlo (hey, all Chevys. Hmmm) and even previous iterations of the Charger weren't fit to carry the jockstraps of their predecessors. If cars wore jockstraps, that is. Anyway, given that the heart of the new Charger is a kick-ass block of engine, it seems a bit shortsighted to nitpick over two extra doors.
Now for Hans' gripe, which is that Detroit continues to crank out cars that guzzle gas like Mean Joe Green guzzles Coke. The argument is compelling: these cars increase our demand for oil, we get most of our oil from the Middle East, the Middle East is primary funder and backer of terrorism targeting America, therefore we should switch to alternative fuels to starve these evil-doers of the cash to carry out their nefarious schemes. It's a nice plan, and we may even get there some day. But I don't think terrorism will shrivel up any time soon if GM would just start making dang hybrids.
First, hybrids are a cross-over technology. They are powered by both batteries and a conventional internal-combustion engine. They still need gasoline. And they may not even be the most efficient use of that gasoline. Many drivers of diesel VWs routinely claim better mileage than what you get out of the current generation of hybrids.
But let's set aside hybrids and say the auto makers should dive into fuel cells, which run on hydrogen and thus obviate the need to purchase Middle Eastern oil to power our automotive fleets. Let's also assume that technological difficulties (mainly extracting, transporting and storing hydrogen) prove unexpectedly easy to solve. Detroit is able to ramp up production of these marvels pretty quickly. How long would it be before enough H-powered cars are on U.S. roads to make a dent in our oil imports? I would guess at least 10 years, maybe 20.
That's not even considering the fact that the U.S. is but one slice of the auto market. The biggest one, for sure, but what about Japan, Germany and China? Unless they get on board with this grand hydrogen plan, there are still going to be major amounts of cash flowing to the Middle East.
The U.S. burns about 20 million barrels of oil a day. About 3/4 of that is imported. Our passenger cars account for something like half of total consumption. The other half goes to things like trucking, aviation, shipping and power consumption, things which I think would take a lot longer to switch over to hydrogen, if it was even possible at all. Even if all our passenger cars ran off of imported oil and we were able to convert them all to hydrogen, that would still leave us importing about 5 million barrels a day, a bit under what Japan's imports are today.
It might be more effective to simply diversify our imports. Russia has become a major player, though it sells overwhelmingly to Europe. Interestingly, Canada has been exporting more oil to us, and recent projects to tap their tar sands could be really exciting. Our neighbor to the north (Hi Mayor!) has more than trillion barrels of black gold locked up in these tar sands. A few years ago, when oil was at $10 a barrel, it didn't make sense to tap that stuff. The equation obviously changes when we're looking at $50 a barrel.
Incidentally, part of the problem with alternative energy cars right now is that they are boring as shit. I have absolutely zero interest in driving a Prius. The thing looks like, I don't know, a streamlined Pontiac Aztek. Look at that ass! The wheels are laughably small -- my son's trike has bigger wheels. Yes, I know the thing is packed with cutting-edge technology and it's a real hoot to see the little computer display showing your current mileage and all that. But I crack open a "Car and Driver" here and see that the Prius takes 11.3 seconds to haul its ass to 60 mph. The magazine carries specs for 148 cars. Here is a complete list of all the vehicles that move slower than the Prius:
.
That's right, the Prius is one of the slowest cars on the roads right now. The next slowest is the Suzuki Verona EX at 10.7 seconds, then the Scion xB at 10.6 seconds. Yup, a rolling refrigerator is faster than the Prius. Big chunks of the American driving population are preoccupied with one thing: horsepower. Witness the proliferation of engines packing serious numbers of ponies recently. We are in the middle of a great horsepower war, and it's awesome because there are more cool cars to chosose from than at any point since the late '60s.
One development that will lend legitimacy to alternative fuels is when it is shown that they won't come at the expense of horsepower and fun. Mitsubishi was on the right track when they showed off a hybrid Eclipse concept last year that mated a 270-hp V6 to an electric motor capable of pumping an additional 200 hp to the rear wheels. Unfortunately Mitsubishi is struggling and it doesn't look like the hybrid setup will go into production. But show me a hydrogen-powered Corvette that scoots to 60 mph in four seconds and I will show you an American market ready to buy.
Anyway, I don't have any real ideological bias against alternative fuels. Though I love a big burly V8 engine (even in four-door cars) what I dig most is performance. If I can have a great driving experience in a car running on electricity or hydrogen or the menstrual blood of teenage Peruvian virgins, hey, that's great, count me in.
But until then, does anyone have the name of a good Chrysler dealer?
<< Home