I've already reviewed both the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Magnum. Since the Dodge Charger is essentially the same as the former, just with different sheetmetal, I initially didn't see a reason to review it.
But then I noted that with the Charger the 250-horsepower 3.5-liter V6 is paired with a manually shiftable five-speed automatic, not the conventional four-speed it teams with in the other cars (with rear wheel drive). When I drove the others, I found the 3.5 too tepid and the 5.7 overkill. I suggested that an engine choice between the two would be the sweet spot for many people. A 4.0-liter is on the way, at least for the mininvans and Chrysler Pacifica. While the LX cars might also get that engine, in the interim maybe an extra cog was all the 3.5 needed?
The Charger is available in SE, SXT, and R/T forms. The first two use the 3.5-liter V6, the last Chrysler's much-hyped 5.7-liter "Hemi" V8. For some reason the last is the "R/T" (with the slash) while the equivalent Magnum is the "RT." Or maybe not. The V8 Magnum was the "RT" last year. Now Dodge's website shows it both ways. They need to figure out what the car is called.
After writing this review I learned that a Road/Track package will be available on the R/T that adds ten horspower and further includes the much better bolstered seats from the SRT and performance steering and suspension systems. I'll check one out as soon as possible and report back...
I drove a Charger SE with no options. With an MSRP of $22,995 it seems like quite a lot of car for the money. But is it?
I later drove and reviewed the Daytona. That review can be found here.
Styling
The Charger has totally different styling than the 300 and Magnum. Meant to recall the Chargers of the 1960s, it also bears more than a little resemblance to Ford's similarly retro new Mustang. I wouldn't be the first person to suggest that the Charger might be the car for those who want a Mustang but need four doors.
Even more than the 300 (but likely not as much as the Magnum) the Charger's styling will resonate with a particular slice of the market: those people who continue to long for the muscle cars of the 1960s. From my visits to the boards I know that a vocal minority of these people are disappointed. Some would prefer a two-door Charger. Others regret that the production Charger isn't nearly as striking as the much swoopier concept car that toured the auto shows a few years ago. But with no close alternative even these people seem to view the Charger as a sedan with, well, no close alternative. Ultimately, this particular slice of the market seems to approve of the car--and want one.
I'm not part of this market, but I do admire how well Chrysler was able to craft a distinctive if not entirely attractive look for the car. No one will mistake it for a 300. As much as two cars can based on unique sheetmetal alone the two should appeal to different markets.
Inside the Charger looks identical to the 300 and Magnum. There might be differences, but you would have to closely compare the cars to spot them (and I haven't). This isn't such a good thing. Interior styling has been the LXs' weakest aspect. Much like the interiors of American sedans of yore, these look and feel very spartan and even cheap. The materials are actually of higher quality than they appear. In the uplevel trims bright trim helps, but the SE I drove was as dour inside as they come. It doesn't help that the only available colors are shades of gray. The Charger will be marketed to police and taxi fleets. This interior will suit those segments well.
Accommodations
Like the other LXs, the Charger is very roomy inside. Make no mistake about it, this is a truly large car. Rear seat headroom has been compromised a bit to achieve the Charger's semi-fastback roofline, but even your larger perps should still fit back there just fine.
Seat comfort is good up front and okay in back. Both front seats have manually adjustable lumbar supports. Unfortunately, if you want decent lateral support in the driver's seat you'll probably have to spring for the pricy SRT, due later in the model year, or an R/T with one of two available performance packages (the second adds a spoiler and retro graphics). These seats will be most welcome.
I remember a more comfortably positioned rear seat in the 300, with a cushion higher off the floor and a more upright seatback. But could be wrong about this. As it is, the rear seat is reasonably comfortable, but not especially so. Okay for police use, not so good for taxi drivers.
The trunk is usefully large and the rear seat folds in two sections for long loads. A large storage compartment resides beneath the center armrest.
On the Road
So, does that extra gear make a difference? A little, but not enough of one. The SE isn't nearly as quick as a Charger should be. (At least the 2.7 isn't available in the Charger.) The upcoming 4.0, if offered in the Charger, should be much closer to the mark. When manually shifted the transmission reacts at least as promptly as most, but this feature doesn't make a whole lot of sense given the character of the SE.
You see, the SE is a softly suspended car with light, numb steering at anything short of highway speeds. It feels very much like a traditional domestic car, and not the muscle car variety. Sure, the chassis is much more balanced and capable than the old iron, but the feel is much the same. You don't guide this car into turns, you throw it. We're not talking about a precision instrument here. You'd never know there was a previous-generation Mercedes E-Class down there somewhere.
This isn't all bad. Cops and taxi drivers won't have to make much of an adjustment.
Even the Charger SE comes standard with traction and stability control. These features, highly advisable for those in northern parts of the country, are part of a $1025 package with the base Magnum and 300.
On the positive side of the ledger, ride quality is very good, if not stellar, and noise from all sources is hushed. In V6 form at least, the Charger should have been called the Cruiser (except I guess Chrysler already grabbed that name). The car is very well suited to long stretches on the highway.
Dodge Charger Price Comparisons and Pricing
For quick, up-to-date pricing, and especially user-specified price comparisons, check out the website I created: www.truedelta.com. Why yet another vehicle pricing website? Well, I personally lacked the patience to keep using the others. They were too slow and required too much effort, especially when trying to compare prices. So I taught myself some programming and created a site where there is no need to dig through option packages, prerequisites, and the like one by one -- the TrueDelta algorithm figures these out for you in one swift pass.
A note on trim lines: Chrysler charges $3,000 extra for the SXT, but TrueDelta suggests that this only buy you $1,500 of extra content. So why buy the SXT? Because few options are available on the SE. This way Chrysler discourages too many people from buying the loss leader.
The closest non-Chrysler competitor is probably Ford's Five Hundred. Though front-wheel-drive and down fifty horsepower, the Five Hundred offers a similarly roomy interior (a bit roomier even) at a slightly lower price. The Ford is about as quick despite the horsepower deficit because it uses a six-speed automatic with steep ratios in the first few gears. Plenty of torque steer, unfortunately.
Last Words
The Charger is SE form is far from exciting to drive. Consider it a modern interpretation of the traditional American large car and you won't be far off. The Ford Five Hundred is more similar than the cars' dissimilar appearances suggest. The Crown Victoria, already embattled by police department concerns over fuel tank ruptures, has even more to fear.
If you want a Charger that drives like a Charger, you'll have to get the V8. Even better, get the SRT or at least the R/T with the Road/Track or Daytona Package.
I suppose offering both plain jane and muscle versions is exactly the way it used to be done. But this time around I wonder if there will be serious consequences for the car's image. Probably not, as long as the two can be readily told apart. Did I mention that the Daytone Package makes prolific use of thick black stripes (decals, I presume) and that the SRT (in addition to huge wheels) includes a hood scoop and prominent spoiler? If you want a driver-oriented LX at a reasonable price but without hoods scoops, stripes, and such, then you want the Road/Track. It has all the content of the Daytona save the questionable aesthetic bits.
Not my thing, but I've given the Charger SE four stars simply because it is a lot of car for $23,000. I'd be between three and four on the SXT, and between four and five on the R/T with Road/Track package.
A Note on Dodge Charger Reliability
I cannot practically cover reliability within the context of this review. However, many people are interested in such information, so I've started collecting my own data. Results, once they are available, will be posted to my site, www.truedelta.com, with updates every three months.
Unlike other sources, TrueDelta will clearly identify what difference it will make if you buy a Charger rather than another vehicle by providing "times in the shop" and "days in the shop" stats (among others). You will be able to specify the number of years, annual miles, and types of repairs to include in Dodge Charger reliability comparisons.
Before I can report results, I need data on all cars--not just the Charger--from people like you. To encourage participation, those who help provide the data will receive free access to the site's reliability information. Non-participants will have to pay an access fee.
For the details, and to sign up, visit www.truedelta.com.
A link to this website and alphabetized links to my other vehicle reviews can be found on my profile page.
Epinions.com periodically updates pricing and product information from third-party sources, so some information may be slightly out-of-date. You should confirm all information before relying on it.
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.