By Mike Solowiow
August 1, 2008
Last month, I brought you the shocking news that local Dodge dealers were marking-up Charger SRT/8's by $10K, or more. I recently revisited the same OK (as in the state) dealer, after a tip-off that they had several pre-delivery Challengers on the back lot. Sneaking on scene with sets of "borrowed" Challenger keys, I passed the same two SRT/8 Chargers that were gracing the showroom floor 30 days prior. They'd painted "Hail Sale!" on the windscreen. A large hail storm had turned their sculpted rears into cellulite infested thighs. You can now pick one up for $38K or so, and 0 percent financing (but no leases). As for the Challengers, seeing them in the metal changed my opinion. They're a sight to behold, with menacing faces and near perfect proportions. The seats are incredibly comfortable, the dash sports soft touch plastic. And the bad news: the build quality sets new lows, even for Chrysler Corp. The paint on the rear bumper didn't match the fender. The metallic grain flopped in numerous places, and the panel gaps were uneven on the trunks and passenger doors (on all three models). So I guess the Challenger is the most faithful rehashing of the 70's muscle car yet. Stay tuned for a full Challenger review; Sajeev Mehta has his own insiders. And yes, they marked up the Challengers by $20K.
Subscribe to New Content Alerts32 Comments on “ All Hail the Charger! Or… Challenger? I Barely Know Her. ”
Leave a Reply 
Back to Top
You must be logged in to post a comment.
POWERED
August 1st, 2008 at 12:11 pm
A dealer here has one with a $25,000 “ADM” sticker slapped on it. And here are the photos to prove it…
http://blog.al.com/engine-block/2008/07/2009_dodge_challenger_lands_in.html
Not even people here in Alabama are stupid enough to pay it.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Interesting preview. Sorry to hear about the build quality. I hope as production continues they can at least get that sorted out. As they say, never buy a first year model. Of course I have done just that the last few times. Advice should be heeded, just never followed.
Right now I continue to be fascinated by the dealer mark-ups. Right now the new car market is sinking like a stone and they’re out trying to squeeze some blood from it.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:14 pm
The Challenger (and Charger) are still the only Chrysler products I would love to buy new and proudly own.
Avondale Dodge here in the Valley has five of them on the lot. I checked them out in person and loved every inch of the car inside and out, until I saw the markup on the sticker.
When the markup madness fades and the affordable R/Ts start populating lots they will be good buys for cool cars. That’s for sure.
I also didn’t note anything egregiously wrong with the car’s workmanship. Nothing I haven’t already seen on a current Camry already anyway.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:32 pm
I was in driving through Windsor Ontario and spotted a black Challenger at a Tim Hortons. I quickly grabbed 2nd, and pulled a u-turn to get a closer look. I have to say that in a sea of today’s ugly vehicles, the Challenger is an awesome sight.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:33 pm
I shake my head and think “typical.” In fact its sad. Here was an opportunity to bring back a classic for us boomers. Bringing back a classic or a retro feeling car shouldn’t mean the same lousy workmanship of yore – My guess is panel gaps are better now than in 1970.
The new Beattle has a decent heater, The inspiration for the Miata was MG & TR but mine starts in the bad weather.
The car is cool but in the what goes around comes around department a MA of $25,000?. Hmm PT cruiser had a MA.
August 1st, 2008 at 12:44 pm
OK… What does this tell us about the New Camaro’s prospects?
Either… people went looking at the Challenger, detected abysmal build quality and poor value and are still looking and the New Camaro has a ghost of a chance…
Or… There’s almost no market for this sort of thing with gas at $3.89 and the New Camaro is also toast?
August 1st, 2008 at 1:02 pm
The Challenger (and Charger) are still the only Chrysler products I would love to buy new and proudly own.
If they came up with a Magnum shooting brake, you could count me in!
August 1st, 2008 at 1:15 pm
There’s three on the lot here, 20K dealer markup. Looked nice, but no thanks.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:21 pm
A fool and his money are soon parted.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Mike, could you please explain “The metallic grain flopped in numerous places”. I’ve heard of wood grain. Are you refering to the paints finish?
I also wonder if the car was damaged during shipping (it happens a lot more than you know) and the bumper was resprayed at a bodyshop.
I would advise against anyone drawing conclusions about build quality from 3 cars damaged in a hail storm. I saw my first one at the local dealership last week (in Hemi Orange) and it looked great. Panel gaps didn’t look any wider than my friends new Civic. Unfortunately I couldn’t sit in it to get a close look at the interior.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:37 pm
@ windswords
when I say “flopped”, its very similar to wood grain. In order to maintain a continuous, and smooth finish and gleam, the metallic “grain” must all flow in the same direction. When it flops, the flakes are in an opposite direction than the rest, creating either a dull, or shiny spot in the finish (depending on lighting conditions). The Cadillac XLR was notorious for this.
And the three Challengers on the lot were not damaged by the hail, they had only been there a few days (two still had the plastic wrapping). The two Chargers that were previously on the showrroom floor were damaged however. So the bad paint and uneven panel gaps were most likely directly from the factory, and I doubt they were fixed in the 3 days since delivery.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:43 pm
In this automotive economic environment any “ADM” on any mass produced car is an insulting joke. A dealer trying to get +25K on the admittedly cool new Challenger is simply trying to make a quick buck on the slim chance that the [rich] guy “who just has to have it” walks into the showroom.
As we know, new & hot just released cars in the past have commanded premiums. But *any* Chrysler vehicle at this time certainly cannot.
The markups will obviously disappear quickly as the arrival of the new Challenger (and Camaro) could not be worse timing. At least during the original muscle car run (late ’60’s to very early ’70s) they got a few good years in before the writing was on the wall. This time around, the Challenger has arrived fully 6 to 9 months AFTER the END of cheap gas and the Camaro will be at least a YEAR worse than that.
I think they’ll sell in limited numbers as a niche toy, but that’s it. Unless gas goes back under $3.00.
August 1st, 2008 at 1:53 pm
“A dealer here has one with a $25,000 “ADM” sticker slapped on it”
A little more sympathy, he’s got to feed his family, on that $25K for the next year or two. BTW, you want a couple of Rams, cheap?
August 1st, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Some of the retro cars are nice enough but why sink so many resources into a car that has such a narrow audience? (A bettle is retro put doesn’t cost an arm and a leg) I figured specialty cars are for companies already successful that want to stretch and/or change perceptions. Acura NSX (?) comes to mind.
August 1st, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Where is the “Buy a Challenger for $60K, get a Ram free sale?”
August 1st, 2008 at 3:33 pm
SherbornSean : Coming soon to a Chryslerebus Dealership near you!
August 1st, 2008 at 3:37 pm
You better get two new rams for that extra $25K. You will need all three vehicles because you will be fighting with the Chrysler dealer to honor the warrantee on the two that will be out of commission at any given time. Oh and 0% for 72 at a minimum.
August 1st, 2008 at 3:39 pm
I would love to go in and ask if the traditional Chrysler “water in the tail lamps” option is standard. What’s the ADM on that?
August 1st, 2008 at 4:00 pm
SherbornSean did you mean: Buy a Challenger for 60k and get 6 craptastic Rams for free? That seems a little more in line. Price wise…
August 1st, 2008 at 4:54 pm
sellfone – Agreed; I’m not even remotely interested in purchasing this car and I find the “market adjustment” a huge slap in the face.
I feel oh so bad for the people that buy these with $20k+ MA and then have the resale values tank after Chrysler files …
August 1st, 2008 at 6:27 pm
rodster,
Great link. I love how the EPA sticker on that car estimates gas costs for a year for 15k miles @ 2.80 a gallon. A little behind the times aren’t we? Try $3,890 a year in gas rather than $2,801.
August 1st, 2008 at 6:38 pm
As for rodster’s link, I noticed another funny bit on the sticker. The all-American Dodge Challenger was assembled in Canada, with a engine from Mexico and a transmission from Germany.
August 1st, 2008 at 10:46 pm
10K over MSRP for a Dodge? The Challenger is not a GT-R.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:38 pm
Good grief, what is with all the disdain for the market adjustment? There are plenty of baby boomers who owned, or lusted after, a Challenger when they were younger who will gladly plunk down that kind of coin to have one of the first. And I won’t blame the dealer for trying to get as much as he can. Hell, if I was a dealer I’d auction it, with MSRP +$10k as the reserve.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:43 pm
Water in the Tail Lamps? heh heh. Had that on 3 different cars. One an Integra, one a Tundra the other an Elantra. Not sure if the ChryCo cars I’ve had just didn’t have the taillights sealed well enough to *hold* the water, but I assure you that Chrysler’s not the only manufacturer with that option.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:49 pm
^^
Just think of it as self-cleaning tailights.
August 2nd, 2008 at 7:03 am
dean ~
My disdain for market adjustments stems from my belief that making people pay significantly more than what should be paid is immoral. When Chrysler files, the value of their cars will plummet. The people who paid $65k for Challengers will find that the cars are “only” worth $35k the year after their purchases.
It is simply poor practice that alienates customers. The first 8GB Apple I-phones were $599. A mere 10 weeks later, the price was dropped by $200! The backlash led to distribution of $100 discount vouchers to the original customers. (see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20624042/)
Some people will not mind paying $20k extra to be the first person on their block with the car. However, others will be angry that six months after they purchased their whip for 65k, the same dealership will be offering the car below MSRP with 0% for 72 months. Those that are screwed out of $20k and are actually angry about the price disparity will never return to Chrysler. Chrysler needs all the customers it can get, and this is just one more practice (among a long list of practices) that destroys long term customer/brand loyalty.
August 2nd, 2008 at 2:55 pm
It is simply poor practice that alienates customers. The first 8GB Apple I-phones were $599. A mere 10 weeks later, the price was dropped by $200! The backlash led to distribution of $100 discount vouchers to the original customers. (see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20624042/)
The price was dropped to $399. More recently, the 3G model is now available for $299.
And I don’t know how many people it alienated, considering the apple store near me has had a line of at least 25 people every day since the release of the 3G iphone.
A car is not an investment. Neither is a cell phone. If you’re buying things in order to sell them at a profit, perhaps I can interest you in this bridge I have for sale? ;)
August 2nd, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Zcline – yes, it’s not an investment. But the apple example stands because the price dropped quickly and significantly. According to the link I provided and the “media,” people (customers) were angry. The company recognized this by providing vouchers of $100 to appease the earlier takers.
I still think it’s a poor practice, but then again, I’m really, really cheap (I’m a grad student).
That being said, what is the make/model of the bridge? … :-)
August 2nd, 2008 at 6:31 pm
I still have to disagree if the example stands … Apple was at that time in full control of the price of the phone, in this case Chrysler only sets the MSRP, and its the dealer who is doing the alienating.
I also read after apple did this, that they were thinking of doing the same thing for concert tickets. Price them really high so that only people who really want to pay that price will pay, then drop them after demand falls off. I think after the iphone backlash they re-thought it though. Its all about what you’re willing to pay, “what the market will bear”.
The bridge has a 2-litre mitsubishi turbo charged engine, and is hand-crafted by honest American union labor. Its a win/win!
August 2nd, 2008 at 9:49 pm
The Challenger is one reason why Chrysler finds itself into so much trouble. Instead of looking into the future they cling to their past glory. The Challenger is one big ugly car which prove how ignorant management has become when it comes to the worlds current and future energy problems. Why would they big such a big ugly car. I understand many people are simply brainwashed to like these types of ugly American cars due to their stupidity and ignornance.
August 3rd, 2008 at 7:53 am
dan:
The Challenger does nothing for me as I’m generally not that interested in American Muscle. However, the people that find this car attractive were never “brainwashed,” nor are they stupid or ignorant. The people that purchase this car will buy it for nostalgic purposes and/or performance. Would you not admit that there is a market for a modern muscle car? The challenger combines classic car looks with the performance and safety of a modern vehicle.
I agree that this vehicle is a poor decision for Chrysler, but to attack the people who find this car appealing is a low blow. Why the hostility? Where’s the love man?