Challenger falling behind in road courses?

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by Stew

You have to remember too that the Camaro and Mustang has multiple generations that have grown up with those cars, there hasn't been a Challenger since 72 or 73?

That makes sense. The only people that are buying them are old people who remember them and need something comfortable!

[1bad65]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

I blame it on consumers being stupid, generally a valid assumption.

Ok. Assuming you are right, Dodge/Chrysler has had a few years to adapt to the consumer stupidity. They have a car that not only sells, but that the dealers often mark up. So it's a car that has it's demand being greater than it's supply. Other companies would kill for that. And what's Chrysler's answer? Why, just keep producing this car in small numbers.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by 1bad65

Ok. Assuming you are right, Dodge/Chrysler has had a few years to adapt to the consumer stupidity. They have a car that not only sells, but that the dealers often mark up. So it's a car that has it's demand being greater than it's supply. Other companies would kill for that. And what's Chrysler's answer? Why, just keep producing this car in small numbers.

That leads to another point, is the extra comfort really worth that extra $5,000+ you exchange for a SRT8 compared to a 2SS/Premium GT?

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by a_Username

That leads to another point, is the extra comfort really worth that extra $5,000+ you exchange for a SRT8 compared to a 2SS/Premium GT?

To some it is

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

To some it is

You should emphasize SOME. Like bold, italicized, underlined, capital, shouted on top of the empire state building, etc. Either way you look at it, it's not outselling its competition and isn't the reason why they're in the automotive industry; actually SELL MORE CARS THAN ANOTHER?!

[Stew]

Originally Posted by a_Username

That makes sense. The only people that are buying them are old people who remember them and need something comfortable!

Actually, this is pretty true, I bet the average age on Challenger talk is higher than here. Me memories of growing up in the 80s and being a teenager in the mid 90s are filled with Monte Carlo SSes, 5.0 Mustangs, 3rd gen TA and Iroacs/Z28s, Grand Nationals, Impala SSes, Taurus SHOs, Countaches, etc, etc, etc THey have something to do with final decision, more than likely, being a new 5.0 Mustang. I know it really has nothing in common but a badge with those old fox bodies but well..... It also helps my first memory of speed from being 8 was in my uncles new 88 Mustang GT

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by a_Username

You should emphasize SOME. Like bold, italicized, underlined, capital, shouted on top of the empire state building, etc. Either way you look at it, it's not outselling its competition and isn't the reason why they're in the automotive industry; actually SELL MORE CARS THAN ANOTHER?!

....Not at Chrysler. They seem to be content to just exist. I don't recall any point in time when they've had a knockout hit that blew away the competition. I think...and I think it still holds true today...that they are content and able to remain a low-production just-barely-on-the-map major OEM.

They say the Challenger was never expected to exceed 30,000 units...so their goals must have been much lower.


EDIT: And just to be clear, I don't say this to belittle Chrysler in any way. I'm a fan of some of their vehicles. It just seems that way (^) to me.

[a_Username]

Every response I've seen on both sides have made me come to the conclusion that Chrysler is stupid.

[Dakota Kid]

I'm not a fan of Chrysler products, but that new Dodge Ram is one great truck...

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by a_Username

You should emphasize SOME. Like bold, italicized, underlined, capital, shouted on top of the empire state building, etc. Either way you look at it, it's not outselling its competition and isn't the reason why they're in the automotive industry; actually SELL MORE CARS THAN ANOTHER?!

No, its not. The goal is profit, not volume explicitly. Low margin/high volume is a bigger gamble than low volume/high profit cars. And given the state they're in, I can't blame them for taking the easy route. They rushed a reskinned Charger to market with a heavy profit margin on each, since the platform was well established and the investment in the car was minimal.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

No, its not. The goal is profit, not volume explicitly. Low margin/high volume is a bigger gamble than low volume/high profit cars. And given the state they're in, I can't blame them for taking the easy route. They rushed a reskinned Charger to market with a heavy profit margin on each, since the platform was well established and the investment in the car was minimal.

I doubt its making enough profit to keep the company afloat by that strategy. That would be one of the main problems with a low volume/high profit.

[MrIcky]

Chrysler has definitely made some questionable decisions. I'll tell you this though, for the most part Challenger owners seem to absolutely LOVE their cars. I mean almost creepy talking to it while rubbing it down with warmed carnuba by candlelight love.

[1bad65]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

....Not at Chrysler. They seem to be content to just exist. I don't recall any point in time when they've had a knockout hit that blew away the competition.

They actually seem content to just bleed money. Both GM and Chrysler got bailouts recently. I see GM has started to repay the Government. Has Chrysler?

Chrysler actually started the minivan craze, didn't they?

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

....Not at Chrysler. They seem to be content to just exist. I don't recall any point in time when they've had a knockout hit that blew away the competition. I think...and I think it still holds true today...that they are content and able to remain a low-production just-barely-on-the-map major OEM.

They say the Challenger was never expected to exceed 30,000 units...so their goals must have been much lower.


EDIT: And just to be clear, I don't say this to belittle Chrysler in any way. I'm a fan of some of their vehicles. It just seems that way (^) to me.

No knockout hits? Just in the last 20 years, the LH cars, the 1st gen Neon, the 94 Ram, the 93 Grand Cherokee, 1st gen Durango, 300C, The new Ram 1500 and HDs, of course there hasn't been too much since they started getting passed around in 98.