i think it looks similar to the new mustangs in many respects....just not enough to keep it from being *** ugly.....let me guess.....it will have a hemi.....

 

Maybe it's just me.....but these original cars were classics. IMO, with the exception of the Ford GT of course, these cars should be left alone. Seems to me that Ford re-released the GT out of demand, while "Dodge-Daimler-Chrysler" are re-releasing this car to catch up. Usually I will keep my opinions to myself, but damn, a redesigned Chrysler 300? Gimme a break. Like Jaymz said, a 4-door CHARGER?

Besides, that thing is ***-ugly.

I'm done, sorry if anyone is offended.

 

I want to know why Chrysler pulled the 04 Dodge Charger R/T Prototype? Anybody? It had 2 doors like the 68 Charger.

 

Actually, the Charger R/t Concept had four doors (you can't tell from your picture)

If you look closely at this pic you'll see the rear door handle and the space between the door and the body just above the wheel well...




And if that's not proof enough, here's Dodge's PR release when they first introduced the car:

"While paying homage to the muscle car era, Charger R/T produces emissions so low it would meet the California Air Resources Board Ultra Low Emission Vehicle (ULEV) standard. It would also reduce carbon dioxide emissions by up to 25 percent. That's because this Charger R/T is powered by a supercharged, compressed natural gas (CNG) 4.7-liter V-8 engine. Not only is this powertrain clean, but it generates 325 horsepower, blending both power and ultra low emissions.

This concept Charger R/T, while sharing the long nose and rearward cab of the original, is a good deal shorter. It's 187 inches in overall length compared to 203 inches for the 1966 Charger. It's also lighter; 3,000 pounds versus 3,650 pounds.

While making an important statement for CNG technology, the Charger R/T was equally appealing to the design community. One other major change distinguishes the concept from the original Charger of the mid-1960s-the concept has four doors. It has functional side scoops, as does the Viper, and the chrome plated, central mounted exhaust is somewhat reminiscent of Viper. It even has functional air exhausters sculpted into its rear fascia.

The Charger R/T is equally important for what it says about CNG technology. The concept car showcases a new storage tank system that one day might deliver 300 miles range in a CNG-powered passenger car and not compromise storage space in the trunk.

The cylinders, or pressure cells, inside the Fiberglas storage tank are lined with a gas-impermeable High Density Polyurethane (HDPE) thermoplastic and wrapped in a hybrid mix of high-strength carbon and super-tough glass filaments that are wound with an epoxy resin. Finally, the cylinders are laid into a foam egg crate to absorb impacts. It's strong for its weight, resistant to environmental damage, reliable and durable. The tank can be made flat, in the shape of a conventional gasoline tank, yet the fuel can still be stored at 3,600 pounds per square inch."

Story By DaimlerChrysler

 

Kobiashi I stand corrected. I still liked the proto over the production one. I guess we all have our opinions.

 

Even when they introduced the R/T concept in '99, the critics loved the look but hated the four doors. The design could easily been changed to turn it into a coupe. Personally, I think this design was beautiful (IF it had been done with 2 doors). I am in total agreement with the others in thinking that the new Charger is UGLY, and the 4 doors is just WRONG!


Here's what it should have looked like.







The Charger should be a coupe.

(It should also be good looking and not some butt-ugly box.

that is all.

 

That thing doesn't look anything like a charger. Atleast Ford's new GT looks A LOT like the old fastbacks.

 

why the he!! is anyone even paying attention to those chitboxes anyway? THIS IS SUPPOSEDLY A FORD FORUM!!!!..YES it is UGLY!!(where do these "engineers" get these idiotic ideas anyway?...zap!

 

I'm not buying one; but, compared to the Magnum and 300C, the Charger is much nicer looking. A shorter coupe version would have been much better though. Is it really fair to compare this car to the Classics? The last Charger and Daytona were front wheel drive for Christ's sake.