Quote:
Originally Posted by a_Username
Then the bold is Chrysler's fault for producing a vehicle that wasn't meant to sell. Why would they make the goal so low for? Do they realize they couldn't compete with the other two? I can understand your point on the marketing of the Challenger as an "image" car. However, the Camaro and Mustang have the same image as the Challenger and they can do this as well as being a good seller.
|
The 3 cars currently have their own areas of the market. Beyond brand loyalty and styling, the Camaro is the best performing and the least practical. The Challenger is the most practical, yet worst performing. The Mustang is between the two in all regards. So, when you consider the fact that most people will never drive their car to 50% of its capabilities, no matter what the car is, so technically performance limitations are actually less important than how you feel while driving it. The Challenger is intended for those who accept that, and merely want a nice daily driver or cruiser. I don't agree with this choice, but I understand where its strength lies.