The Dodge Charger and Challenger are legendary names in American muscle car history. The Charger was introduced in 1966 as an upscale, upsized response to the success of high-performance pony cars like the Ford Mustang, and intermediate-sized hot rods from General Motors like the Chevelle, the GTO, and the 442. From the beginning, it was available with Chrysler Corporation’s most powerful V8 engine, the 426 Hemi. The Charger continued through three iterations before the emissions regulations and fuel crisis of the 1970s choked the life out of Detroit’s muscle car era. The second iteration of the Charger, built from 1968 to 1970, is the most iconic, with a shape sculpted in a wind-tunnel and substantial success on the Nascar race circuit.
The Challenger was a latecomer to the muscle car world, debuting in 1970. It featured most of the same high-performance engine choices as the Charger, but stuffed into a smaller, tidier body. A special edition, the Challenger T/A, was built to compete in the Sports Car Club of America’s Trans America series against the Boss 302 Mustang and the Camaro Z/28. Like the Mustang and the Camaro, the Challenger T/A used a relatively small displacement V8, a 340 cubic inch mill with three two-barrel carburetors and a horsepower rating, probably conservative, just under the 300 mark. Sadly, the Challenger, as originally conceived, was short-lived. The Challenger T/A was 1970 only, and 1971 was the last year for the two big-block engines. After selling just 16,000 units in 1974, the Challenger was gone.
For the next 35 years the Charger name was used continuously by Chrysler Corporation, but for vehicles that often bore no resemblance to the wicked, ground-shaking street-rods and race cars they once were. The Challenger name found its way to a car that Chrysler imported from Mitsubishi, a small sporty coupe reminiscent of a Toyota Celica. This new Challenger was on sale from 1978 to 1983, but like its contemporary Charger siblings it was nothing like the original car.
The nadir of Detroit’s chokehold on engine output occurred in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The horsepower ratings of once proud models like Corvette, Camaro, and Mustang barely topped 200. Then, as it became clear that the world was not running out of oil, and electronic control of engine management systems increased the fuel efficiency of engines, compression ratios and horsepower began to creep back up. The fourth generation Corvette debuted in 1984 with 230 horsepower, and Firebirds, Camaros, and Fox body Mustangs weren’t far behind. By the mid-90s, when the fifth generation Corvette went on sale, the base engine, a 5.7-liter V8 dubbed LS1, boasted 345 horsepower, and the car was rated at 28 miles per gallon (mpg) on the highway. Corvette’s sixth generation debuted a 6.0-liter V8 named LS2, with 400 horsepower and 0-60 capability that would destroy any of the first generation muscle cars of the 1960s and early 1970s. The horsepower wars were back on.
With engine outputs and performance rising precipitously (like a hockey stick), the decade from 2000 to 2010 saw all the big-three Detroit car companies release new versions of the Charger/Challenger, the Mustang, and the Camaro. The new generations paid homage to the performance and aesthetics of the 1960s/1970s classics. A new, retro-styled Mustang debuted in 2005 with 300 horsepower. A new Charger in 2006 had four doors and looked less like its origins than the Mustang but was available with a 6.1 liter Hemi V8 and 425 net horsepower, which exceeded the 425 gross horsepower rating of the legendary 426 Hemi available in the original Charger. A new Challenger that looked very similar to the original 1970 car went on sale in 2008. The hot version, dubbed SRT8 like the Charger, featured the same 6.1-liter, 425 horsepower Hemi. A new Camaro with an LS3 V8 rated at 426 (gotcha!) horsepower debuted in 2010. Frustrated owners of new Mustangs found themselves running about 100 horsepower shy of their competitors, and Ford finally got with the program in 2011 when it released the first version of its “Coyote” 5.0-liter V8, rated at 412 horsepower.
Detroit muscle from the 1960s and 1970s was most famous for its straight-line prowess. They did build some sports car examples that were designed to go, stop, and turn like the Boss 302, Z/28 and Challenger T/A, but those cars were not the norm. In the 21st century Ford and Chevrolet took a different path and built Mustangs and Camaros into well-rounded sports cars that could do more than burnouts and drag races. Chrysler, now Stellantis after mergers with the Fiat group and then Peugeot, stuck closer to the drag racing formula, but modern braking and suspension components will hustle current-day Chargers and Challengers around a road course with surprising alacrity. The latest Camaros and Mustangs have available trim and option packages that transform these vehicles into world-class sports cars that are at home on the track with legendary cars from Porsche, BMW, Lamborghini, and Ferrari.
Fifty years ago, new emissions regulations and fears of a low-carbon world (not enough oil) ended the first great era of the muscle car. Today, new emissions regulations and fears of a high-carbon world are ending the second great era of the muscle car. To illustrate the heights to which we have ascended in this second era, let me provide one brilliant, bonkers example, the 2023 Dodge Challenger, in Demon 170 trim. The Demon 170 uses a three-liter supercharger sitting astride a 6.4 liter Hemi V8 to generate about 900 horsepower on 91 octane gasoline, and 1025 horsepower on E85 ethanol, which has an octane rating in the 100 to 105 range. The 170 number in the name refers to the fuel (85 percent ethanol by volume equals 170 proof) needed to generate maximum horsepower. On a prepped surface the car will run quarter miles times below nine seconds with trap speeds around 150 mph. An owner who recently took possession of one of these monsters drove the break-in period of 500 miles on 91 octane gasoline. On a flat stretch of highway, he set the cruise at 60 mph and drove for eleven miles. The car averaged 25 mpg for the segment. Nine second quarter miles and 25 miles per gallon on the highway. All hail the internal combustion engine.
Time is running short if you want a Demon 170. 2023 was the last model year for the current generation of Challengers and Chargers. 2024 is the last model year for the Camaro, with no successor announced. The original pony car, the Mustang, is the lone survivor, for now. In the last week, much has been written about why these cars are being discontinued. In a word, or two: central planning. On March 20th, the Environmental Protection Agency released its new rules governing emissions within the automobile sector. The Biden administration claims the new rules will “position U.S. companies and workers to lead the clean vehicle future, protect public health, address the climate crisis, (and) save drivers money.” The lever they are pulling to meet their objectives is to impose tailpipe emissions so stringent that automakers will have no choice but to rapidly substitute the sales of popular vehicles powered by internal combustion engines with sales of fully electric and hybrid vehicles that aren’t nearly as popular among American buyers as a whole. As Kimberley Strassel of the Wall Street Journal put it in an opinion piece published last Friday: Biden Is Coming For Your Truck. She writes:
This week’s Environmental Protection Agency tailpipe rule amounts to an imminent ban on gasoline-powered cars, never mind the soothing language of “incentivizing” a “transition.” Last year, 84% of all cars sold in America were powered by internal-combusion engines. By 2027, the government will restrict that share to 64%. In eight years, the cap will be 29%. High demand for the few gasoline vehicles still made at that point will drive up prices, making them unattainable to anyone but a limousine liberal. It’s a ban.
Marlo Lewis is a Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. He published an article on the day of the EPA ruling and described how the new emissions standards are so stringent that a U.S. passenger car fleet comprised entirely of Toyota Priuses would not meet the standards the car industry is obligated to meet by 2032. I don’t think he has that exactly right. The emissions numbers he quotes for a Toyota Prius are about 150 grams of CO2 per mile. 50 grams per mile are tailpipe emissions, and 100 grams per mile come from the electricity generated to charge the battery. All these numbers are from the website fueleconomy.gov. The proposed passenger car fleet standard for 2032 is 73 grams of CO2 per mile, but the new limit is on tailpipe emissions, so a Prius at 50 grams/mile would make it.
I checked the emissions profile of several other EVs at fueleconomy.gov. The worst I found was a Ford F150 Lightning at 218 grams of CO2 per mile. That’s all from the electricity generation required to charge the battery. That’s worse than the current tailpipe emissions standards for both light trucks (184 g/mi) and passenger cars (131 g/mi), but the EPA says you can buy one of these in 2032 because there’s no symphony of tiny explosions going on under the hood. I wonder if all the other touted benefits of the Biden plan, like $13 billion of annual public health benefits due to improved air quality were calculated the same way. Perhaps there has been some omission of emissions?
So, like it or not, the second great era of the muscle car, and the truck, and the SUV, is ending. Not so fast says Stellantis. The next generation Dodge Charger will be in showrooms before the end of the year. In this new iteration, the Charger will be available as both a two-door coupe and a four-door sedan, much like BMW used to build two and four door versions of the iconic M3. BMW has sinced changed their naming convention, so the two-door is an M4, and the four-door is an M3. The styling of the new Charger evokes the somewhat sinister, skulking profile of the ‘68-’70 model, with its rear haunches hunched down and tensed like a cat ready to pounce. Think of the way the back end of a whippet curves down into its muscular thighs. The grill too, pays homage to its late 60s ancestors. It’s a flat, skinny rectangle with no visible headlights—a black maw that devours whatever stands in its way. I see some late 60s Camaro SS in there as well. So, yes, the packaging is effective, but that’s not the big news. The new Charger is, according to Stellantis, the world’s only electric muscle car.
Personally, I think that ship has sailed, given Tesla has been building Model S Plaid’s with 1000+ horsepower since 2021. More accurate language would be world’s first muscle car that is now electrified, but I get it. Marketing. I have written before that EV manufacturers have no difficulty making cars that are fast, and the new Charger will certainly live up to the reputation. There are two versions available initially, one with 670 horsepower, and one with 496 horsepower. Launching them from a standing start will be less problematic than it is in the Demon 170 because all of the new Chargers will be all-wheel drive, and it’s a good thing, because these cars are HEAVY. The estimated curb weight of an electric Dodge Charger is 5,838 pounds. The car weighs as much as a long wheelbase Cadillac Escalade. If this thing was rear wheel drive it wouldn’t need a prepped surface to launch, like the Demon 170. It would need a prepped surface and a set of drag slicks off an NHRA funny car. The current Chargers and Challengers in their heaviest trims are more than 1,000 pounds lighter than the electric versions. As quick as these new electric muscle cars will be on the dragstrip—think 0-60 in the low threes, and quarter-mile times in the mid-11s—they are, like all electric vehicles, hopelessly compromised. Forget range degradation when the weather is cold, or the hours you’ll spend at charging stations; let’s stick with performance. For some reason, Dodge has seen fit to limit the top speed of the two electric Chargers to 137 mph for the 670 hp car, and 134 mph for the 596 hp car. Forgive me a brief digression.
In 1995 my wife bought a new, pearl white Nissan Maxima SE. It was an exceptionally good car. The ‘95 Maxima was Motor Trend’s Import Car of the Year. Power was supplied by a 3.0 liter V6 making 190 horsepower and 205 foot pounds of torque. The car was svelte for a mid-size sedan. The curb weight was 3,000 pounds. And it was quick for the time. With a manual transmission you could do the 0-60 run in under seven seconds. And on an open road, it would roll. One of the car magazines published a measured top speed of 143 mph. So sure, an electric Dodge Charger will smoke it in a quarter mile, but let the cars run for a mile or two and that old Nissan Maxima is pulling away. One wonders why the designers and engineers at Dodge have limited the cars in this way. Perhaps they have calculated that the kinetic energy stored in one of these behemoths traveling at more than 137 mph starts to approach that of a nuclear device, and they can’t risk the liability of blowing up a city if there’s a high-speed accident.
Over at National Review magazine, Charles Cooke has a new article on the EPA mandates. It’s titled Biden's EV Mandate Is an Affront to Car Lovers. Charles is an auto enthusiast, and one of the things he laments about the transition to commodified, sterilized, electric vehicles is the sound. I have a 2014 Chevrolet SS. It is powered by a 6.2 liter LS3 V8, which is one of the latest iterations of high-performance, small-block V8s developed by General Motors. With a couple of modest modifications, it makes about 450 horsepower. The day before I installed a new set of tires, I had my son film a couple of junior-level burnouts on a quiet lane behind our office. I showed the video to my uncle, who owned a Chevelle SS back in the late 1960s. “Ooooh,” he said. “I like the sound.”
Fear not, EV enthusiasts. Stellantis/Dodge has figured out a way to make your giant, high-performance golf cart as aurally intimidating as a Hemi with a hot camshaft. I’ll leave this to the editors at Stellantis:
The patent-pending Fratzonic Chambered Exhaust elevates the Charger Daytona experience and embodies Dodge's legacy of raw power and adrenaline-pumping performance. With a soon to be iconic roar as commanding as a supercharged V8, the Fratzonic exhaust will deliver the feedback you expect to hear when driving a Dodge.
My research indicates the name “Fratzonic” derives from the “Fratzog” symbol that adorned certain vehicles built by Dodge beginning in 1962. As you can see below, the symbol is composed of three delta shapes arranged around an equilateral triangle. The name apparently hails from a Dodge designer, who, when put on the spot to name the symbol, said “Fratzog.” Fratzonic sound is generated by speakers, but is shaped acoustically instead of digitally, in chambers beneath the car before being routed through dual “exhaust” ports at the rear. Reports of the aural experience have been underwhelming, and the designers must know that it will immediately be dubbed “fartsonic sound.” I mean, they must know, right?
Stellantis, like Toyota, is hedging their electric bets. The new platform accommodates internal combustion engines as well, and in 2025 the Charger will be available with two versions of the Stellantis Hurricane engine, which is a turbocharged, 3.0 liter inline six cylinder. This is heresy—muscle cars are powered by V8 engines—but unlike the electric conversion, it is forgiveable. This is heresy on the level of Porsche deciding that their flat-six engines should be liquid-cooled instead of air-cooled, or Porsche putting turbocharged flat-four and flat-six engines in cars with a long history of normally aspirated flat-six power. We’ll get over it. Die-hard muscle car fans will lament the absence of the V8 configuration and its distinctive sound, but inline six-cylinder engines have advantages of their own. With an appropriate firing order, the inline six has perfect primary and secondary balance, a feature that can only be matched in other engine configurations that also have six cylinders in a row, like V-12s or flat 12s. I’ve owned a couple of baby BMWs with inline sixes and the turbine-like smoothness is well suited for high performance work. Although they have less than half the displacement of the big V8s they’re replacing, the turbochargers work their magic, and the Hurricane engines have higher power and torque numbers than all but the most bonkers examples of the outgoing Charger/Challenger. With ICE power the new cars should weigh about the same as the old models, roughly 4500 pounds. That’s not svelte, but it’s not too porky by modern standards. Purists may complain about the I-6, but I think these cars will sell.
The electric models? Meh. They’re electric. If you use one within the confines of a routine that involves regular, reliable access to a charger when you’re at home or at work, or if you take one out on the weekend as a novelty, you’ll probably be happy. If you keep EVs in their lane, they’re fine. Heavy enough to destroy tires and bust guardrails, but fine. The genius of a vehicle powered by an internal combustion engine is that there is no lane. It doesn’t matter if the vehicle is a diesel truck that can tow 30,000 pounds, a muscle car, a minivan, a luxury SUV, or a bare bones Toyota Corolla, every one of those vehicles can be a commuter today and tackle a cross-country trip across Canada in the dead of winter tomorrow. This amazing capacity to be useful is what really separates ICE vehicles from EVs. The daily news articles describing headwinds in the EV market are a clear reflection of this fact. Without government coercion in the form of EPA emissions mandates, EVs are not likely to occupy much space on dealer lots for years to come.
What is the reason for coercing the sale of products that are more expensive, and less useful? I’ll repeat the rationale from the Biden administration: we will “lead the clean vehicle future, protect public health, address the climate crisis, (and) save drivers money.” A more sinister, Malthusian take on this sees the disadvantages of EVs as a feature, rather than a bug. When the only vehicles available are ones that are less useful and more expensive, the result will be everyday people driving and traveling less than they do now, to preserve the ability of those who plan our lives to continue driving and traveling at will.
The Rush song “Red Barchetta” imagines a future where many classes of vehicles from a “better, vanished time” have been banned by a “Motor Law.” In the song, the narrator has an uncle who has secreted away one of these banned vehicles, a “brilliant red barchetta.” Every weekend the narrator rides the “Turbine Freight” to “far outside the Wire” and commits his “weekly crime” of taking the car for a drive. A thrilling chase ensues, as authorities in “air cars” try to apprehend the driver. He eludes them by racing the tidy sports car across a one-lane bridge. The air cars are too bloated and wide to follow.
The song is a warning. The EPA mandates are the first iteration of a motor law. The better, vanished time is now. I can picture our lithe, Nissan Maxima sprinting across the narrow bridge with massive Dodge Charger EVs skidding to a stop on the other side. Of course, if they were able to get across the bridge and continue the chase, I could just outrun them.
🖤 “Like” this post or be captured by the cops in the air cars.
I love the nostalgia. Truly you had a love affair with the automobile, as many did. Your knowledge is impressive.
I spent mine on a 1958 firefleet De Soto, buit too many people thought I had real money so I let it go.
I think the future holds some big, big changes, but getting rid of a heavy preference for gasoline engines is not one of them. Putting left wing fanatics out of power might be.
Love it, Trevor!