Charger Forums banner
1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,855 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have heard alot of posters crying over the name of the new Charger. What would you call it? would you use an exsisting Dodge name like Coronet? or would you've liked to see something new like "Venom"? What do you think?
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
chargershed said:
I have heard alot of posters crying over the name of the new Charger. What would you call it? would you use an exsisting Dodge name like Coronet? or would you've liked to see something new like "Venom"? What do you think?
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :eek:
I would have done something all new. The name Magnum has worked well, so if they had the same people think of a name, I'm sure it wouldn't be too bad. Venom isn't exactly new if you're a Viper enthusiast...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,855 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
neither is magnum...dodge built this car in the late 70's as a satelite replacement( and nascar shell ;) ) I mean chrysler's naming skills aren't exactly great :eek: crossfire? stratus? cirrus? firepower??? anyone???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
chargershed said:
I have heard alot of posters crying over the name of the new Charger. What would you call it? would you use an exsisting Dodge name like Coronet? or would you've liked to see something new like "Venom"? What do you think?
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :eek:
The Charger name was used on the 99-2000 concept Charger. This 2006 car is not a Charger, they (dcx) just "used" the name Charger to sell more cars. Its based off the S-8 or Super8 concept so they could have just called it that I guess. If they called it a S-8, Challenger, Intrepid or Coronet there would have been "less" of a backlash for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
chargershed said:
neither is magnum...dodge built this car in the late 70's as a satelite replacement( and nascar shell ;) ) I mean chrysler's naming skills aren't exactly great :eek: crossfire? stratus? cirrus? firepower??? anyone???
How in the hell could I have forgotten about the infamous Magnum? I mean, it spawned such a huge following it just baffles me that I didn't remember when I made that asinine statement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
I'll begin this by saying, I somewhat agree with everyone who is pissed off that they named this car the Charger. But the more I think about, the more I realize - who the hell am I to tell Dodge what to do with their car naming?

Just because I really like the 68 Dodge Charger, doesn't mean I should have any say in how they market, name or use their heritage to their advantage.

It's not 1968 any more. The car buying market has obviously changed. If Dodge says they can't build and market a two-door car profitably, then they're probably right. They know a lot more about it than I do.

Is this a modern muscle car? Maybe. Maybe not. But it's definitely a big, bold car putting down some serious power (especially compared to the other sedans available right now).

So I'm caving already. I'm glad they called it the Charger. I'm glad they abandoned any retro-styling (like I've said, and others have said, the retro craze is done - those Mustangs won't move in 2 years). I'm glad they made the car they wanted to make it, and they're sticking to their guns.

That's what made the original Charger a great car. And this one has the potential to do it again. Remember when Chrysler started doing cab-forward design? - How long did it take every other car maker to start making their cars to look like that? And the redesigned Ram... OH MY GOD, they made a pick up without a square, ugly ass front? How DARE THEY! And within two years, EVERY other truck had been restyled.

Daimler Chrysler is designing the best-looking cars on the road (overall average of their complete line, I think this is almost un-arguable). So - kudos to them.

Let it be the Charger.

*end rant*
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
DubleDex said:
I'll begin this by saying, I somewhat agree with everyone who is pissed off that they named this car the Charger. But the more I think about, the more I realize - who the hell am I to tell Dodge what to do with their car naming?

Just because I really like the 68 Dodge Charger, doesn't mean I should have any say in how they market, name or use their heritage to their advantage.

It's not 1968 any more. The car buying market has obviously changed. If Dodge says they can't build and market a two-door car profitably, then they're probably right. They know a lot more about it than I do.

Is this a modern muscle car? Maybe. Maybe not. But it's definitely a big, bold car putting down some serious power (especially compared to the other sedans available right now).

So I'm caving already. I'm glad they called it the Charger. I'm glad they abandoned any retro-styling (like I've said, and others have said, the retro craze is done - those Mustangs won't move in 2 years). I'm glad they made the car they wanted to make it, and they're sticking to their guns.

That's what made the original Charger a great car. And this one has the potential to do it again. Remember when Chrysler started doing cab-forward design? - How long did it take every other car maker to start making their cars to look like that? And the redesigned Ram... OH MY GOD, they made a pick up without a square, ugly ass front? How DARE THEY! And within two years, EVERY other truck had been restyled.

Daimler Chrysler is designing the best-looking cars on the road (overall average of their complete line, I think this is almost un-arguable). So - kudos to them.

Let it be the Charger.

*end rant*
well put.
if you're hung up on the ol' skool, get the charger off your liking and drop a crate 6.1 in her.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
SlickerSRT said:
perhaps it would be because I like modern amenities, like head rests.
Slicker...

That's the great thing about customs. All you need is the "frame". best of both worlds. your model year and all of the modern amenities to your liking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
tekhen said:
Slicker...

That's the great thing about customs. All you need is the "frame". best of both worlds. your model year and all of the modern amenities to your liking.
That's going to get very costly. Plus, you can only put in so much money into an old car before you realize you could have bought a new Ford GT and gotten an even better car from the late 60's....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,855 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Now that I've seen the Daytona version.... Charger was the perfect name!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
I believe Chrysler is resurrecting these names to hold on to the rights ... "Firepower" was originally used for the Chrysler Hemi way back in the 50's. IIRC, Ram Horn was used to identify the early dual cross-ram intakes on the 413 wedge motors. I don't know for sure, but I believe Magnum replaced the term Max Wedge or Wedge ... and other Chrysler/Plymouth/Dodge nomenclature that was used for the small & big block wedge motors, hence the 340, 383 & 440 magnum---all being wedge motors.

And now ultimately used as the primary moniker ... Magnum, Firepower, Ram, Power Wagon, Charger, etc... to retain the heritage and rights.

My guess is crossfire is a derivative of the cross-ram/firepower inductions used in the 50's-60's.

chargershed said:
neither is magnum...dodge built this car in the late 70's as a satelite replacement( and nascar shell ;) ) I mean chrysler's naming skills aren't exactly great :eek: crossfire? stratus? cirrus? firepower??? anyone???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
lets not forget who its replacing
the INTREPID, big ass car with great handling, ride, comfort, space, and the needed power


but hell, its has a hemi, not an original hemi, but a hemi, so "Charger" doesn't bother me
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
I would have liked it to be called either Monoco or Polara, more fitting for a big 4 door with lots of power...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
greentrep94 said:
but hell, its has a hemi, not an original hemi, but a hemi, so "Charger" doesn't bother me
But technically so is my SRT-4, considering it has the spark plugs right at the bottom of each cylinder....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,762 Posts
jdp said:
I would have liked it to be called either Monoco or Polara, more fitting for a big 4 door with lots of power...
Those are good names, but the new Charger is smaller than the old Chargers, and WAY smaller than a Polara or Monaco.

I don't get why people get so worked up about the name. I've wanted a '68 Charger since I was a little kid in the '70s. People always associate "Charger" with the '68-'70 models, but forget that many (most) of the cars to wear the Charger names were horribly ugly POSes, including but not limited to the rebadged Chrysler Cordobas (sans rich Corinthian leather, I'm sure) and rebadged Omnis.

Sure, 2 doors would be ideal, but let's all just be happy it's not a front wheel drive hatchback with a 4-banger.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
I'm over my problems with this new car being a Charger. . .Now on to other items Why didn't they cal the new pontiac 2 seater a Fiero! :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
bottom line is this company has no room to hold onto the sentimental value of the old charger , whether this new one is or isnt true the ones made 30+ years ago they need to go with what works before honda and toyota end up with both feet in their proverebial ass, they're doing well lets not blow it
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top