Dodge Challenger Engine and trans

[Anthony]

From resident Mopar insider oh2o on Allpar:

 

2008 Challenger (SOP March 2008)

 

SRT8 - 6.1L (LCDX22)

2009 Challenger (SOP July 2008)

 

SXT - 3.5L HO V6 with 42RE 4-speed (LCDH22)

R/T - New 5.7L gen 2 Hemi (LCDP22)

SRT8 - 6.1L (LCDX22)

2010 Challenger (SOP July 2009, convertibles Jan 2009)

SXT

SXT convertible (early model year intro)

R/T

R/T convertible (early model year intro)

SRT8 - 6.1L

SRT8 - 6.4L HO

2011 Challenger

4.0L Phoenix engine replaces 3.5L HO

2008-2009 Challenger features and options

 

Overall - very similar to the 2008 Charger models

All models - functional hood scoop

Keyless Go ignition system (intro 2009 model year)

Audio - Boston Acoustics

Navigation option - MyGIG

Steering column - Tilt/Telescoping

Transmissions - 4-sp auto 42RLE, 5-speed auto W5A580, 6-speed manual TREMEC

Radio antenna built-in to rear window

Fuel capacity - 18.5 gal.

Side air bags (Standard on all models)

No spare tire

--oh2o--

Edited September 30, 2007 by Intrepidatious

[Traveler]

If I were buying one, I'd tell the dealer to get me an extra rim and a full size tire on it to keep as a spare, even if it dramatically cut down on trunk volume. This crap about having 'no spare' is absolutely dumb! Who wants to be sitting beside the interstate at 10:30 in the evening while waiting for Roadside Assistance to come help you? Plus, what can they do on site if your sidewall is blown open? Ridiculous. I think these car company execs should be shown where to put their cans of Fix-A-Flat.

 

As for the rest of car, sounds like fun. I wonder what the final curb weight is going to wind up being?? I also see that upcoming is the 6.4L Hemi...500 naturally aspirated horsepower!!

[02MustangGT]

I'm betting the curb weight will be damn near 4000 pounds with the V8.

[waymondospiff]

Wow. Chrysler's 250 horsepower 3.5L with a four-speed automatic is standard. So, you'll buy a Challenger and be able to rip 0-60 in a blazing eight seconds. Great. While the Altimas, Auras, and Accords fly by...

 

I'd love to see the business case for either this car or the Camaro.

 

Scott

[BlackHorse]

Wow. Chrysler's 250 horsepower 3.5L with a four-speed automatic is standard. So, you'll buy a Challenger and be able to rip 0-60 in a blazing eight seconds. Great. While the Altimas, Auras, and Accords fly by...

 

I'd love to see the business case for either this car or the Camaro.

 

Scott

 

Well golly gee I thought all of you guys around here were staunchly opposed to any kind of street racing so it shouldn't matter right?

[Traveler]

Well, the Mustang V6 will make something like 40 horsepower LESS than the 2009 Challenger V6, so I don't think the 3.5L is that bad a choice. Of course, Chrysler does have the 4.0L on tap for '11 according to this, but the real battle in the trenches will be the R/T vs. GT and the GT-500 vs. SRT-8 Challenger. Looks like the Shel' will probably have it outgunned for awhile, but I think where Dodge really wants to go after Ford is on the GT level.

 

You have to keep in mind that Chrysler doesn't bear the same burden to push V6 sales like Ford does with the Mustang. The Challenger will share considerably on the line with its sedans/wagon siblings. The Challenger R/T is the make or break for the Dodge coupe in my belief.

[Ford-150]

the V6 mustang will most likely still be faster than the V6 Challenger because of weight, but when you are buying a V6, speed isn't job #1

 

i do have to say that the new Challenger looks a TON better than the new Camaro

 

and hopefully the competition will have a good outcome with the mustang

[ANTAUS]

And a 4 speed? Thats pretty rediculous. As it is, they could have used the 4.0L V6 and 6 speed combo from the minivans and I'm sure that combination would give it something in the decent mid 7's range.

 

I think this puppy will be around for just one generation...

[BlackHorse]

It's far too early to be speculating about performance numbers and length of production. Doing so represents a whole lot of wishful thinking and very little application of any real common sense.

[Anthony]

I don't think anyone will be buying a Challenger V6 to go out prowling for Mustang V6's or vice versa. That's not why someone buys a V6 ponycar...

[BlackHorse]

I don't think anyone will be buying a Challenger V6 to go out prowling for Mustang V6's or vice versa. That's not why someone buys a V6 ponycar...

 

 

Let's not start the stereotyping either. There's probably a bazillion reasons why people would or will buy a V6 pony car, to include prowling for other cars of it's kin. I've seen plenty of V6 Mustang and Camaro owners over the years that don't mind matching their cars up against one another at the street light or just out in traffic somewhere. Happens all the time. It is entirely possible, in fact probable that many V6 Mustang and Camaro drivers are only driving one because they just couldn't afford the V8 model. It doesn't dampen their thirst for performance driving any, only their ability.

[waymondospiff]

It's far too early to be speculating about performance numbers and length of production. Doing so represents a whole lot of wishful thinking and very little application of any real common sense.

I'm sorry BlackHorse - I must have missed the memo that said you were in control of the pony car discussions on this board.

 

Ford, with a continuous history of building and selling Mustangs manages to sell 150-200K/year with virtually ZERO competitors. To make this happen the Mustang starts under $20K, uses a solid rear axle to save cost, uses an outdated V6 as the base engine, relies on not-insignificant fleet sales (especially the V6 convertible), and sells mainly on style.

 

Chrysler & GM are stating that they are going to build cars on more expensive chassis with more sophisticated suspensions. In plain terms, how can a Challenger or Camaro even approach $20K as a profitable price point? GM can use the 3900 as their base engine, so the engine cost won't be an issue but Chrysler is going to use the 3.5L. The 3.5L has been a weak performer it's entire life, probably more to do with the UltraDrive transmission, yet it costs more to build than the 4.0L or 3900 owing to its DOHC 24V design. So the Challenger is going to be slower AND more expensive?

 

And we could get into the overall buyers of these pony cars. The average buying age for the Mustang is not mid-20s - demand is being spurred by baby boomers recapturing some of their youth. There's nothing wrong with that - their cash is as good as anyone else's - but this isn't an infinite market. Baby boomers are aging - despite capturing one's youth there's usually a limit to how long someone will put up with long doors, small interiors, and laid back seats for the sake of style.

 

What I'm arriving at is that the Challenger and Camaro are chasing a market that is small. $3/gal gasoline and a 6.4L Hemi are only fun for so long. Sleek, cut-down styling will wow the neighbors, but cause the typical buyer to go to the chiropractor once a week. The Mustang has evolved into the perfect vehicle for the market - it's high on style with good (not outstanding) performance. But it's high on value (minus the Shelby models...) and it does well with a monopoly.

 

So when I ask to see the business case for these cars, I'm not saying "Blue Oval Number One! Bleed Blue!" I'm saying "How do GM & Chrysler think they're going to double or triple the size of the pony car market coming to market five years after the Mustang with more expensive cars?"

 

And yet somehow I'm lacking in common sense?

 

Scott

[BlackHorse]

I'm sorry BlackHorse - I must have missed the memo that said you were in control of the pony car discussions on this board.

 

Ford, with a continuous history of building and selling Mustangs manages to sell 150-200K/year with virtually ZERO competitors. To make this happen the Mustang starts under $20K, uses a solid rear axle to save cost, uses an outdated V6 as the base engine, relies on not-insignificant fleet sales (especially the V6 convertible), and sells mainly on style.

 

Chrysler & GM are stating that they are going to build cars on more expensive chassis with more sophisticated suspensions. In plain terms, how can a Challenger or Camaro even approach $20K as a profitable price point? GM can use the 3900 as their base engine, so the engine cost won't be an issue but Chrysler is going to use the 3.5L. The 3.5L has been a weak performer it's entire life, probably more to do with the UltraDrive transmission, yet it costs more to build than the 4.0L or 3900 owing to its DOHC 24V design. So the Challenger is going to be slower AND more expensive?

 

And we could get into the overall buyers of these pony cars. The average buying age for the Mustang is not mid-20s - demand is being spurred by baby boomers recapturing some of their youth. There's nothing wrong with that - their cash is as good as anyone else's - but this isn't an infinite market. Baby boomers are aging - despite capturing one's youth there's usually a limit to how long someone will put up with long doors, small interiors, and laid back seats for the sake of style.

 

What I'm arriving at is that the Challenger and Camaro are chasing a market that is small. $3/gal gasoline and a 6.4L Hemi are only fun for so long. Sleek, cut-down styling will wow the neighbors, but cause the typical buyer to go to the chiropractor once a week. The Mustang has evolved into the perfect vehicle for the market - it's high on style with good (not outstanding) performance. But it's high on value (minus the Shelby models...) and it does well with a monopoly.

 

So when I ask to see the business case for these cars, I'm not saying "Blue Oval Number One! Bleed Blue!" I'm saying "How do GM & Chrysler think they're going to double or triple the size of the pony car market coming to market five years after the Mustang with more expensive cars?"

 

And yet somehow I'm lacking in common sense?

 

Scott

 

Well, first off, my comment that you responded to was directed at what ANTAUS had posted right before it, not you. But since you brought it up, I guess it never registered to you that Chrysler and GM may not be trying to double and triple the size of the pony car market. It is entirely possible that both the upcoming Camaro and Challenger are niche vehicles and are not intended to be sold on the wholesale Wal-Mart approach with which Ford handles the Mustang.

 

The only comment I directed at you was that you are complaining how the 4 speed V6 Challenger is going to be slower then then Mustang V6. Maybe it will, but then given that everyone around here makes it a point to talk about how they are so staunchly opposed to any kind of street racing then it really shouldn't matter which car is "faster" should it? I mean you guys are all better then that right? You never street race because it's dangerous and illegal so by default it shouldn't matter if the V6 Mustang is 1 or 2 seconds quicker in the 0 to 60 department because you guys aren't going to lower yourselves to find out anyway are you? I mean, unless you're going to take your stock V6 Mustang to a drag track and kick some serious ass. LMAO.

[silvrsvt]

I wouldn't worry too much about the V6 Mustang, keep in mind that the 4L is going away soon and there are pently of rumors on the Mustang boards that the V6 mustang will get the 3.5 or 3.7L engine in the 2009/10 refresh plus a twinforce version...

 

But I do have to ask...why 4 speed auto in it? :lol:

[ANTAUS]

I believe the 3.5L has always been coupled with the 4 speed. And as it is, I'm sure they will get rid of this engine and replace it with the 4.0L/6Speed combo. It's just, since the vehicle still isn't coming out for another year or so, I myself am surprised they are doing a typical Ford "Bububu it's good enough" introduction and using THAT as the entry engine. It's as if they are putting more energy on the more premium engines, and their entry drive-train is sort of mediocre.

 

And thats not even taking weight into consideration since nothing is set in stone. It's kinda laughable they even offer the 2.7L on the same platform..and fuel efficient it's not.

[waymondospiff]

[...]I guess it never registered to you that Chrysler and GM may not be trying to double and triple the size of the pony car market. It is entirely possible that both the upcoming Camaro and Challenger are niche vehicles and are not intended to be sold on the wholesale Wal-Mart approach with which Ford handles the Mustang.

Well, I asked to see the business plan. If the business plan for the Camaro and Challenger call for the vehicles to be low-volume niche vehicles then that's great. It alleviates most of my questions. However, with targeted prices in the low-20s (Camaro at least, Challenger is still unknown) it's hard to believe it's a niche vehicle. Include the coupe and convertible bodystyles and the choice of V6 and V8 (choice of V8s in the Challenger at least) and it's even harder to see how it's a niche vehicle.

 

So when I say I'd like to see the business plan for these vehicles, I mean it. Is the Challenger a low-volume, high-priced sports car? Riding on the LY chassis and weighing around 4000lbs makes it hard to believe it's a true sports car. Is the Camaro a high-volume, low priced pony car? If so, where are the sales coming from? If it's a niche product why V6 engines? Why the coupe & convertible? How does a low-volume Camaro help justify the development costs of an expensive new chassis from Holden? These are real questions that are unanswered. A quick quip doesn't answer these questions. There may be answers, good and soundly-based answers, but I have yet to see them.

 

[...]Maybe it will, but then given that everyone around here makes it a point to talk about how they are so staunchly opposed to any kind of street racing then it really shouldn't matter which car is "faster" should it? [...]

I read well less than 1/2 of the threads on this board and I can honestly say I have never participated in any street racing threads. But 0-60 in 8 seconds is performance that you'll "feel" in everyday driving. And the Challenger is going to feel slower than a Honda Accord Coupe V6. Sure, it's about style not performance, but you'd expect at least "sporty" performance from a base model. Especially if it's a pricey "niche" vehicle as you proposed above.

 

I believe the 3.5L has always been coupled with the 4 speed. And as it is, I'm sure they will get rid of this engine and replace it with the 4.0L/6Speed combo. It's just, since the vehicle still isn't coming out for another year or so, I myself am surprised they are doing a typical Ford "Bububu it's good enough" introduction and using THAT as the entry engine. It's as if they are putting more energy on the more premium engines, and their entry drive-train is sort of mediocre.

The 3.5L comes with a 5-speed auto in the Charger, I think with the 300 too (mid-cycle addition in 2006 or 2007?) and it definitely comes with the 3.5L AWD 300 & Magnum. Why not on the Challenger - I don't know. It makes me wonder about the veracity of the opening post.

 

Why not go with the Pacifica's 4.0L until the all-new Phoenix V6s are available?

 

Scott

[Anthony]

Why not go with the Pacifica's 4.0L until the all-new Phoenix V6s are available?

 

Remember, this is built on a modified LX platform which does not currently offer the 4.0L. Not sure if the cost of getting the 4.0L in there was enough to offset just waiting a couple years till the next gen platform.

 

The 3.5L comes with a 5-speed auto in the Charger, I think with the 300 too (mid-cycle addition in 2006 or 2007?) and it definitely comes with the 3.5L AWD 300 & Magnum. Why not on the Challenger - I don't know. It makes me wonder about the veracity of the opening post.

 

 

The 5-speed with V6's is currently only available on AWD models. Otherwise, the V6's (2.7L and 3.5L) have the 4-speed currently.

Edited October 1, 2007 by Intrepidatious

[igor]

Market and CAFE ruled - Challenger was not to get a v8 - Crhysler just wanted the higher profit V8 sales (albeit at lower bolume) .. things change ..

 

the V8 offerings are nice and competitive, but the V6 will be subpar until replaced by the Phoenix engine - the current engine is unrefined, weak and thirsty ... atll while Ford will have the D35 and GM will have the 3.6lHF under the hood and probably matted to 6speed transmissions.

 

Igor

[old_fairmont_wagon]

I'm not sure anyone has confirmed either way what GM will have under the hood of hte base V6 camaro. The HF3.6L is not exactly a fuel mizer, and, the 3900VCT is not a bad engine for a base camaro. ITs got a nice broad torque curve, and gets good mileage on the highway.

 

For Chrysler, I expected the base engine to be their 3.5L and the base auto from the Charger. Nothing surprising there. Its all about comonality there.

 

Given the release dates for the Challenger will have at most half a year before the updated mustang hits the streets. We have strong rumors to a change in the base V6 from the existing cologne 4.0L SOHC to the D35. Even if they don't, this isn't anything to be overly concerned about. From the mag articles about the v6 stang that have been presented, the v6 was detuned a bit. If the GT gets the rumored performance bump, there's no reason that they would hold back the v6 as well. The engine is easily capable of at least 10 more hp and 15 more lbs of torque, if not more, in its present form.

 

The one thing I am most worried about for Chrysler is the gas mileage numbers that the base challenger will have. I don't believe that it will be very good. The mustang may actually have a significant advantage there.

[BlackHorse]

Well, I asked to see the business plan. If the business plan for the Camaro and Challenger call for the vehicles to be low-volume niche vehicles then that's great. It alleviates most of my questions. However, with targeted prices in the low-20s (Camaro at least, Challenger is still unknown) it's hard to believe it's a niche vehicle. Include the coupe and convertible bodystyles and the choice of V6 and V8 (choice of V8s in the Challenger at least) and it's even harder to see how it's a niche vehicle.

 

I'm not sure how you make the distinction or come to the conclusion that a niche vehicle by definition must also be an expensive vehicle. I mean I could see it if you're a Ford Exec because apparently Ford does subscribe to that school of thought. But take for instance the Jeep Wrangler, perhaps the icon of niche vehicles, starting at 18K and some change. The same is true of the PT Curiser. Pontiac Solstice is another good example, with prices as low as 23 or 24K. So it is entirely possible to have a Camaro and Challenger priced in the low 20's and still be regarded, marketed and intended as a niche vehicle.

 

I don't doubt that you have never participated in some of the threads about the Mustang around here when the flow of the conversation swings to driving a mustang fast and how fast is it compared to other cars. Invariably I will point out that street racing is for kids, idiots and it's stupid and dangerous, which of course is true. It's also true that as soon as I point that out that all the guys will insist they only drive their mustangs fast at a drag racing track because nobody wants to be percieved to be a dangerous idiot around here. Hence the bit about street racing, which of course is true. I don't doubt that many a buyer will take a peak at the performance numbers of even the base model cars in the Challenger vs the rest of the field aspect. I also don't doubt that it will still sell quite well for awhile because it's new and different and cool looking and that will outweigh any performance disadvantage it may suffer to the Mustang or Camaro. I suspect that eventually Dodge will address any serious performance disadvantage it has.

[suv_guy_19]

Remember, this is built on a modified LX platform which does not currently offer the 4.0L. Not sure if the cost of getting the 4.0L in there was enough to offset just waiting a couple years till the next gen platform.

The 5-speed with V6's is currently only available on AWD models. Otherwise, the V6's (2.7L and 3.5L) have the 4-speed currently.

 

 

Nope, our 2006 Magnum SXT (3.5) RWD has a 5 speed

[White99GT]

We have strong rumors to a change in the base V6 from the existing cologne 4.0L SOHC to the D35. Even if they don't, this isn't anything to be overly concerned about. From the mag articles about the v6 stang that have been presented, the v6 was detuned a bit.

 

Performance isn't what's wrong the the 4.0L SOHC, NVH is. The quicker they ditch it for the D35 the better.

[Anthony]

Nope, our 2006 Magnum SXT (3.5) RWD has a 5 speed

 

My bad, you must have a late-build 2006 with the NAG1 5-speed, the earlier 2006's came with the 42RLE 4 speed across the 3.5L spectrum (minus AWD). I was posting before thinking and caught in a time-warp (it happens every so often ).

[suv_guy_19]

My bad, you must have a late-build 2006 with the NAG1 5-speed, the earlier 2006's came with the 42RLE 4 speed across the 3.5L spectrum (minus AWD). I was posting before thinking and caught in a time-warp (it happens every so often ).

 

 

Yeah I thought that was what happened. When my dad told me he was thinking of buying it, I started doing research and was really hoping that it had the five speed and not the four. I was very happy when I got the answer .

[Traveler]

While I see the Challenger and Mustang squaring off against each other, both have two different means to an end. The Mustang has always been dependant on V6 sales. I think with Challenger, the opposite will be true. The Dodge will need most of its success in the R/T with the base Hemi. People who want the look and decent V8 power and snarl, but with better fuel economy and a cheaper price than the SRT.

 

Dodge Challenger has support from 300, Charger and Magnum. Mustang is required to be self-reliant to stay in production. Challenger is just a fourth car, a coupe, added to a platform that is already planned to continue for several years to come. If Magnum was a sole production vehicle, it would have already had its plug pulled. Apparently, Chrysler can justify keeping it in low-volume production as an alternative to the 300 and Charger sedan. Another possible reason for keeping the Magnum around is that the wagon is (or was) sold in Europe with the 300 front end as a Chrysler wagon. Much like the continued success of the Panthers in the Middle East, if the wagon is justifiable in a secondary market, it would make sense to keep it around for the few who like the Magnum.

 

Frankly, I don't really think the V6 model will be that popular anyway. Where the Challenger will be a very formidable contender is with the Hemi models. You'll likely see a lot of Challenger R/T models more so than anything else and it'll probably find the greatest appeal with those who also want to team it with an automatic transmission.