By on August 13, 2014

2015 Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat

 

Here’s our first look at the Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat, until our live pictures are uploaded later on.

UPDATE: Gallery is now up.

Wth a 204 mph top speed, the Charger is faster than its Challenger twin, though it won’t get the 6-speed manual gearbox. Instead, the 8-speed automatic Charger will reportedly complete the quarter-mile sprint in 11 seconds flat, .2 seconds faster than the Challenger.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

127 Comments on “Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat Good For 204 MPH [Now With Gallery]...”


  • avatar

    Two middle fingers held high and waved with pride to the socialist/globalist agenda that would tax us on displacement simply because “They” felt we should be driving something “more sensible” with higher “miles per Gallon”.

    This is AMERICA.

    What you hear roaring past you isn’t just the sound of SEVEN HUNDRED and SEVEN Horses…

    It’s the sound of FREEDOM.

    • 0 avatar
      kvndoom

      Eh, they still win. While you’re waving your middle fingers, they’re collecting the gas guzzler tax.

      FCA just needs to change the bumper to get it classified as a light truck.

      • 0 avatar

        This isn’t just about taxes…”they” don’t even want you to be seen in cars like this.

        As far as they’re concerned, it’s obnoxious and “unnecessary”.

        Like having a clip for your Kimber .45 with 18 bullets… “YOU DON’T NEED THAT” they say…

        In fact, you should be driving a Model S – Self Driving car – and car sharing with people less fortunate than you are…

        YES – this is obnoxious.
        HELLCAT is the most obnoxious car built since the Veyron Super Sport. The very name is obnoxious.
        A vehicle that will “whine” past bus stations populated by those who didn’t work hard enough and choose to sit back on the Government till – angry they aren’t making $15 an hour while stocking boxes at Walmart so they can afford new sneakers and Galaxy S 6.

        This is a car for revolutionaries who would gladly dump the King’s tea AND HIS MOMA into the harbor.

        • 0 avatar

          What? This car is for the people who firmly believe America of the 1960s was The Best America and that it shouldn’t move beyond big sedans with big engines.

          I mean, to each his own, but those aren’t ‘revolutionaries’. They’re conservative and fond of the glories of the past…hardly the people you would find dumping tea into the harbour.

        • 0 avatar
          KixStart

          You do seem to be doing standup.

          I mean, really, you measure freedom by horsepower and how much you can use it to annoy someone else? Laughable.

        • 0 avatar
          greaseyknight

          The M1 Garand that the Greatest Generation used to storm the beaches of Normandy to give us such freedoms uses a clip. Your Kimber uses a magazine like most other guns.

          Move to a free state where its possible to have more then 7 rounds in a magazine, and talk on a cell phone while driving(not that I recommend using a cell phone while driving a Hellcat)

        • 0 avatar
          jpolicke

          18 rounds in a 1911 mag and it would stick out of the grip like an Uzi. But I get your point. Kimber makes a fine product, and refuses to cut corners. Daughter had to wait 8 months for hers.

        • 0 avatar
          hybridkiller

          “Like having a clip for your Kimber .45 with 18 bullets… “YOU DON’T NEED THAT” they say…”

          Actually they’re right, what you need is a mag (or magazine) with 14 rounds (or cartridges) – no such thing as a “clip” for a 1911-style pistol, and a bullet doesn’t do you much good without a loaded casing attached to it. Also, I believe 14 rounds is the highest capacity non-drum mag you can get for that gun.

          Today’s totally off-topic comment has been brought to you by sillygunmetaphors.com

          Carry on.

          @jpolicke & greaseyknight
          I don’t think BTSR knows a Kimber from a Colt, a friend probably has one or he read it somewhere and thought mentioning it would make him sound cool…

      • 0 avatar
        Superdessucke

        Right, and raise it up a bit and give it an awkward looking wagon/truck body. Come to think of it, why not do the Durango Hellcat instead of this?

    • 0 avatar
      Vega

      Hey, as long as you can find enough poor rural kids willing to get shot at, be maimed and suffer PTSD for your right to use as much fossil fuel as you want (all the way up to a 75mph speed limit), knock yourself out.

      You guys will never get rid of your middle east curse as long as you consider any reasonable measure to increase efficiency part of a socialist/globalist agenda. On the other hand, it would be kind of hard to find work for all those poor rural kids if the biggest socialist government employment program (aka the US armed forces) would have to be scaled down. So maybe it is all part of a bigger plan…

      But what do I know, I’m just and elitist, socialist, university educated, European pinko commie that doesn’t get what’s great about ‘Murica.

      • 0 avatar

        The Middle East was lopping heads off and raping and pillaging since THOUSANDS OF YEARS before America existed.

        This isn’t new.

        MY SOLUTION is to develop neurological inhibitors that take away their ability to be violent.

        An anesthesiologist takes away your body’s fight or flight mechanisms so you can’t fight back or flee from his intrusion of your body with surgical tools.

        Imagine dropping neurotoxins that make it so people can’t find the will to pull the trigger of an AK47…

        You could just walk in and take all the Super Premium 93 I’ll ever need.

        • 0 avatar
          Vega

          “The Middle East was lopping heads off and raping and pillaging since THOUSANDS OF YEARS before America existed. ”

          Yes, and it would be exclusively their own problem if the energy policy of the west would be a bit smarter. I’m not even talking about green solutions here, but why isn’t the US moving to CNG as automotive fuel considering all the shale gas you guys have lying around?

          • 0 avatar
            JohnnyFirebird

            Uh… I’m pretty liberal and all, but that’s one fantastic looking car.

            Would this be the cheapest way to propel yourself over 200 mph ever? On a road anyway. That’s not a motorcycle.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Vega you do realize how very very little oil the United States uses comes from the Middle East?
            This car, if the challenger hellcat is any indication, will be affordable to a very large number of people, including our armed forces. Don’t stereotype our Brave soldiers as rural and uneducated, they do much better than the rest of the world. No apologies, we don’t spit and hiss at the people that fight for us.

          • 0 avatar
            KixStart

            Hummer, you do realize it’s a world market for oil and our behavior helps set the price, whether our actual imports are up or down from last year?

            The way to fix the certain countries in the Middle East is to starve them of oil revenue, so that their privileged classes must leave the madrassas and political science classes and find actual work. We starve them of oil revenue by finding ways to depress demand and lower the world price.

            This has been true for 4 decades and we haven’t done anything about it and I don’t expect we will now.

        • 0 avatar
          Nick_515

          Showing your true colors finally. These comments are a disgrace to people who genuinely enjoy these cars, and I invite them to speak up.

          • 0 avatar

            True. Becoming more and more embarrassed I actually have a soft spot for many Chrysler brand cars. Gladly, most people who buy this car do not think or act remotely like this. Come to think of it this is only he embarassing himself, but he does that quite frequently so pretty par for the course.

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            “…you do realize how very very little oil the United States uses comes from the Middle East?”

            45% of US crude consumption came from OPEC alone in 2013, and until this year we were still importing more than half of the oil we use (total oil imports just this year dropped below 50% for the first time in 20 years)

            That doesn’t fit most people’s definition of “very very little”.

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            “Don’t stereotype our Brave soldiers as rural and uneducated…”

            I read nothing derogatory in Vega’s comments, as a matter of fact I believe he’s suggesting that poorer and less educated people are effectively being exploited by our society – they sign up for one of the most dangerous jobs in the world and are meagerly compensated for it.

            And fwiw, the US Army’s own recruiting data says that the vast majority have a high school education or less, and a plurality come from rural areas (less than 20% from major cities). Not stereotyping, just reality.

        • 0 avatar

          “MY SOLUTION is to develop neurological inhibitors that take away their ability to be violent.

          An anesthesiologist takes away your body’s fight or flight mechanisms so you can’t fight back or flee from his intrusion of your body with surgical tools.

          Imagine dropping neurotoxins that make it so people can’t find the will to pull the trigger of an AK47…

          You could just walk in and take all the Super Premium 93 I’ll ever need.”

          Also, these paragraphs, even if meant to be funny, are easily bordering on racism. Please, you’ve said your bit about the car, we know (and knew) that you would like it, lets not have this devolve.

          • 0 avatar
            hgrunt

            I think he’s been taking some neurological inhibitors of his own. Exposure to lead (Via leaded fuel) has been strongly linked to the crime wave of the 70s-80s.

            I also suspect he can’t, nor can be bothered to, tell the difference between “sheik” and “sikh.”

        • 0 avatar
          hgrunt

          Shameless socialist here.

          I don’t find myself getting excited about the Hellcat at all, and in my book, an S65 AMG is actually more of an F-U statement, more ridiculous and more obnoxious in every department, from price tag (you can buy like, 3-4 Hellcats, I think) and options, to the depreciation (which is approx. 1 hellcat per year for 5 years).

      • 0 avatar
        Roader

        “Hey, as long as you can find enough poor rural kids willing to get shot at, be maimed and suffer PTSD for your right to use as much fossil fuel as you want (all the way up to a 75mph speed limit), knock yourself out.”

        The thing is, we no longer need the military to protect oil shipments because we’re getting close to making all we need. From what I can tell we’re spending 4.5% of GDP on defense in order to keep Europe/Japan/Taiwan/etc. from getting rolled over by Russia/Iran/China. All the while the EU and Japan spend ~1% of GDP on defense and are loathe to risk one of their kid’s lives protecting their own territory.

        I agree with you, reduce military spending. Start by abandoning our 20 military bases in Germany, pulling out our 75K personnel. The EU’s all growed up now. Time for them to move out of their parents’ basement. And if Vlad decides to take the Baltic states back, or if Iran threatens to lobs some nukes into Germany, well, good luck to you.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          x1,000,000 roader.

          Let the rest of the world take care of itself, its not our responsibility to fix everyone’s problems, especially as long as we have problems of our own. And if you want to mess with us, its best to just send a nuke and let them rebuild theirselves.

          • 0 avatar
            mikeg216

            Actually as of earlier this year merica is a net energy exporter, we can’t refine oil fast enough. Or build pipelines quick enough, we’ve got so much natural gas there’s nowhere left to store it, in the Bakken shale alone a billion dollars a month of natural gas is burned off a month until the pipelines catch up. It’s truly a grand time to be American, 700 hp factory cars stock market humming along, relatively cheap gas and the rest of the world falling apart without our assistance. Get used to it, we aren’t going anywhere.

        • 0 avatar
          Vega

          Why would Iran throw nukes on us? It’s you the’ve always had a problem with. Maybe because you sponsored a coup in Iran in the late 60s, helping to throw out a democratically elected because he nationalized the, you guessed it, oil industry.

        • 0 avatar
          hybridkiller

          “The thing is, we no longer need the military to protect oil shipments because we’re getting close to making all we need.”

          I don’t know where y’all are getting this nonsense from, we still import close to half of US domestic consumption (see my comment above)

      • 0 avatar
        APaGttH

        Looks at the above, looks at bowl of popcorn, ponders. No, I can’t let this one pass.

        Where to start. US total energy consumption has dropped 20% since 2005. The decline started in 2005, before the great recession and with the improving economy continued to decline. US oil consumption has declined 14% as of the latest data, 2012, and was projected to have declined by around 17% by the end of 2014 – again since 2005. Do a search, the info is out here and I’ve posted these links multiple times on TTAC.

        The United States will be North American energy independent by 2020 to 2025 by all projections – even the most conservative. The US should be completely energy independent by 2035. Is that because we’re fracking away our future? Well fracking and access to once thought untouchable oil is helping but the reality is America is using less energy. A lot less energy. This despite steady population growth. The biggest improvements have been in the motor vehicle fleet economy and aircraft energy use reduction. The other big improvement has been a decades long push for energy efficient appliances and homes. The number one appliance for electric consumption? The AC. I don’t think that is a big surprise. Number two? Cable TV boxes. Yup, they suck up more power than an electric clothes dryer, electric stove, or refrigerator. New flat screen TVs are ridiculous efficient compared to their rear projection counterparts of 15 to 20 years ago.

        So where does America get that imported oil?

        The number one trade partner is Canada – no one is even close. The United States enjoys the largest undefended border in the world with out close neighbor the Canadians, who generally love everyone (although I hear Russia won’t be buying Canadian pork anymore – the fools!). Number two flip flops between Saudi Arabia and Mexico. Mexico was number one through 2012, and Saudi Arabia dramatically cranked up production, moving Mexico back to third place.

        Total OPEC imports, that is oil from OPEC nations, which goes now beyond American hating Muslim states in the Middle East was 42% of all imports in 2013. It is projected to plummet to just 28% of all imports this year (and by the monthly data, well on its way to being an accurate prediction).

        For Iraq specifically, Iraqi oil represents less than 2% of total oil imported into the US, and just shy of 1% of all oil used the United States. If you’re looking for the correct answer on who got Iraqi oil after Gulf War II, the correct answer would be China.

        The portrait of America sucking on the teats of Middle Eastern Oil is on the brink of being dead. Between domestic production, conservation (surprise!), reduced energy uses by industry and residents alike, and improving systemic efficiencies, the United States in 2012 became a net exporter of refined fuel products – and refined fuel products now represents the largest single export for the United States, in terms of dollars.

        Refinery capacity in the United States is at 81% to 85% utilization, depending on the time of the year. A student of LEAN production will tell you, that’s actually bad – it is under utilized by 9 to 14% – meaning that refiners are actually leaving money on the table. The reduction is in large part due to the dramatic reduction in US usage – again – we’re past the Great Recession, and this reduction started a full two years before the Great Recession started.

        There were wails 15 years ago about how the big problem was no refineries were being built because it was too hard and expensive through the permit process. More refineries would solve the problem. The oil industries own experts knew the hand writing on the wall, improved efficiencies at existing facilities, but weren’t very interested in investing in further infrastructure. The one refinery to be built in Arizona has been plagued with problems, and I don’t know if the project ever completed. As a matter of fact, there is a mountain of evidence that some oil companies, namely Shell, wanted to reduce refinery capacity to tighten supply and raise their overall margins.

        America still uses 20% of the world oil – a 20% reduction in less than 20 years. That reduction is in part because BRIC nations, especially China, are buying every single drop we stop using.

        But America’s dependence on the Middle East for oil is moving to a thing of the past – and in a dramatically short period of time. Think a decade or two.

        As far as our Middle East trading partners, Saudi Arabia in particular is scared out of their minds by religious extremism. History shows that Osama bin Laden offered to take the AQ army he had built in Afghanistan and go to Saudi Arabia to protect the holy lands from Saddam Hussein and take back Kuwait. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait both said, ya thanks, but no, you stay in your cave. The “infidels” arrived in Saudi Arabia and that was the breaking point for Osama bin Laden – the rest is a sad history.

        I won’t deny that Western foreign policy has made a mess of the Middle East going back to the fall of the Ottoman Empire. The British, the United Nations, France, and yes the United States post 1967 carries a lot of weight on just how screwed up things are. However, this region has a documented history in clay tablets going back 8,000 years. They have ruthlessly killed each other with stunning efficiency and brutality. To paraphrase Lawrence of Arabia they are a small, petty people, and will remain so if they continue to fight among themselves.

        But America’s interests and needs in the Middle East, could very well be a thing of the past. If the OPEC nations need to fear anything it is two things. First, religious extremism at the hands of AQ, ISIS, Islamic Jihad, and others. Second, the growing ability for the world to find other sources of fossils fuels, and use less, than what sits under the Arabian Peninsula.

        • 0 avatar
          sportyaccordy

          Holy crap. This should be its own article, entitled “BTSR shut the hell up”

        • 0 avatar
          FormerFF

          “although I hear Russia won’t be buying Canadian pork anymore – the fools!”

          No back bacon? What are they thinking???

          • 0 avatar
            APaGttH

            This was part of the ban on food imports Russia imposed on the west.

            When I read that Canada was included it made me stop and consider that Putin may actually be a couple of cans short of a six pack.

            No one hates the Canadians and Canada back bacon is some of the tastiest stuff in the world.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          The way I understand it is we’re partnered with OPEC nations to keep them using the US dollar for oil commerce. So we must keep buying Saudi oil indefinitely. Quitting is not an option. And they can only accept US dollars for all their oil transactions. Meaning every nation that buys OPEC oil must show up with US dollars in hand. This keeps the US dollar relevant throughout the world, in high demand and hoarded by every banana republic to 1st world nations. This (pyramid) scheme was dreamed up when the US dollar was on the gold standard, so it was an easy sell. That’s how we became a super power. And the real reason we invaded Iraq was Hussein had switched to the Euro for all oil transaction. That was changed back to the US dollar post haste. Iran is using the Euro now. So any excuse to invade them the too.

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            @DenverMike
            Even if you don’t have a good understanding of the geopolitics of oil and currency markets (and most people don’t), I hope you’re smart enough to know that just because you read it on some lunatic fringe / conspiracy theory website doesn’t mean it’s true, right?

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            @hybridkiller – This is from my own research. And I’d rather be wrong so I’d feel all safe and comfy all the time. So tell me where I’m wrong…

            But if I’m right, a lot of things that don’t add up, start to make sense. Like the so called “weapons of mass destruction” and why there’s so much foot dragging over becoming oil independent.

            None of what I believe that may be true is said on the mainstream media, but why should we limit ourselves to what they’re telling us?

        • 0 avatar
          bortlicenseplate

          This was superb. Thank you.

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            Mike, while I do think a certain amount of skepticism of mainstream media is healthy – I have more than a little contrarian in me – the reality of how the world works makes most of these fringe theories implausible to the point of insanity.

            I hate writing tl;dr posts, but this isn’t a simple topic – so sorry if this gets kinda long…

            1. If oil had been the real impetus behind the Iraq invasion, why didn’t we secure the southern oil fields on day one of the invasion? Why did we allow Saddam’s guys to torch those same oil fields? Why did we allow the Iraqis to price-gouge us for fuel? And why didn’t we make it a priority to get Iraqi oil production back on line as soon as possible?
            The answer to this is, of course, that the 2003 invasion of Iraq was driven by Neocon ideology, plain and simple. The 9/11 attacks were the catalyst that allowed them to act on it. Since you are obviously interested in this stuff, google “draining the swamp Iraq” and “flypaper strategy Iraq” for more on this.

            2. You won’t find anyone who’s more gung ho about the holy grail of US energy independence than me. Unfortunately the “foot dragging” comes down to simple economics. Oil is still relatively cheap when compared to the cost of developing and building out infrastructure for alternatives and renewables. And OPEC has historically manipulated output to keep global prices from rising too high – they know that too-high-for-too-long oil prices will only bolster a serious commitment to investing in alternative energy sources, which eventually leads to the death of their massive cash cow. Fortunately it’s looking more and more like the momentum in that direction is gaining real traction.

            As to the bit about the US dollar, it’s not the dollar itself, but the absolute dominance of US Treasuries that make ours the world’s reserve currency. Even at the depth of the “great recession” US Treasury debt was still the most desirable asset class on the planet. And anytime someone mentions gold or the gold standard in their theory it’s a clear sign that they lack even the most rudimentary understanding of modern financial markets. So, for your own benefit, please don’t listen to those people.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            @hybrid – Maybe it’s ME. I’m the one “sane” people shouldn’t listen too… But anytime something doesn’t make any kind of sense, I’m not just gonna let it go when they switch to Justin Beaver’s hairdo. But we invaded Iraq to secure weapons of mass destruction “primarily”. And you can’t deny if the world lost its confidence on the US dollar it’d be catastrophic. There’s just too much of it in circulation around the world. The US dollar would be pure confetti at that point. The Dollar must be protected above all. That’s our global policy. Anything else is just ancillary.

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            “…if the world lost its confidence on the US dollar it’d be catastrophic.”

            Absolutely correct. My point was simply that confidence in the dollar equates to confidence in the US govt (treasuries) and overall strength of the US economy – it has little to do with who uses what currency to buy OPEC oil. They like the US dollar because its relative valuation tends to be more stable and that’s important when you are fulfilling contracts that are made months in advance of execution. No big conspiracy there.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            As OPEC nations start to ditch the Dollar, those bills don’t go away. And they start to flood the world with less and less potent Dollars. Supply/demand. And that’s tied in with confidence. It would have a cascading effect.

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            Mike, with respect, you really don’t understand how this stuff works. Google “fiat currency” and start reading.

            Currency valuations are controlled by central banks buying assets and selling sovereign debt – in the case of the US that comes under the perview of Fed monetary policy. In Europe, it’s the ECB, in China it’s the PBC, and so on. You have to disengage your thinking from the old gold standard and commodity-based money – there’s no such thing anymore.

            Holders of dollars can’t alter the US money supply, only the Federal Reserve can do that.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          Excellent post.

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            Look, I think we can all agree that the continuous flow of oil money into the Middle East is not a good thing, but in my mind it’s much more about geopolitical instability than economics or even energy supply.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            What happens when banks in say Columbia refuse US dollars? Conference starts to slip. And you got a random billionaire in the drug cartel wanting out of his Dollars, fast, which he can’t even count. Weighs them at a truck scale and rounds off. He’ll take anything in exchange. He’s gotta go on shopping spree in the US. Anyone that’ll take them. Buys out ranchers. All cash. Gives it away. Relatives. Strangers. It’s no different than us printing Dollars.

            We can’t keep the Dollar artificially strong for a good while, and say you refuse to sell your 1,000 acre ranch. A Persian offers you a billion Dollars for it. You gonna say no?

            I was just I Mexico and they’re not thrilled to see the “oro” like they used to be. Some merchants even refused my Dollars!!! They’ve certainly figured out it’s not good as gold. When the Peso is more stable, something’s a brew’n!

          • 0 avatar
            hybridkiller

            Mike, I don’t believe the USA is the center of the universe like some people do, and we’re certainly not bullet-proof – that kind of over-confidence is dangerous and foolish – so in a broader sense I think we probably agree on many things.
            But I just don’t share your fear that the dollar is in any danger of collapse, at least not any time soon. In 2008 and early 2009 with financial markets imploding many people were predicting a bond market collapse. Didn’t happen. When Standard & Poors downgraded the US’s credit rating in 2011, same predictions – again, didn’t happen – bonds/treasuries actually rallied.

            As long as global bond traders think US Treasuries ARE as good as gold, I’m not worried about the dollar. There are, however, plenty of other things to worry about, like religious fanatics trying to kill us. THAT’S the main reason we should be pursuing energy independence at all costs – we can’t make them bend to our will but we can damn sure reduce the money flow into the region.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            The US dollar is a commodity at best. Pyramid scheme at worst. But I just say don’t have too much stake in it. Like anything else. And be aware of all the ways in can crash. And it will crash. Perhaps not this year or even in our lifetimes. So definitely live for the day. Save for tomorrow? Sure. But put some of it into real estate. Start a business. Learn to live off the land. Farming. Hunting. Heck, these things just feel right for some reason.

      • 0 avatar
        mikeg216

        Actually as of earlier this year merica is a net energy exporter, we can’t refine oil fast enough. Or build pipelines quick enough, we’ve got so much natural gas there’s nowhere left to store it, in the Bakken shale alone a billion dollars a month of natural gas is burned off a month until the pipelines catch up. It’s truly a grand time to be American, 700 hp factory cars stock market humming along, relatively cheap gas and the rest of the world falling apart without our assistance. Get used to it, we aren’t going anywhere.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          ” Or build pipelines quick enough, we’ve got so much natural gas there’s nowhere left to store it, in the Bakken shale alone a billion dollars a month of natural gas is burned off a month until the pipelines catch up.”

          Shhhh, the last time I said this I got called names and everything else for saying something commentors didn’t want to hear.

          • 0 avatar
            mikeg216

            The marcellus shale here is just getting off the ground and projects are getting pushed back because there’s nowhere for it all to go, hell they’re building a multi billion dollar hydrocarbon cracker here in Ohio.

          • 0 avatar
            This Is Dawg

            “We’ve got so much natural gas there’s nowhere left to store it, in the Bakken shale alone a billion dollars a month of natural gas is burned off a month until the pipelines catch up.” WTF? It’s already stored before we dig it back up. Why can’t we just slow down production instead of flat out waste it? I’m sure there are inefficiencies to slowing down production but… come on nothing is infinite….

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            You can actually see the flame where its burning from space, pretty cool stuff. There’s a lot of stuff its best to not know, but I wouldn’t worry about running out of fossil fuels any time in the next several hundred years.

            Just stuff I learned in meetings at work.

        • 0 avatar
          FormerFF

          US is not a net energy exporter. We are a net refined products exporter, but import lots of crude. What do you think Keystone XL is about? It’s the desire of the Canadian oil producers to get their crude to the refining capacity of the US Gulf coast.

        • 0 avatar
          APaGttH

          Couple of nits.

          We are not a net exporter of “energy.” Not even close. We import way more than we create. We are a net exporter of refined fuel products – it is our largest single export three years in a row, when looked at in terms of total dollars.

          Not all that natural gas getting burned off in the Bakken is because there is nowhere to store it and no one to use it. A significant amount (but less than half) of Bakken natural gas is sour. Sour gas has to have the Hydrogen Sulfide separated out (aka stench). HS2 is corrosive and sour gas can kill people. A lot of what is being burned off up there is flare gas. Yes you can crack the HS2 out but it is expensive, and it is so plentiful it is cheaper to burn it off in place.

          I don’t know if this is a “grand time” to be an American. I can list all the ways USA is not number one anymore by any standard. We’ve been in slow decline since Nixon and the Vietnam War – for reasons that are very complex.

          The reality is you better get ready for China to be calling a lot more of the shots around the world. They are already dictating the design and specifications of many of our cars because the US is no longer the largest car economy in the world. China is.

          • 0 avatar
            Roader

            I agree with mikeg216, it’s a grand time to be an American. It’s also a grand time to be Chinese (no matter your nationality). If Japan and the Philippines and Taiwan and the rest of the Asian Tigers team up, along with Vietnam, it will be a grand time to be a Southeast Asian. Add in India and Sri Lanka, and about the only place in the world it won’t be a grand time is Europe and the Middle East, including Russia. They’re just so 20th Century (or 8th Century). The 21st Century really will be the Pacific Century. Of course Russian has quite a Pacific coastline. Too bad they can’t get their heads out of their collective hindquarters to realize it.

    • 0 avatar
      Zykotec

      You should really thank all the Socialist carhaters, CAFE, threehuggers and whatnots, that this car is built with modern technology instead of late 60’s tech, so that the engine actually weighs less than 1000 pounds, and you don’t need a trailer to haul around all the gas that the 10:71 GMC Roots blower and the dual 4 bbls would need to feed the 900 cubic inch cast iron big block. (no to mention the drum brakes, and rear leaf springs.)

      • 0 avatar
        mikeg216

        How true the 94 5.0 had 225 horsepower! The Ford Mustang cobra from back then was treated like a space age a supercharged 5.4!385 hp! Independent rear suspension, it had no radio no air conditioning and no rear seat… The old 5.0 gives up 60 hp to a 3.7v6 and the super expensive cobra r of one car last generation is down 40-50 hp on this generations base gt, it’s a great time to be a car enthusiast

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      @BTRS

      Will you please grow up? You are like a 15yo!

      This car is a penis extension for graying old dudes in navy caps. The added dealer greed and insurance rates will keep hardly anyone under 50 from buying it.

      It doesn’t bother me in any way that FCA is building these cars, but I find them cosmically silly. I hope FCA and the dealers make an absolute killing on them. Something about fools and money?

      • 0 avatar
        danio3834

        “This car is a penis extension for graying old dudes in navy caps.”

        Hardly. It will also be bought by employed young guys who still live with their parents, guys in their 30s and 40s with home equity to cash out, and immature cool dads (aka me).

        • 0 avatar
          Ryoku75

          And those young-ons will soon find fame in youtube crash videos, along with a valuable lesson in driving fast cars.

          • 0 avatar
            mikeg216

            This self employed yute will be buying a ram hellcat as soon as my accountant says it’s time for new vehicles to reduce my overall gross income

          • 0 avatar
            Mandalorian

            I want one.

            The world needs more cars like this.

            The Model S can go eat a bowl of Truck-Nuts, this is what (North) AMERICA does right.

            It would be nice if it had AWD though, would make putting down all that power a bit easier.

    • 0 avatar
      koshchei

      Piss off with the political crap, BTR. I agree with you on a lot of things car-related, but you’re a complete ignoramus when it comes to understanding political ideology. I realize that you’re excited — I am too — but when you get going, you come across like an even more demented version of Buck Turgidson from Dr. Strangelove.

      NB: I’m a proud Socialist, born and raised in the Socialist country that actually makes these cars, and I’d love to own one. These vehicles are nothing short of remarkable, and a testament to North American innovation. The workers who build these should be damn proud.

  • avatar
    jmo

    These will be worth a lot of money in +30 years.

  • avatar

    “though it won’t get the 6-speed manual gearbox”

    NOR DOES IT NEED IT.

    When you are doing 200 mph on the interstate at 3 AM the last thing you have time for is “rowing your own gears”.

    Afterall, how are you supposed to hold your iPhone6?

    • 0 avatar
      Easton

      The refusal to offer a 6-speed manual on at least one of the Charger models is really disappointing, especially considering how easily it would go in. No, it doesn’t NEED it, nor is it necessarily true anymore than manuals are faster or more fuel efficient but there are still enough people out there who want them on performance cars and still utterly refuse to buy an automatic. This is the sole reason I’ve turned down the opportunity to buy one.

      • 0 avatar
        Ryoku75

        But if you want a manual Hellcat Charger you can always get the Challenger, same platform after all.

        FYI I’d rather have a Hellcat Challenger with the 8-speed automatic.

      • 0 avatar

        Have you ever DRIVEN an SRT with a 392 in it?

        I drove the Challenger 392.

        You couldn’t shift fast enough to make it work the way it’s supposed to.

        8-speed transmission in Sport mode will do whatever you wanted it to do FASTER.

        • 0 avatar
          Zykotec

          The 6 speed would provide more ‘freedom’ for those who wanted it. I’m also reasonably sure it has enough torque that you could easily go fast enough using only 2nd 4th and 6th gear, or if you’re lazy enough, drive it around in 3rd all day…
          I guess the intelligent 8 speed is there to make sure it actually gets a decent enough mileage. Those darn auto-crowd-commies XD

      • 0 avatar
        mikeg216

        So by that logic you would refuse to buy a Porsche gt3 or any Ferrari or Lamborghini? Have fun in your flashy plumbers weekend car, the corvette.

    • 0 avatar
      Vega

      I really want to like the Charger. Your obnoxious commenting makes it damn hard though. You are not doing Fiatsler any favors if people get the impression the Hellcat is only for loudmouths and comment spammers.

    • 0 avatar
      philadlj

      I’m hoping someone makes a YouTube video of this exact scenario at some point in the future.

    • 0 avatar
      Lampredotto

      BTSR, your perennial arguments against manual gearboxes seem to boil down to, ‘I don’t need one; ergo NOBODY should need one’.

      True, the *pragmatic* advantages of manual transmissions are rapidly disappearing in the era of eight- and nine- speed dual clutch boxes (although I feel that lower out-of-warranty repair costs are still a compelling argument against CVT’s and DCT’s).

      What it comes down to is the fact that for many of us, rowing your own is a visceral thrill. It’s the same kind of visceral thrill you undoubtedly get from your Mopar V8’s. So why do you persist in ranting against something that harms nobody and brings people joy? What’s so wrong with having the choice?

    • 0 avatar
      NormSV650

      Can’t for the Bigtruck 200 mph test video.

  • avatar
    mjz

    The 2015 refresh is starting to grow on me. I think the SRT Hellcat front end is the best of the bunch.

  • avatar
    TopJimmy5150

    That car is a menace. Hopefully it’s priced out of the range of any the dipshits drooling over it. This car is going to kill people, and sadly it won’t be just the douche bags who buy it.

  • avatar

    The front end looks like a ‘roided up, constipated Chrysler 200.

  • avatar
    Ryoku75

    I’m not really sure what to think of the aesthetics, I’m a bit disappointing that they couldn’t at least try making a Daytona-esque wing for the back. The rest of the back ends good though.

    The sides still look weird, never did like that tacked on side vent.

    The front end on the other hand looks WAY too much like a Toyota, namely that cheap blacked out bit.

    I think I liked the Challengers more radical foglight ram air front end better.

  • avatar
    philadlj

    I use the term “understated” relatively, but that is one tastefully understated car, considering the beast that breathes within. With more sedate wheels and an SRT badge delete, it could almost be a Q-ship.

  • avatar
    JohnnyFirebird

    Dumb question, but do the SRT cars still have the reduced (3 year versus 5) powertrain warranty?

  • avatar
    Jeff Weimer

    BTSR just nutted.

    • 0 avatar
      Timothy

      “This is a car most brands would never bring to market,” Dodge CEO Tim Kuniskis said. “This is a car that you absolutely cannot build a business case for. But sometimes, you need to stop listening to the focus groups. Sometimes you need to build a car that defines itself.”

      Brilliant.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        And that is why fiatsler is gaining market share as quickly as they are, they allow the brands to breath.

        Obviously they need to replace the top people at Chrysler division and fiat division, and bring more of the Dodge, jeep, ram ilk into the company.

        • 0 avatar

          and the Jeep and Dodge divisions get to do all they do by their lonesome?

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            You certainly don’t see Acura or Smart building anything exciting or crowd pleasing.

          • 0 avatar

            Hey Hummer, and I ask you, is that up to Acura or smart to decide? No, and you know that. What the individual brands do is not up to the individual brand, but to the dominante interest. While Fiat listens closely to Chrysler and then decides and disposes, the rest you mention have zero leverage.

            Fwiw, the new smart forfour seems destined to have a performance variant…

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            If the parent company with as many divisions as Fiat were so closely pulling the strings for all their makes, the low quality fiat is known for would be even worse and translate to low quality for all the divisions. Of course anything as expensive as a platform is going to be dealt with by the parent company. But from an outsider what I just mentioned looks to be pretty spot on. You don’t see fiat using the LX platform in its cars, and you don’t see the grand cherokee being rebranded as a Alfa Romeo using a OHV V8.

            You can’t tell me secondary brands such as Acura and Smart want to have the poor selection of vehicles they peddle. Acura doesn’t have anything other than poorly rebranded Hondas that only compete with the Hondas they’re base upon. Smart has used the same platform well past its sell by date and really is a waste of a division.

          • 0 avatar

            Your second paragraph is spot on. The first, well not really. How it usually happens is that the dependent brands have their engineering and must then convince the dominant entity of the viability of their ideas and get permission to go ahead or not. It depends greatly from company to company the exactl details and the level of oversight they suffer. To use the example you gave, if Alfa engineering wanted a Chrysler enginee for a model, they’d have to convince Fiat. Because that is a strategic decsion it would be handled at the strategic level, which is Fiat.

            As to quality, processes and construction you would have to be closer to the companies to appreciate the usefulness of Fiat’s contribution to Chrysler. FCA seems to have the potencial to really develop into a global player. Their strengths are really propping each other up, but yes they must be mindful of their myriad defficiencies.

      • 0 avatar
        challenger2012

        Mr. T The comments by Mr. Kuniskis is exactly what is needed to help push the US auto industry forward. For too long, the US auto industry was too slow to increase HP. Sure GM, Ford and Chrysler had engines that got into the 400 HP range, but so did many others. (I realize the Vett and Shelby are above these in HP) Chrysler has upped their game, big time for the masses. Can you imagine the response for the euro-snobs, when a Dodge out runs their 100K plus pretty boy cars? All the talk about how fine the leather is won’t make up for being 50 MPH slower. Oh the humanity!! Maybe this will finally kick Ford in the ass to supercharge and direct-inject their V-8 engines. GM needs to get their second generation Camaro on a weight reduction plan and add about 250 HP to the top of the line model and sell it in left and right hand versions. Actually, the US automakers have an advantage over their Japanese and European competitors, the majority of these high HP cars will be sold in the US where gas is less expensive and the market can support the production of these cars. The same cannot be said in Japan or Europe. The icing of the cake is any sales overseas can be at a huge market up i.e. profit.

        • 0 avatar
          danio3834

          The remarkable thing is how fast the HP wars accelerated. Remember, 10 years ago the top of the line Corvette just made it over the 400hp mark. The 90s were pretty lame with regards selection of high hp mass market cars. The 70’s and 80’s need not even be spoken of (Thanks Nixon).

          • 0 avatar
            NoGoYo

            For some reason my 4.6 V8 Thunderbird was rated at 10 less horsepower than a V6 powered Chrysler LH car. That’s downright sad.

            Now I can buy a 310 horsepower V6 Mustang and my car sounds like a weak old turd…

          • 0 avatar
            Timothy

            I’m not entirely sure the 90’s were all that lame, there was definitely a HP war going on, especially among the Japanese sports car segment (remember when Japan used to build exciting cars?) and the German super saloons. All this power and the relative high mileage is made only possible by the technology in the last few years.

            As a kid (born 1978 for historical perspective) I often wondered about the cars of the future. I’m so happy to live in this time of crazy HP, amazing handling, and relatively decent fuel economy and even better emission controls. Having our cake and eating it too.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            “I’m not entirely sure the 90′s were all that lame, there was definitely a HP war going on, especially among the Japanese sports car segment (remember when Japan used to build exciting cars?) and the German super saloons.”

            I recall, but the horsepower just wasn’t as accessable as it is today where family sedans have as much power as the Corvette, Supra and other higher end sports cars did back then. It’s all relative, I know, but back then you had to really drop some serious cash to get something fast.

          • 0 avatar
            That guy

            The 2010s are pretty great for enthusiasts. I get to drive a 370hp RWD sedan every day that would run with almost anything from the 90s. It fits my baby’s rear facing car seat, it has a huge trunk, it rides great, and it’ll pull 27-28mpg cruising at 78mph with the AC on. It was also less than $30K out the door. And the radio doesn’t suck.

        • 0 avatar
          mikeg216

          You can bet that ford will answer the call with an updated Mustang, perhaps with a 5.0 eco boost that they showed back when they were calling the project hurricane

          • 0 avatar
            mikeg216

            How true the 94 5.0 had 225 horsepower! The Ford Mustang cobra from back then was treated like a space age a supercharged 5.4!385 hp! Independent rear suspension, it had no radio no air conditioning and no rear seat… The old 5.0 gives up 60 hp to a 3.7v6 and the super expensive cobra r of one car last generation is down 40-50 hp on this generations base gt, it’s a great time to be a car enthusiast

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            The poor 5.0 made just 225 HP, but had 300 lb/ft. I’d take that over a 3.7 V6 any day and 2X on Sunday. Most 5.0s came with 2.73 gears unless you knew to special-order 3.08s. Give the old 5.0 and new V6 a set of 3.73 gears and then talk to me. Factory gearing still $UCKED back then.

          • 0 avatar
            NoGoYo

            I am so glad the guy I bought my T-Bird from put 3.73s in the ol’ 8.8 IRS. Sure I still have to deal with the crap shifting 4R70W (until I can get the “J-mod” done), but the thing will actually chirp the tires and get its ass moving.

  • avatar
    raph

    Do want! It would look good sitting next, to the Shelby… well after the ADMs and in well… lightly used condition.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    4 doors = fail (to me, anyway). I really prefer the Challenger’s looks.

    Anyway, good for them. Mach 0.27 is pretty fast.

  • avatar
    Dragophire

    wow thats a good looking car…Thank God we still have some choices even if they are rare and heading out to a grave. At the price it will cost I will never be able to own one….new that is…I predict after two years the rest of the lineup with adopt that new face.

  • avatar
    mars3941

    Darn it, I could have made it up to my vacation spot from Florida in the Smokey’s in exactly 3 hours. 204 mph on I 95, right. Any idiot that would buy this thing wouldn’t live to finish off his 84 payments.

  • avatar
    mars3941

    At 4 bucks a gallon for premium this ho
    rsepower race should be short lived.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Not sure where you live but were at $3.40 a gallon for premium here $3.15 regular, and it would have to triple before I considered changing out of a 11mpg DD. I’m sure this car will be fine doing 20mpg average.

      Not everyone wants to drive tiny sh*tboxes.

    • 0 avatar
      bills79jeep

      My opinion is that people love to complain about the price of gas, but once they adjust to the “new normal” price, it becomes a non-issue again. People simply get used to the price as a part of their budget.

      Also, there are a lot of people with enough disposable income that getting less MPG just doesn’t really matter. If that weren’t the case, everyone would be buying stripper compacts for sub-$20k.

      Of course, this all doesn’t apply to everyone, but not everyone is buying this car.

    • 0 avatar
      sportyaccordy

      Everyone shouldn’t suffer because you can’t afford something.

    • 0 avatar
      Zykotec

      LOL, my CRV gets as low as 17mpg towing a caravan, but usually hovers around 25 mixed. And with gas prices here in Norway varying being between 8-10 dollars pr gallon, I have no problem with that at all(the hilariously small gas tank annoys me more, Teslas have more range than I do)
      If I had a car that was also fun to drive, I would gladly pay a few dollars more pr week to drive it. (but,around here even the V6 would be considered a powerful beast, and would rob you of your license after a few weeks…)

  • avatar
    CJinSD

    Marvin the Paranoid Android has his ride.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States