 |
 |
|
 |
Comments: 27 (Read/Post) |
 |
 |
|
 |
So after receiving quite a few emails regarding an article in the current issue of Mopar Collector's Guide (January 2005), I finally got around to getting my hands on a copy of the magazine. They did an excellent full page write up on the site although they referenced a few things that changed in this summer's site redesign. So if you're a MCG reader checking out the site, here is a quick run down of the changes:
The "You Know You're a Riceboy If..." and the Riceboy Rules were in the now defunct Articles section of the site. That area didn't receive much love so I axed it. I may have to put those two articles in the current Stuff section though.
The Defense section is another area that got the axe. There weren't too many people that wrote in to defend their cars and the people that did write in didn't have pictures of their cars on the site. Although that section is gone, anyone that is ticketed is free to create an account and post in the comments section if they see their car on here.
Top Officers will have to make a come back at some point, I just have to find the time to put that together.
The store is the final area that isn't here anymore. I got rid of it since I wasn't sure of the quality of the merchandise in there and I would rather sell no merchandise then half-ass merchandise. I do occasionally offer ticket books and quality t-shirts for sale, keyword occasionally.
If you want to check out the old ticketed vehicles you can see them in the Gallery or to view them with commentary just go through the Old News. I'm planning on adding a bunch of search features to the site so people can see exactly what they want (again, when time permits).
That about covers it. Thanks again to Mopar Collector's Guide for the excellent article. Definitely check the magazine out if you see it on the newsstand. |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
Posted by: Trooper |
|
 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Showing page: 1 of 2
[ 1 2 ]
 |
|
#1
|
12-09-2004 @ 06:55:33 PM
|
| Posted
By: DiRF |
Reply | Edit | Del |
| Kickass, I may have to pick meself up a copy. |
|
|
#3
|
12-09-2004 @ 07:52:51 PM
|
| Posted
By: autocar |
Reply | Edit | Del |
| yeah it is,I was reading about it in car and driver. I still cant seem to accept that it has 4 doors |
|
|
#4
|
12-09-2004 @ 08:16:37 PM
|
| Posted
By: DiRF |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I don't get it... what would people consider worse?
A Charger that is a 4-banger powered, FWD, hatchback/fastback version of a Dodge Omni... or...
A Charger that is a large, V8, RWD muscle sedan that has 4 doors?
People seem to want to bitch about the latter moreso than the former. |
|
|
#5
|
12-09-2004 @ 08:58:12 PM
|
| Posted
By: 89Rettagt |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#4, its because they tried to make this a "Charger" the omni you are talking about is just a name with no meaning, like the nova in the 80's, everyone knew it was no nova. id be bitching more about its ricer appearance, orange? seriously, all black, and no crappy grill cross, a horizontal bar of indescrernable black. yeah, the originals looked mean as hell.
[Edited by 89Rettagt on 12-09-2004 @ 09:00:12 PM] |
|
|
#7
|
12-10-2004 @ 11:00:50 AM
|
| Posted
By: Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
| #4, Neither is worse. They're both equally apalling. It could be argued that at least the FWD 4 banger Charger was made to feel like a performance car, not something to haul the kiddies in. |
|
|
#8
|
12-10-2004 @ 12:01:52 PM
|
| Posted
By: moparornocar |
Reply | Edit | Del |
| The new charger is based on the 300/magnum platform, and will be available with the Hemi. I can assure you, from driving 3 r/t magnums that the new charger will be no slouch. the magnum is very fast and has head slamming acceleration. The fact that it has 4 doors doesnt make much difference, because the power and performance is definately going to be there. As for the cross hair grille, that is and has been a throwback to the old mopar days. Also, how is orange a "ricer" color? all of the best muscle cars back in the 60's and 70's came in orange. ie chevy's "hugger orange" and mopar's "Organge-peel". At least Mopar isnt shying away from bringing back the V8 RWD cars like some other car companies I know of......(cough) gm (cough) ford (cough) |
|
|
#10
|
12-10-2004 @ 01:41:48 PM
|
| Posted
By: moparornocar |
Reply | Edit | Del |
| I said bringing back, the stang has always been RWD, and just because ford has one RWD car doesnt make any point towards what i said. Ath least GM did one (GTO), but they just got rid of two (camaro and firebird) |
|
|
#11
|
12-10-2004 @ 05:28:47 PM
|
| Posted
By: Disrupture |
Reply | Edit | Del |
| #10, The Ford GT makes it two. And that's one serious performance car. |
|
|
#12
|
12-10-2004 @ 05:38:17 PM
|
| Posted
By: moparornocar |
Reply | Edit | Del |
| Yes, but I am not talking supercars here,thats like comparing apples to oranges. the Charger is going to be a car that the average Joe could buy, along with the stang and GTO. Unless you have a job where you make $200k/yr,have inherited alot of money, sell more crack than the average dope dealer or won the lotto, you wont be buying a GT. |
|
|
#13
|
12-10-2004 @ 07:30:31 PM
|
| Posted
By: Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#8, I don't doubt it will be fast, but numbers don't make a performance car.
As for the cross-hair grille being a throwback to the "old Mopar days", I can't for the life of me think of one old Mopar that had a cross hair grille, at least not one older than the 1986 Ram truck.
[Edited by Skid on 12-10-2004 @ 07:32:36 PM] |
|
|
#14
|
12-10-2004 @ 07:34:49 PM
|
| Posted
By: DiRF |
Reply | Edit | Del |
| #13, Chrysler had the gunsight grille with the old 300s, but yeah, the Dodge crosshair grille is faily new. Nothing retro about it. |
|
|
#16
|
12-10-2004 @ 10:22:53 PM
|
| Posted
By: 99neon |
Reply | Edit | Del |
| #15, have to agree with you on the GTO. While it is a great performance car, 35k is more than the average joe can afford. |
|
|
#17
|
12-11-2004 @ 10:29:41 AM
|
| Posted
By: moparornocar |
Reply | Edit | Del |
| The crosshair grille did come from the old 300s, therefore its retro. They didnt use it on their other cars, but if you have read anything from the chrysler designers, they took the crosshair grille from the old 300s and decided to incorporate it into their new designs. As far as the Charger being a performance car, if the handling is as good as the magnums and 300s, its going to handle great. As far as numbers go, how else do you determine the true performance of a car? 0-60 times, 60-0 times, 1/4 mile times, lap times on a road course. when it comes down to it, numbers are everything. Well, that is unless you are a ricer, then you can figure performance by fiberglass body kits, hood scoops, spoilers and stickers. The charger is, and always has been a muscle/luxury car, which is exactly what they are doing with the new one. |
|
|
#18
|
12-11-2004 @ 10:31:06 AM
|
| Posted
By: moparornocar |
Reply | Edit | Del |
| Oh, the $35,000 price of a GTO makes it alot more affordable than the $160,000 youd have to pay to get a ford GT. |
|
|
#19
|
12-11-2004 @ 01:15:44 PM
|
| Posted
By: Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#17, Performance cars are built to be fun to drive. That's all. An MGB may not have produced amazing numbers, but it was so much fun to drive that it is now considered a fine classic sports car.
An enthusiast's car is something that relies on the senses...sight, sound, touch, hell it even has to smell right. It's the little things....the way the gauges are placed. The sychronization of the shifter and clutch. The styling. What the engine looks like when you pop the hood. The exhaust note. But "refined" and "practical" are two things that performance cars should not be, lest it count against them. While the original Chargers were performance cars in this idiom, the new Chargers will not be. Hence, they will be watered-down, soulless "sports sedans" that produce high numbers. High-speed driving utensils, rather than true enthusiast's cars. That's why I'm dreading their release.
As for old Chargers being muscle/luxury cars: There were a few luxury features optional, but the keyword here is optional. And "refined" they weren't.
http://www.cars-on-line.com/2wdirec...dodge6040-B.jpg
Doesn't look like luxury to me.
[Edited by Skid on 12-11-2004 @ 01:19:04 PM] |
|
|
#20
|
12-11-2004 @ 03:13:53 PM
|
| Posted
By: Sensekhmet |
Reply | Edit | Del |
| #19, This is my dream car: it should handle as hell (lift off oversteer? Be my guest), sound right, look nice, be uncommon and have all the little details that bring a smile to my face. It can be unreliable and even rust (a little) but it wouldn't matter. That was just what FIAT 127 Sport that my father once owned was. Funny compact car with a tiny engine (1000cc/75HP), great handling, no mass (750 kilos), no gadgets (well... it had a sport steering wheel and oil pressure/temp gauge) and an Italian soul. That soul consisted of rust, electrical problems, loud, raspy exhaust, revvy engine and doing circles around fat assed golfs with 2.0 litre engines (not the GTis though). *sigh* I miss it so much... |
Showing page: 1 of 2
[ 1 2 ]
Login to leave a comment
|
|
|
|
|
