I hadn't taken our Challenger any distance, so this sounded about right: a long weekend when we'd be blasting up to Santa Barbara for a lacrosse game, 132 miles away, almost all freeway, sometimes trafficky. If the car managed a freeway cruise okay, great. If not, it wasn't all that long a trip.
The black Challenger did fine. I've complained how big and heavy and soft the new Challenger is for a retro-ponycar, but settling in for a couple hours on US 101, that wasn't an issue. (I aired up the tires to 36 psi instead of the recommended 32, and maybe that sharpened things a bit, but I still think THIS should have been the Charger and the Challenger should have been smaller and more athletic. But that's just me. I have a 1968 Charger, and it feels like the Queen Mary as I dock it in the garage, yet this 2009 Challenger is 200 pounds heavier than it is!)
Burbling along at 75, the Challenger feels relaxed and comfy. The seats are okay (the front ones, at least; don't put anyone in back for long), the HVAC and stereo and NAV work well enough, visibility is okay (except to the rear quarters), and the interior is plenty roomy enough for two and a snack bag and a weekend of stuff. Best of all, the car has a certain presence on the road that I like. And others like it too. This may be the only car currently in our fleet that kids in other cars take cell-phone pictures of.
My favorite feature in the Challenger is the shifter. It has to stir some heavy-duty gears down there, but it still feels light and positive, the gates are easy to find, and the sort-of pistol grip shape is quite functional. Honorable mention for a best feature has to be the exhaust note, which has great character without actually being all that loud.
For my least-favorite feature, the Challenger gets dinged for a pet peeve of mine: the door handles. This is the first physical contact you make with a car, and their feel should give you confidence. They should be solid and sturdy, with good, natural action. The Challenger's aren't. The lightweight handle feels flexy and loose when you pull it, and its angle in the body side has you lifting up too much. A small thing, but in a very vulnerable place. I've already cringed a little to myself, and I haven't even gotten in the car. Note to manufacturers: don't scrimp on door handles!
But that's about all I have to complain about. The Challenger makes a fine medium-range cruiser, with decent fuel economy (low-20s) to compliment its slightly malevolent attitude. I'd take it again.
Kevin Smith, Editorial Director, at 20,169 miles
bodyblue says:
01:45 PM, 02/16/10
Have you guys figured out the transmission issues that you were having?
badblackrt says:
02:02 PM, 02/16/10
The fact is that although she is not perfect, it is a great car and unlike anything on the road.
I love my Challenger R/T. In a world of look a like egg shaped cars, the Challenger is a refreshing change. And best of all it is pure Americana!!
yellowmiata says:
04:16 PM, 02/16/10
I really enjoyed your thoughts on the importance of the door handles. I didn't realize how a solid door handle and a good "thunk" when the door closes contribute to a good initial experience to a car.
sgude says:
05:52 PM, 02/16/10
So who wrote this, Kevin or Donna? Either way, nicely done.
r1chwa1nwr1ght says:
07:23 PM, 02/16/10
I quite like the door handles. Yes, I'll admit, they aren't as functional as the GM and Ford handles, but I think they are quite solid, it really doesn't take much effort to open the massive doors. I'm much happier that the handles were designed with retro and the original in mind for a car and not shared with say, the Dodge Ram. I feel bad for Saab owners who open doors with truck handles because GM did part sharing with Saab cars and Chevy Trucks (why would you do that????) where you grab a massive handle and pull instead of a car door handle like you should be using.
Just a thought... I might be the only person who thinks the Dodge Challenger door handles are very fitting and acceptable for the car.
stephen987 says:
04:12 AM, 02/17/10
Why should a Challenger be small and nimble? The original one wasn't. This car is very much in line with its namesake vehicle. Meanwhile, the Charger name has been debased by being placed on a personal luxury car, an Omni coupe (remember the Charger 2.2?), and a police cruiser.
bimmerjay says:
08:03 AM, 02/17/10
Mr. Smith, I'm very sorry to hear about your less-than-ideal experience flying Southwest Airlines the other day. The Challenger is definitely a vehicle more befitting of your ample girth, with its wide seats, oversize proportions, and slow transient responses.
By the way, kids also take cell phone pics of the Weinermobile. Just sayin'.
bodyblue says:
12:40 PM, 02/17/10
Come on , Jay, that was beneath you! LOL The Challenger is what it is.....and it does what it is supposed to do better than the Camaro.....when compared apples to apples.
Stephen when the Charger 2.2's came out they were pretty quick for the time and a blast to drive.....the Shelby Chargers were even more fun......It was another example of Chrylser doing the best with what was available to them at the time. The Shelbys of the time could run with any American V8s of the time and handled like crazy.......the engines lasted forever but the body surrounding it was another story. I hope MOPAR survives ....they have had the rawest deal of any American car company with how Daimler raped and looted them and then kicked them to the curb. GM deserves no sympathy as they were always the masters of their own fate.