Dodge Challenger SE Rallye Debuts at Owners Meet

It definitely is not pointless. Except for the Camaro, V6 versions of muscle cars are about everything but performance. To a bunch of people (hopefully) the Rallye will make a lot of sense. It's in a different class than the Genesis size wise, and performance really isn't that far from the Mustang. There are plenty of people for whom a V6 Challenger will make perfect sense. It's not that expensive, gets decent gas mileage, goes plenty fast, and looks amazing. And for 80% of the buyers, that's plenty.

But now I'm left to wonder if I should go snatch up one of the only new muscle cars with a 4 speed in it. Could be $$$ 50 years from now...

The narrow-spoke wheels give this car a better look; like the way it should be. Add those wheels and the retro badging and it would be near perfect...except for the power and the sound.

a crap 4spd on a crap V6 pushing a 2 tonne coupe isn't going to appreciate in 50 years. The V8 is a pig but at least it can back up the great looks with respectable numbers.

Like it or not, the V6 Camaro just made the V6 Challenger and Mustang an embarassing afterthought. Chevy has the benchmark V6 and the rest look like a total waste of $ in comparison.

You want secretarial transport with good looks? There are far, far better options for $26K. People that appreciate muscle cars will see this poser for what it is: SRT-8 afterbirth.

You can whine all you want about the V6 engine or 4 speed auto in the Challenger but all it shows is you just have no clue as to why most people buy these cars.

sandcountry360 is correct. People buy the base version for the looks. The vast majority of drivers will never use the performance the 3.5 has. That's why Ford sold millions of 4 cyl Mustangs (the least sporting 4 cyl ever made) and when they replaced it they used the equally poor 3.8 minvan V6.... and people still bought them because they didn't care who it goes.

The vast majority of V6 Camaro drivers will drive around with light foot, loving the mpgs with no clue about the 300+ hp they have.

If you care about performance, you will buy the V8. That's the whole purpose of pony cars and muscle cars.

If you want a sports car, buy something else.

cruiserhead1
Name a car with better looks for $26K.

Camaro V6. duh.

Camaro is faster, not better looking.

Firstwagon that would be because YOU like the challenger. I like the Camaro a hell of a lot better than the challenger.

I fail to understand why you all spend so much time over arguing whether the Challenger, Camaro, or Mustang is better. It is all about personal preference. I like the Challenger. So much so that I bought one. I like performance, so I bought the RT. The RT is not a pig and the SE is not pointless. Yeah, the 2010 Camaro is faster. If that is the only consideration when buying a car, then that would be the one. If you like the Camaro better, then I hope you go buy one. If you like the Mustang best, I hope you go buy one of those. All three manufacturers could use the sales. For those of us who love American muscle cars, we should be thankful that the Big 3 are building these.

Cruiserhead,

I think you're wrong. Most buyers choose the V6 because they want the look of the muscle car without the price. They couldn't care less about the 0-60.

The Camaro is much faster than the Challenger and Mustang, but that doesn't make them slow.

I don't doubt that the Camaro will steal some sales to (primarily) young male buyers who can't afford the V8 or its insurance premium.

But for the buyer who is shopping primarily on looks, which is a high percentage of V6 buyers, the extra power of the Camaro won't have a huge impact.

And for the record, if I were to buy a V6 version of one of the 3 it would be the Challenger. If V8, the Mustang.

GM has done a fatastic job with it's powertrains, but I just don't care for the Camaro. I wasn't a fan of the original either, so the retro look doesn't do anything for me. On the other hand the 69-70 Mustang is my favorite muscle car, with the '70 Challenger a close second.

Chrysler/Dodge finally built the car with great look; but they don’t care to engineer it because people will buy it anyway? What a forward thinking company.

I don't get the argument that you should buy a Challenger for the looks. It looks exactly like a 1970 model, so why not just buy a 1970 model? It will appreciate, unlike the 2009 model, and represents up-to-date quality and performance for the era it was built in, unlike the 2009 model.

"and represents up-to-date quality and performance for the era it was built in, unlike the 2009 model."

are you crazy? The LX cars have excellent quality. I wont even mention the 1970's quality rep.

mopar424 is right. The new car is a real car while the original is a wonderful trip down memory lane...both good memories and bad.

The LX cars have been very reliable. I know several people with various versions of them and have never heard of a serious problem. One guy is around the 100K mile mark now with his hemi Charger and it's been the most trouble free car he's owned.