I have the underpowered 383 68 Dodge Charger. Not a Hemi, Not a 440. I kept it stock and stock she shall stay. Get one of these and one day your kids will thank you as they are going to be rare one day. Paint and rims can be changed to get the same look and your kids won't get as many tickets!
@kenny1309 Seriously thinking about getting one, I'm not that old... can't even drive yet... but I have a little under $1000 bucks in the bank for it. That won't even cover taxes... :-(
@Stevenhiggles Everyone knows what mileage your "no head turning Altima" gets. They just want the look of a cool looking car for a cheaper price. It's a heavy ass car, what kind of mileage did you expect? They aren't trying to race anyways with this underpowered V6. You could leave them in the dust all day and they still wouldn't care.
@87PowerMan - Done. Just wait another month untill the 2011 gets the new Pentastar V6 - 310 Hp and 28 MPG Highway. I think they say it will be about 2K more base though ...
What are they comparing this ugly slow piece of shit to, a 16 sec 1/4 mile run is slow and 7.8 0-6 is also damm slow compared to its main rivals, the Camaro v6 and the mustang v6
@camaroman101 ok i wasnt talking about the v8.. and the v8 is not even worth it... you can buy a GT or SS for 10k less then the str8 and the srt8 will still lose to them... people get the v6 challenger to say " ya i have a challenger "
daniocal the Challengers 3720 lb weight for a 250hp V6 is crazy. The 2010 Camaro 300hp V6 is 3780 lbs. The 2010 Mustang 210 hp V6 is 3420 lbs. At least the Camaro has more balls than the Challenger.
Chrysler should have developed a new chassis platform for their Challenger & Charger product lines. The 300 frame is just too heavy to start out with.
A colleague of mine often complained about two of his Chrysler cars having problems. It turns out he learned they put engines that were too low of displacement to handle the weight of the car for what would be considered a normal car life.
I once owned a Plymouth Breeze. Not the most expensive car I've ever owned, but one of my favorites. The engine was actually well suited for the weight. Imagine that.
I don't hate Chrysler, but stop putting these itty bitty engines in jumbo cars...
I really like this car, what they need to do is introduce a 6 speed automatic and boost up the HP on the 3.5, as the competitors have really jumped ahead now!
All those saying, "this car is great if you care about fuel prices," are dumb. The 2011 mustang GT gets BETTER gas mileage (17 city, 26 highway) at 412 hp, and does 0 to 60 in 4.3 seconds. I won't even mention the 2011 V6's stats.
Wow thats pretty weak fuel economy for what you get. 25 Hwy and 17 City? The Mustang GT 05-10 gets that and 300hp. Hell even the 300hp V6 Camaro does better.
I think its time to put Chrysler down. Unimaginative, heavy, and dated technology just wrapped in a new package. As beautiful as the body is, this overweight car really suffers because of this.
There has been a lot of variations in 0-60 times. What many don't realize (including the testers themselves possibly) is Dodge changed transmissions up and went with a 5spd automatic with the autostick option (even though they still list it as a 4 spd in some literature). They made the change in later 2009, so a few 09s and all 2010s will have the revised gearing. Whether this one was actually a 5spd or not....?? Not here to give any opinions, just thought I'd share what I heard. :)
@hozzyboy Motorweek is a production of maryland public broadcasting and has been on the air since 1981. John Davis, the host of the show is also the shows creator and executive producer. He is an expert who knows what he is talking about.
@th3ha1og0d i get that alot. perhaps i should rephrase...yes challenger R/T Manual, no SE V6. For the same amount as the V6 i'd rather have the genesis coupe 2.0T.
Dont get me wrong,250hp is ALOT for 3.5 liters,but fuck chrylser put the challenger on a diet,you got looks down pat,but in handling,fuel economy and performace you fall short,imagine how quick the SRT would be with 3500lbs or so.I mean fuck,my cavalier is quicker than this challenger se.And 25 mpg just isnt worth a 16 sec 1/4 mile.
yes, at least 3 V8 options, 300hp 375hp and 425hp, I have the SXT/SE, shave off 500lbs, with a 5 speed manual, then it might be up there with the competition.
@rahmani15 , the first V6 stang came out 10 years before the G35. 185 was actually fairly decent for its time.
And if you really wanna talk V6 power-battles, we can look at the GERMAN makes of the early 2000's. Mercedes' cars had 349 hp out of small 3.2L and BMW's V6 M3 had 333hp. Infiniti JUST RECENTLY reached that level with the 3.7 VQ. Besides, the Japs have always been more concerned with their V6 leagues, they cant even compare to America and Germany for the REAL (i.e.V8) power battles.
Nothing wrong with the V6; Its quick on the road (not V8 quick, but quick enough), surprisingly economical, the insurance is also affordable. The 3.5L V6 250HP engine is durable and provides smooth operation on the road.
For all you trash-talking millionaires, I can understand your disgust. But for a working class loser like me, who has other expenses not just a car; my ass is very comfortable and happy in a V6.
@Ciper83 but honestly, why the hell would you buy a v6 challenger in the first place? you could have a v6 mustang or a v6 camaro, both of which are 10 years ahead of this car in technology and performance. or, if you're really smart, you could have a hyundai genesis coupe 3.8.
@rs2p00nz The reason alot of people would get this over the mustang or camaro is the fact that you can actually fit 4-5 adults in it unlike the other two. The thing with the camaro is you love it or hate it, I have heard more people say they don't like the extreme styling of it. It looks to much like a concept car.
thanks for stepping up to other assholes, i hate when dumbass people start talkin shit. im happy with my V6 Challenger, i was shooting for a R/T but couldnt afford the extra 100 a month but i still took the V6 and i like it
Or you could just buy a 2011 Mustang V6 for the same money with 305 hp... What the Challenger SE is, is a rental fleet special thats why it wasn't even available with a manual tranny
@xoquixxoqafxo I guess you could if you are a short guy. I'm 6'4 and can barely fit in a Mustang. It is so tight and uncomfortable. The Camaro and Challenger have great leg room and look better IMO. Dodge could have did a better job with this V6. Even if they gave the Mustang leg room, I'd still hate it because there's too many Mustangs on the road and they all look the same. You can't standout in a car that everyone has!
A 1995 Maxima or Taurus SHO automatic would take this thing and the manual versions would destroy it, good work Dodge you are now up par with sedans from 15 yrs ago.
Umm actually it wouldn't if you go look up the 2001 auto Maxima you'll see it does 0-60 in 8.0 seconds and covers the quarter mile in 16.1. Now look at the weight advantage the Maxima has and understand it still can't perform as well as the heavier Dodge. Nissan should be embarrassed. And you should be too for making such a pointless comment.
MT mag says, 1996 5 speed Maxima does 0-60mph in 6.6 sec and 1/4 mile in 15.1, auto a little slower and a 1995 stick SHO would be about the same. Nice try mental midget but you are out of your league.
Notice how I said 2001 AUTO Maxima. BTW the time for the manual 4th gen is 15.2 quarter mile dumbfuck. At any rate the Maxima would obliterate the SHO as well so I would shut the fuck up if I were you.
You are a douche and you know nothing about cars, a 1995 SHO and 1996 Maxima both do 0-60mph in 6.5-7.0 sec and 1/4 mile in 15-15.5 sec. Get your facts right before you mess with the big boys you punk ass pussy bitch.
also look at the trap speeds, 91mph for this car and motorweek could only muster 86mph from the maxima. that is far from being able to "take this thing" as you so eloquently put it. Fuckin dumbass.
this 3.5 v6 is more efficiant than the 5.7 or the 6.1,and the internals are all forged.its not a bad motor.they respond very very well to mods...and nitrous:)
I love the challenger and I love v6 in any car but when I saw the engine shot I hope its just the cover over the engine because it looks like you have less then a foot of room from the alternator to the front of the car. As for the 5 speed In not a manual guy myself but i did some research it would cost them more to put a manual in because it would cast more on the assembly line. I like having a lot of room in the engine compartment makes it very easy to do any changes.
yeah..... $22,000 for 250 hp auto with a 7.8 0-60, or $23,000 for a 304hp camaro 6 speed manual and a 6 second 0-60. dodge is gonna have to do something about this....
Keep in mind though, the Camaro interior is absolute trash. The plastics used in the Chevy are about on par with your favorite garbage can. The worst gauge cluster and cheapest dashboard ever. I'd probably take the Challenger V6 over a Camaro despite the performance disadvantage. The Camaro's interior is horrible -- next to the new Mustang interior, its not even competitive.
0-60 IN 7.8 secs? 16.0 sec 1/4 mile? wow....my 2007 civic si can do 6.5 secs to 60 and 15.2 1/4 mile runs......and it only has 200hp.....that sucks!!!!
24mpg isn't really that good for a 3.5 v6. Jaguar have 4 ltr twin turbo v8s that will return 50 at a push - and they are not economy cars as a rule. You should develope your technology as far as you can so you can evolve your dream motors. Or you will end up like British Leyland. Thats a very nice car, I might add. Bit thirsty though..
i'm assuming you are referring to the diesel...everyone knows diesels are more efficient than gasoline engines...but here in the states we try to calculate our mpg a little more accurate than you do over in Britain. In your gallons, the challenger will get about 32 mpg combined
Oh i'd completely forgot that US gallon is not the same as our gallon. So that v6 gets 32 to the english gallon combined you reckon? So I suppose it might get 40 on motorway / 56mph driving. Thats not a bad effort.
no sorry i meant for your estimations it will get about 32 mpg, i'm just guessing that based on the rating for the chrysler 300c. i think the U.S. estimates the v6 at 17 and 25. you should check out the chevrolet camaro with 304 hp and 18/29 mpg in U.S. ratings
I'd say dodge are on the right track. 240 hp is still not a little amount. Cars in your country need to wake up to the fact that if you carry on with the big hemi's you'll have no fuel left to make them go in a decade to come, and not all oil barron countries are as easy to rob as iraq.
16 Seconds and a 4 speed auto? This car needs a serious shot of power. Dont line up against my wifes minivan, you might get embarrassed. Come on dodge...pull your head out.
The v6 HP may be a little low for a heavey car. However to justify the car Chrysler/Dodge needs to see units. With the energy crisis, the v6/SE seems like a better daily drive. However a 4 speed auto? At least get a 5 speed auto and or manual trans option! I would love the srt8, but I would not cry in the SE! The 3.5 in the challenger gets about the same MPG as the 2.7 in a Charger how is that?
the Challenger SE is idiot? who said that im gonna squish their head off the SE is meant to be bought by teenagers 16 to 26 because the car was fit for that kind of kids!
i know right. my first vehicle was a 1995 Dodge Ram 1500 318 V8 than i got a 2008 Ford Mustang V6 Then a 2009 Dodge Charger SXT 3.5L and now i have the 2010 Dodge Challenegerr SE all because i couldnt afford to pay an extra $100-150 on car payments and insurance and im only 20 years old maybe in a couple of years i can afford an V8
I wouldn't call it performance. Chrysler Said they Designed the V6 Models with Family in mind (hence the massive back seats and trunk space). If your trying to get a performance car Get an R/T or (if you can afford it) a SRT8 :P. Otherwise, It's not bad for a V6 model.
Comment removed
BMan100 3 weeks ago
WTF!!! John Davis does'nt age!
hegzum 3 months ago
The Pentastar 3.6 with the 8-speed automatic will be on another level altogether.
lfsracer79 5 months ago
the 2008-present Dodge Challenger is assembled in
Brampton, Ontario, Canada
Annihilator1111 5 months ago
f yea
musclerocker 6 months ago
you guys have to remember back in the 70s, the challengers smaller v8 put out around 250 hp. but also the car was much lighter back then.
duckanddodge01 9 months ago
305hp now!
BigEyeGreedy 10 months ago 3
@BigEyeGreedy yeah are they fast?
zacheryds 1 day ago
I have the underpowered 383 68 Dodge Charger. Not a Hemi, Not a 440. I kept it stock and stock she shall stay. Get one of these and one day your kids will thank you as they are going to be rare one day. Paint and rims can be changed to get the same look and your kids won't get as many tickets!
Oscha12 10 months ago
I'm getting one!!! only 20 grand! v6! 17/25 mpg! AWESOME!!!
christianninja14 10 months ago
@christianninja14
Used?
kenny1309 9 months ago
@kenny1309 Probably.
christianninja14 9 months ago
@christianninja14
Getting it soon?
Thinking about getting one, in between the Challenger and Camaro.
kenny1309 9 months ago
@kenny1309 get the camaro, you can get a v6 with 6 speed manual!!! way more fun to drive!
brandonww1985 9 months ago
@kenny1309 Seriously thinking about getting one, I'm not that old... can't even drive yet... but I have a little under $1000 bucks in the bank for it. That won't even cover taxes... :-(
christianninja14 9 months ago
does it have the autostick feature
mustangdocter 11 months ago
@mustangdocter yes
duckanddodge01 9 months ago
they made a new v6, 3.6 305hp
sergsrt8 1 year ago
did he just say dandy?
GetSome0OfThis 1 year ago
did he just say dandy?
GetSome0OfThis 1 year ago
my 312hp altima gets 35mgp on highway :D
Stevenhiggles 1 year ago
@Stevenhiggles Everyone knows what mileage your "no head turning Altima" gets. They just want the look of a cool looking car for a cheaper price. It's a heavy ass car, what kind of mileage did you expect? They aren't trying to race anyways with this underpowered V6. You could leave them in the dust all day and they still wouldn't care.
drjd2real 1 year ago
@drjd2real Actually this car turns alot of heads. Especially those of V8 owners.
Stevenhiggles 1 year ago
@Stevenhiggles its also lighter. and not a "muscle car". Your comparing apples to Organes.
halflife103 11 months ago
17 city, 25 highway ROFL .. . ... my 05 mustang GT gets better MPG
pkidro 1 year ago
@pkidro The 05 only gets 17-26 with the 4.0L V6. But it isn't bad since it still gets 15-23 with the 4.6 V8
halflife103 11 months ago
sparks will fly or fall shy. clever
littlered20101 1 year ago
sexy, just wish it had more power and better mpg
87PowerMan 1 year ago
@87PowerMan - Done. Just wait another month untill the 2011 gets the new Pentastar V6 - 310 Hp and 28 MPG Highway. I think they say it will be about 2K more base though ...
SauceCaptain 1 year ago
@SauceCaptain , OMG NO WAY! shut the front door!! lol
87PowerMan 1 year ago
This reminds me of the dodge intrepid r/t
Royaleboy 1 year ago
my 09' ford focus is .2 seconds slower 0-60, not to diss the challenger or anything.
ATR944994 1 year ago
@rahmani15
Your goin thru Midlife crisis? sad ):
vinylcollector08 1 year ago
What are they comparing this ugly slow piece of shit to, a 16 sec 1/4 mile run is slow and 7.8 0-6 is also damm slow compared to its main rivals, the Camaro v6 and the mustang v6
mrosen369 1 year ago
Fuk what anybody says, this v6 challenger is an All American Muscle carthats why its heavy..because of all that muscle and this baby still hauls ass!
SumthinEazy1DosTres 1 year ago
@SumthinEazy1DosTres
yeah muscle cars of the 70's weigh over 4000 pounds and back then nobody complained about that lol
vinylcollector08 1 year ago
this car sucks .... who would buy this car... just for the name?
360mmspider 1 year ago
@360mmspider styling and looks, and power too if you get the v8
camaroman101 1 year ago
@camaroman101 ok i wasnt talking about the v8.. and the v8 is not even worth it... you can buy a GT or SS for 10k less then the str8 and the srt8 will still lose to them... people get the v6 challenger to say " ya i have a challenger "
360mmspider 1 year ago
Lmao. I raced my friends with my 4.3 v6 2000 chevy blazer. Owned his shit bad lmao. GG v6..
truetoheart44 1 year ago
@truetoheart44
Lmao well i race a Chevy Silverado V8 yesterday and passed him like it was nothing and he got a better start
vinylcollector08 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
daniocal the Challengers 3720 lb weight for a 250hp V6 is crazy. The 2010 Camaro 300hp V6 is 3780 lbs. The 2010 Mustang 210 hp V6 is 3420 lbs. At least the Camaro has more balls than the Challenger.
Chrysler should have developed a new chassis platform for their Challenger & Charger product lines. The 300 frame is just too heavy to start out with.
syvrin 1 year ago
A colleague of mine often complained about two of his Chrysler cars having problems. It turns out he learned they put engines that were too low of displacement to handle the weight of the car for what would be considered a normal car life.
I once owned a Plymouth Breeze. Not the most expensive car I've ever owned, but one of my favorites. The engine was actually well suited for the weight. Imagine that.
I don't hate Chrysler, but stop putting these itty bitty engines in jumbo cars...
syvrin 1 year ago
Comment removed
syvrin 1 year ago
Well the new Pentastar V6 with just about 300 hp is right around the corner now...that will give this car the boost it needs.
2003SCT 1 year ago 3
@2003SCT 305. put exhaust and air intake system you'll get at least 320
zacheryds 1 day ago
I really like this car, what they need to do is introduce a 6 speed automatic and boost up the HP on the 3.5, as the competitors have really jumped ahead now!
spritz0 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
how come the SE doesn't have a manual transmission?
conlazycat 1 year ago
All those saying, "this car is great if you care about fuel prices," are dumb. The 2011 mustang GT gets BETTER gas mileage (17 city, 26 highway) at 412 hp, and does 0 to 60 in 4.3 seconds. I won't even mention the 2011 V6's stats.
deanP382 1 year ago
Wow thats pretty weak fuel economy for what you get. 25 Hwy and 17 City? The Mustang GT 05-10 gets that and 300hp. Hell even the 300hp V6 Camaro does better.
I think its time to put Chrysler down. Unimaginative, heavy, and dated technology just wrapped in a new package. As beautiful as the body is, this overweight car really suffers because of this.
syvrin 1 year ago
@syvrin part of the reason it's "overweight" is that its much larger. The weight is a tradeoff.
daniocal 1 year ago
There has been a lot of variations in 0-60 times. What many don't realize (including the testers themselves possibly) is Dodge changed transmissions up and went with a 5spd automatic with the autostick option (even though they still list it as a 4 spd in some literature). They made the change in later 2009, so a few 09s and all 2010s will have the revised gearing. Whether this one was actually a 5spd or not....?? Not here to give any opinions, just thought I'd share what I heard. :)
Moparism 1 year ago
North America needs better auto shows/presenters. I keep expecting him to say "And now on the price is right!"
hozzyboy 1 year ago
@hozzyboy Motorweek is a production of maryland public broadcasting and has been on the air since 1981. John Davis, the host of the show is also the shows creator and executive producer. He is an expert who knows what he is talking about.
flyinDPOD 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Watch this : 2009 Dodge Challenger SE V6 0-60 MPH
Mike85220 1 year ago
Comment removed
Mike85220 1 year ago
Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T please
skimaniac05 2 years ago
@skimaniac05
You should be shot.
th3ha1og0d 1 year ago
@th3ha1og0d i get that alot. perhaps i should rephrase...yes challenger R/T Manual, no SE V6. For the same amount as the V6 i'd rather have the genesis coupe 2.0T.
skimaniac05 1 year ago
@skimaniac05
Excuse me? You should be shot.
th3ha1og0d 1 year ago
Dont get me wrong,250hp is ALOT for 3.5 liters,but fuck chrylser put the challenger on a diet,you got looks down pat,but in handling,fuel economy and performace you fall short,imagine how quick the SRT would be with 3500lbs or so.I mean fuck,my cavalier is quicker than this challenger se.And 25 mpg just isnt worth a 16 sec 1/4 mile.
rockerdude29 2 years ago
@rockerdude29
Hahaha, no, your Cavalier is not quicker than this car. You're silly.
th3ha1og0d 1 year ago
Actually, if it is an Ecotec 02-05 Cavalier, its 0-60 with an automatic is 8.4 seconds.
The Challenger 3.5 is being rated anywhere from 8.1- 9 seconds 0-60.
It is possible.
Mike85220 1 year ago
@Mike85220
Where are you getting your times from?
Motorweek has the Challenger SE doing 0-60 in 7.8, Car & Driver in 7.5 and Motortrend in 7.3.
Far off from 9 seconds.
th3ha1og0d 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@th3ha1og0d Video: 2009 Dodge Challenger SE V6 0-60 MPH
Mike85220 1 year ago
Too bad Dodge didnt put the 4.7 V-8 from the Jeep Grand Cherokee-Commander which has around 300 horses as an optional engine for the SE.
wildbilltexas 2 years ago
@wildbilltexas its too heavy, its a truck engine.
shamzahm 2 years ago
yes, at least 3 V8 options, 300hp 375hp and 425hp, I have the SXT/SE, shave off 500lbs, with a 5 speed manual, then it might be up there with the competition.
02mp9696 1 year ago
@rahmani15 , the first V6 stang came out 10 years before the G35. 185 was actually fairly decent for its time.
And if you really wanna talk V6 power-battles, we can look at the GERMAN makes of the early 2000's. Mercedes' cars had 349 hp out of small 3.2L and BMW's V6 M3 had 333hp. Infiniti JUST RECENTLY reached that level with the 3.7 VQ. Besides, the Japs have always been more concerned with their V6 leagues, they cant even compare to America and Germany for the REAL (i.e.V8) power battles.
4MATICbenz 2 years ago
@rahmani15 , the V6 stang gets 315hp, and will yield sub 14 sec quarter mile times. You call THAT "pointless"?!?
4MATICbenz 2 years ago
the v8 mustang gets 315 hp
bigenginesismythang 2 years ago
@bigenginesismythang , that was theo previous GT's motor. The NEW V6 is getting 315, and the GT is getting around 400.
4MATICbenz 2 years ago
for 2011?
bigenginesismythang 2 years ago
While definetely not powerful, the V6 sounds quiet, refined, and smooth even under full-throttle acceleration runs.
4MATICbenz 2 years ago
Nothing wrong with the V6; Its quick on the road (not V8 quick, but quick enough), surprisingly economical, the insurance is also affordable. The 3.5L V6 250HP engine is durable and provides smooth operation on the road.
For all you trash-talking millionaires, I can understand your disgust. But for a working class loser like me, who has other expenses not just a car; my ass is very comfortable and happy in a V6.
Ciper83 2 years ago 66
@Ciper83 but honestly, why the hell would you buy a v6 challenger in the first place? you could have a v6 mustang or a v6 camaro, both of which are 10 years ahead of this car in technology and performance. or, if you're really smart, you could have a hyundai genesis coupe 3.8.
rs2p00nz 1 year ago
@rs2p00nz The reason alot of people would get this over the mustang or camaro is the fact that you can actually fit 4-5 adults in it unlike the other two. The thing with the camaro is you love it or hate it, I have heard more people say they don't like the extreme styling of it. It looks to much like a concept car.
91generallee 1 year ago
@Ciper83 the V8 variant really isnt THAT much more expensive....
StevoElsupremo 1 year ago
@Ciper83
thanks for stepping up to other assholes, i hate when dumbass people start talkin shit. im happy with my V6 Challenger, i was shooting for a R/T but couldnt afford the extra 100 a month but i still took the V6 and i like it
vinylcollector08 1 year ago
@Ciper83
Or you could just buy a 2011 Mustang V6 for the same money with 305 hp... What the Challenger SE is, is a rental fleet special thats why it wasn't even available with a manual tranny
xoquixxoqafxo 1 year ago
@xoquixxoqafxo I guess you could if you are a short guy. I'm 6'4 and can barely fit in a Mustang. It is so tight and uncomfortable. The Camaro and Challenger have great leg room and look better IMO. Dodge could have did a better job with this V6. Even if they gave the Mustang leg room, I'd still hate it because there's too many Mustangs on the road and they all look the same. You can't standout in a car that everyone has!
drjd2real 1 year ago
@Ciper83 AMEN!
But dude do you know if it comes with the auto/stick like in the avenger? or is it a strait auto?
DUSHANMANGRUE 1 year ago
@Ciper83 I'd get one..... if it came in manual...... v6 camaro it is i guess...
brandonww1985 9 months ago
the challenger never was and never is a pony car. its a muscle car
M3MPH1SM0J0 2 years ago
v6 is pointless.
dayfisher1 2 years ago
maybe not for people who can't afford the v8 up front, or the extra fuel and insurance costs.
th3ha1og0d 2 years ago 10
A 1995 Maxima or Taurus SHO automatic would take this thing and the manual versions would destroy it, good work Dodge you are now up par with sedans from 15 yrs ago.
blowersho 2 years ago
Umm actually it wouldn't if you go look up the 2001 auto Maxima you'll see it does 0-60 in 8.0 seconds and covers the quarter mile in 16.1. Now look at the weight advantage the Maxima has and understand it still can't perform as well as the heavier Dodge. Nissan should be embarrassed. And you should be too for making such a pointless comment.
th3ha1og0d 2 years ago
MT mag says, 1996 5 speed Maxima does 0-60mph in 6.6 sec and 1/4 mile in 15.1, auto a little slower and a 1995 stick SHO would be about the same. Nice try mental midget but you are out of your league.
blowersho 2 years ago
@blowersho
Notice how I said 2001 AUTO Maxima. BTW the time for the manual 4th gen is 15.2 quarter mile dumbfuck. At any rate the Maxima would obliterate the SHO as well so I would shut the fuck up if I were you.
th3ha1og0d 2 years ago
You are a douche and you know nothing about cars, a 1995 SHO and 1996 Maxima both do 0-60mph in 6.5-7.0 sec and 1/4 mile in 15-15.5 sec. Get your facts right before you mess with the big boys you punk ass pussy bitch.
blowersho 2 years ago
Ford couldn't even make their own v6 for the SHO they had to get Yamaha to do it. Sad.
th3ha1og0d 2 years ago
also look at the trap speeds, 91mph for this car and motorweek could only muster 86mph from the maxima. that is far from being able to "take this thing" as you so eloquently put it. Fuckin dumbass.
th3ha1og0d 2 years ago
this 3.5 v6 is more efficiant than the 5.7 or the 6.1,and the internals are all forged.its not a bad motor.they respond very very well to mods...and nitrous:)
drkscion 2 years ago 3
i knew the 3.5 crankshaft was forged but is it connecting rods as well?
th3ha1og0d 2 years ago
forged crank and forged rods.. not bad
th3ha1og0d 2 years ago
it might not be an rt or srt8. but its still a beautiful car. i wouldnt mind havin one. id get a super or turbocharger for it and make it a sleeper
crg616 2 years ago
or for $24k get a v6 gen coupe with 310hp
or for $23k get a v6 camaro with 304hp
or in 2011 a v6 mustang with 315hp
hmmmm.....i love the look though
stevestutz 2 years ago
I love the challenger and I love v6 in any car but when I saw the engine shot I hope its just the cover over the engine because it looks like you have less then a foot of room from the alternator to the front of the car. As for the 5 speed In not a manual guy myself but i did some research it would cost them more to put a manual in because it would cast more on the assembly line. I like having a lot of room in the engine compartment makes it very easy to do any changes.
Portableshadow 2 years ago
The buyers of the SE are not looking to hit the tracks.
Mike85220 2 years ago
that sums up a few thing on here.LOL
I own the SXT/SE
02mp9696 1 year ago
The 3.5 might be adequate in an Avenger but it seems very taxed in a 3800lb Challenger. How could they not make a 5 speed an option on the v6? WTF...
UInACrash 2 years ago
Standard for the 2010 models is a 5 speed automatic.
clagwell 2 years ago
@UInACrash
3700 pounds actually the v6 camro weighs 3800 pounds
vinylcollector08 1 year ago
yeah..... $22,000 for 250 hp auto with a 7.8 0-60, or $23,000 for a 304hp camaro 6 speed manual and a 6 second 0-60. dodge is gonna have to do something about this....
dodgechargr74 2 years ago
You do make a good point on performance.
Keep in mind though, the Camaro interior is absolute trash. The plastics used in the Chevy are about on par with your favorite garbage can. The worst gauge cluster and cheapest dashboard ever. I'd probably take the Challenger V6 over a Camaro despite the performance disadvantage. The Camaro's interior is horrible -- next to the new Mustang interior, its not even competitive.
slantsix73 2 years ago
@dodgechargr74
not if you drop a CAI and and Tuner, then the challenegr would be equal to other V6 Muscle cars out today, that what i did to mine and its fast
vinylcollector08 1 year ago
i like the gto. no poser v6 version available
fcabido 2 years ago
@fcabido
um yeah, the G6 is a Poser version even the G8 come in the V6's
vinylcollector08 1 year ago
HAVE to get one between now and sooN!!!!
nrhbmw 2 years ago
Only reason i like this ride looks like old school bmw. Much rather roll in this ride than jap civic.
CRDLIBERTY 2 years ago
True but your honda isn't in fat camp like the challenger! Nor as inefficient either. Has its charm, which the japanese lack.
0luke 2 years ago 2
0-60 IN 7.8 secs? 16.0 sec 1/4 mile? wow....my 2007 civic si can do 6.5 secs to 60 and 15.2 1/4 mile runs......and it only has 200hp.....that sucks!!!!
07SiPOWER 2 years ago
Well, you get what you pay for. For a few thousand more you can get an R/T which runs high 13's and gets 25 mpg highway to boot w/ MDS.
TurboBuick1986 2 years ago
24mpg isn't really that good for a 3.5 v6. Jaguar have 4 ltr twin turbo v8s that will return 50 at a push - and they are not economy cars as a rule. You should develope your technology as far as you can so you can evolve your dream motors. Or you will end up like British Leyland. Thats a very nice car, I might add. Bit thirsty though..
0luke 2 years ago
i'm assuming you are referring to the diesel...everyone knows diesels are more efficient than gasoline engines...but here in the states we try to calculate our mpg a little more accurate than you do over in Britain. In your gallons, the challenger will get about 32 mpg combined
merandez0 2 years ago
Oh i'd completely forgot that US gallon is not the same as our gallon. So that v6 gets 32 to the english gallon combined you reckon? So I suppose it might get 40 on motorway / 56mph driving. Thats not a bad effort.
0luke 2 years ago
no sorry i meant for your estimations it will get about 32 mpg, i'm just guessing that based on the rating for the chrysler 300c. i think the U.S. estimates the v6 at 17 and 25. you should check out the chevrolet camaro with 304 hp and 18/29 mpg in U.S. ratings
merandez0 2 years ago
I'd say dodge are on the right track. 240 hp is still not a little amount. Cars in your country need to wake up to the fact that if you carry on with the big hemi's you'll have no fuel left to make them go in a decade to come, and not all oil barron countries are as easy to rob as iraq.
0luke 2 years ago
jealousy....... Go pay your litre tax on your engine. LOl
Lumotaku 2 years ago
Is that supposed to offend me?
0luke 2 years ago
16 Seconds and a 4 speed auto? This car needs a serious shot of power. Dont line up against my wifes minivan, you might get embarrassed. Come on dodge...pull your head out.
HOHOHOTCAKES 2 years ago
yeah im getting an SE for my first car i would get an srt8 but insurance would be hell
therobotsnake7 2 years ago
same insurance is 16grand a year for srt 8 lolz
bigj2344 2 years ago
@therobotsnake7
just get a twin turbo put in it
vinylcollector08 1 year ago
The v6 HP may be a little low for a heavey car. However to justify the car Chrysler/Dodge needs to see units. With the energy crisis, the v6/SE seems like a better daily drive. However a 4 speed auto? At least get a 5 speed auto and or manual trans option! I would love the srt8, but I would not cry in the SE! The 3.5 in the challenger gets about the same MPG as the 2.7 in a Charger how is that?
tgpii 2 years ago
16 second quarter mile? I'm sorry, but that is horrible. =(
v4mpirehunterd 3 years ago
the Challenger SE is idiot? who said that im gonna squish their head off the SE is meant to be bought by teenagers 16 to 26 because the car was fit for that kind of kids!
rockkyman 3 years ago
Everyone saying the V6 is bad is an idiot. It's for teenagers. Or anyone under 25.
Do any of you have any idea how expensive a V8 is to insure for someone under 25?
back2schoolfool 3 years ago 3
I have a 09 SXT/SE, and am 29, the insurance is $2000 a year, I find this expencive. not like my old chevy, $400 a year hahah
02mp9696 1 year ago
you may need to check out a new carrier. I'm 25 and my 2010 SE costs about $1200/yr to insure.
dgruney 1 year ago
Im in canada!! lol, I dont have any points/discounts on my license. have to pay full price. shity
02mp9696 1 year ago
@back2schoolfool
i know right. my first vehicle was a 1995 Dodge Ram 1500 318 V8 than i got a 2008 Ford Mustang V6 Then a 2009 Dodge Charger SXT 3.5L and now i have the 2010 Dodge Challenegerr SE all because i couldnt afford to pay an extra $100-150 on car payments and insurance and im only 20 years old maybe in a couple of years i can afford an V8
vinylcollector08 1 year ago
I wouldn't call it performance. Chrysler Said they Designed the V6 Models with Family in mind (hence the massive back seats and trunk space). If your trying to get a performance car Get an R/T or (if you can afford it) a SRT8 :P. Otherwise, It's not bad for a V6 model.
GeneralCuster14 3 years ago
now THATS a waist........ Why didn't Chrysler put the efi 5.2l/5.9l found in older ram trucks in the SE models???? And 4 spd auto??? PUKE!!!!
HotRodDT 3 years ago
You want them to produce an engine that hasn't been made in years and that plain sucked just so soccer moms can get to 60 a little faster?
ambientflier 2 years ago
the dumbest crap i've ever seen. you'd be wasting your money if you didn't get the r/t or the srt
yroczepp 3 years ago
Cuz.. its about selling units buddy.. affordability is one of the main things that keep the muscle cars alive.
Berumen85 3 years ago
you're right, but i wouldn't call this a muscle car
yroczepp 3 years ago
@yroczepp
this car has MUSCLE written all over it, just look at it, they made V6's back then and there still considered muscle cars
vinylcollector08 1 year ago
@vinylcollector08 yeah, just LOOK at the body and you'll see muscle. but don't pop the hood. you'll be disappointed. lol
yroczepp 1 year ago
Carbon Footprint? Are you guys serious?
Otherwise good review.
pentastar1x 3 years ago
hahahahahahahahaha. Is dodge series about this. My 1.3 rx7 was faster than this when it was bone stock N/A.
elmelllo 3 years ago
Hello 250hp is big!!! Even the old maxima was about that
CRDLIBERTY 3 years ago
Good looking kinda BMW between an american car
CRDLIBERTY 3 years ago
Does the se some with Xenon headlight???
farhooddd 3 years ago
COOL
morgangamer22 3 years ago
How slow! Cant they do tis on the V8!
USTankslashercoal 3 years ago
It's Heavy Man
ReGGaEToNFLoW88 3 years ago
yea. About 4,000lbs , or around that. That muscle cars gotta go on about a thousand pound diet and it'll be fast! Same with the SRT8!
Awesome car no matter tho! No doubt about that!
USTankslashercoal 3 years ago
the SE is about 3700lbs but its trans a bad one and even though the srt weighs alot its still fast
styylite 3 years ago