"New" Front Grill

Discussion in 'Dodge Challenger General Discussions' started by SRT-Tom, Sep 25, 2021.

Page 1 of 2
  1. Sep 25, 2021 at 5:21 PM #1
    SRT-Tom

    SRT-Tom Well-Known Member Staff Member Super Moderator Article Writer

    Posts:
    7,093
    Likes Received:
    2,222
    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2011
    Location:
    southern New Jersey
    I saw this rendering of a modern Challenger with a 1972-1974-style front grill.

    It's something different. Thumbs up or down?

    I didn't like it back then, and don't like it now.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Sep 25, 2021 at 5:39 PM #2
    IntimidatorRT

    IntimidatorRT Well-Known Member Staff Member Super Moderator

    Age:
    68
    Posts:
    2,785
    Likes Received:
    753
    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2017
    Location:
    Rosepine,LA.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    70-426_10-SRT likes this.
  3. Sep 26, 2021 at 7:05 AM #3
    2017 Redline HC

    2017 Redline HC 2021 Durango RT

    Posts:
    1,105
    Likes Received:
    320
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2019
    Location:
    Southern Ontario
    I agree, not a fan.
     
    70-426_10-SRT likes this.
  4. Sep 26, 2021 at 8:11 AM #4
    NC20RT

    NC20RT Full Access Member

    Posts:
    904
    Likes Received:
    635
    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2021
    Location:
    Mountains of western NC
    I prefer what we have BUT I certainly would not turn it down if no other design. I'll have to give both a :thumbsdown: and :waytogo:
     
  5. Sep 26, 2021 at 10:03 AM #5
    B5blueRT

    B5blueRT Full Access Member

    Posts:
    1,129
    Likes Received:
    541
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2018
    Location:
    Broadview Hts., Ohio
    :eek:
     
  6. Sep 27, 2021 at 12:01 PM #6
    moabutman1

    moabutman1 Full Access Member

    Posts:
    56
    Likes Received:
    34
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2015
    Horrible grill style in previous Challengers.
    It'll remind you of the low performance versions of the Challenger that were built in 1974. We don't want to bring back memories like that!
     
    70-426_10-SRT likes this.
  7. Sep 27, 2021 at 3:06 PM #7
    stingray

    stingray Full Access Member

    Posts:
    829
    Likes Received:
    155
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2012
    Location:
    California
    :lol2::hmmm2::snoopfacepalm::yaoface2:
     
  8. Sep 28, 2021 at 9:15 AM #8
    NC20RT

    NC20RT Full Access Member

    Posts:
    904
    Likes Received:
    635
    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2021
    Location:
    Mountains of western NC
    The 360 4 bbl was NOT slow at all. I had the 1974 'Cuda with that engine and I'd gladly own it again today. It wasn't Hemi fast but it was NOT slow or low performance. It accelerated very well with a 0 - 60 time of 6.8 seconds. IMG_20210723_0003.jpg IMG_20201113_0002 (2).jpg
     
    Larry St Denis and 70-426_10-SRT like this.
  9. Sep 28, 2021 at 9:34 AM #9
    moabutman1

    moabutman1 Full Access Member

    Posts:
    56
    Likes Received:
    34
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2015
    I had a 2000 Chrysler 300M that did 0-60 in 7.1 seconds. 6 cylinder with no modifications. Fast for a 6 cyl.
    But if it felt fast to you, then that's all that matters.
    But 1974 was near the peak of low performance due to insurance and government interference.
     
  10. Sep 28, 2021 at 9:46 AM #10
    moabutman1

    moabutman1 Full Access Member

    Posts:
    56
    Likes Received:
    34
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2015
    Four-Barrel Model
    The model years 1973 and 1974 were only slightly brighter for Chrysler's V8s. The 340 was gone, but the 360 now came with a four-barrel carb, giving buyers three 360 engine choices. All three featured an 8.4:1 compression ratio, with the two-barrel version providing 180 horsepower and 290 ft.-lbs. of torque. Two four-barrel versions pushed the 360 to the top spot in power. They wielded 200 horsepower and 290 ft.-lbs. of torque or 245 horsepower and 320 ft.-lbs. of torque
     
    Larry St Denis and NC20RT like this.
Page 1 of 2